That's because your methodology is flawed, I have it:-KingVoid wrote:It’s selective because otherwise the entire cross comparison doesn’t make sense.Paolo_Lasardi wrote:In order to twist the analysis to be as void as the selective one by KingVoid.Zoue wrote:why would you?Paolo_Lasardi wrote:Well, with selective figures, you can show everything.
We could focus on 2016 only for the Vettel-Räikkönen comparison, for instance.
Alonso had 0.287s over Massa on average but 0.528s over Raikkonen
This would imply that Massa was as dominant over Kimi as Alonso was over him. We know that isn’t true. Massa and Kimi were evenly matched at Ferrari.
Alonso and Massa spend 4 years together while Alonso and Kimi spend only 1 year together, so it’s likely that Alonso vs Massa was more representative because we have a lot more data.
If you want to believe that Alonso is actually over half a second faster than Kimi on average, then you are free to believe that.
Alonso > Massa 0.27s
Alonso > Kimi 0.28s