The Official Sir Lewis Hamilton thread

Forum rules
Please read the forum rules
pokerman
Posts: 36347
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by pokerman »

sandman1347 wrote:Fortunately for Lewis, this season is 21 races long. He has plenty of time to catch up but I think he needs to stop Rosberg's momentum immediately and start winning again.

I also think he needs to generate a greater sense of urgency with his demeanor and comments. I think it's great that he doesn't throw the team under the bus and has kept his composure 100% but I believe that he must guard against complacency and sloppiness on his side of the garage. I scratched my head today when they pulled him in from third to switch from softs to mediums. I don't understand why they did that and there just generally seems to be some sloppiness that I'd want to nip in the bud if I were him. He needs to up his overall level of intensity IMO.
There was nothing they could really do his car was damaged and it was chewing through it's tyres, performance wise I believe he is quicker than Rosberg even this season but you can't show that in a damaged car.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10201
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Covalent »

pokerman wrote:
babararacucudada wrote:
pokerman wrote:
babararacucudada wrote:
Hamilton_Jar wrote:At the end of the day Lewis can't be that disappointed this season, just had such bad luck. 2 poles out of 2 and there's no prove Nico has been faster in races.
Just looking forward to when we might actually see a battle at the front with both Mercs and both Ferraris and not just one car running into the distance. Nico has probably forgotten what pressure feels like.
Bad starts aren't necessarily bad luck. Nico has the same clutch and has had 3 good starts (I'm calling China good because he was on harder tyres). It's more down to the driver now.

The biggest question mark over Lewis is can he handle pressure. Niki Lauda said that Nico has to put him under pressure. It is 6 wins in a row now, and though Hamilton denies it affects him, we will see in the races to come how that pans out.
http://www.sportsmole.co.uk/formula-1/m ... 19977.html

On the plus side for Hamilton, he brought an end to Rosberg's 6 poles in a row in the first 2 races. On the down side, Rosberg seems to have improved his ability to compete in the race.
Rosberg has not had to compete in any of the races against Hamilton, all of Hamilton's races basically have ended after the first corner.
The race starts when the lights go out.
Rosberg beat him from the start in the first 2 races.
I can't see how pressure caused his engine to fail in qualifying and he made a perfectly good start today whereas Rosberg got beaten into the first corner by Ricciardo, was this pressure?

By not having to compete I mean it would be nice to see Hamilton in a race without a damaged car, for now it is what it is and all the cards are falling into place for Rosberg.
You're saying Hamilton's start was better than Nico's? Based on what, and if only based on Riccirdo passing him then please provide proof that Hamilton had a better start than Ricciardo.

pokerman
Posts: 36347
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by pokerman »

Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
babararacucudada wrote:
pokerman wrote:
babararacucudada wrote: Bad starts aren't necessarily bad luck. Nico has the same clutch and has had 3 good starts (I'm calling China good because he was on harder tyres). It's more down to the driver now.

The biggest question mark over Lewis is can he handle pressure. Niki Lauda said that Nico has to put him under pressure. It is 6 wins in a row now, and though Hamilton denies it affects him, we will see in the races to come how that pans out.
http://www.sportsmole.co.uk/formula-1/m ... 19977.html

On the plus side for Hamilton, he brought an end to Rosberg's 6 poles in a row in the first 2 races. On the down side, Rosberg seems to have improved his ability to compete in the race.
Rosberg has not had to compete in any of the races against Hamilton, all of Hamilton's races basically have ended after the first corner.
The race starts when the lights go out.
Rosberg beat him from the start in the first 2 races.
I can't see how pressure caused his engine to fail in qualifying and he made a perfectly good start today whereas Rosberg got beaten into the first corner by Ricciardo, was this pressure?

By not having to compete I mean it would be nice to see Hamilton in a race without a damaged car, for now it is what it is and all the cards are falling into place for Rosberg.
You're saying Hamilton's start was better than Nico's? Based on what, and if only based on Riccirdo passing him then please provide proof that Hamilton had a better start than Ricciardo.
I'm judging by the cars around them, Hamilton passed 4 cars on the start whilst Rosberg got passed by Ricciardo, we can state that Hamilton made a bad start if he gets passed by one car but not Rosberg?
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

Asphalt_World
Posts: 5207
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Asphalt_World »

I'm not arguing about which Mercedes made the best start. Only data from the telemetry would prove that. That said, pretty much any driver could have made up that many places on such a long run to T1 which you get in China, especially when starting at the back. He hardly flew past similarly paced cars. Good start yes, but comparing it to Nico's seems futile imo.
Instagram @simply_italian_cars

aice
Posts: 588
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:37 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by aice »

pokerman wrote: I'm judging by the cars around them, Hamilton passed 4 cars on the start whilst Rosberg got passed by Ricciardo, we can state that Hamilton made a bad start if he gets passed by one car but not Rosberg?
Mercedes have issued a statement regarding this. And while it does not categorically state who, out of the Merc boys had the better start, they stress that Hamilton's start was his best so far this season.

"Starting on Lewis’ side, one of the debates we actually had overnight was whether to do a bit more work to the car and start him from the pit lane, which ironically would have been a better decision in hindsight given what happened at the first corner. Equally, Lewis had by far his best start of the season, which ironically contributed to him being caught up in the cascade of collisions ahead of him. So, a perfect storm of unfortunate circumstances all round put him on the back foot straight away. We could see that there were problems with the car – both aerodynamic and mechanical – affecting him through the low-speed corners in particular. Under the safety car, we chose to perform consecutive pit stops with Lewis to get rid of the SuperSoft and enable us to run the rest of the race on the Soft, which was the stronger race tyre. As it transpired, his first set of softs were cut from the first corner incident – something we were unaware of at the time – which meant we were then forced to run the medium at the end of the race, rendering our SuperSoft eliminating tactic redundant. So, overall, Lewis did a great job to recover what he could with a car that was significantly underperforming. On Nico’s side, he actually had a less good start, losing a place into the first corner – although he was obviously running a less grippy tyre compound than the cars around him."
You just need to be accepted for who you are and be proud of who you are and that is what I'm trying to do.
Lewis Hamilton

sandman1347
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by sandman1347 »

pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:Fortunately for Lewis, this season is 21 races long. He has plenty of time to catch up but I think he needs to stop Rosberg's momentum immediately and start winning again.

I also think he needs to generate a greater sense of urgency with his demeanor and comments. I think it's great that he doesn't throw the team under the bus and has kept his composure 100% but I believe that he must guard against complacency and sloppiness on his side of the garage. I scratched my head today when they pulled him in from third to switch from softs to mediums. I don't understand why they did that and there just generally seems to be some sloppiness that I'd want to nip in the bud if I were him. He needs to up his overall level of intensity IMO.
There was nothing they could really do his car was damaged and it was chewing through it's tyres, performance wise I believe he is quicker than Rosberg even this season but you can't show that in a damaged car.
Yeah nothing has changed between Hamilton and Rosberg from a performance standpoint but that doesn't mean that Lewis doesn't need to change anything. I think there needs to be a heightened level of intensity on his part.

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10201
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Covalent »

pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
babararacucudada wrote:
pokerman wrote: Rosberg has not had to compete in any of the races against Hamilton, all of Hamilton's races basically have ended after the first corner.
The race starts when the lights go out.
Rosberg beat him from the start in the first 2 races.
I can't see how pressure caused his engine to fail in qualifying and he made a perfectly good start today whereas Rosberg got beaten into the first corner by Ricciardo, was this pressure?

By not having to compete I mean it would be nice to see Hamilton in a race without a damaged car, for now it is what it is and all the cards are falling into place for Rosberg.
You're saying Hamilton's start was better than Nico's? Based on what, and if only based on Riccirdo passing him then please provide proof that Hamilton had a better start than Ricciardo.
I'm judging by the cars around them, Hamilton passed 4 cars on the start whilst Rosberg got passed by Ricciardo, we can state that Hamilton made a bad start if he gets passed by one car but not Rosberg?
So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.

User avatar
Flash2k11
Posts: 2940
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Flash2k11 »

Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
2018 Pick 10 Champion

Asphalt_World
Posts: 5207
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Asphalt_World »

Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Oh come on. What driver in F1 couldn't out drag 4 significantly slower cars on one of the longest runs down the T1 that there is? Couple the length with the fact that they are at the back of the grid so have another 100m or more in which to accelerate.

The fact is, had he not gained places, it would have been a dreadful start. We see the way him, even with a damaged car could simply out drag back markers during the race when accelerating out of corners.

Not saying his start was bad, just not unexpected to be honest.
Instagram @simply_italian_cars

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Zoue »

Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Objectively speaking that's not really the case. The guy at the back has more opportunity to pass others as he has a longer straight to do it in, plus it's heavily dependant upon the quality of the opposition (and their cars). Both cars could have identical starts but the front guy might be the only one with a faster starting opponent, which would skew the results. Not saying that was what happened here but you can't just look at the numbers in isolation

User avatar
Flash2k11
Posts: 2940
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Flash2k11 »

Asphalt_World wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Oh come on. What driver in F1 couldn't out drag 4 significantly slower cars on one of the longest runs down the T1 that there is? Couple the length with the fact that they are at the back of the grid so have another 100m or more in which to accelerate.

The fact is, had he not gained places, it would have been a dreadful start. We see the way him, even with a damaged car could simply out drag back markers during the race when accelerating out of corners.

Not saying his start was bad, just not unexpected to be honest.
....so Hamilton makes an 'expectedly' good start, but it's still worse than Rosberg losing a place because of where he lined up on the grid? More than a whiff of damned if you do here.
2018 Pick 10 Champion

User avatar
Flash2k11
Posts: 2940
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Flash2k11 »

Zoue wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Objectively speaking that's not really the case. The guy at the back has more opportunity to pass others as he has a longer straight to do it in, plus it's heavily dependant upon the quality of the opposition (and their cars). Both cars could have identical starts but the front guy might be the only one with a faster starting opponent, which would skew the results. Not saying that was what happened here but you can't just look at the numbers in isolation
Objectively, sure. You'd have to look at the take off speed and how fast they reach T1 to determine who had the absolute best start, but in subective terms, beating 4 cars down to the first turn is a bit better than being done off the line by a supposedly slower car.
2018 Pick 10 Champion

aice
Posts: 588
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:37 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by aice »

Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Well whether passing 4 cars etc is conclusive proof or not, Paddy Lowe, who would be privy to all the relevant data/telemetry, when comparing to Hamilton, has already stated that Nico had a less good start.
Last edited by aice on Sun Apr 17, 2016 9:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
You just need to be accepted for who you are and be proud of who you are and that is what I'm trying to do.
Lewis Hamilton

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Zoue »

Flash2k11 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Objectively speaking that's not really the case. The guy at the back has more opportunity to pass others as he has a longer straight to do it in, plus it's heavily dependant upon the quality of the opposition (and their cars). Both cars could have identical starts but the front guy might be the only one with a faster starting opponent, which would skew the results. Not saying that was what happened here but you can't just look at the numbers in isolation
Objectively, sure. You'd have to look at the take off speed and how fast they reach T1 to determine who had the absolute best start, but in subective terms, beating 4 cars down to the first turn is a bit better than being done off the line by a supposedly slower car.
Not when you factor in that the one who was overtaken was on Softs while the guy doing the overtaking was on Super Softs, giving him much better traction. That's a definite mitigating factor

User avatar
Flash2k11
Posts: 2940
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Flash2k11 »

Zoue wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Objectively speaking that's not really the case. The guy at the back has more opportunity to pass others as he has a longer straight to do it in, plus it's heavily dependant upon the quality of the opposition (and their cars). Both cars could have identical starts but the front guy might be the only one with a faster starting opponent, which would skew the results. Not saying that was what happened here but you can't just look at the numbers in isolation
Objectively, sure. You'd have to look at the take off speed and how fast they reach T1 to determine who had the absolute best start, but in subective terms, beating 4 cars down to the first turn is a bit better than being done off the line by a supposedly slower car.
Not when you factor in that the one who was overtaken was on Softs while the guy doing the overtaking was on Super Softs, giving him much better traction. That's a definite mitigating factor
Certainly a factor, but given the supposed advantage of the Merc engine over the Renault (and I use this phrase very loosely, I truly believe there isn't all that much of a difference anymore, especially in the shortened environment of the start) that had Nico made a good start, then Ricciardo would have been covered off.
2018 Pick 10 Champion

pokerman
Posts: 36347
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by pokerman »

Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
babararacucudada wrote: The race starts when the lights go out.
Rosberg beat him from the start in the first 2 races.
I can't see how pressure caused his engine to fail in qualifying and he made a perfectly good start today whereas Rosberg got beaten into the first corner by Ricciardo, was this pressure?

By not having to compete I mean it would be nice to see Hamilton in a race without a damaged car, for now it is what it is and all the cards are falling into place for Rosberg.
You're saying Hamilton's start was better than Nico's? Based on what, and if only based on Riccirdo passing him then please provide proof that Hamilton had a better start than Ricciardo.
I'm judging by the cars around them, Hamilton passed 4 cars on the start whilst Rosberg got passed by Ricciardo, we can state that Hamilton made a bad start if he gets passed by one car but not Rosberg?
So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
We judge that Hamilton makes a bad start if he is passed by one car but not Rosberg?

Also I didn't realise that there was a rule of thumb that says the slower the car, the slower the start?
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

pokerman
Posts: 36347
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by pokerman »

Zoue wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Objectively speaking that's not really the case. The guy at the back has more opportunity to pass others as he has a longer straight to do it in, plus it's heavily dependant upon the quality of the opposition (and their cars). Both cars could have identical starts but the front guy might be the only one with a faster starting opponent, which would skew the results. Not saying that was what happened here but you can't just look at the numbers in isolation
It had nothing to do with the length of the straight, watch Hamilton's onboard camera.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

Asphalt_World
Posts: 5207
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Asphalt_World »

Flash2k11 wrote:
Asphalt_World wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Oh come on. What driver in F1 couldn't out drag 4 significantly slower cars on one of the longest runs down the T1 that there is? Couple the length with the fact that they are at the back of the grid so have another 100m or more in which to accelerate.

The fact is, had he not gained places, it would have been a dreadful start. We see the way him, even with a damaged car could simply out drag back markers during the race when accelerating out of corners.

Not saying his start was bad, just not unexpected to be honest.
....so Hamilton makes an 'expectedly' good start, but it's still worse than Rosberg losing a place because of where he lined up on the grid? More than a whiff of damned if you do here.
The fact I never said that confuses me as to why you wrote the above!
Instagram @simply_italian_cars

lamo

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by lamo »

Nico has made 2 better starts, I agree with that. But when I am looking at performance of a driver. How well they start is pretty low down the order and it has been something that has levelled out over the season the last 2-3 between the two.

But Nico beating Lewis off the line is no evidence that he is any different to 2014 or 2015 performance wise on track.

pokerman
Posts: 36347
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by pokerman »

lamo wrote:Nico has made 2 better starts, I agree with that. But when I am looking at performance of a driver. How well they start is pretty low down the order and it has been something that has levelled out over the season the last 2-3 between the two.

But Nico beating Lewis off the line is no evidence that he is any different to 2014 or 2015 performance wise on track.
Nail on the head, Hamilton driving with damaged cars and a grid penalty would tend to mask that.
Lewis Hamilton #44

World Drivers Titles: 7 (1st)
Grand Prix Wins: 95 (1st)
Pole Positions: 98 (1st)
Podiums: 165 (1st)


PF1 Pick 10 Competition
2014: Champion

ALESI
Posts: 2418
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2003 1:36 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by ALESI »

So the fact that Nico knew that Ricciardo (and the Ferraris) would be pitting after a handful of laps didn't affect him then? He only had to sit tight and wait for the other cars to pit, so no need for any heroics or sense in getting involved in any silly accidents. This versus a guy who was starting last and had to take risks. Seriously, some people here need to get a grip.
Shoot999: "And anyone who puts a Y on the end of his name as a nickname should be punched in the face repeatedly."

F1_Ernie
Posts: 3775
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by F1_Ernie »

lamo wrote:Nico has made 2 better starts, I agree with that. But when I am looking at performance of a driver. How well they start is pretty low down the order and it has been something that has levelled out over the season the last 2-3 between the two.

But Nico beating Lewis off the line is no evidence that he is any different to 2014 or 2015 performance wise on track.

👍 How ever much people like to think it is this is nothing against Rosberg but how often does it happen like the last 2 grand prixs when your rivals havnt even made it past turn 1 without incident and you can read a book for the rest of the Grand Prix, nothing to do with Rosberg but a lot of luck involved. It's not even just Hamilton who has been involved but the Ferraris have gone missing. Looking forward to seeing the other 3 put some real pressure on Rosberg.
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

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

KingVoid
Posts: 3004
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by KingVoid »

The thing is, if Nico continues to nail his starts better than Lewis, and also outqualifies Lewis about 45% of the time, then it really doesn't matter that Lewis has slightly better race pace than Nico, because more often than not he will find himself stuck behind his teammate. Mercedes only have one strategist for both drivers, and they are not very creative either. Overtaking an equal car on track is also extremely difficult (as Lewis found out in Mexico and Brazil).

User avatar
Lotus49
Posts: 5273
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Lotus49 »

Plenty of time left in the season and the closer Ferrari and hopefully RB after Canada get to Mercedes there will be more drivers that can take points of Rosberg and of course Lewis but i'd be inclined to think he would lose out less than Rosberg but of course you never know.

Also the closer the other teams get will force Mercedes to run in the higher engine modes for longer so that opens up the possibility for more failures and they could start hurting Nico just as easily.

Rosberg looks very calm and collected thus far though, I think he realises this might be his best chance at a title with the rule changes likely to make the front of the grid more competitive. Not that I think Mercedes will suddenly fall away or anything but other teams and drivers will likely win next year a lot more often than recently.
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10201
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Covalent »

pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Covalent wrote:
pokerman wrote: I can't see how pressure caused his engine to fail in qualifying and he made a perfectly good start today whereas Rosberg got beaten into the first corner by Ricciardo, was this pressure?

By not having to compete I mean it would be nice to see Hamilton in a race without a damaged car, for now it is what it is and all the cards are falling into place for Rosberg.
You're saying Hamilton's start was better than Nico's? Based on what, and if only based on Riccirdo passing him then please provide proof that Hamilton had a better start than Ricciardo.
I'm judging by the cars around them, Hamilton passed 4 cars on the start whilst Rosberg got passed by Ricciardo, we can state that Hamilton made a bad start if he gets passed by one car but not Rosberg?
So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
We judge that Hamilton makes a bad start if he is passed by one car but not Rosberg?

Also I didn't realise that there was a rule of thumb that says the slower the car, the slower the start?
Who judges that? Not me (hint: read the "I'm not saying that was the case" part). All I'm saying is that you can't compare Nico's and Lewis's starts solely on how many cars they pass or get passed by if they literally start at the opposing ends of the grid. Based on the "evidence" you have provided, how do you know that had Lewis had the exact start Nico had, he wouldn't have passed those cars?

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10201
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Covalent »

Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Well with this reasoning Lewis would still had the better start if he had rolled his car in neutral past 4 cars that stalled on the grid. So yeah, sure, of course gaining 4 places is better than losing 1, but you're missing the point entirely.

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10201
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Covalent »

Zoue wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Objectively speaking that's not really the case. The guy at the back has more opportunity to pass others as he has a longer straight to do it in, plus it's heavily dependant upon the quality of the opposition (and their cars). Both cars could have identical starts but the front guy might be the only one with a faster starting opponent, which would skew the results. Not saying that was what happened here but you can't just look at the numbers in isolation
Objectively, sure. You'd have to look at the take off speed and how fast they reach T1 to determine who had the absolute best start, but in subective terms, beating 4 cars down to the first turn is a bit better than being done off the line by a supposedly slower car.
Not when you factor in that the one who was overtaken was on Softs while the guy doing the overtaking was on Super Softs, giving him much better traction. That's a definite mitigating factor
Also a good point. The drivers behind Nico were on the supersofts and the drivers ahead of Lewis were on softs.

F1_Ernie
Posts: 3775
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by F1_Ernie »

Covalent wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Well with this reasoning Lewis would still had the better start if he had rolled his car in neutral past 4 cars that stalled on the grid. So yeah, sure, of course gaining 4 places is better than losing 1, but you're missing the point entirely.
Why you coming out with a stupid comment like that. All I know is Paddy Lowe said Hamilton got a better start, he has more info than anyone here.
Does it really matter anyway?
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

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

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10201
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Covalent »

Hamilton_Jar wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Well with this reasoning Lewis would still had the better start if he had rolled his car in neutral past 4 cars that stalled on the grid. So yeah, sure, of course gaining 4 places is better than losing 1, but you're missing the point entirely.
Why you coming out with a stupid comment like that. All I know is Paddy Lowe said Hamilton got a better start, he has more info than anyone here.
Does it really matter anyway?
Even if he did say that (link please?) that's evidence that come afterwards and if you actually read what we've been discussing is whether you can compare starts of two drivers solely on how they compare to others around them. In my view you can't if that reference point isn't the same. What Lowe says is irrelevant in that discussion.

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10201
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Covalent »

And no it really doesn't matter, I couldn't care less if Hamilton had a better start or not.

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Zoue »

pokerman wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Objectively speaking that's not really the case. The guy at the back has more opportunity to pass others as he has a longer straight to do it in, plus it's heavily dependant upon the quality of the opposition (and their cars). Both cars could have identical starts but the front guy might be the only one with a faster starting opponent, which would skew the results. Not saying that was what happened here but you can't just look at the numbers in isolation
It had nothing to do with the length of the straight, watch Hamilton's onboard camera.
and read the rest of the post. I'm not making a judgement on either Nico or Lewis here, just pointing out that you can't assess comparative starts based purely on how many cars either have passed or been passed by. There's a lot more to factor in

F1_Ernie
Posts: 3775
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by F1_Ernie »

I don't think you can judge starts directly on the other cars around you. What if there was 2 Williams at the back does that suddenly make it a good start? It's pretty obvious from the onboard and pundits comments Hamilton got a good start. Less pressure at the back probably helps and gave him the chance to practice.
It's like people saying Rosberg is a better driver this year than the previous 2 years, there's nothing to compare that too, he has been winning races from the front for years now.
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

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

Zoue
Posts: 25158
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Zoue »

Flash2k11 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote: I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Objectively speaking that's not really the case. The guy at the back has more opportunity to pass others as he has a longer straight to do it in, plus it's heavily dependant upon the quality of the opposition (and their cars). Both cars could have identical starts but the front guy might be the only one with a faster starting opponent, which would skew the results. Not saying that was what happened here but you can't just look at the numbers in isolation
Objectively, sure. You'd have to look at the take off speed and how fast they reach T1 to determine who had the absolute best start, but in subective terms, beating 4 cars down to the first turn is a bit better than being done off the line by a supposedly slower car.
Not when you factor in that the one who was overtaken was on Softs while the guy doing the overtaking was on Super Softs, giving him much better traction. That's a definite mitigating factor
Certainly a factor, but given the supposed advantage of the Merc engine over the Renault (and I use this phrase very loosely, I truly believe there isn't all that much of a difference anymore, especially in the shortened environment of the start) that had Nico made a good start, then Ricciardo would have been covered off.
But that's making a big assumption on relative acceleration over short distances. I don't think we can say for sure the Mercedes is significantly better under such circumstances.

We're getting into detail here. The point I'm making is that simple stats such as outlined above (e.g. number of cars passed) shouldn't be used as any kind of proof of relative starts, particularly when the team mates started at other ends of the grid. There are too many factors to take into account to make such a simple view accurate

stevey
Posts: 1616
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:31 am

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by stevey »

Wow lots of arguments about the starts why not just rewatch it and see who had the better start from the in car perspective. If they are close in start speeds you wont really get much from watching it but if one had a bad start then its pretty obvious either way.

Anyway just a quick message to Hamilton fans, keep the faith guys we've all been here before, the agony that you sometimes get when is always dismissed when our boy grits his teeth and gets down to business. Things haven't gone his way so far this season but I still don't doubt his ability to take this wdc.

lamo

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by lamo »

KingVoid wrote:The thing is, if Nico continues to nail his starts better than Lewis, and also outqualifies Lewis about 45% of the time, then it really doesn't matter that Lewis has slightly better race pace than Nico, because more often than not he will find himself stuck behind his teammate. Mercedes only have one strategist for both drivers, and they are not very creative either. Overtaking an equal car on track is also extremely difficult (as Lewis found out in Mexico and Brazil).
This is exactly true and also all Nico had to do in 2014 and 2015 and to think he started ahead of Lewis 12-7 in 2014 too...

lamo

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by lamo »

Covalent wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Well with this reasoning Lewis would still had the better start if he had rolled his car in neutral past 4 cars that stalled on the grid. So yeah, sure, of course gaining 4 places is better than losing 1, but you're missing the point entirely.
This is true, but worth also considering the team stating he had "by far his best start of the year". Arguing who had the best start of Lewis and Nico in China pointless but for the person who said Nico just had to sit back and stay out of trouble at t1 and the first stint. The best way to stay out of trouble is not go side by side with cars into t1 - i.e. make a good start.

The Mercedes car or both there drivers are terrible off the line this year. Nico went from P2 to P1 in Bahrain but only because he had no Vettel in P3 and Raikkonen made an awful start in P4 and Hamilton and awful one too. The pack P5 backwards were hauling in the 2 Mercedes. Australia, both Mercedes made bad starts. China, again Nicos wasn't great and Hamiltons is harder to judge but if the team say it was good it must have been. They've built a rocket ship that can't get off the line - only as strong as your weakest link

F1_Ernie
Posts: 3775
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by F1_Ernie »

KingVoid wrote:The thing is, if Nico continues to nail his starts better than Lewis, and also outqualifies Lewis about 45% of the time, then it really doesn't matter that Lewis has slightly better race pace than Nico, because more often than not he will find himself stuck behind his teammate. Mercedes only have one strategist for both drivers, and they are not very creative either. Overtaking an equal car on track is also extremely difficult (as Lewis found out in Mexico and Brazil).
That's very true and could be Hamilton's biggest problem, the majority of the time the Merc in front at the first corner generally wins and there is lack of overtaking tracks, 2 of the best ones are already gone where you can make race pace count. There's not many where you will get a chance to overtake an equal car this season.
Like you said having one strategist is also a problem and Merc simply won't mix up the strategys.
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

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

aice
Posts: 588
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:37 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by aice »

Covalent wrote:
Hamilton_Jar wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Covalent wrote: So no proof in other words. I'm not saying that was the case, but it's possible his start was worse than Nico's even though he did pass four backmarkers. I'm amazed you do not realize this.
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Well with this reasoning Lewis would still had the better start if he had rolled his car in neutral past 4 cars that stalled on the grid. So yeah, sure, of course gaining 4 places is better than losing 1, but you're missing the point entirely.
Why you coming out with a stupid comment like that. All I know is Paddy Lowe said Hamilton got a better start, he has more info than anyone here.
Does it really matter anyway?
Even if he did say that (link please?) that's evidence that come afterwards and if you actually read what we've been discussing is whether you can compare starts of two drivers solely on how they compare to others around them. In my view you can't if that reference point isn't the same. What Lowe says is irrelevant in that discussion.
I would argue Lowe’s opinion carries weight. He has access to all the relevant information and data. He has the knowledge, experience and expertise to judge each start in context with the cars around and in isolation. He states Hamilton’s start was his best yet and when comparing to Nico’s side, he made reference to Nico's start as being less good. Make of that what you will but for me, this carries gravity. However, others have already stated, why argue about this? It’s pointless and as you have said yourself, it really doesn’t matter!
You just need to be accepted for who you are and be proud of who you are and that is what I'm trying to do.
Lewis Hamilton

User avatar
tootsie323
Posts: 3319
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by tootsie323 »

Look at Lewis in isolation: he has had two iffy getaways and one sharp one. Three starts this season. That's not really enough to determine whether he is a poor starter or not (or whether he needs to get his act together), as was implied probably about two pages ago.
Where I'm going, I don't need roads

User avatar
Covalent
Posts: 10201
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 12:07 pm

Re: The Official Lewis Hamilton thread

Post by Covalent »

aice wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Hamilton_Jar wrote:
Covalent wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
I'd say passing 4 cars compared to losing a place is fairly conclusive proof, regardless of the relative performance of the cars compared to each other. I'm amazed that you don't realise that gaining 4 places is better than losing 1.
Well with this reasoning Lewis would still had the better start if he had rolled his car in neutral past 4 cars that stalled on the grid. So yeah, sure, of course gaining 4 places is better than losing 1, but you're missing the point entirely.
Why you coming out with a stupid comment like that. All I know is Paddy Lowe said Hamilton got a better start, he has more info than anyone here.
Does it really matter anyway?
Even if he did say that (link please?) that's evidence that come afterwards and if you actually read what we've been discussing is whether you can compare starts of two drivers solely on how they compare to others around them. In my view you can't if that reference point isn't the same. What Lowe says is irrelevant in that discussion.
I would argue Lowe’s opinion carries weight. He has access to all the relevant information and data. He has the knowledge, experience and expertise to judge each start in context with the cars around and in isolation. He states Hamilton’s start was his best yet and when comparing to Nico’s side, he made reference to Nico's start as being less good. Make of that what you will but for me, this carries gravity. However, others have already stated, why argue about this? It’s pointless and as you have said yourself, it really doesn’t matter!
I'm running out of ways to explain what the point I'm trying to make is. Lowe's opinion carries weight regarding Hamilton's start being good or not (still haven't read it btw), but it does not carry weight regarding the validity of a comparison between two starts by use of surrounding drivers as a reference when the two drivers are at either end of the grid.

Post Reply