planetf1.com

3 place grid penalty of Leclerc.

Would expect Mercedes to start on the mediums tomorrow as that’s probably the best strategy. Wonder if Verstappen might go for softs to try and beat Hamilton to turn one and get track position?

JN23 wrote:Would expect Mercedes to start on the mediums tomorrow as that’s probably the best strategy. Wonder if Verstappen might go for softs to try and beat Hamilton to turn one and get track position?

I've got a feeling Mercedes will start on the softs. Track temperature is meant to be cooler and I believe Hamilton can make the S-M or S-H work. Bottas to start on softs so he can get pass Max quicker.

pokerman wrote:Sky suggesting SC's for tomorrow, sigh.

Sky was pushing the ridiculous story about how we wouldn't have qualifying and FP2 was setting the grid, so I wouldn't give anything they say much credence. Especially if Crofty said it.

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:Sky suggesting SC's for tomorrow, sigh.

Sky was pushing the ridiculous story about how we wouldn't have qualifying and FP2 was setting the grid, so I wouldn't give anything they say much credence. Especially if Crofty said it.

Sorry I realise I worded it wrong, they hoped for SC's because it made the last race so good, I think they're just interested in the views and they think it makes good viewing.

Disappointed Leclerc didn't do better in those conditions. Russell and Norris (again) were outstanding. Sainz and Ocon too. Hamilton and Verstappen up where there should be in those conditions - but there was only one rain-master today.

scouseknight wrote:Disappointed Leclerc didn't do better in those conditions. Russell and Norris (again) were outstanding. Sainz and Ocon too. Hamilton and Verstappen up where there should be in those conditions - but there was only one rain-master today.

scouseknight wrote:Disappointed Leclerc didn't do better in those conditions. Russell and Norris (again) were outstanding. Sainz and Ocon too. Hamilton and Verstappen up where there should be in those conditions - but there was only one rain-master today.

Verstappen isn't anything special in the wet. His entire wet weather reputation is founded on the 2016 Brazilian GP, a race in which he escaped a crash by pure luck while Hamilton was untroubled at the front.

To be clear, he performs at a very high level in all conditions. But I don't consider him to be unusually good -- relative to his base ability level -- in the rain.

Austria isn't a particularly technical track, and a bit like Monza, the cars (in the dry) tend to be quite 2 by 2 - which makes Hamiltons margin quite remarkable really.

That's a guy who's got the tyres and brakes working as well as they could, and completely at one with the car.

He has absolutely nailed it.

Exediron wrote:

scouseknight wrote:Disappointed Leclerc didn't do better in those conditions. Russell and Norris (again) were outstanding. Sainz and Ocon too. Hamilton and Verstappen up where there should be in those conditions - but there was only one rain-master today.

Verstappen isn't anything special in the wet. His entire wet weather reputation is founded on the 2016 Brazilian GP, a race in which he escaped a crash by pure luck while Hamilton was untroubled at the front.

To be clear, he performs at a very high level in all conditions. But I don't consider him to be unusually good -- relative to his base ability level -- in the rain.

Isn't Verstappen's base level special, and therefore isn't his ability in the rain special?

Also, where is Sandman these days?

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:Sky suggesting SC's for tomorrow, sigh.

Sky was pushing the ridiculous story about how we wouldn't have qualifying and FP2 was setting the grid, so I wouldn't give anything they say much credence. Especially if Crofty said it.

Oh good yeah, we were listening to fp2 and that's all the conjecture Crofty kept banging on about.

Exediron wrote:

scouseknight wrote:Disappointed Leclerc didn't do better in those conditions. Russell and Norris (again) were outstanding. Sainz and Ocon too. Hamilton and Verstappen up where there should be in those conditions - but there was only one rain-master today.

Verstappen isn't anything special in the wet. His entire wet weather reputation is founded on the 2016 Brazilian GP, a race in which he escaped a crash by pure luck while Hamilton was untroubled at the front.

To be clear, he performs at a very high level in all conditions. But I don't consider him to be unusually good -- relative to his base ability level -- in the rain.

I disagree, his final lap where he made a mistake was going to be around 4-5 tenths off Hamilton's IIRC. Which is about what we saw throughout practice. So if we assume that Hamilton got pretty much everything out of his Mercedes, which I think is a fair assumption, then on pace Verstappen demonstrated he could get pretty much everything out of his car too.

Black_Flag_11 wrote:

Exediron wrote:

scouseknight wrote:Disappointed Leclerc didn't do better in those conditions. Russell and Norris (again) were outstanding. Sainz and Ocon too. Hamilton and Verstappen up where there should be in those conditions - but there was only one rain-master today.

Verstappen isn't anything special in the wet. His entire wet weather reputation is founded on the 2016 Brazilian GP, a race in which he escaped a crash by pure luck while Hamilton was untroubled at the front.

To be clear, he performs at a very high level in all conditions. But I don't consider him to be unusually good -- relative to his base ability level -- in the rain.

I disagree, his final lap where he made a mistake was going to be around 4-5 tenths off Hamilton's IIRC. Which is about what we saw throughout practice. So if we assume that Hamilton got pretty much everything out of his Mercedes, which I think is a fair assumption, then on pace Verstappen demonstrated he could get pretty much everything out of his car too.

About 0.6. The reality is that Hamilton got much more out of the car because Verstappen didn't confirm his lap, but supposing he did, is the car 0.6 worse in the wet than the Merc? I don't know.

Black_Flag_11 wrote:

Exediron wrote:

scouseknight wrote:Disappointed Leclerc didn't do better in those conditions. Russell and Norris (again) were outstanding. Sainz and Ocon too. Hamilton and Verstappen up where there should be in those conditions - but there was only one rain-master today.

Verstappen isn't anything special in the wet. His entire wet weather reputation is founded on the 2016 Brazilian GP, a race in which he escaped a crash by pure luck while Hamilton was untroubled at the front.

To be clear, he performs at a very high level in all conditions. But I don't consider him to be unusually good -- relative to his base ability level -- in the rain.

I disagree, his final lap where he made a mistake was going to be around 4-5 tenths off Hamilton's IIRC. Which is about what we saw throughout practice. So if we assume that Hamilton got pretty much everything out of his Mercedes, which I think is a fair assumption, then on pace Verstappen demonstrated he could get pretty much everything out of his car too.

He was already a tenth down after his second sector before he spun, Hamilton then went another 5 tenths quicker so that makes Verstappen more like 6/7 tenths slower.

Exediron wrote: Verstappen isn't anything special in the wet.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Exediron wrote: To be clear, he performs at a very high level in all conditions.

This I can agree with you on.

https://twitter.com/SportmphMark/status ... 8179402752

Thoughts?

Also...

https://twitter.com/SportmphMark/status ... 7938371585

Seems the numbers have been crunched and Max would have been about 0.8 off Hamilton's pole time.


Were you guys more impressed by this lap or Singapore 2018?

Are the comments of ‘Verstappen would have been closer had he not spun’ missing the, not insignificant, idea that you need to not spin for the lap to count?

I think I’d give the edge to Singapore 2018 as I felt it just came out of nowhere.

I always tend to be more impressed by what drivers can do in wet qualifying, to that end nothing much seemed to be made of Hamilton's wet pole lap in Monza 2017, he also cleared the field by over a second, Bottas by 2 seconds.

Invade wrote:https://twitter.com/SportmphMark/status ... 8179402752

Thoughts?

Also...

https://twitter.com/SportmphMark/status ... 7938371585

Seems the numbers have been crunched and Max would have been about 0.8 off Hamilton's pole time.


Were you guys more impressed by this lap or Singapore 2018?

Excuses from Verstappens side and Bottas, also the belief that Verstappen is the equal of Hamilton in the wet because of what happened in Germany last year, a race that Hamilton was leading before the team put hiim on the wrong tyres.

pokerman wrote:I always tend to be more impressed by what drivers can do in wet qualifying, to that end nothing much seemed to be made of Hamilton's wet pole lap in Monza 2017, he also cleared the field by over a second, Bottas by 2 seconds.

Really for years you have argued Vettel Monza '08 was with the best car, so why is this different?

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:I always tend to be more impressed by what drivers can do in wet qualifying, to that end nothing much seemed to be made of Hamilton's wet pole lap in Monza 2017, he also cleared the field by over a second, Bottas by 2 seconds.

Really for years you have argued Vettel Monza '08 was with the best car, so why is this different?

I HAve Maybe a small Idea why couLd That be, but nO spoilers from me, None whatsoever...

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:I always tend to be more impressed by what drivers can do in wet qualifying, to that end nothing much seemed to be made of Hamilton's wet pole lap in Monza 2017, he also cleared the field by over a second, Bottas by 2 seconds.

Really for years you have argued Vettel Monza '08 was with the best car, so why is this different?

In all fairness, they're not the same if you accept the premise that Vettel did have the best car in Monza. He qualified on pole by just over a tenth of a second, whereas Lewis (in what I think we can all agree was the best car) qualified on pole by 1.2 seconds.

Any argument that Vettel's performance was equally or more impressive must perforce hinge on the Toro Rosso not having been the best car that day. Hamilton's pole is more comparable to Senna's famed Monaco pole, where nobody questions that it was set in the best car -- the gap is the impressive part, not the pole itself.

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:I always tend to be more impressed by what drivers can do in wet qualifying, to that end nothing much seemed to be made of Hamilton's wet pole lap in Monza 2017, he also cleared the field by over a second, Bottas by 2 seconds.

Really for years you have argued Vettel Monza '08 was with the best car, so why is this different?

I can't remember what I said exactly but I tended to counter the argument that the STR was a midfield car, given his teammate qualified 4th in those conditions it had to be one of the best cars.

In recent years Vettel hasn't looked that special in the wet, Kimi often beat him, so yes my opinion might be that the STR must have been the best car in those wet conditions.

pokerman wrote:

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:I always tend to be more impressed by what drivers can do in wet qualifying, to that end nothing much seemed to be made of Hamilton's wet pole lap in Monza 2017, he also cleared the field by over a second, Bottas by 2 seconds.

Really for years you have argued Vettel Monza '08 was with the best car, so why is this different?

I can't remember what I said exactly but I tended to counter the argument that the STR was a midfield car, given his teammate qualified 4th in those conditions it had to be one of the best cars.

In recent years Vettel hasn't looked that special in the wet, Kimi often beat him, so yes my opinion might be that the STR must have been the best car in those wet conditions.

Except it was a full second difference to his team mate and that was not is only good wet weather performance.

In which wet race would that be Kimi being faster than Sebastian?

Exediron wrote:

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:I always tend to be more impressed by what drivers can do in wet qualifying, to that end nothing much seemed to be made of Hamilton's wet pole lap in Monza 2017, he also cleared the field by over a second, Bottas by 2 seconds.

Really for years you have argued Vettel Monza '08 was with the best car, so why is this different?

In all fairness, they're not the same if you accept the premise that Vettel did have the best car in Monza. He qualified on pole by just over a tenth of a second, whereas Lewis (in what I think we can all agree was the best car) qualified on pole by 1.2 seconds.

Any argument that Vettel's performance was equally or more impressive must perforce hinge on the Toro Rosso not having been the best car that day. Hamilton's pole is more comparable to Senna's famed Monaco pole, where nobody questions that it was set in the best car -- the gap is the impressive part, not the pole itself.

Maybe cos he beat his team mate by over a second.

pokerman wrote:In recent years Vettel hasn't looked that special in the wet, Kimi often beat him, so yes my opinion might be that the STR must have been the best car in those wet conditions.

Don't really agree. Vettel has consistently looked faster in the wet than his teammates, including Ricciardo, Kimi and now Leclerc.

I've been looking at big gaps between 1st and 2nd in qualifying sessions and came across the 1997 Australian Grand Prix.

Villeneuve was 1.754s faster than his teammate Frentzen and 2.103 fastest than the first non-Williams car. The session wasn't wet I don't think, was the Williams just that much faster than the others?

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:I always tend to be more impressed by what drivers can do in wet qualifying, to that end nothing much seemed to be made of Hamilton's wet pole lap in Monza 2017, he also cleared the field by over a second, Bottas by 2 seconds.

Really for years you have argued Vettel Monza '08 was with the best car, so why is this different?

I can't remember what I said exactly but I tended to counter the argument that the STR was a midfield car, given his teammate qualified 4th in those conditions it had to be one of the best cars.

In recent years Vettel hasn't looked that special in the wet, Kimi often beat him, so yes my opinion might be that the STR must have been the best car in those wet conditions.

Except it was a full second difference to his team mate and that was not is only good wet weather performance.

In which wet race would that be Kimi being faster than Sebastian?

His teammate Bourdais got sacked the following year mid season after giving second best to rookie Buemi whos also a few years later got sacked.

I believe in particular we are talking about wet qualifying, Kimi beat Vettel in Monza 2017 and Hungary 2018.

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:In recent years Vettel hasn't looked that special in the wet, Kimi often beat him, so yes my opinion might be that the STR must have been the best car in those wet conditions.

Don't really agree. Vettel has consistently looked faster in the wet than his teammates, including Ricciardo, Kimi and now Leclerc.

Ricciardo I would agree but we just seen him beat by Ocon in the wet, also Vergne use to beat him in the wet, I just listed were Kimi beat Vettel, also Kimi was out pacing Vettel in Brazil 2018 wet race, Leclerc was out pacing Vettel at Germany last year.

JN23 wrote:I've been looking at big gaps between 1st and 2nd in qualifying sessions and came across the 1997 Australian Grand Prix.

Villeneuve was 1.754s faster than his teammate Frentzen and 2.103 fastest than the first non-Williams car. The session wasn't wet I don't think, was the Williams just that much faster than the others?

Most of the first half of the season I think it was.

pokerman wrote:

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:I always tend to be more impressed by what drivers can do in wet qualifying, to that end nothing much seemed to be made of Hamilton's wet pole lap in Monza 2017, he also cleared the field by over a second, Bottas by 2 seconds.

Really for years you have argued Vettel Monza '08 was with the best car, so why is this different?

I can't remember what I said exactly but I tended to counter the argument that the STR was a midfield car, given his teammate qualified 4th in those conditions it had to be one of the best cars.

In recent years Vettel hasn't looked that special in the wet, Kimi often beat him, so yes my opinion might be that the STR must have been the best car in those wet conditions.

Except it was a full second difference to his team mate and that was not is only good wet weather performance.

In which wet race would that be Kimi being faster than Sebastian?

His teammate Bourdais got sacked the following year mid season after giving second best to rookie Buemi whos also a few years later got sacked.

I believe in particular we are talking about wet qualifying, Kimi beat Vettel in Monza 2017 and Hungary 2018.

Lol 2 out of 10 i would love what you are smoking really!

Bourdais getting sacked negates Vettel outqualifying him by a second in monza, Japan as well, beating Webber as well moving to Redbull?

So I guess should Mercedes let Bottas go next year it would negate Hamilton beating Bottas?

Or because Button beat Hamilton in the wet as well and he went to Mercedes?

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Rockie wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Rockie wrote: Really for years you have argued Vettel Monza '08 was with the best car, so why is this different?

I can't remember what I said exactly but I tended to counter the argument that the STR was a midfield car, given his teammate qualified 4th in those conditions it had to be one of the best cars.

In recent years Vettel hasn't looked that special in the wet, Kimi often beat him, so yes my opinion might be that the STR must have been the best car in those wet conditions.

Except it was a full second difference to his team mate and that was not is only good wet weather performance.

In which wet race would that be Kimi being faster than Sebastian?

His teammate Bourdais got sacked the following year mid season after giving second best to rookie Buemi whos also a few years later got sacked.

I believe in particular we are talking about wet qualifying, Kimi beat Vettel in Monza 2017 and Hungary 2018.

Lol 2 out of 10 i would love what you are smoking really!

Bourdais getting sacked negates Vettel outqualifying him by a second in monza, Japan as well, beating Webber as well moving to Redbull?

So I guess should Mercedes let Bottas go next year it would negate Hamilton beating Bottas?

Or because Button beat Hamilton in the wet as well and he went to Mercedes?

What do you mean by 2 out of 10, were are your other examples?

Bourdais only lasted 18 months in F1 which means we also don't have a comparitor in F1 to his level, he never managed to beat a teammate.

I've no idea what the Button reference is about?

JN23 wrote:I've been looking at big gaps between 1st and 2nd in qualifying sessions and came across the 1997 Australian Grand Prix.

Villeneuve was 1.754s faster than his teammate Frentzen and 2.103 fastest than the first non-Williams car. The session wasn't wet I don't think, was the Williams just that much faster than the others?

The first part mostly dominated by the Williams. That session in Australia though was cut short with a red flag, so the drivers didn't get to run the last 2 minutes of the quali.