planetf1.com

mikeyg123 wrote:If that were true then Norris is going to become the greatest of all time and Hulkenberg is as good as Schumacher.

It's been a while since Norris has looked like being quicker than Sainz. As for Hulk, I think time will show that 2018 was a bit of an anomaly, and likely to end up as Sainz's worst year.

(I don't really think Sainz is better than Verstappen, however)

Exediron wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:If that were true then Norris is going to become the greatest of all time and Hulkenberg is as good as Schumacher.

It's been a while since Norris has looked like being quicker than Sainz. As for Hulk, I think time will show that 2018 was a bit of an anomaly, and likely to end up as Sainz's worst year.

(I don't really think Sainz is better than Verstappen, however)

I think Sainz was better last year than the year before. in 2017, he crashed out and retired 3 times. caused more retirements than any other driver that year. 2 of them being very serious incidents that resulted in a grid drop if i am correct. He knocked himself and another driver out both times. Canada nearly causing a pile up of retirements. That IMO should have been a race ban. He pretty much did exactly what Grosjean did at spa 2012.

And I agree about sainz and Verstappen. I think Verstappen has improved significently and I'm not sure Sainz has. I think the Mclaren is better than many realise this year and it is often unchallenged by other teams resulting in Sainz not really getting challenged much. (probably why he gets next to no coverage)

mikeyg123 wrote:

F1 MERCENARY wrote:

Asphalt_World wrote:Max drove very well, but having the fastest car in the race makes it a little less of a drive compared to Sainz and Gasly.

Agreed, and while Sainz & Gasly were both excellent, without the safety cars, they wouldn't have finished so close to the front runners.

I will say however, with all this talk about Verstappen being the best driver on the grid today… First, no he's not, he's not far off, but I'd venture to say the Sainz is even better. Sainz has put on a clinic in the McLaren this year and hasn't made any mistakes that I can recall. In fact, Sainz is likely the DOTY for me. He's been that good and that consistent all year long. In races where he has the outright pace over his teammate he's run excellent races, but on days when Norris is faster, he usually managed to maintain his pace, maximize his opportunities and finish ahead. Really impressive stiff from Sainz and I think if he were in RBR with Verstappen they'd be awfully close, and wouldn't be surprised to see him best Verstappen.

If that were true then Norris is going to become the greatest of all time and Hulkenberg is as good as Schumacher.

Pretty sure you're basing this statement because you misunderstood and assume something I didn't say.

I've gone for Gasly, Verstappen and Grosjean. Would have gone for Sainz too if I could. But I think he just did a decent job given how quick Mclaren was. He gained a whole load of positions near the end due to bottas retireing and others messing up / getting penalties and was obviously lucky with the safety car to. Also from what has been discussed, I'm a bit unsure how him and others got away without a penalty. I think Grosjean has been seriously under rated this race. Don't know how i can be the only one giving him a vote.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I've gone for Gasly, Verstappen and Grosjean. Would have gone for Sainz too if I could. But I think he just did a decent job given how quick Mclaren was. He gained a whole load of positions near the end due to bottas retireing and others messing up / getting penalties and was obviously lucky with the safety car to. Also from what has been discussed, I'm a bit unsure how him and others got away without a penalty. I think Grosjean has been seriously under rated this race. Don't know how i can be the only one giving him a vote.

Sainz was obviously brilliant. That was one of the best drives of his career and his racecraft was generally exemplary, particularly regarding his pass on Perez which was so skillfully executed.

One of the drivers of the day.

Invade wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I've gone for Gasly, Verstappen and Grosjean. Would have gone for Sainz too if I could. But I think he just did a decent job given how quick Mclaren was. He gained a whole load of positions near the end due to bottas retireing and others messing up / getting penalties and was obviously lucky with the safety car to. Also from what has been discussed, I'm a bit unsure how him and others got away without a penalty. I think Grosjean has been seriously under rated this race. Don't know how i can be the only one giving him a vote.

Sainz was obviously brilliant. That was one of the best drives of his career and his racecraft was generally exemplary, particularly regarding his pass on Perez which was so skillfully executed.

One of the drivers of the day.

I did say I would add him if I could. I think it is stranger that there are no votes what so ever other than mine for Grosjean rather than a few missing out sainz. I also said that I don't normally like doing this, but it was a sort of sympathy vote towards Grosjean because i feel his great performance just was not recognised. It was his MGU-K problem that likely allowed Sainz to go by and he didn't do it in a clean way IMO.
He pushed Grosjean onto the grass / artificial grass when Grosjean was still fully along side. If Grosjean hadn't driven onto that (which could have gone wrong), then there would have been contact. Grosjean wasn't very happy with this either and quite understandably.

Because of the rest of his drive, I would have voted him as well, but I have tried to explain the reason why I went for Grosjean over him as there was only a choice of 3.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I've gone for Gasly, Verstappen and Grosjean. Would have gone for Sainz too if I could. But I think he just did a decent job given how quick Mclaren was. He gained a whole load of positions near the end due to bottas retireing and others messing up / getting penalties and was obviously lucky with the safety car to. Also from what has been discussed, I'm a bit unsure how him and others got away without a penalty. I think Grosjean has been seriously under rated this race. Don't know how i can be the only one giving him a vote.

I think the battles further back are generally unreported, especially if you only watch the highlights. I wasn't even aware of the push from Sainz before you mentioned it.

Siao7 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I've gone for Gasly, Verstappen and Grosjean. Would have gone for Sainz too if I could. But I think he just did a decent job given how quick Mclaren was. He gained a whole load of positions near the end due to bottas retireing and others messing up / getting penalties and was obviously lucky with the safety car to. Also from what has been discussed, I'm a bit unsure how him and others got away without a penalty. I think Grosjean has been seriously under rated this race. Don't know how i can be the only one giving him a vote.

I think the battles further back are generally unreported, especially if you only watch the highlights. I wasn't even aware of the push from Sainz before you mentioned it.

Yes, I myself didn't see this. Until they showed a replay of the guys at the front at the restart, you could just about see what Sainz did to Grosjean, and it certainly was a beet cheeky. Grosjean was fully alongside as they completed a right hand turn and he was nearly completely pushed off track by Sainz. Sainz went much wider after the turn then he needed to and Grosjean already left more than enough room because Sainz looked to be understeering into him.

The more I think about it the more I come to the opinion that Sainz drove an absolutely tremendous race. He came through the whole field in a Mclaren, hardly the same as doing it in a top 3 car and was easily faster than his team mate. Then at the end of the race he has all the cards stacked against him and somehow manages to hold position. I voted for Verstappen, Gasly and Sainz but if I could only vote 1 it would be Sainz. His race was more impressive than Gasly's who really only gained positions because people fell off in front of him.

mikeyg123 wrote:The more I think about it the more I come to the opinion that Sainz drove an absolutely tremendous race. He came through the whole field in a Mclaren, hardly the same as doing it in a top 3 car and was easily faster than his team mate. Then at the end of the race he has all the cards stacked against him and somehow manages to hold position. I voted for Verstappen, Gasly and Sainz but if I could only vote 1 it would be Sainz. His race was more impressive than Gasly's who really only gained positions because people fell off in front of him.

mikeyg123 wrote:The more I think about it the more I come to the opinion that Sainz drove an absolutely tremendous race. He came through the whole field in a Mclaren, hardly the same as doing it in a top 3 car and was easily faster than his team mate. Then at the end of the race he has all the cards stacked against him and somehow manages to hold position. I voted for Verstappen, Gasly and Sainz but if I could only vote 1 it would be Sainz. His race was more impressive than Gasly's who really only gained positions because people fell off in front of him.

At the end of the race with all the chaos and including Bottas retiring, Gasly and Sainz both gained the same number of positions. Other than 1 impressive overtake on perez, all of the rest should have just been expected really. Other than perhaps his team mate who I think should have done better. That McLaren is no slouch. When I look back at the race in detail as well as the pit stops other drivers made, I think he actually overtook on track 8 times including both stints. Not including him getting by Magnussen and Ricciardo as they both had damage as Sainz past. And one of them was on Grosjean at the end which I think was done in an unreasonable manner. The rest was done by strategy which he did do really well with admittedly. But on lap 45, he was in 14th. Several laps later, he was in 9th. But he had only actually overtaken Noris. The rest had all pitted at an incredibly convenient time that avoided troubling Sainz. To me things sort of went his way throughout a lot of the race. Then came the safety car. He will have been under pressure due to old tyres at the end which he did very well with (other than overtaking Grosjean). Other than that, i think it was that due to the lack of coverage, i think it was sort of hidden that he benefited from so many things when i look more closely.

He didn't overtake anywhere near as many as his results make it look. Most cars that he did go by were a fair bit slower than him. I think the main stand out for him was that he made his tyres last. But then I think the safety car helped him here. But then as you point out, he did have to hold position and he has Saubers behind him on way better tyres which he did keep behind.



I'd still vote him if I could vote for 4 drivers, but I don't think he was the main stand out driver for the weekend and IMO has possibly been slightly over rated actually.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:The more I think about it the more I come to the opinion that Sainz drove an absolutely tremendous race. He came through the whole field in a Mclaren, hardly the same as doing it in a top 3 car and was easily faster than his team mate. Then at the end of the race he has all the cards stacked against him and somehow manages to hold position. I voted for Verstappen, Gasly and Sainz but if I could only vote 1 it would be Sainz. His race was more impressive than Gasly's who really only gained positions because people fell off in front of him.

At the end of the race with all the chaos and including Bottas retiring, Gasly and Sainz both gained the same number of positions. Other than 1 impressive overtake on perez, all of the rest should have just been expected really. Other than perhaps his team mate who I think should have done better. That McLaren is no slouch. When I look back at the race in detail as well as the pit stops other drivers made, I think he actually overtook on track 8 times. Not including him getting by Magnussen and Ricciardo as they both had damage as Sainz past. And one of them was on Grosjean at the end which I think was done in an unreasonable manner. The rest was done by strategy which he did do really well with admittedly. But on lap 45, he was in 14th. Several laps later, he was in 9th. But he had only actually overtaken Noris. The rest had all pitted at an incredibly convenient time that avoided troubling Sainz. To me things sort of went his way throughout a lot of the race. Then came the safety car. He will have been under pressure due to old tyres at the end which he did very well with (other than overtaking Grosjean). Other than that, i think it was that due to the lack of coverage, i think it was sort of hidden that he benefited from so many things when i look more closely.

He didn't overtake anywhere near as many as his results make it look. Most cars that he did go by were a fair bit slower than him. I think the main stand out for him was that he made his tyres last. But then I think the safety car helped him here. But then as you point out, he did have to hold position and he has Saubers behind him on way better tyres which he did keep behind.



I'd still vote him if I could vote for 4 drivers, but I don't think he was the main stand out driver for the weekend and IMO has possibly been slightly over rated actually.

Overtaking 8 cars in a midfield car is very good going especially on a 1 stop strategy. Was the Mclaren the class of the midfield? It didn't look it in Norris hands? He certainly had to do a lot more to get his 3rd place than Gasly had to do to get his second. The safety car actually should have hurt him not helped. He turned it into a plus with his excellent driving. Really it was a weekend where things fell against him and he made the best of it. Given his circumstances he shouldn't have been able to get a podium.

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:The more I think about it the more I come to the opinion that Sainz drove an absolutely tremendous race. He came through the whole field in a Mclaren, hardly the same as doing it in a top 3 car and was easily faster than his team mate. Then at the end of the race he has all the cards stacked against him and somehow manages to hold position. I voted for Verstappen, Gasly and Sainz but if I could only vote 1 it would be Sainz. His race was more impressive than Gasly's who really only gained positions because people fell off in front of him.

At the end of the race with all the chaos and including Bottas retiring, Gasly and Sainz both gained the same number of positions. Other than 1 impressive overtake on perez, all of the rest should have just been expected really. Other than perhaps his team mate who I think should have done better. That McLaren is no slouch. When I look back at the race in detail as well as the pit stops other drivers made, I think he actually overtook on track 8 times. Not including him getting by Magnussen and Ricciardo as they both had damage as Sainz past. And one of them was on Grosjean at the end which I think was done in an unreasonable manner. The rest was done by strategy which he did do really well with admittedly. But on lap 45, he was in 14th. Several laps later, he was in 9th. But he had only actually overtaken Noris. The rest had all pitted at an incredibly convenient time that avoided troubling Sainz. To me things sort of went his way throughout a lot of the race. Then came the safety car. He will have been under pressure due to old tyres at the end which he did very well with (other than overtaking Grosjean). Other than that, i think it was that due to the lack of coverage, i think it was sort of hidden that he benefited from so many things when i look more closely.

He didn't overtake anywhere near as many as his results make it look. Most cars that he did go by were a fair bit slower than him. I think the main stand out for him was that he made his tyres last. But then I think the safety car helped him here. But then as you point out, he did have to hold position and he has Saubers behind him on way better tyres which he did keep behind.



I'd still vote him if I could vote for 4 drivers, but I don't think he was the main stand out driver for the weekend and IMO has possibly been slightly over rated actually.

Overtaking 8 cars in a midfield car is very good going especially on a 1 stop strategy. Was the Mclaren the class of the midfield? It didn't look it in Norris hands? He certainly had to do a lot more to get his 3rd place than Gasly had to do to get his second. The safety car actually should have hurt him not helped. He turned it into a plus with his excellent driving. Really it was a weekend where things fell against him and he made the best of it. Given his circumstances he shouldn't have been able to get a podium.

I think Noris has very often been disappointing on race day which is not the case in qualifying. And yes, I personally think that a lot of this year, the Mclaren has been easily the best of the rest. There have been many races where Sainz has sort of been in the middle of nowhere. Behind the top 3 teams and above the others. Hasn't been much of a challenge, but I don't think it is all down to him being excellent this year. I think the car is better than many realise. I feel if verstappen or Hamilton was driving it, it would much more often have sneaked into the top 6 at least in qualifying. He has been extremely solid, but not that impressive IMO.

I'm still not against it being a very good drive, but without all these other things happening, he would have been 8th or 9th Maybe even out of the points without Ricciardo messing up his race and Grosjean having issues. That isn't even close to a podium. Would we have been quite as amazed if he finished this low? I'm not convinced. Points all to often mean everything with votes.

For the ability of his car, I'd say it was similar to Stroll's drive in Baku when he got on the podium. Kept it pretty clean and made the most of of crazy circumstances. But to me wasn't incredible.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:The more I think about it the more I come to the opinion that Sainz drove an absolutely tremendous race. He came through the whole field in a Mclaren, hardly the same as doing it in a top 3 car and was easily faster than his team mate. Then at the end of the race he has all the cards stacked against him and somehow manages to hold position. I voted for Verstappen, Gasly and Sainz but if I could only vote 1 it would be Sainz. His race was more impressive than Gasly's who really only gained positions because people fell off in front of him.

At the end of the race with all the chaos and including Bottas retiring, Gasly and Sainz both gained the same number of positions. Other than 1 impressive overtake on perez, all of the rest should have just been expected really. Other than perhaps his team mate who I think should have done better. That McLaren is no slouch. When I look back at the race in detail as well as the pit stops other drivers made, I think he actually overtook on track 8 times. Not including him getting by Magnussen and Ricciardo as they both had damage as Sainz past. And one of them was on Grosjean at the end which I think was done in an unreasonable manner. The rest was done by strategy which he did do really well with admittedly. But on lap 45, he was in 14th. Several laps later, he was in 9th. But he had only actually overtaken Noris. The rest had all pitted at an incredibly convenient time that avoided troubling Sainz. To me things sort of went his way throughout a lot of the race. Then came the safety car. He will have been under pressure due to old tyres at the end which he did very well with (other than overtaking Grosjean). Other than that, i think it was that due to the lack of coverage, i think it was sort of hidden that he benefited from so many things when i look more closely.

He didn't overtake anywhere near as many as his results make it look. Most cars that he did go by were a fair bit slower than him. I think the main stand out for him was that he made his tyres last. But then I think the safety car helped him here. But then as you point out, he did have to hold position and he has Saubers behind him on way better tyres which he did keep behind.



I'd still vote him if I could vote for 4 drivers, but I don't think he was the main stand out driver for the weekend and IMO has possibly been slightly over rated actually.

Overtaking 8 cars in a midfield car is very good going especially on a 1 stop strategy. Was the Mclaren the class of the midfield? It didn't look it in Norris hands? He certainly had to do a lot more to get his 3rd place than Gasly had to do to get his second. The safety car actually should have hurt him not helped. He turned it into a plus with his excellent driving. Really it was a weekend where things fell against him and he made the best of it. Given his circumstances he shouldn't have been able to get a podium.

I think Noris has very often been disappointing on race day which is not the case in qualifying. And yes, I personally think that a lot of this year, the Mclaren has been easily the best of the rest. There have been many races where Sainz has sort of been in the middle of nowhere. Behind the top 3 teams and above the others. Hasn't been much of a challenge, but I don't think it is all down to him being excellent this year. I think the car is better than many realise. I feel if verstappen or Hamilton was driving it, it would much more often have sneaked into the top 6 at least in qualifying. He has been extremely solid, but not that impressive IMO.

I'm still not against it being a very good drive, but without all these other things happening, he would have been 8th or 9th Maybe even out of the points without Ricciardo messing up his race and Grosjean having issues. That isn't even close to a podium. Would we have been quite as amazed if he finished this low? I'm not convinced. Points all to often mean everything with votes.

For the ability of his car, I'd say it was similar to Stroll's drive in Baku when he got on the podium. Kept it pretty clean and made the most of of crazy circumstances. But to me wasn't incredible.

What makes you think Hamilton or Verstappen would get it into the top six in qualifying at times? Is there any evidence for that other than a long winded cross-driver comparison?

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:The more I think about it the more I come to the opinion that Sainz drove an absolutely tremendous race. He came through the whole field in a Mclaren, hardly the same as doing it in a top 3 car and was easily faster than his team mate. Then at the end of the race he has all the cards stacked against him and somehow manages to hold position. I voted for Verstappen, Gasly and Sainz but if I could only vote 1 it would be Sainz. His race was more impressive than Gasly's who really only gained positions because people fell off in front of him.

At the end of the race with all the chaos and including Bottas retiring, Gasly and Sainz both gained the same number of positions. Other than 1 impressive overtake on perez, all of the rest should have just been expected really. Other than perhaps his team mate who I think should have done better. That McLaren is no slouch. When I look back at the race in detail as well as the pit stops other drivers made, I think he actually overtook on track 8 times. Not including him getting by Magnussen and Ricciardo as they both had damage as Sainz past. And one of them was on Grosjean at the end which I think was done in an unreasonable manner. The rest was done by strategy which he did do really well with admittedly. But on lap 45, he was in 14th. Several laps later, he was in 9th. But he had only actually overtaken Noris. The rest had all pitted at an incredibly convenient time that avoided troubling Sainz. To me things sort of went his way throughout a lot of the race. Then came the safety car. He will have been under pressure due to old tyres at the end which he did very well with (other than overtaking Grosjean). Other than that, i think it was that due to the lack of coverage, i think it was sort of hidden that he benefited from so many things when i look more closely.

He didn't overtake anywhere near as many as his results make it look. Most cars that he did go by were a fair bit slower than him. I think the main stand out for him was that he made his tyres last. But then I think the safety car helped him here. But then as you point out, he did have to hold position and he has Saubers behind him on way better tyres which he did keep behind.



I'd still vote him if I could vote for 4 drivers, but I don't think he was the main stand out driver for the weekend and IMO has possibly been slightly over rated actually.

Overtaking 8 cars in a midfield car is very good going especially on a 1 stop strategy. Was the Mclaren the class of the midfield? It didn't look it in Norris hands? He certainly had to do a lot more to get his 3rd place than Gasly had to do to get his second. The safety car actually should have hurt him not helped. He turned it into a plus with his excellent driving. Really it was a weekend where things fell against him and he made the best of it. Given his circumstances he shouldn't have been able to get a podium.

I think Noris has very often been disappointing on race day which is not the case in qualifying. And yes, I personally think that a lot of this year, the Mclaren has been easily the best of the rest. There have been many races where Sainz has sort of been in the middle of nowhere. Behind the top 3 teams and above the others. Hasn't been much of a challenge, but I don't think it is all down to him being excellent this year. I think the car is better than many realise. I feel if verstappen or Hamilton was driving it, it would much more often have sneaked into the top 6 at least in qualifying. He has been extremely solid, but not that impressive IMO.

I'm still not against it being a very good drive, but without all these other things happening, he would have been 8th or 9th Maybe even out of the points without Ricciardo messing up his race and Grosjean having issues. That isn't even close to a podium. Would we have been quite as amazed if he finished this low? I'm not convinced. Points all to often mean everything with votes.

For the ability of his car, I'd say it was similar to Stroll's drive in Baku when he got on the podium. Kept it pretty clean and made the most of of crazy circumstances. But to me wasn't incredible.

You think Sainz is that bad? For Hamilton or Verstappen to start beating one of the big boys in the Mclaren they would have to be about 0.75 at least quicker than Sainz or Norris. That would probably put Sainz and Norris at best around Stroll kind of speed. Considering the cross comparison between Sainz/Hulk/Ricciardo/Verstappen this seems unlikely.

Probably 0.3 at most.

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:The more I think about it the more I come to the opinion that Sainz drove an absolutely tremendous race. He came through the whole field in a Mclaren, hardly the same as doing it in a top 3 car and was easily faster than his team mate. Then at the end of the race he has all the cards stacked against him and somehow manages to hold position. I voted for Verstappen, Gasly and Sainz but if I could only vote 1 it would be Sainz. His race was more impressive than Gasly's who really only gained positions because people fell off in front of him.

At the end of the race with all the chaos and including Bottas retiring, Gasly and Sainz both gained the same number of positions. Other than 1 impressive overtake on perez, all of the rest should have just been expected really. Other than perhaps his team mate who I think should have done better. That McLaren is no slouch. When I look back at the race in detail as well as the pit stops other drivers made, I think he actually overtook on track 8 times. Not including him getting by Magnussen and Ricciardo as they both had damage as Sainz past. And one of them was on Grosjean at the end which I think was done in an unreasonable manner. The rest was done by strategy which he did do really well with admittedly. But on lap 45, he was in 14th. Several laps later, he was in 9th. But he had only actually overtaken Noris. The rest had all pitted at an incredibly convenient time that avoided troubling Sainz. To me things sort of went his way throughout a lot of the race. Then came the safety car. He will have been under pressure due to old tyres at the end which he did very well with (other than overtaking Grosjean). Other than that, i think it was that due to the lack of coverage, i think it was sort of hidden that he benefited from so many things when i look more closely.

He didn't overtake anywhere near as many as his results make it look. Most cars that he did go by were a fair bit slower than him. I think the main stand out for him was that he made his tyres last. But then I think the safety car helped him here. But then as you point out, he did have to hold position and he has Saubers behind him on way better tyres which he did keep behind.



I'd still vote him if I could vote for 4 drivers, but I don't think he was the main stand out driver for the weekend and IMO has possibly been slightly over rated actually.

Overtaking 8 cars in a midfield car is very good going especially on a 1 stop strategy. Was the Mclaren the class of the midfield? It didn't look it in Norris hands? He certainly had to do a lot more to get his 3rd place than Gasly had to do to get his second. The safety car actually should have hurt him not helped. He turned it into a plus with his excellent driving. Really it was a weekend where things fell against him and he made the best of it. Given his circumstances he shouldn't have been able to get a podium.

I think Noris has very often been disappointing on race day which is not the case in qualifying. And yes, I personally think that a lot of this year, the Mclaren has been easily the best of the rest. There have been many races where Sainz has sort of been in the middle of nowhere. Behind the top 3 teams and above the others. Hasn't been much of a challenge, but I don't think it is all down to him being excellent this year. I think the car is better than many realise. I feel if verstappen or Hamilton was driving it, it would much more often have sneaked into the top 6 at least in qualifying. He has been extremely solid, but not that impressive IMO.

I'm still not against it being a very good drive, but without all these other things happening, he would have been 8th or 9th Maybe even out of the points without Ricciardo messing up his race and Grosjean having issues. That isn't even close to a podium. Would we have been quite as amazed if he finished this low? I'm not convinced. Points all to often mean everything with votes.

For the ability of his car, I'd say it was similar to Stroll's drive in Baku when he got on the podium. Kept it pretty clean and made the most of of crazy circumstances. But to me wasn't incredible.

You think Sainz is that bad? For Hamilton or Verstappen to start beating one of the big boys in the Mclaren they would have to be about 0.75 at least quicker than Sainz or Norris. That would probably put Sainz and Norris at best around Stroll kind of speed. Considering the cross comparison between Sainz/Hulk/Ricciardo/Verstappen this seems unlikely.

Probably 0.3 at most.

I personally think Verstappen has improved significantly more than Sainz has. Verstappen is making Red Bull seem better than it is, and yes, I wouldn't be surprised that if there was a top driver in the Mclaren that it would more often challenge red bull or at least be a fair bit closer. He's also only got a rookie team mate who may also be making him look better. I also think that I think if he was in a top team against Verstappen or hamilton, I don't think he'd do that well. At least not as well as some are getting the impression of based on his performance this year. Norris isn't a good comparison. And I'm not totally sure if it is always McLaren that results on Sainz sometimes not doing quite as well.

I mean i know i could well be wrong with this, but i don't think he's been maximising the performance out that car this year. Results wise i'd probably say so most of the time, but i myself think the car being better than others think it is has helped a lot with this.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

At the end of the race with all the chaos and including Bottas retiring, Gasly and Sainz both gained the same number of positions. Other than 1 impressive overtake on perez, all of the rest should have just been expected really. Other than perhaps his team mate who I think should have done better. That McLaren is no slouch. When I look back at the race in detail as well as the pit stops other drivers made, I think he actually overtook on track 8 times. Not including him getting by Magnussen and Ricciardo as they both had damage as Sainz past. And one of them was on Grosjean at the end which I think was done in an unreasonable manner. The rest was done by strategy which he did do really well with admittedly. But on lap 45, he was in 14th. Several laps later, he was in 9th. But he had only actually overtaken Noris. The rest had all pitted at an incredibly convenient time that avoided troubling Sainz. To me things sort of went his way throughout a lot of the race. Then came the safety car. He will have been under pressure due to old tyres at the end which he did very well with (other than overtaking Grosjean). Other than that, i think it was that due to the lack of coverage, i think it was sort of hidden that he benefited from so many things when i look more closely.

He didn't overtake anywhere near as many as his results make it look. Most cars that he did go by were a fair bit slower than him. I think the main stand out for him was that he made his tyres last. But then I think the safety car helped him here. But then as you point out, he did have to hold position and he has Saubers behind him on way better tyres which he did keep behind.



I'd still vote him if I could vote for 4 drivers, but I don't think he was the main stand out driver for the weekend and IMO has possibly been slightly over rated actually.

Overtaking 8 cars in a midfield car is very good going especially on a 1 stop strategy. Was the Mclaren the class of the midfield? It didn't look it in Norris hands? He certainly had to do a lot more to get his 3rd place than Gasly had to do to get his second. The safety car actually should have hurt him not helped. He turned it into a plus with his excellent driving. Really it was a weekend where things fell against him and he made the best of it. Given his circumstances he shouldn't have been able to get a podium.

I think Noris has very often been disappointing on race day which is not the case in qualifying. And yes, I personally think that a lot of this year, the Mclaren has been easily the best of the rest. There have been many races where Sainz has sort of been in the middle of nowhere. Behind the top 3 teams and above the others. Hasn't been much of a challenge, but I don't think it is all down to him being excellent this year. I think the car is better than many realise. I feel if verstappen or Hamilton was driving it, it would much more often have sneaked into the top 6 at least in qualifying. He has been extremely solid, but not that impressive IMO.

I'm still not against it being a very good drive, but without all these other things happening, he would have been 8th or 9th Maybe even out of the points without Ricciardo messing up his race and Grosjean having issues. That isn't even close to a podium. Would we have been quite as amazed if he finished this low? I'm not convinced. Points all to often mean everything with votes.

For the ability of his car, I'd say it was similar to Stroll's drive in Baku when he got on the podium. Kept it pretty clean and made the most of of crazy circumstances. But to me wasn't incredible.

You think Sainz is that bad? For Hamilton or Verstappen to start beating one of the big boys in the Mclaren they would have to be about 0.75 at least quicker than Sainz or Norris. That would probably put Sainz and Norris at best around Stroll kind of speed. Considering the cross comparison between Sainz/Hulk/Ricciardo/Verstappen this seems unlikely.

Probably 0.3 at most.

I personally think Verstappen has improved significantly more than Sainz has. Verstappen is making Red Bull seem better than it is, and yes, I wouldn't be surprised that if there was a top driver in the Mclaren that it would more often challenge red bull or at least be a fair bit closer. He's also only got a rookie team mate who may also be making him look better. I also think that I think if he was in a top team against Verstappen or hamilton, I don't think he'd do that well. At least not as well as some are getting the impression of based on his performance this year. Norris isn't a good comparison. And I'm not totally sure if it is always McLaren that results on Sainz sometimes not doing quite as well.

I mean i know i could well be wrong with this, but i don't think he's been maximising the performance out that car this year. Results wise i'd probably say so most of the time, but i myself think the car being better than others think it is has helped a lot with this.

If you think Verstappen or Hamilton could regularly get among the top teams in that McLaren then you have to think Sainz and Norris are at least among the slowest drivers if not the two actual slowest drivers in F1.

I think that's a big call with about zero evidence to back it up.

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
Overtaking 8 cars in a midfield car is very good going especially on a 1 stop strategy. Was the Mclaren the class of the midfield? It didn't look it in Norris hands? He certainly had to do a lot more to get his 3rd place than Gasly had to do to get his second. The safety car actually should have hurt him not helped. He turned it into a plus with his excellent driving. Really it was a weekend where things fell against him and he made the best of it. Given his circumstances he shouldn't have been able to get a podium.

I think Noris has very often been disappointing on race day which is not the case in qualifying. And yes, I personally think that a lot of this year, the Mclaren has been easily the best of the rest. There have been many races where Sainz has sort of been in the middle of nowhere. Behind the top 3 teams and above the others. Hasn't been much of a challenge, but I don't think it is all down to him being excellent this year. I think the car is better than many realise. I feel if verstappen or Hamilton was driving it, it would much more often have sneaked into the top 6 at least in qualifying. He has been extremely solid, but not that impressive IMO.

I'm still not against it being a very good drive, but without all these other things happening, he would have been 8th or 9th Maybe even out of the points without Ricciardo messing up his race and Grosjean having issues. That isn't even close to a podium. Would we have been quite as amazed if he finished this low? I'm not convinced. Points all to often mean everything with votes.

For the ability of his car, I'd say it was similar to Stroll's drive in Baku when he got on the podium. Kept it pretty clean and made the most of of crazy circumstances. But to me wasn't incredible.

You think Sainz is that bad? For Hamilton or Verstappen to start beating one of the big boys in the Mclaren they would have to be about 0.75 at least quicker than Sainz or Norris. That would probably put Sainz and Norris at best around Stroll kind of speed. Considering the cross comparison between Sainz/Hulk/Ricciardo/Verstappen this seems unlikely.

Probably 0.3 at most.

I personally think Verstappen has improved significantly more than Sainz has. Verstappen is making Red Bull seem better than it is, and yes, I wouldn't be surprised that if there was a top driver in the Mclaren that it would more often challenge red bull or at least be a fair bit closer. He's also only got a rookie team mate who may also be making him look better. I also think that I think if he was in a top team against Verstappen or hamilton, I don't think he'd do that well. At least not as well as some are getting the impression of based on his performance this year. Norris isn't a good comparison. And I'm not totally sure if it is always McLaren that results on Sainz sometimes not doing quite as well.

I mean i know i could well be wrong with this, but i don't think he's been maximising the performance out that car this year. Results wise i'd probably say so most of the time, but i myself think the car being better than others think it is has helped a lot with this.

If you think Verstappen or Hamilton could regularly get among the top teams in that McLaren then you have to think Sainz and Norris are at least among the slowest drivers if not the two actual slowest drivers in F1.

I think that's a big call with about zero evidence to back it up.

Yea i did over do it when I said much more often. What I do believe is sometimes. Like I mentioned, If Verstappen was not at Red Bull, it is likely that there won't be a driver as good as him that replaces him. This would also likely mean that Sainz has a better chance of occasionally beating a red Bull in qualifying. I noticed that in france, Norris was a tiny fraction of a second behind Verstappen. To me showing that it could well have been possible that if the drivers were the other way round that Verstappen could well have occasionally out qualified one or both of the red bulls. In terms of 1 lap pace, I'm not sure there is any difference between hamilton and Verstappen being the best on the grid. And having two weaker drivers than verstappen in the Red Bull could have made this possible sometimes. Remember how often even Sainz out qualified Gasly? I think Verstappen being at McLaren would have resulted in this happening more.

I shouldn't have said often, But I certainly think That if Verstappen wasn't at Red Bull and was in this team, it would sometimes be possible a few more times. They even both outqualified Vettel in france.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:If you think Verstappen or Hamilton could regularly get among the top teams in that McLaren then you have to think Sainz and Norris are at least among the slowest drivers if not the two actual slowest drivers in F1.

I think that's a big call with about zero evidence to back it up.

Yea i did over do it when I said much more often. What I do believe is sometimes. Like I mentioned, If Verstappen was not at Red Bull, it is likely that there won't be a driver as good as him that replaces him. This would also likely mean that Sainz has a better chance of occasionally beating a red Bull in qualifying. I noticed that in france, Norris was a tiny fraction of a second behind Verstappen. To me showing that it could well have been possible that if the drivers were the other way round that Verstappen could well have occasionally out qualified one or both of the red bulls. In terms of 1 lap pace, I'm not sure there is any difference between hamilton and Verstappen being the best on the grid. And having two weaker drivers than verstappen in the Red Bull could have made this possible sometimes. Remember how often even Sainz out qualified Gasly? I think Verstappen being at McLaren would have resulted in this happening more.

I shouldn't have said often, But I certainly think That if Verstappen wasn't at Red Bull and was in this team, it would sometimes be possible a few more times. They even both outqualified Vettel in france.

There have been a few times this year when I think a top driver in the McLaren could have beaten the slowest 'Big Three' team -- Bahrain comes to mind, and maybe France as mentioned above. But definitely not very often.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

At the end of the race with all the chaos and including Bottas retiring, Gasly and Sainz both gained the same number of positions. Other than 1 impressive overtake on perez, all of the rest should have just been expected really. Other than perhaps his team mate who I think should have done better. That McLaren is no slouch. When I look back at the race in detail as well as the pit stops other drivers made, I think he actually overtook on track 8 times. Not including him getting by Magnussen and Ricciardo as they both had damage as Sainz past. And one of them was on Grosjean at the end which I think was done in an unreasonable manner. The rest was done by strategy which he did do really well with admittedly. But on lap 45, he was in 14th. Several laps later, he was in 9th. But he had only actually overtaken Noris. The rest had all pitted at an incredibly convenient time that avoided troubling Sainz. To me things sort of went his way throughout a lot of the race. Then came the safety car. He will have been under pressure due to old tyres at the end which he did very well with (other than overtaking Grosjean). Other than that, i think it was that due to the lack of coverage, i think it was sort of hidden that he benefited from so many things when i look more closely.

He didn't overtake anywhere near as many as his results make it look. Most cars that he did go by were a fair bit slower than him. I think the main stand out for him was that he made his tyres last. But then I think the safety car helped him here. But then as you point out, he did have to hold position and he has Saubers behind him on way better tyres which he did keep behind.



I'd still vote him if I could vote for 4 drivers, but I don't think he was the main stand out driver for the weekend and IMO has possibly been slightly over rated actually.

Overtaking 8 cars in a midfield car is very good going especially on a 1 stop strategy. Was the Mclaren the class of the midfield? It didn't look it in Norris hands? He certainly had to do a lot more to get his 3rd place than Gasly had to do to get his second. The safety car actually should have hurt him not helped. He turned it into a plus with his excellent driving. Really it was a weekend where things fell against him and he made the best of it. Given his circumstances he shouldn't have been able to get a podium.

I think Noris has very often been disappointing on race day which is not the case in qualifying. And yes, I personally think that a lot of this year, the Mclaren has been easily the best of the rest. There have been many races where Sainz has sort of been in the middle of nowhere. Behind the top 3 teams and above the others. Hasn't been much of a challenge, but I don't think it is all down to him being excellent this year. I think the car is better than many realise. I feel if verstappen or Hamilton was driving it, it would much more often have sneaked into the top 6 at least in qualifying. He has been extremely solid, but not that impressive IMO.

I'm still not against it being a very good drive, but without all these other things happening, he would have been 8th or 9th Maybe even out of the points without Ricciardo messing up his race and Grosjean having issues. That isn't even close to a podium. Would we have been quite as amazed if he finished this low? I'm not convinced. Points all to often mean everything with votes.

For the ability of his car, I'd say it was similar to Stroll's drive in Baku when he got on the podium. Kept it pretty clean and made the most of of crazy circumstances. But to me wasn't incredible.

You think Sainz is that bad? For Hamilton or Verstappen to start beating one of the big boys in the Mclaren they would have to be about 0.75 at least quicker than Sainz or Norris. That would probably put Sainz and Norris at best around Stroll kind of speed. Considering the cross comparison between Sainz/Hulk/Ricciardo/Verstappen this seems unlikely.

Probably 0.3 at most.

I personally think Verstappen has improved significantly more than Sainz has. Verstappen is making Red Bull seem better than it is, and yes, I wouldn't be surprised that if there was a top driver in the Mclaren that it would more often challenge red bull or at least be a fair bit closer. He's also only got a rookie team mate who may also be making him look better. I also think that I think if he was in a top team against Verstappen or hamilton, I don't think he'd do that well. At least not as well as some are getting the impression of based on his performance this year. Norris isn't a good comparison. And I'm not totally sure if it is always McLaren that results on Sainz sometimes not doing quite as well.

I mean i know i could well be wrong with this, but i don't think he's been maximising the performance out that car this year. Results wise i'd probably say so most of the time, but i myself think the car being better than others think it is has helped a lot with this.

Yes you are very wrong with this and like you many others as I believe Verstappen would have crashed much more than Sainz. Despite driving a RB he has been always involved in some sort of first lap scrap and the Bahrain's race you cite against Sainz guess who was the other driver involved in the contact? Verstappen.

People have this impression that RB is never good enough and because his teammate are finding it difficult to drive "his" cars just like Alonso's teammates so the 10s tend to flock at every opportunity even when Verstappen fluffs the start and finish lower than his starting position.

Pullrod wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:
Overtaking 8 cars in a midfield car is very good going especially on a 1 stop strategy. Was the Mclaren the class of the midfield? It didn't look it in Norris hands? He certainly had to do a lot more to get his 3rd place than Gasly had to do to get his second. The safety car actually should have hurt him not helped. He turned it into a plus with his excellent driving. Really it was a weekend where things fell against him and he made the best of it. Given his circumstances he shouldn't have been able to get a podium.

I think Noris has very often been disappointing on race day which is not the case in qualifying. And yes, I personally think that a lot of this year, the Mclaren has been easily the best of the rest. There have been many races where Sainz has sort of been in the middle of nowhere. Behind the top 3 teams and above the others. Hasn't been much of a challenge, but I don't think it is all down to him being excellent this year. I think the car is better than many realise. I feel if verstappen or Hamilton was driving it, it would much more often have sneaked into the top 6 at least in qualifying. He has been extremely solid, but not that impressive IMO.

I'm still not against it being a very good drive, but without all these other things happening, he would have been 8th or 9th Maybe even out of the points without Ricciardo messing up his race and Grosjean having issues. That isn't even close to a podium. Would we have been quite as amazed if he finished this low? I'm not convinced. Points all to often mean everything with votes.

For the ability of his car, I'd say it was similar to Stroll's drive in Baku when he got on the podium. Kept it pretty clean and made the most of of crazy circumstances. But to me wasn't incredible.

You think Sainz is that bad? For Hamilton or Verstappen to start beating one of the big boys in the Mclaren they would have to be about 0.75 at least quicker than Sainz or Norris. That would probably put Sainz and Norris at best around Stroll kind of speed. Considering the cross comparison between Sainz/Hulk/Ricciardo/Verstappen this seems unlikely.

Probably 0.3 at most.

I personally think Verstappen has improved significantly more than Sainz has. Verstappen is making Red Bull seem better than it is, and yes, I wouldn't be surprised that if there was a top driver in the Mclaren that it would more often challenge red bull or at least be a fair bit closer. He's also only got a rookie team mate who may also be making him look better. I also think that I think if he was in a top team against Verstappen or hamilton, I don't think he'd do that well. At least not as well as some are getting the impression of based on his performance this year. Norris isn't a good comparison. And I'm not totally sure if it is always McLaren that results on Sainz sometimes not doing quite as well.

I mean i know i could well be wrong with this, but i don't think he's been maximising the performance out that car this year. Results wise i'd probably say so most of the time, but i myself think the car being better than others think it is has helped a lot with this.

Yes you are very wrong with this and like you many others as I believe Verstappen would have crashed much more than Sainz. Despite driving a RB he has been always involved in some sort of first lap scrap and the Bahrain's race you cite against Sainz guess who was the other driver involved in the contact? Verstappen.

People have this impression that RB is never good enough and because his teammate are finding it difficult to drive "his" cars just like Alonso's teammates so the 10s tend to flock at every opportunity even when Verstappen fluffs the start and finish lower than his starting position.

I'm not at all convinced Verstappen would crash more than Sainz. Verstappen and Sainz have both had very bad points in their careers in terms of crashing or having some very clumsy collisions with bad results. I think they both have been better this year, but still think Verstappen would do a lot better than sainz. I also think that Verstappen extremely rarely lacks pace whereas I think Sainz does more often - especially over a single lap. I think Noris often makes him look bad here.

In Bahrian, I initially blamed Verstappen, and someone in this forum actually seemed to think that was unreasonable. I now think both could have done a better job. I'm not sure I was ever more against Sainz than Verstappen for this.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

Pullrod wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:
I think Noris has very often been disappointing on race day which is not the case in qualifying. And yes, I personally think that a lot of this year, the Mclaren has been easily the best of the rest. There have been many races where Sainz has sort of been in the middle of nowhere. Behind the top 3 teams and above the others. Hasn't been much of a challenge, but I don't think it is all down to him being excellent this year. I think the car is better than many realise. I feel if verstappen or Hamilton was driving it, it would much more often have sneaked into the top 6 at least in qualifying. He has been extremely solid, but not that impressive IMO.

I'm still not against it being a very good drive, but without all these other things happening, he would have been 8th or 9th Maybe even out of the points without Ricciardo messing up his race and Grosjean having issues. That isn't even close to a podium. Would we have been quite as amazed if he finished this low? I'm not convinced. Points all to often mean everything with votes.

For the ability of his car, I'd say it was similar to Stroll's drive in Baku when he got on the podium. Kept it pretty clean and made the most of of crazy circumstances. But to me wasn't incredible.

You think Sainz is that bad? For Hamilton or Verstappen to start beating one of the big boys in the Mclaren they would have to be about 0.75 at least quicker than Sainz or Norris. That would probably put Sainz and Norris at best around Stroll kind of speed. Considering the cross comparison between Sainz/Hulk/Ricciardo/Verstappen this seems unlikely.

Probably 0.3 at most.

I personally think Verstappen has improved significantly more than Sainz has. Verstappen is making Red Bull seem better than it is, and yes, I wouldn't be surprised that if there was a top driver in the Mclaren that it would more often challenge red bull or at least be a fair bit closer. He's also only got a rookie team mate who may also be making him look better. I also think that I think if he was in a top team against Verstappen or hamilton, I don't think he'd do that well. At least not as well as some are getting the impression of based on his performance this year. Norris isn't a good comparison. And I'm not totally sure if it is always McLaren that results on Sainz sometimes not doing quite as well.

I mean i know i could well be wrong with this, but i don't think he's been maximising the performance out that car this year. Results wise i'd probably say so most of the time, but i myself think the car being better than others think it is has helped a lot with this.

Yes you are very wrong with this and like you many others as I believe Verstappen would have crashed much more than Sainz. Despite driving a RB he has been always involved in some sort of first lap scrap and the Bahrain's race you cite against Sainz guess who was the other driver involved in the contact? Verstappen.

People have this impression that RB is never good enough and because his teammate are finding it difficult to drive "his" cars just like Alonso's teammates so the 10s tend to flock at every opportunity even when Verstappen fluffs the start and finish lower than his starting position.

(1)I'm not at all convinced Verstappen would crash more than Sainz. Verstappen and Sainz have both had very bad points in their careers in terms of crashing or having some very clumsy collisions with bad results. (2)I think they both have been better this year, but still think Verstappen would do a lot better than sainz . I also think that Verstappen extremely rarely lacks pace whereas I think Sainz does more often - especially over a single lap. I think Noris often makes him look bad here.

In Bahrian, I initially blamed Verstappen, and someone in this forum actually seemed to think that was unreasonable. I now think both could have done a better job. I'm not sure I was ever more against Sainz than Verstappen for this.

(1) The data is there. No need to do gymnastics. And if you crash or DNF you get a fat 0 points or very bad results.
The other driver similar to Verstappen who seem to be a magnet for other cars in the first laps is Vettel.

(2) That's your opinion and I think that Verstappen look a LOT better because of his teammates who can not cope with the car AND the team the way it is, similar to Alonso. I have worked(not played) on simulators and it is simply impossible for 2 competent drivers to be so distant like it happened with ALO-VAN and VER-GAS for example. They might be less talented but the gap is not what people see and is the result of many things that go beyond the car.

May be you can check my post history but I have said a long time ago that SAI would have done better against VER than RIC. He is easily a TOP driver(talent wise) but his problem is that he was not 16 years old when he started, his father minds his own business and he is very humble unlike the classic c*cky F1 driver. Just wait when he will put his hands on a Mercedes/RB/Ferrari.
Norris is doing well and qualifying means nothing because it depends mainly on tyre temperatures. Lewis Hamilton has been cr*p in this department this year but look at how many races he has won. And what about Leclerc?

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I also think that Verstappen extremely rarely lacks pace whereas I think Sainz does more often - especially over a single lap. I think Noris often makes him look bad here.

It's interesting that this perception seems to have stuck to Sainz. Based on most people's reactions, you'd think Norris was winning the qualifying battle against Sainz -- but actually, the last time Norris out-qualified Sainz was Belgium, and has since been beaten five straight times (Brazil not counted at all) at an average gap of +0.434 seconds. The closest he's gotten to out-qualifying Sainz since Belgium was in Japan, where he was only +0.160 off.

On the other hand, Leclerc doesn't have this issue. Vettel beat him 6 times out of the first 7, but the perception is that he's the quicker qualifier based on his more recent form. I just wonder why that's the case for Leclerc and not for Norris.

Pullrod wrote:(2) That's your opinion and I think that Verstappen look a LOT better because of his teammates who can not cope with the car AND the team the way it is, similar to Alonso. I have worked(not played) on simulators and it is simply impossible for 2 competent drivers to be so distant like it happened with ALO-VAN and VER-GAS for example. They might be less talented but the gap is not what people see and is the result of many things that go beyond the car.

Gasly maybe -- 7 tenths is hard to credit between two competent F1 drivers. But Vandoorne was only more like 3 tenths off Alonso, which I don't find nearly as hard to believe.

Exediron wrote:

Pullrod wrote:(2) That's your opinion and I think that Verstappen look a LOT better because of his teammates who can not cope with the car AND the team the way it is, similar to Alonso. I have worked(not played) on simulators and it is simply impossible for 2 competent drivers to be so distant like it happened with ALO-VAN and VER-GAS for example. They might be less talented but the gap is not what people see and is the result of many things that go beyond the car.

Gasly maybe -- 7 tenths is hard to credit between two competent F1 drivers. But Vandoorne was only more like 3 tenths off Alonso, which I don't find nearly as hard to believe.

Different circuits need different characteristics and since two clones are not driving the car, it is impossible(for two competent drivers) to win the battle 20-0 in qualifying no matter you name or talent in a "normal" season.

Pullrod wrote:
(1) The data is there. No need to do gymnastics. And if you crash or DNF you get a fat 0 points or very bad results.
The other driver similar to Verstappen who seem to be a magnet for other cars in the first laps is Vettel.

(2) That's your opinion and I think that Verstappen look a LOT better because of his teammates who can not cope with the car AND the team the way it is, similar to Alonso. I have worked(not played) on simulators and it is simply impossible for 2 competent drivers to be so distant like it happened with ALO-VAN and VER-GAS for example. They might be less talented but the gap is not what people see and is the result of many things that go beyond the car.

May be you can check my post history but I have said a long time ago that SAI would have done better against VER than RIC. He is easily a TOP driver(talent wise) but his problem is that he was not 16 years old when he started, his father minds his own business and he is very humble unlike the classic c*cky F1 driver. Just wait when he will put his hands on a Mercedes/RB/Ferrari.
Norris is doing well and qualifying means nothing because it depends mainly on tyre temperatures. Lewis Hamilton has been cr*p in this department this year but look at how many races he has won. And what about Leclerc?

Not a popular thought but I agree. This is F1, and it's not just Gasly that was way off, we now see Albon is way off too. No way would two different drivers on the grid be that far away from their teammate if things were completely equal. Matthew Carter also thought similarly in his latest Missed Apex podcast appearance, and I believe Rosberg flagged it also earlier in the season as well. Verstappen is really good, just not as good as it seems.

kleefton wrote:

Pullrod wrote:
(1) The data is there. No need to do gymnastics. And if you crash or DNF you get a fat 0 points or very bad results.
The other driver similar to Verstappen who seem to be a magnet for other cars in the first laps is Vettel.

(2) That's your opinion and I think that Verstappen look a LOT better because of his teammates who can not cope with the car AND the team the way it is, similar to Alonso. I have worked(not played) on simulators and it is simply impossible for 2 competent drivers to be so distant like it happened with ALO-VAN and VER-GAS for example. They might be less talented but the gap is not what people see and is the result of many things that go beyond the car.

May be you can check my post history but I have said a long time ago that SAI would have done better against VER than RIC. He is easily a TOP driver(talent wise) but his problem is that he was not 16 years old when he started, his father minds his own business and he is very humble unlike the classic c*cky F1 driver. Just wait when he will put his hands on a Mercedes/RB/Ferrari.
Norris is doing well and qualifying means nothing because it depends mainly on tyre temperatures. Lewis Hamilton has been cr*p in this department this year but look at how many races he has won. And what about Leclerc?

Not a popular thought but I agree. This is F1, and it's not just Gasly that was way off, we now see Albon is way off too. No way would two different drivers on the grid be that far away from their teammate if things were completely equal. Matthew Carter also thought similarly in his latest Missed Apex podcast appearance, and I believe Rosberg flagged it also earlier in the season as well. Verstappen is really good, just not as good as it seems.

The gaps not that big. Why is a 0.4-0.5 tenth gap between a top driver and a rookie so unbelievable? It's not far off what I'd expect an average F1 driver to be off Hamilton or Verstappen.

Edit - The average across the sessions they can be compared, where neither were getting a grid penalty is 0.33.

Hardly unrealistic.

Exediron wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I also think that Verstappen extremely rarely lacks pace whereas I think Sainz does more often - especially over a single lap. I think Noris often makes him look bad here.

It's interesting that this perception seems to have stuck to Sainz. Based on most people's reactions, you'd think Norris was winning the qualifying battle against Sainz -- but actually, the last time Norris out-qualified Sainz was Belgium, and has since been beaten five straight times (Brazil not counted at all) at an average gap of +0.434 seconds. The closest he's gotten to out-qualifying Sainz since Belgium was in Japan, where he was only +0.160 off.

On the other hand, Leclerc doesn't have this issue. Vettel beat him 6 times out of the first 7, but the perception is that he's the quicker qualifier based on his more recent form. I just wonder why that's the case for Leclerc and not for Norris.

I should have said that Norris often made him look weaker. I think Sainz should almost always have beeen outqualifying Norris (specially to begin with). In was aware that Sainz had been better more recently, but as I said, I think he should be. It is his 5th season in F1 after all. So in terms of qualifying in the first half of the season, I would say the amount of times Sainz was out qualified was actually a negative point to his season. I myself don't rate Norris very highly and especially in the races which is why I don't think Sainz has been that amazing a lot of the time. I know I probably will be in the minority though.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

Exediron wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I also think that Verstappen extremely rarely lacks pace whereas I think Sainz does more often - especially over a single lap. I think Noris often makes him look bad here.

It's interesting that this perception seems to have stuck to Sainz. Based on most people's reactions, you'd think Norris was winning the qualifying battle against Sainz -- but actually, the last time Norris out-qualified Sainz was Belgium, and has since been beaten five straight times (Brazil not counted at all) at an average gap of +0.434 seconds. The closest he's gotten to out-qualifying Sainz since Belgium was in Japan, where he was only +0.160 off.

On the other hand, Leclerc doesn't have this issue. Vettel beat him 6 times out of the first 7, but the perception is that he's the quicker qualifier based on his more recent form. I just wonder why that's the case for Leclerc and not for Norris.

I should have said that Norris often made him look weaker. I think Sainz should almost always have beeen outqualifying Norris (specially to begin with). In was aware that Sainz had been better more recently, but as I said, I think he should be. It is his 5th season in F1 after all. So in terms of qualifying in the first half of the season, I would say the amount of times Sainz was out qualified was actually a negative point to his season. I myself don't rate Norris very highly and especially in the races which is why I don't think Sainz has been that amazing a lot of the time. I know I probably will be in the minority though.

The problem I have is this.

You seem to be making a judgement on Sainz based on Norris and making a judgement on Norris based on Sainz.

You don't rate Norris because he isn't beating Sainz who you don't rate.

You don't rate Sainz much because he isn't beating Norris more handily who you don't rate.

See what i mean?

You don't rate Norris because he isn't beating Sainz.

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

Exediron wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I also think that Verstappen extremely rarely lacks pace whereas I think Sainz does more often - especially over a single lap. I think Noris often makes him look bad here.

It's interesting that this perception seems to have stuck to Sainz. Based on most people's reactions, you'd think Norris was winning the qualifying battle against Sainz -- but actually, the last time Norris out-qualified Sainz was Belgium, and has since been beaten five straight times (Brazil not counted at all) at an average gap of +0.434 seconds. The closest he's gotten to out-qualifying Sainz since Belgium was in Japan, where he was only +0.160 off.

On the other hand, Leclerc doesn't have this issue. Vettel beat him 6 times out of the first 7, but the perception is that he's the quicker qualifier based on his more recent form. I just wonder why that's the case for Leclerc and not for Norris.

I should have said that Norris often made him look weaker. I think Sainz should almost always have beeen outqualifying Norris (specially to begin with). In was aware that Sainz had been better more recently, but as I said, I think he should be. It is his 5th season in F1 after all. So in terms of qualifying in the first half of the season, I would say the amount of times Sainz was out qualified was actually a negative point to his season. I myself don't rate Norris very highly and especially in the races which is why I don't think Sainz has been that amazing a lot of the time. I know I probably will be in the minority though.

The problem I have is this.

You seem to be making a judgement on Sainz based on Norris and making a judgement on Norris based on Sainz.

You don't rate Norris because he isn't beating Sainz who you don't rate.

You don't rate Sainz much because he isn't beating Norris more handily who you don't rate.

See what i mean?

You don't rate Norris because he isn't beating Sainz.

I have compared qualifying between the two, and mentioned that Sainz should have beaten him more convincingly especially at the start of the season. I still think that is the case given Norris is a rookie against a driver who has been in F1 for nearly 5 years. During the races Sainz has been better than him.

I shouldn't have given the reason i did in my last post as i pretty much disagree with myself in the bold highlighted part. I'm guessing i must have changed what I was writing part way through and not read it through before posting. I do think Norris has often been underwhelming in the races yes - but he is a rookie. This isn't the reason why I am against was thinking Sainz wasn't quite as impressive as others think.

That is just my personal opinion that the car is stronger than Sainz is making it look. I'm happy for anyone to agree here. But I think there are a few more weekends where i feel he could have got higher positions than he did somehow.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

Exediron wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:I also think that Verstappen extremely rarely lacks pace whereas I think Sainz does more often - especially over a single lap. I think Noris often makes him look bad here.

It's interesting that this perception seems to have stuck to Sainz. Based on most people's reactions, you'd think Norris was winning the qualifying battle against Sainz -- but actually, the last time Norris out-qualified Sainz was Belgium, and has since been beaten five straight times (Brazil not counted at all) at an average gap of +0.434 seconds. The closest he's gotten to out-qualifying Sainz since Belgium was in Japan, where he was only +0.160 off.

On the other hand, Leclerc doesn't have this issue. Vettel beat him 6 times out of the first 7, but the perception is that he's the quicker qualifier based on his more recent form. I just wonder why that's the case for Leclerc and not for Norris.

I should have said that Norris often made him look weaker. I think Sainz should almost always have beeen outqualifying Norris (specially to begin with). In was aware that Sainz had been better more recently, but as I said, I think he should be. It is his 5th season in F1 after all. So in terms of qualifying in the first half of the season, I would say the amount of times Sainz was out qualified was actually a negative point to his season. I myself don't rate Norris very highly and especially in the races which is why I don't think Sainz has been that amazing a lot of the time. I know I probably will be in the minority though.

The problem I have is this.

You seem to be making a judgement on Sainz based on Norris and making a judgement on Norris based on Sainz.

You don't rate Norris because he isn't beating Sainz who you don't rate.

You don't rate Sainz much because he isn't beating Norris more handily who you don't rate.

See what i mean?

You don't rate Norris because he isn't beating Sainz.

I have compared qualifying between the two, and mentioned that Sainz should have beaten him more convincingly especially at the start of the season. I still think that is the case given Norris is a rookie against a driver who has been in F1 for nearly 5 years. During the races Sainz has been better than him.

I shouldn't have given the reason i did in my last post as i pretty much disagree with myself in the bold highlighted part. I'm guessing i must have changed what I was writing part way through and not read it through before posting. I do think Norris has often been underwhelming in the races yes - but he is a rookie. This isn't the reason why I am against was thinking Sainz wasn't quite as impressive as others think.

That is just my personal opinion that the car is stronger than Sainz is making it look. I'm happy for anyone to agree here. But I think there are a few more weekends where i feel he could have got higher positions than he did somehow.

This is valid for every for every driver on the grid or do you expect Sainz to be perfect?

You said the car is stronger than Sainz makes it look so what about the RB or do we rate cars based on the fallacy of the teammate?
McLaren is not strong enough for a legit podium position so I don't see how you can say otherwise. No driver performs miracles(see the years of Alonso in the McLaren) and can only go as fast as the car can.

Pullrod wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

Exediron wrote: It's interesting that this perception seems to have stuck to Sainz. Based on most people's reactions, you'd think Norris was winning the qualifying battle against Sainz -- but actually, the last time Norris out-qualified Sainz was Belgium, and has since been beaten five straight times (Brazil not counted at all) at an average gap of +0.434 seconds. The closest he's gotten to out-qualifying Sainz since Belgium was in Japan, where he was only +0.160 off.

On the other hand, Leclerc doesn't have this issue. Vettel beat him 6 times out of the first 7, but the perception is that he's the quicker qualifier based on his more recent form. I just wonder why that's the case for Leclerc and not for Norris.

I should have said that Norris often made him look weaker. I think Sainz should almost always have beeen outqualifying Norris (specially to begin with). In was aware that Sainz had been better more recently, but as I said, I think he should be. It is his 5th season in F1 after all. So in terms of qualifying in the first half of the season, I would say the amount of times Sainz was out qualified was actually a negative point to his season. I myself don't rate Norris very highly and especially in the races which is why I don't think Sainz has been that amazing a lot of the time. I know I probably will be in the minority though.

The problem I have is this.

You seem to be making a judgement on Sainz based on Norris and making a judgement on Norris based on Sainz.

You don't rate Norris because he isn't beating Sainz who you don't rate.

You don't rate Sainz much because he isn't beating Norris more handily who you don't rate.

See what i mean?

You don't rate Norris because he isn't beating Sainz.

I have compared qualifying between the two, and mentioned that Sainz should have beaten him more convincingly especially at the start of the season. I still think that is the case given Norris is a rookie against a driver who has been in F1 for nearly 5 years. During the races Sainz has been better than him.

I shouldn't have given the reason i did in my last post as i pretty much disagree with myself in the bold highlighted part. I'm guessing i must have changed what I was writing part way through and not read it through before posting. I do think Norris has often been underwhelming in the races yes - but he is a rookie. This isn't the reason why I am against was thinking Sainz wasn't quite as impressive as others think.

That is just my personal opinion that the car is stronger than Sainz is making it look. I'm happy for anyone to agree here. But I think there are a few more weekends where i feel he could have got higher positions than he did somehow.

This is valid for every for every driver on the grid or do you expect Sainz to be perfect?

You said the car is stronger than Sainz makes it look so what about the RB or do we rate cars based on the fallacy of the teammate?
McLaren is not strong enough for a legit podium position so I don't see how you can say otherwise. No driver performs miracles(see the years of Alonso in the McLaren) and can only go as fast as the car can.

Another opinion of mine is that verstappen does often bring it into the mix with the other two teams, which I think other drivers would struggle with far more than him. I myself have sometimes thought Red Bull is as far off Mercedes and Ferrari as McLaren are off Red Bull. And on those weekends, Verstappen has been closer or sometimes beaten one of them. But yes, you can certainly saying this is predicting stuff that may not be accurate.

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

Pullrod wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

TheGiantHogweed wrote:
I should have said that Norris often made him look weaker. I think Sainz should almost always have beeen outqualifying Norris (specially to begin with). In was aware that Sainz had been better more recently, but as I said, I think he should be. It is his 5th season in F1 after all. So in terms of qualifying in the first half of the season, I would say the amount of times Sainz was out qualified was actually a negative point to his season. I myself don't rate Norris very highly and especially in the races which is why I don't think Sainz has been that amazing a lot of the time. I know I probably will be in the minority though.

The problem I have is this.

You seem to be making a judgement on Sainz based on Norris and making a judgement on Norris based on Sainz.

You don't rate Norris because he isn't beating Sainz who you don't rate.

You don't rate Sainz much because he isn't beating Norris more handily who you don't rate.

See what i mean?

You don't rate Norris because he isn't beating Sainz.

I have compared qualifying between the two, and mentioned that Sainz should have beaten him more convincingly especially at the start of the season. I still think that is the case given Norris is a rookie against a driver who has been in F1 for nearly 5 years. During the races Sainz has been better than him.

I shouldn't have given the reason i did in my last post as i pretty much disagree with myself in the bold highlighted part. I'm guessing i must have changed what I was writing part way through and not read it through before posting. I do think Norris has often been underwhelming in the races yes - but he is a rookie. This isn't the reason why I am against was thinking Sainz wasn't quite as impressive as others think.

That is just my personal opinion that the car is stronger than Sainz is making it look. I'm happy for anyone to agree here. But I think there are a few more weekends where i feel he could have got higher positions than he did somehow.

This is valid for every for every driver on the grid or do you expect Sainz to be perfect?

You said the car is stronger than Sainz makes it look so what about the RB or do we rate cars based on the fallacy of the teammate?
McLaren is not strong enough for a legit podium position so I don't see how you can say otherwise. No driver performs miracles(see the years of Alonso in the McLaren) and can only go as fast as the car can.

Another opinion of mine is that verstappen does often bring it into the mix with the other two teams, which I think other drivers would struggle with far more than him. I myself have sometimes thought Red Bull is as far off Mercedes and Ferrari as McLaren are off Red Bull. And on those weekends, Verstappen has been closer or sometimes beaten one of them. But yes, you can certainly saying this is predicting stuff that may not be accurate.

Yes there's almost certainly a delta between between the very best drivers and Sainz and it is part of what makes the gap look as big as it looks.

I'm very interested in seeing how Norris develops next season. I've been very impressed with his rookie season. I don't think we've seen many better in recent times. For 2020 he needs to get better at race management and start to pull ahead of Sainz.

mikeyg123 wrote:

kleefton wrote:

Pullrod wrote:
(1) The data is there. No need to do gymnastics. And if you crash or DNF you get a fat 0 points or very bad results.
The other driver similar to Verstappen who seem to be a magnet for other cars in the first laps is Vettel.

(2) That's your opinion and I think that Verstappen look a LOT better because of his teammates who can not cope with the car AND the team the way it is, similar to Alonso. I have worked(not played) on simulators and it is simply impossible for 2 competent drivers to be so distant like it happened with ALO-VAN and VER-GAS for example. They might be less talented but the gap is not what people see and is the result of many things that go beyond the car.

May be you can check my post history but I have said a long time ago that SAI would have done better against VER than RIC. He is easily a TOP driver(talent wise) but his problem is that he was not 16 years old when he started, his father minds his own business and he is very humble unlike the classic c*cky F1 driver. Just wait when he will put his hands on a Mercedes/RB/Ferrari.
Norris is doing well and qualifying means nothing because it depends mainly on tyre temperatures. Lewis Hamilton has been cr*p in this department this year but look at how many races he has won. And what about Leclerc?

Not a popular thought but I agree. This is F1, and it's not just Gasly that was way off, we now see Albon is way off too. No way would two different drivers on the grid be that far away from their teammate if things were completely equal. Matthew Carter also thought similarly in his latest Missed Apex podcast appearance, and I believe Rosberg flagged it also earlier in the season as well. Verstappen is really good, just not as good as it seems.

The gaps not that big. Why is a 0.4-0.5 tenth gap between a top driver and a rookie so unbelievable? It's not far off what I'd expect an average F1 driver to be off Hamilton or Verstappen.

Edit - The average across the sessions they can be compared, where neither were getting a grid penalty is 0.33.

Hardly unrealistic.

When you can lock up and completely blow a corner like Max did at COTA and still end up half a sec up on someone driving the same car something is not right.
Moreover when you are 4 tenths faster at Interlagos it means your advantage is likely a whole lot more than 4-5 tenths on most tracks.
I’ve said it before; this average gap that some forumers use as if it was gospel is meaningless to me because there are too many factors that skew it. What is certain is that whoever is in the second Redbull car is miles off Max. We cannot quantify the gap precisely though.

kleefton wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

kleefton wrote:

Pullrod wrote:
(1) The data is there. No need to do gymnastics. And if you crash or DNF you get a fat 0 points or very bad results.
The other driver similar to Verstappen who seem to be a magnet for other cars in the first laps is Vettel.

(2) That's your opinion and I think that Verstappen look a LOT better because of his teammates who can not cope with the car AND the team the way it is, similar to Alonso. I have worked(not played) on simulators and it is simply impossible for 2 competent drivers to be so distant like it happened with ALO-VAN and VER-GAS for example. They might be less talented but the gap is not what people see and is the result of many things that go beyond the car.

May be you can check my post history but I have said a long time ago that SAI would have done better against VER than RIC. He is easily a TOP driver(talent wise) but his problem is that he was not 16 years old when he started, his father minds his own business and he is very humble unlike the classic c*cky F1 driver. Just wait when he will put his hands on a Mercedes/RB/Ferrari.
Norris is doing well and qualifying means nothing because it depends mainly on tyre temperatures. Lewis Hamilton has been cr*p in this department this year but look at how many races he has won. And what about Leclerc?

Not a popular thought but I agree. This is F1, and it's not just Gasly that was way off, we now see Albon is way off too. No way would two different drivers on the grid be that far away from their teammate if things were completely equal. Matthew Carter also thought similarly in his latest Missed Apex podcast appearance, and I believe Rosberg flagged it also earlier in the season as well. Verstappen is really good, just not as good as it seems.

The gaps not that big. Why is a 0.4-0.5 tenth gap between a top driver and a rookie so unbelievable? It's not far off what I'd expect an average F1 driver to be off Hamilton or Verstappen.

Edit - The average across the sessions they can be compared, where neither were getting a grid penalty is 0.33.

Hardly unrealistic.

When you can lock up and completely blow a corner like Max did at COTA and still end up half a sec up on someone driving the same car something is not right.
Moreover when you are 4 tenths faster at Interlagos it means your advantage is likely a whole lot more than 4-5 tenths on most tracks.
I’ve said it before; this average gap that some forumers use as if it was gospel is meaningless to me because there are too many factors that skew it. What is certain is that whoever is in the second Redbull car is miles off Max. We cannot quantify the gap precisely though.

It's usually about half a second. I think the fastest driver in F1 are about 0.75 faster than the slowest drivers (minus Kubica). Therefore I don't see Verstappen being half a second quicker than Albon as unrealistic.

Without any evidence on the contrary I think it's a bit unfair on Verstappen to say he's doing too good a job to be believed.

Out of interest how close would they have to be for you to believe the gap was genuine?