planetf1.com

mikeyg123 wrote:Once you factor out a drivers debut and retirement seasons then it is pretty accurate the vast majority of the time.

Sharknose wrote:A probably really unpopular opinion: Rosberg was faster than Hamilton. He just had other deficits because of which he couldn't really compete with Hamilton, mainly psychological. I think this because in 2015, when the WDC was decided and the pressure was off, Rosberg was completely untouchable. But when the pressure was on, Rosberg always faltered.

Herb wrote:Or maybe, when the deed was done, Hamilton stopped trying?

Sharknose wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:Once you factor out a drivers debut and retirement seasons then it is pretty accurate the vast majority of the time.

I beg to differ, for reasons stated in my previous post. Drivers aren't static in performance throughout their careers.

mikeyg123 wrote:

IDrinkYourMilkshake wrote:

Sharknose wrote:

IDrinkYourMilkshake wrote:Ricciardo is not so much better than Vettel, as 2014 seemed to show.

Because if he was, it would throw the whole driver status dynamic out of whack.

Comparing drivers with long-term teammates is the most reliable way we have of seeing where two drivers stand.

For example, Alonso used to be less than a tenth behind Hamilton in qualifying, in 2007.
Hamilton to Button, the gap used to be 2 to 3 tenths in qualifying, over 3 years. This would tell us it would be similar to that if Alonso was Button's teammate.

And from 2015 to 2016, that is indeed the gap Alonso had to Button.

Alonso dominated Massa speedwise from 2010 to 2013, so it was obvious the same would happen to Raikkonen. People hyped the partnership, but 2014 made it clear that Alonso dominated Raikkonen the same way he dominated Massa. Maybe even a little more, which is accurate, since Massa used to be a little quicker than Raikkonen in qualifying.

So, if we use this basis, and assume 2014 to be an accurate reflection of Ricciardo vs Vettel, then:

Ricciardo is even better than Alonso, because Alonso dominated Raikkonen in qualifying, while Vettel also has good speed over Raikkonen. So Alonso is only a little better than Vettel, speedwise.

Alonso's gap to Massa is similar to how Schumacher dominated Massa. Hence, Alonso and Schumacher are similar speedwise, with Ricciardo still a healthy chunk faster than both!

I could still have maybe digested it till this point, Ricciardo could well have been the fastest driver ever, it's not preposterous. He certainly did have excellent racecraft, speed, and consistency.
(Although one sign that was an anomaly in the domination was rain. Whenever it rained, even in 2014, Vettel easily outpaced Ricciardo in qualifying and seemed faster. Verstappen seems faster than Ricciardo in the rain too.)

But then Verstappen comes along. And he has even greater racecraft, though granted he makes mistakes which I think will iron out with age, and he seems to be even faster than Ricciardo now, in every qualifying. That would make it ludicrious, that Verstappen is ages, ages better than Schumacher and Alonso in raw speed.

And I don't believe we such jumps of talent in F1, ever. The odds of Ricciardo and Verstappen BOTH being the fastest drivers ever by some margin, and ending up in the same era and same team, are really, really improbable.


So, I believe that because of issues in his motivation, not liking the cars, not working well with the tyres which used to be his specialty, and ultimately teammate pressure, Vettel underperformed in 2014.

But of course Ricciardo was better in 2014.

If I had to say what would happen between them when both are in good form, with a gun to my head? Vettel will beat Ricciardo by a smidgen in qualifying. The race would be very close, as Vettel might manage his tyres slightly better, while Ricciardo has the better racecraft. But they'll overall be very evenly matched, not domination like 2014.

It's like Raikkonen and Massa, 2007 and 2008, actually. Raikkonen was just slightly better in 2007. Due to low motivation, then some bad luck in races, losing the points lead, and car not suiting him, he fell a long way behind Massa. If we had only used 2008 as a comparison for Raikkonen and Massa, we'd not get an accurate picture. I believe similar things happened in 2014 between Vettel and Ricciardo. They would be, IMO, very, very similar, with differing strengths.

Phew.

You clearly put a lot of thought into that, but I don't think it works that way. The A beat B and B beat C so A is better than C logic is flawed, because it assumes that drivers are performing at the same level all the time. There are many differences between years however, be it different teams, different in-team dynamics, different cars and regulations, drivers age and gain more experience . . . the list goes on.
I do agree Vettel just had a bad year in 2014, for the various reasons you stated.

Comparing A vs B vs C when they've been teammates for long periods of time, or in stable conditions, has demonstrably worked. It's certainly worked better than any other system anyone else can think of.

Once you factor out a drivers debut and retirement seasons then it is pretty accurate the vast majority of the time.

Herb wrote:

Sharknose wrote:A probably really unpopular opinion: Rosberg was faster than Hamilton. He just had other deficits because of which he couldn't really compete with Hamilton, mainly psychological. I think this because in 2015, when the WDC was decided and the pressure was off, Rosberg was completely untouchable. But when the pressure was on, Rosberg always faltered.

Or maybe, when the deed was done, Hamilton stopped trying?

Rosberg was fast, but I don't think he was faster than Hamilton - But this is the unpopular opinions thread!

pokerman wrote:Yeah I think the party started early for Hamilton, also Hamilton was actually still faster than Rosberg in most of the races he just couldn't get close enough to pass.

KingVoid wrote:Hamilton was never able to properly dominate Rosberg in qualifying when they were teammates. Overall Rosberg took 29 pole positions to Hamilton's 35. Which is not exactly convincing. I believe that the average gap across 4 seasons and 78 races was 0.091s in Hamilton's favor.

Exediron wrote:When Bottas paired with Hamilton, the model was right.

Sharknose wrote:

Exediron wrote:When Bottas paired with Hamilton, the model was right.

No it wasn't. If I understand 'the model' correctly, the reasoning would be: Hamilton and Alonso are equally fast, Alonso was way faster than Massa, but Bottas was only slightly faster than Massa. Therefore according to 'the model' Bottas should be much further off Hamilton's pace than he actually is.
Of course, these comparisons are made over a period of ten years, with different teams and cars, etcetera. Which is why I don't believe in 'the model'.

mikeyg123 wrote:

IDrinkYourMilkshake wrote:Comparing A vs B vs C when they've been teammates for long periods of time, or in stable conditions, has demonstrably worked. It's certainly worked better than any other system anyone else can think of.

Once you factor out a drivers debut and retirement seasons then it is pretty accurate the vast majority of the time.

Sharknose wrote:

Exediron wrote:When Bottas paired with Hamilton, the model was right.

No it wasn't. If I understand 'the model' correctly, the reasoning would be: Hamilton and Alonso are equally fast, Alonso was way faster than Massa, but Bottas was only slightly faster than Massa. Therefore according to 'the model' Bottas should be much further off Hamilton's pace than he actually is.
Of course, these comparisons are made over a period of ten years, with different teams and cars, etcetera. Which is why I don't believe in 'the model'.

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:Yeah I think the party started early for Hamilton, also Hamilton was actually still faster than Rosberg in most of the races he just couldn't get close enough to pass.

That's not quite true...

After the Japanese Grand Prix - which Lewis won by a dominant margin - the only race you could make a good case for him being the faster driver but unable to pass was Mexico. In Russia Nico qualified on pole and was cruising to victory when his car failed. In the United States Nico was comfortably ahead before his 'gust of wind' - it was completely his fault, but it wasn't that Lewis was right behind and trying to overtake before it, either. And in Brazil and Abu Dhabi Nico was comfortably on pole and never really challenged in the race; Lewis finished about 8 seconds behind in both, which doesn't fit with being faster but not close enough to pass.

KingVoid wrote:Hamilton was never able to properly dominate Rosberg in qualifying when they were teammates. Overall Rosberg took 29 pole positions to Hamilton's 35. Which is not exactly convincing. I believe that the average gap across 4 seasons and 78 races was 0.091s in Hamilton's favor.

Sharknose wrote:

Exediron wrote:When Bottas paired with Hamilton, the model was right.

No it wasn't. If I understand 'the model' correctly, the reasoning would be: Hamilton and Alonso are equally fast, Alonso was way faster than Massa, but Bottas was only slightly faster than Massa. Therefore according to 'the model' Bottas should be much further off Hamilton's pace than he actually is.
Of course, these comparisons are made over a period of ten years, with different teams and cars, etcetera. Which is why I don't believe in 'the model'.

Lotus49 wrote:Bottas was much faster than Massa I believe, at least from summer 2015 onwards.

Sharknose wrote:

Exediron wrote:When Bottas paired with Hamilton, the model was right.

No it wasn't. If I understand 'the model' correctly, the reasoning would be: Hamilton and Alonso are equally fast, Alonso was way faster than Massa, but Bottas was only slightly faster than Massa. Therefore according to 'the model' Bottas should be much further off Hamilton's pace than he actually is.
Of course, these comparisons are made over a period of ten years, with different teams and cars, etcetera. Which is why I don't believe in 'the model'.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Sharknose wrote:

Exediron wrote:When Bottas paired with Hamilton, the model was right.

No it wasn't. If I understand 'the model' correctly, the reasoning would be: Hamilton and Alonso are equally fast, Alonso was way faster than Massa, but Bottas was only slightly faster than Massa. Therefore according to 'the model' Bottas should be much further off Hamilton's pace than he actually is.
Of course, these comparisons are made over a period of ten years, with different teams and cars, etcetera. Which is why I don't believe in 'the model'.

Bottas is a fair old wack of Hamilton for pace. I would say the model would put Bottas about half way between Hamilton and Massa which is about what we have seen.

Sharknose wrote:

Lotus49 wrote:Bottas was much faster than Massa I believe, at least from summer 2015 onwards.

You're contradicting your own argument here. According to 'the model' the gap should have been identical throughout their three seasons together.

bradtheboywonder wrote:One for the stat lovers.

McDonalds is healthier and better for you than the Health Food brigade lead you to believe

pokerman wrote:Well my model is:

Hamilton > Alonso 0.07s
Hamilton > Bottas 0.13s
Alonso > Massa 0.26s (49-14)
Bottas > Massa 0.16s (36-12)

Not exactly perfect but it would fit a prediction model of who might beat who.

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:Hamilton was never able to properly dominate Rosberg in qualifying when they were teammates. Overall Rosberg took 29 pole positions to Hamilton's 35. Which is not exactly convincing. I believe that the average gap across 4 seasons and 78 races was 0.091s in Hamilton's favor.

That sounds about right I have my own method for doing it, the poles are skewed a bit because of bad luck that Hamilton had with reliability problems which never seemed to happen to Rosberg, there is also "cough" Monaco 2014 "cough".

Gumption wrote:

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:Hamilton was never able to properly dominate Rosberg in qualifying when they were teammates. Overall Rosberg took 29 pole positions to Hamilton's 35. Which is not exactly convincing. I believe that the average gap across 4 seasons and 78 races was 0.091s in Hamilton's favor.

That sounds about right I have my own method for doing it, the poles are skewed a bit because of bad luck that Hamilton had with reliability problems which never seemed to happen to Rosberg, there is also "cough" Monaco 2014 "cough".

I don't understand this "cough" Monaco 2014 thing... the stewards with all the data cleared Rosberg of any wrongdoing. The same way the stewards with all the data cleared Hamilton of any brake-checking in Baku 2017. So which is it? Are both infractions questionable or neither?

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:Well my model is:

Hamilton > Alonso 0.07s
Hamilton > Bottas 0.13s
Alonso > Massa 0.26s (49-14)
Bottas > Massa 0.16s (36-12)

Not exactly perfect but it would fit a prediction model of who might beat who.

I'm a little surprised that the Alonso > Massa number is that low, and I think it might reflect a weakness of the comparative model in looking only at qualifying. Massa was closer to Alonso in qualifying, but his race pace was almost invariably worse off.

Of course, it would be much more difficult to build a good model that takes races into consideration.

(I also think Bottas' number has been flattered by a few weak performances from Hamilton, and it will by worse by the end of the season)

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:Yeah I think the party started early for Hamilton, also Hamilton was actually still faster than Rosberg in most of the races he just couldn't get close enough to pass.

That's not quite true...

After the Japanese Grand Prix - which Lewis won by a dominant margin - the only race you could make a good case for him being the faster driver but unable to pass was Mexico. In Russia Nico qualified on pole and was cruising to victory when his car failed. In the United States Nico was comfortably ahead before his 'gust of wind' - it was completely his fault, but it wasn't that Lewis was right behind and trying to overtake before it, either. And in Brazil and Abu Dhabi Nico was comfortably on pole and never really challenged in the race; Lewis finished about 8 seconds behind in both, which doesn't fit with being faster but not close enough to pass.

kleefton wrote:

Exediron wrote:In the United States Nico was comfortably ahead before his 'gust of wind' - it was completely his fault, but it wasn't that Lewis was right behind and trying to overtake before it, either.

I still remember that COTA race in 15'. Actually Lewis was catching Nico at an alarming rate when Nico made his mistake. He was not leading comfortably at all. Granted Nico was somehow much faster than Lewis in the wet during that race, but when it dried up, the race turned in Lewis's favor for sure. And then Nico compounded it by making the mistake to lose the lead, but there is a decent chance Lewis would have passed him anyway.

mikeyg123 wrote:

Gumption wrote:

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:Hamilton was never able to properly dominate Rosberg in qualifying when they were teammates. Overall Rosberg took 29 pole positions to Hamilton's 35. Which is not exactly convincing. I believe that the average gap across 4 seasons and 78 races was 0.091s in Hamilton's favor.

That sounds about right I have my own method for doing it, the poles are skewed a bit because of bad luck that Hamilton had with reliability problems which never seemed to happen to Rosberg, there is also "cough" Monaco 2014 "cough".

I don't understand this "cough" Monaco 2014 thing... the stewards with all the data cleared Rosberg of any wrongdoing. The same way the stewards with all the data cleared Hamilton of any brake-checking in Baku 2017. So which is it? Are both infractions questionable or neither?

I think you have to make a judgement yourself. I don't believe Hamilton brake checked because I don't find the evidence convincing. I do believe Rosberg went off deliberately in Monaco because I think that's where the evidence points.

I certainly wouldn't put the stewards verdict on Hamilton in Baku as any kind of conclusive proof. Neither do I agree with the logic that if I coincidently agree with the stewards once it means I must always agree with them.

Gumption wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Gumption wrote:

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:Hamilton was never able to properly dominate Rosberg in qualifying when they were teammates. Overall Rosberg took 29 pole positions to Hamilton's 35. Which is not exactly convincing. I believe that the average gap across 4 seasons and 78 races was 0.091s in Hamilton's favor.

That sounds about right I have my own method for doing it, the poles are skewed a bit because of bad luck that Hamilton had with reliability problems which never seemed to happen to Rosberg, there is also "cough" Monaco 2014 "cough".

I don't understand this "cough" Monaco 2014 thing... the stewards with all the data cleared Rosberg of any wrongdoing. The same way the stewards with all the data cleared Hamilton of any brake-checking in Baku 2017. So which is it? Are both infractions questionable or neither?

I think you have to make a judgement yourself. I don't believe Hamilton brake checked because I don't find the evidence convincing. I do believe Rosberg went off deliberately in Monaco because I think that's where the evidence points.

I certainly wouldn't put the stewards verdict on Hamilton in Baku as any kind of conclusive proof. Neither do I agree with the logic that if I coincidently agree with the stewards once it means I must always agree with them.

Well-said mikey. I like your posts, you seem to be one of the more objective posters on here.

I guess my unpopular opinion is that Hamilton did brake-check Vettel in Baku (the on-screen telemetry clearly shows he tapped the brake just after coming out of the turn). As for Monaco, I don't think Rosberg went off deliberately but I think he backed up deliberately knowing it would prolong any yellow.

A maybe unpopular opinion... I strongly feel the stewards base decisions primarily off of championship standings and keeping things close. Championship contenders usually get a pass unless they're running away with the title.

Gumption wrote: As for Monaco, I don't think Rosberg went off deliberately but I think he backed up deliberately knowing it would prolong any yellow.

KingVoid wrote:Senna wasn't that good at wheel to wheel racing.

Within his own era, I rated Mansell higher at wheel to wheel combat. I also think that Montoya was better than Senna at overtaking and defending.

There are a few drivers on the current grid who I think have better racecraft than Senna did (but I won't mention them because that will just derail the topic).

cm97 wrote:
Alonso has dropped a little in race craft (think Aus 16 misjudgment) in the last 18 months but is still the driver I would hire if I was starting a new team.

IDrinkYourMilkshake wrote:Ricciardo is not so much better than Vettel, as 2014 seemed to show.

Because if he was, it would throw the whole driver status dynamic out of whack.

Comparing drivers with long-term teammates is the most reliable way we have of seeing where two drivers stand.

For example, Alonso used to be less than a tenth behind Hamilton in qualifying, in 2007.
Hamilton to Button, the gap used to be 2 to 3 tenths in qualifying, over 3 years. This would tell us it would be similar to that if Alonso was Button's teammate.

And from 2015 to 2016, that is indeed the gap Alonso had to Button.

Alonso dominated Massa speedwise from 2010 to 2013, so it was obvious the same would happen to Raikkonen. People hyped the partnership, but 2014 made it clear that Alonso dominated Raikkonen the same way he dominated Massa. Maybe even a little more, which is accurate, since Massa used to be a little quicker than Raikkonen in qualifying.

So, if we use this basis, and assume 2014 to be an accurate reflection of Ricciardo vs Vettel, then:

Ricciardo is even better than Alonso, because Alonso dominated Raikkonen in qualifying, while Vettel also has good speed over Raikkonen. So Alonso is only a little better than Vettel, speedwise.

Alonso's gap to Massa is similar to how Schumacher dominated Massa. Hence, Alonso and Schumacher are similar speedwise, with Ricciardo still a healthy chunk faster than both!

I could still have maybe digested it till this point, Ricciardo could well have been the fastest driver ever, it's not preposterous. He certainly did have excellent racecraft, speed, and consistency.
(Although one sign that was an anomaly in the domination was rain. Whenever it rained, even in 2014, Vettel easily outpaced Ricciardo in qualifying and seemed faster. Verstappen seems faster than Ricciardo in the rain too.)

But then Verstappen comes along. And he has even greater racecraft, though granted he makes mistakes which I think will iron out with age, and he seems to be even faster than Ricciardo now, in every qualifying. That would make it ludicrious, that Verstappen is ages, ages better than Schumacher and Alonso in raw speed.

And I don't believe we such jumps of talent in F1, ever. The odds of Ricciardo and Verstappen BOTH being the fastest drivers ever by some margin, and ending up in the same era and same team, are really, really improbable.


So, I believe that because of issues in his motivation, not liking the cars, not working well with the tyres which used to be his specialty, and ultimately teammate pressure, Vettel underperformed in 2014.

But of course Ricciardo was better in 2014.

If I had to say what would happen between them when both are in good form, with a gun to my head? Vettel will beat Ricciardo by a smidgen in qualifying. The race would be very close, as Vettel might manage his tyres slightly better, while Ricciardo has the better racecraft. But they'll overall be very evenly matched, not domination like 2014.

It's like Raikkonen and Massa, 2007 and 2008, actually. Raikkonen was just slightly better in 2007. Due to low motivation, then some bad luck in races, losing the points lead, and car not suiting him, he fell a long way behind Massa. If we had only used 2008 as a comparison for Raikkonen and Massa, we'd not get an accurate picture. I believe similar things happened in 2014 between Vettel and Ricciardo. They would be, IMO, very, very similar, with differing strengths.

Phew.

pokerman wrote:

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:Yeah I think the party started early for Hamilton, also Hamilton was actually still faster than Rosberg in most of the races he just couldn't get close enough to pass.

That's not quite true...

After the Japanese Grand Prix - which Lewis won by a dominant margin - the only race you could make a good case for him being the faster driver but unable to pass was Mexico. In Russia Nico qualified on pole and was cruising to victory when his car failed. In the United States Nico was comfortably ahead before his 'gust of wind' - it was completely his fault, but it wasn't that Lewis was right behind and trying to overtake before it, either. And in Brazil and Abu Dhabi Nico was comfortably on pole and never really challenged in the race; Lewis finished about 8 seconds behind in both, which doesn't fit with being faster but not close enough to pass.

I would have to look, I must admit I don't remember all the races, in the USA Rosberg made the mistake because Hamilton was catching him hand over fist.