It is currently Sun Jul 05, 2020 12:51 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

who is faster? Merc or Ferrari?
Poll ended at Fri Dec 01, 2017 2:35 am
Ferrari 37%  37%  [ 44 ]
Mercedes 63%  63%  [ 74 ]
Total votes : 118
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3900
pokerman wrote:
kleefton wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
lamo wrote:
Not that is really matters in the context of the championship because of how the races worked out. But Mercedes have at times been the third best car in Malaysia, Singapore and possibly Monaco. I don't think Ferrari have ever gone behind Red Bull this year.

Mercedes wasn't slower than Red Bull in Singapore on race day. The race was in cold/wet conditions and Ricciardo said afterwards that he could feel that RB had gone the wrong way in terms of setup. I don't think that Merc was slower than RB at Monaco either. Bottas beat them both in qualifying, and got jumped by Ricciardo because he got stuck behind Sainz. Hamilton is normally much quicker than Bottas in the race. If Lewis was on it that weekend, he'd definitely beat the Red Bulls and maybe even challenge Ferrari.

Ferrari was slower than Red Bull in Monza.


Don't you think Verstappen would have been quicker than Lewis in Singapore? I think most objective fans would agree to that.
I will give you Monaco, but in Singapore Ricciardo was slightly hampered, and based from what we have seen this year, he doesn't have the race pace that Verstappen usually has.

I doubt he would have been quicker, Hamilton was on it, later in the race remember that Ricciardo pitted for new inters, Hamilton stayed on old inters and still drove away from Ricciardo.


Right, but that was Ricciardo with a gearbox issue. Verstappen is not Ricciardo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:54 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3900
Exediron wrote:
kleefton wrote:
I will give you Monaco, but in Singapore Ricciardo was slightly hampered, and based from what we have seen this year, he doesn't have the race pace that Verstappen usually has.

Malaysia is literally the first race they've both finished where that was true throughout.


There isn't a lot of data because of all the problems Max has had finishing races, but he has been ahead of Dan seemingly all year, and pretty much every time they have been out there at the same time, even though it has been abbreviated on so many occasions. Some of the gaps that Max has had over Dan this year in qualifying have also been mind boggling. .469 in Spain, .502 in Monaco, 1.535 in Baku (I'm assuming Dan had a problem there, but still), .483 in Belgium, the remainder of their contests have been mostly within 2 tenths of a second, with Max coming on top of more often than not. Moreover Dan has never gapped Max the way the latter has done to him on a Saturday. This tells me that Max definitely has a speed advantage in qualifying. And usually qualifying speed translates into the races.
The only race that Dan looked quicker than Max was China, during their last stint, but even in that one Max was being held up by Grosjean and his tires were a couple of laps older.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:22 pm
Posts: 1824
I think this is my favourite thread. A lot of Ferrari fans arguing the Mercedes is quicker, and a lot of Mercedes fans arguing the Ferrari is quicker. What's going on with the world?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:39 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3526
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 94341.html

Ferrari upgrades have brought 3 tenths. Vettel is using the new suspension while Kimi is keeping with the old one.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10289
Location: Ireland
Ennis wrote:
I think this is my favourite thread. A lot of Ferrari fans arguing the Mercedes is quicker, and a lot of Mercedes fans arguing the Ferrari is quicker. What's going on with the world?

It's a strange old sport isn't it?

"No! The one I support isn't as good as the one you support!"

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:05 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 34251
lamo wrote:
There has been quite a good relative corrleation between 2016 and 2017 with Mercedes strengths and weaknesses.

The Mercedes gap in qualifying during the 2016 races:

Japan -0.300 (Ferrari)
USA -0.510 (RB)
Mexico -0.350 (RB)
Brazil -0.670 (RB)
AD -0.840 (RB)

The gaps were huge in AD and Brazil (its a really short lap there), given how the general pattern has gone from 2016 to 2017. This would put Ferrari likely to be slightly in front of Mercedes in Mexico and Japan. Brazil and AD look like Mercedes tracks, Ferrari haven't got close this year on any track Mercedes enjoyed such an advantage on the year before except for Australia really.

That's interesting. :thumbup:

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:09 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 34251
kleefton wrote:
pokerman wrote:
kleefton wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
lamo wrote:
Not that is really matters in the context of the championship because of how the races worked out. But Mercedes have at times been the third best car in Malaysia, Singapore and possibly Monaco. I don't think Ferrari have ever gone behind Red Bull this year.

Mercedes wasn't slower than Red Bull in Singapore on race day. The race was in cold/wet conditions and Ricciardo said afterwards that he could feel that RB had gone the wrong way in terms of setup. I don't think that Merc was slower than RB at Monaco either. Bottas beat them both in qualifying, and got jumped by Ricciardo because he got stuck behind Sainz. Hamilton is normally much quicker than Bottas in the race. If Lewis was on it that weekend, he'd definitely beat the Red Bulls and maybe even challenge Ferrari.

Ferrari was slower than Red Bull in Monza.


Don't you think Verstappen would have been quicker than Lewis in Singapore? I think most objective fans would agree to that.
I will give you Monaco, but in Singapore Ricciardo was slightly hampered, and based from what we have seen this year, he doesn't have the race pace that Verstappen usually has.

I doubt he would have been quicker, Hamilton was on it, later in the race remember that Ricciardo pitted for new inters, Hamilton stayed on old inters and still drove away from Ricciardo.


Right, but that was Ricciardo with a gearbox issue. Verstappen is not Ricciardo.

Yes I know but like I say Hamilton was able to drive away on older inters, that's why he just may have been quicker, without the crash Hamilton is never leading the race in the first place anyway so it's a scenario that doesn't play out in the first place.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:13 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 34251
Ennis wrote:
I think this is my favourite thread. A lot of Ferrari fans arguing the Mercedes is quicker, and a lot of Mercedes fans arguing the Ferrari is quicker. What's going on with the world?

For some it probably relates to the drivers themselves and the need for one of them to be in the inferior car, some others are more interested in exactly which one is quicker, the two groups put together and you have an ongoing thread.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 1:14 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 34251
F1_Ernie wrote:
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/formel-1/ferrari-techik-upgrade-nur-vettel-faehrt-neues-fahrwerk-12694341.html

Ferrari upgrades have brought 3 tenths. Vettel is using the new suspension while Kimi is keeping with the old one.

Gulp. :(

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 4:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1898
F1_Ernie wrote:
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/formel-1/ferrari-techik-upgrade-nur-vettel-faehrt-neues-fahrwerk-12694341.html

Ferrari upgrades have brought 3 tenths. Vettel is using the new suspension while Kimi is keeping with the old one.


3/10ths is a lot! Merc better bring some good upgrades or they're toast going into the last leg of the season.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 4:56 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 34251
ReservoirDog wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/formel-1/ferrari-techik-upgrade-nur-vettel-faehrt-neues-fahrwerk-12694341.html

Ferrari upgrades have brought 3 tenths. Vettel is using the new suspension while Kimi is keeping with the old one.


3/10ths is a lot! Merc better bring some good upgrades or they're toast going into the last leg of the season.

I guess it's a case of whether the upgrade that didn't work in Malaysia happens to work in Japan?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 9:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2745
Image

10 = fastest car
9.5 = joint fastest car
9 = second fastest car
8 = slower than Red Bull


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:40 pm 
That is a good way of visualizing it. Interesting chart. Where did you get that from?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2745
I made it myself in google docs :lol:

I reckon there will probably be a fair bit of disagreement but feel free to point it out.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7981
KingVoid wrote:
Image

10 = fastest car
9.5 = joint fastest car
9 = second fastest car
8 = slower than Red Bull

Without going through it properly there's a couple that jump out at me as ones I disagree with. In Russia Mercedes was better in qualifying IMO, or at least equal if you assume that either Vettel underperformed or Bottas & Kimi overperformed. I also think Baku should be equal for race pace.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2745
In Baku, Hamilton pulled out a 4 second lead to Vettel relatively easily in the first stint.

Russia is an interesting debate. One's perspective depends heavily on whether you think that Bottas was special that weekend, or whether Hamilton was just very underwhelming.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:50 pm 
Online

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 34251
KingVoid wrote:
In Baku, Hamilton pulled out a 4 second lead to Vettel relatively easily in the first stint.

Russia is an interesting debate. One's perspective depends heavily on whether you think that Bottas was special that weekend, or whether Hamilton was just very underwhelming.

Come raceday did not Hamilton have severe overheating issues with his car which caused his engine to go into safe mode at times, this dropping the engine down to 4 or 5 cylinders, he basically had to bring the car home and couldn't do much more.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 5:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
KingVoid wrote:
Image

10 = fastest car
9.5 = joint fastest car
9 = second fastest car
8 = slower than Red Bull

Good chart! At first glance looks about right, although I would contend the cars were equal on race pace in Australia, too. Vetel managed the tyres very well, but he said at the time he was going flat out just to keep up and once Lewis went in didn't increase his pace. Mercedes lost through strategy, not speed


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 6:36 am 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 16986
KingVoid wrote:
Image

10 = fastest car
9.5 = joint fastest car
9 = second fastest car
8 = slower than Red Bull


Good effort. I disagree with a couple but generally the result seems fair.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2635
IIRC, Australia saw Hamilton and Merc lose their cool under Vettel's pressure, pitting him early (though many argued it was at the right time and they knew best which is, of course, possible) and then Hamilton got stuck behind Verstappen while Vettel put in some open-air laps and came out ahead. Pretty even race pace probably.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
Disagree with the last race to, ok Ferrari had pace, but no reliability, doesn't that count for a lower rank? one breakdown in qualy, one in race?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2635
I'm also not bothered by the lack of evidence for Singapore. I simply think Ferrari had the car and were ruined by a racing incident. I also suspect Verstappen might have been able to utilised the car advantage over Merc and even Ricc might have been able to given he was nursing a problem, though I don't think his race pace has been blistering recently.

So I see it as Aus 9.5-9.5 and Singapore 8-10.


Last edited by Invade on Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:28 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5247
AnRs wrote:
Disagree with the last race to, ok Ferrari had pace, but no reliability, doesn't that count for a lower rank? one breakdown in qualy, one in race?


I think there was a previous conversation where things like that were taken into account. Like Baku headrest meant it was technically better to be in a Ferrari so yeah Malaysia would be Mercedes in that one but I think that list above is just talking about pace.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:29 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2635
AnRs wrote:
Disagree with the last race to, ok Ferrari had pace, but no reliability, doesn't that count for a lower rank? one breakdown in qualy, one in race?


About pace not luck.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 7:59 am 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3526
Invade wrote:
I'm also not bothered by the lack of evidence for Singapore. I simply think Ferrari had the car and were ruined by a racing incident. I also suspect Verstappen might have been able to utilised the car advantage over Merc and even Ricc might have been able to given he was nursing a problem, though I don't think his race pace has been blistering recently.

So I see it as Aus 9.5-9.5 and Singapore 8-10.


That’s how I see it. I think that would make it even so far which is how I have judged the races with a slight advantage going the way of Mercedes.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
Invade wrote:
AnRs wrote:
Disagree with the last race to, ok Ferrari had pace, but no reliability, doesn't that count for a lower rank? one breakdown in qualy, one in race?


About pace not luck.


How can you measure pace in race and qualy when one car doesn't start and one can't qualify?
It's not bad luck but bad reliability, I would put Malaysia 7 qualy and 7 race, the other numbers is just an estimate, they didn't had a car to win with?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2635
AnRs wrote:
Invade wrote:
AnRs wrote:
Disagree with the last race to, ok Ferrari had pace, but no reliability, doesn't that count for a lower rank? one breakdown in qualy, one in race?


About pace not luck.


How can you measure pace in race and qualy when one car doesn't start and one can't qualify?
It's not bad luck but bad reliability, I would put Malaysia 7 qualy and 7 race, the other numbers is just an estimate, they didn't had a car to win with?


Well they didn't have the best car because they had reliability issues but they had the fastest car (or would have).

Given what transpired, the best car to have for Malaysia was the Red Bull. I think they should have scored a 1-2.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:09 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3900
F1_Ernie wrote:
Invade wrote:
I'm also not bothered by the lack of evidence for Singapore. I simply think Ferrari had the car and were ruined by a racing incident. I also suspect Verstappen might have been able to utilised the car advantage over Merc and even Ricc might have been able to given he was nursing a problem, though I don't think his race pace has been blistering recently.

So I see it as Aus 9.5-9.5 and Singapore 8-10.


That’s how I see it. I think that would make it even so far which is how I have judged the races with a slight advantage going the way of Mercedes.


Yeah. Singapore really skews things doesn't it. Merc was the third best car there, 3 out of the cars that were presumably faster crashed out so Hamilton took the win, but I'm confident pace wise either Vettel or Verstappen would have had Lewis covered.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 9:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5247
AnRs wrote:
Invade wrote:
AnRs wrote:
Disagree with the last race to, ok Ferrari had pace, but no reliability, doesn't that count for a lower rank? one breakdown in qualy, one in race?


About pace not luck.


How can you measure pace in race and qualy when one car doesn't start and one can't qualify?
It's not bad luck but bad reliability, I would put Malaysia 7 qualy and 7 race, the other numbers is just an estimate, they didn't had a car to win with?


How does a car that should of got pole on Saturday(Kimi) only get a 7?. They still had a car there and competing and we saw its pace. Likewise for Sunday we saw its pace.

Should be a 10 for both on pace like he's done. The other discussion was an interesting one and for that one I'd agree it was a bad one for Ferrari despite their pace so you'd rather be in a Mercedes for that one.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
Lotus49 wrote:
AnRs wrote:

How does a car that should of got pole on Saturday(Kimi) only get a 7?. They still had a car there and competing and we saw its pace. Likewise for Sunday we saw its pace.

Should be a 10 for both on pace like he's done. The other discussion was an interesting one and for that one I'd agree it was a bad one for Ferrari despite their pace so you'd rather be in a Mercedes for that one.


Because no Ferrari did qualy and race. So we agree that it's better to have a Mercedes but still Ferrari should have a 10 and Mercedes an 8, makes sense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5247
AnRs wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

How does a car that should of got pole on Saturday(Kimi) only get a 7?. They still had a car there and competing and we saw its pace. Likewise for Sunday we saw its pace.

Should be a 10 for both on pace like he's done. The other discussion was an interesting one and for that one I'd agree it was a bad one for Ferrari despite their pace so you'd rather be in a Mercedes for that one.


Because no Ferrari did qualy and race. So we agree that it's better to have a Mercedes but still Ferrari should have a 10 and Mercedes an 8, makes sense.


We saw a Ferrari qualify and we saw it's pace. Easy 10.
We saw a Ferrari in the race and we saw it's pace. Easy 10.

In a table or discussion discussing pace then it's a no-brainer it gets a 10.
In a discussion about considering the circumstances what car was better that weekend to be in for the title race though I'd agree with choosing the Mercedes. (That's not the goal of the table though)

It's really not tricky.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:19 am
Posts: 990
Lotus49 wrote:

We saw a Ferrari qualify and we saw it's pace. Easy 10.
We saw a Ferrari in the race and we saw it's pace. Easy 10.

In a table or discussion discussing pace then it's a no-brainer it gets a 10.
In a discussion about considering the circumstances what car was better that weekend to be in for the title race though I'd agree with choosing the Mercedes. (That's not the goal of the table though)

It's really not tricky.


We saw no Ferrari qualy and race. IMO if you summarize a table like that it looks like Ferrari was the car to have in Malaysia, but no such Ferrari exists.
To me it's not tricky at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2635
AnRs wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

We saw a Ferrari qualify and we saw it's pace. Easy 10.
We saw a Ferrari in the race and we saw it's pace. Easy 10.

In a table or discussion discussing pace then it's a no-brainer it gets a 10.
In a discussion about considering the circumstances what car was better that weekend to be in for the title race though I'd agree with choosing the Mercedes. (That's not the goal of the table though)

It's really not tricky.


We saw no Ferrari qualy and race. IMO if you summarize a table like that it looks like Ferrari was the car to have in Malaysia, but no such Ferrari exists.
To me it's not tricky at all.


You are conflating two different things.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
AnRs wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

We saw a Ferrari qualify and we saw it's pace. Easy 10.
We saw a Ferrari in the race and we saw it's pace. Easy 10.

In a table or discussion discussing pace then it's a no-brainer it gets a 10.
In a discussion about considering the circumstances what car was better that weekend to be in for the title race though I'd agree with choosing the Mercedes. (That's not the goal of the table though)

It's really not tricky.


We saw no Ferrari qualy and race. IMO if you summarize a table like that it looks like Ferrari was the car to have in Malaysia, but no such Ferrari exists.
To me it's not tricky at all.

The table is about which car was faster, not which was the car to have


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 12:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 5247
That's a better way of putting it,yeah.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 12:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 2:49 am
Posts: 919
Great effort KingVoid - could you do it for Merc / Ferrari / RB?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 12:41 pm 
Online

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 3526
kleefton wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Invade wrote:
I'm also not bothered by the lack of evidence for Singapore. I simply think Ferrari had the car and were ruined by a racing incident. I also suspect Verstappen might have been able to utilised the car advantage over Merc and even Ricc might have been able to given he was nursing a problem, though I don't think his race pace has been blistering recently.

So I see it as Aus 9.5-9.5 and Singapore 8-10.


That’s how I see it. I think that would make it even so far which is how I have judged the races with a slight advantage going the way of Mercedes.


Yeah. Singapore really skews things doesn't it. Merc was the third best car there, 3 out of the cars that were presumably faster crashed out so Hamilton took the win, but I'm confident pace wise either Vettel or Verstappen would have had Lewis covered.


Taking out Ferrari’s best track really does change things. Also some would argue Mercedes would get an 8 for Monaco. What really shows is Mercedes have been the 3rd best car on 3 occasions and got away with it twice. Ferrari was the third best car at Monza and got away with it.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place
2018: 12th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016, 3rd China 2018, 3rd Japan 2018, 2nd Mexico 2018


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:19 pm 
AnRs wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:

We saw a Ferrari qualify and we saw it's pace. Easy 10.
We saw a Ferrari in the race and we saw it's pace. Easy 10.

In a table or discussion discussing pace then it's a no-brainer it gets a 10.
In a discussion about considering the circumstances what car was better that weekend to be in for the title race though I'd agree with choosing the Mercedes. (That's not the goal of the table though)

It's really not tricky.


We saw no Ferrari qualy and race. IMO if you summarize a table like that it looks like Ferrari was the car to have in Malaysia, but no such Ferrari exists.
To me it's not tricky at all.


I agree with your point but these lists are purely speed and therefore need context.

Hamilton's head rest issue gave Vettel a better opportunity in Baku
Hamilton's gearbox change gave Vettel a better opportunity in Austria

Ferrari being "behind" Red Bull in Monza in both qualifying and the race was rendered irrelevant due to Red Bull taking huge grid penalties. On track, the lead Ferrari hasn't been behind Red Bull all year. Mercedes have finished behind them twice.

It works both ways.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 05, 2017 2:15 pm 
In terms of opportunity for the maximum result.

So if its a 1 stopper with no SC's then qualifying is more important.

10-10: both had equal chance to win it.
10-9 : One better chance than the other, but slower driver still ahead of faster drivers team mate. So usually 1-2 between the pair.
10-8: Faster one ahead as well as his team mate too and/or fell behind a Red Bull.

Australia: Ham 9 Vet 10
China: Ham 10 Vet 9 (Vettel was unlucky with SC timing here)
Bahrain: Ham 9 Vet 10 (Ham bound by lead Mercedes must pit first rule)
Russia: Ham 10 Vet 10
Spain: Ham 10 Vet 10
Monaco: Ham 8 Vet 10 (Kimi ahead too)
Canada: Ham 10 Vet 9 (controversial, but if Vettel survives turn 1 he finishes 2nd for me)
Baku: Ham 8 Vet 10 (head rest issue made him 5th, Vettel should have won thereafter)
Austria: Ham 8 Vet 9 (Gearbox change means low start, Mercedes slightly quicker overall though)
Britain: Ham 10 Vet 8 (Bottas ahead too, like Ham should have won been / 2nd in Russia. Vettel should have been P3, arguably P2)
Hungary: Ham 8 Vet 10 (Raikkonen ahead too)
Belgium: Ham 10 Vet 9 (pole key here)
Monza: Ham 10 Vet 8 (Bottas ahead too)
Singapore: Ham 10 Vet 10 (once everybody was wiped out, it was Hamiltons race to win, before that it was Vettels)
Malaysia: Ham 9 Vet 8 (Only 1 Red Bull between them ultimately)

Hamilton "car" : 139
Vettels "car" : 140

I was surprised with the result, so much so I went back and added it together again. The deciding factor boils down to Vettels start line incidents (Canada and Singapore) and if you consider his puncture in Silverstone bad luck or bad tyre management.

Edit-
Upon reflection this method does mask some quirks of the points system. For example Hamilton winning with Vettel 2nd gives him +7 in WDC points. Say that was 10-9 for the race. Now if that race becomes 10-8 because Bottas got 2nd, Vettel only loses an additional 3 points WDC wise. I got the idea for out of 10 from Kingvoids analysis as I liked the look of it. Really to make this better I should have done it in terms of WDC points. Maybe I'll do that at a later date when I get some time.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 06, 2017 9:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
Pretty much as I predicted:

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-says-mercedes-car-back-to-normal-at-suzuka-961994/


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Clarky, Covalent, Johnson, pokerman and 89 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group