2014 Singapore Grand Prix Thread

[The Black Knight]

Wrong. You're just crying. Also, the growing opinion was that Rosberg "gave" the win at Monza.

No, it's absolutely 100% correct. You only have to open your eyes and look at what has happened. If you can't, that's fine, I don't mind Also, if he did give the win to Hamilton in Monza then that's proper order as far as I am concerned given that he cheated in Spa and Monaco.

LOL! What? It's Rosberg's problem that he was legitimately ahead? You're just making poo up now. What do you want Rosberg to do? "Hey Lewis. I'll lead for 10 laps. The I'll let you past for 10 laps. SO we both can have an equal amount of time in the dirty air?" Suck it up up.

No, I'm just saying that it wasn't any spectacular special ability that enabled him to survive to the end of the race, which is the impression your post conveyed.

LOL! You've contradicted yourself. Who is the delusional one?

I'll admit he drove good races as well...In a car 3 secs a lap quicker than others...

No contradiction there at all. The safety car did benefit him but starting from the pits didn't. It wa sjust the timing of the car safety car played to his advantage. This isn't really a hard concept to understand, and the Merc is not 3 seconds a lap quicker than the other cars, certainly not in Hungary either.

I'll pay that. However, it's not Rosberg's problem. It didn't warrant incessant whinging about how "unlucky" Hamilton was. Particularly in hindsight now, it's proven to be he's been fortunate.

Never said it was Rosberg's problem, just another exampole of how mechanical failures have cost Hamilton more than they have cost Rosberg and he still lead the WDC now.

LOL! Even if the Ferrari was better. It was hardly a significant amount. Even then, Massa would've won the title had he not had more mechanical failures than Hamilton (particularly Hungary. where Massa broke down down while clearly leading with 3 laps to go. Hamilton was nowhere). There was also that year's Monaco GP. Hamilton was extremely lucky to win the race. And in turn, he was lucky to be champ. Oh yes he was!

I'll agree that there was some luck involved but I don't think there are much that would deny he deserved it as he was also mighty unlucky not to win it the year before in his rookie year. All he needed was 3 points from the last two races in 2007. It was harder to lose the WDC at that point than not win it and McLaren managed to successfully stuff that up for him by their own admission.

[Tazio]

Disappointed Rosberg tells Mercedes to improve reliability

How strange it is that Rosberg wasn't complaining so much when all the trouble was hitting Lewis' car!
All the times Hamilton's car blew up, puked out or burst into flames, and he never pointed a finger at the team. Rosberg has a problem and suddenly "We have already had several problems with reliability this year."
Nico can complain all he wants, but he still has less DNFs than his teammate.

Ok mate, here is the article that motorsport.com and others quoted, and was somehow construed by you as complaining. To me it was simply a statement of fact, and most likely the answer to a direct question. Me, I don't care which Mercedes pilot wins the WDC, or which one complains more, it doesn't change the racing, or the talent of the guys driving the cars. However this was not complaining by Nico, not even close. So sorry to ruin the fantasy by motorspoorts.com and others of turning this into a provocation, which you took the bait and swam very deeply with. Here is another excerpt from the same article that your link didn't include because it ruins the sensation of the trash they published

For Rosberg, it is after the transmission defect in Silverstone already the second failure. Even teammate Hamilton had two clear rounds in Australia and Montreal, because the technology did not cooperate. Rosberg can be explained by the setback but not discouraged "This is a very sobering result. A hard day for me. I must accept. But now I give full throttle until the end of the season. Complete attack for Suzuka."

http://translate.google.com/translat...66%26bih%3D620

You can bet on one thing; we haven't seen the last Mercedes failure, so don't take it too hard boyz if your guy gets punked by circumstances outside of his own control.

Paddy Lowe said:

“I’ve said internally from the beginning of the year, when it was clear we had the dominant car, that my biggest concern is that we will decide the championship on the basis of car breakdowns.”“I’m not going to pretend it’s good enough because it isn’t. It’s one of the weaknesses that we have. We’re doing a lot of work behind the scenes to turn it around but it’s a long-term project. It’s not something you can hit in five minutes. It takes a lot work. We are making progress but we’ve got further to go.”

[N. Jones]

I missed the first quarter of the race. What happened to Rosberg's car?

Good race overall. I really like this track, although I thought that Vergne was skirting the rules by turning up the wick in spite of his penalty....

....but then again that might be because I don't know the rules.

[donKey jote]

broken wire in the steering column... not something a quick change of the steering wheel could fix

[Tazio]

broken wire in the steering column... not something a quick change of the steering wheel could fix

Broken wire en la Cabeza most likely. Aleman muy loco!!

Sorry donks not a personal afronte

[journeyman racer]

As much as I'd like to reply to TGK's weak response to my posts. The fact is, there's heaps of text to read. It'll be even longer if I respond to everything that's incorrect. Also, I'm sure no one's actually enjoying reading it. So I'm just going to leave it at this.

First point. TBK, and to anyone else concerned, may want to look up the meaning of the word "luck". Based on their posts, I'm not sure he/they understand the actual meaning of it. Here's some help.

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=l...sm=93&ie=UTF-8

I think it's fair to say Hamilton was lucky at Hungary, and particularly in 2008. The end of 2007 doesn't constitute as "luck" because he choked. Choked at China. Choked in Brazil qualifying (apparently a strength of his, that deserted him). Choked in the race.

But, more than that. The popular notion is that Hamilton's been"unlucky". Like he's been denied. Well. I've done some analysis of the season so far. It seems interesting reading to me.

Based on the fact that both drivers have once retired in a race so early, that's it's hard to truly determine where they would've finished with any certainty. Hamilton's race in Australia and Rosberg's in Singapore cancel each other out. This is the probable amount of points gained and lost, from the moment of mechanical failures.

Hamilton.

Canada. He had an issue which caused a non-driving dnf. It's fair to say he was only leading due to a quicker pit stop. Rosberg had the better of the race. As a result, it's fair to say he missed out on 18pts.

Germany. Hamilton had a glazed brake in qualifying, which contributed to him slamming the wall. Rosberg also had a glazed brake, and stuck in on pole. But that's beside the point. Hamilton went on to finish 3rd, and gained 15pts.

Hungary. A similar situation to Germany. Blown engine in qualifying. Finished 3rd. Gained 15pts.

Britain. Hamilton was a clear second, before Rosberg's engine failed. By inherting the lead and winning the race. Hamilton gained an extra 7pts.

The net result? -18 +15 +15 +7 = +19pts.

Now lets have a look at Rosberg.

Canada. Was a leader throughout the race. Conceded initially to Hamilton before he broke down. Still hampered with the problem throughout the race, Rosberg was passed by Ricciardo for the win. A second place that really should've been first. Rosberg missed out on 7 pts.

Britain. Rosberg had pole. Led the whole way, til his engine denied him an opportunity to continue and win the race. A highly likely win denied. Rosberg missed out on 25pts.

The net result? -7 -25 = -32

The allowing for the adjustment of scores. Rosberg would be leading the title on 270pts. Hamilton second on 222pts.

It's not me saying it. I'm just being fair.

[airshifter]

Real math vs crazy math.

Based on crazy math, Rosberg would have 270 points and Hamilton would have 222.

Based on real math, both cars have suffered two mechanical DNFs, so both drivers have potentially lost 50 points. And with equal car failures, Hamilton now leads Rosberg.


I could come up with a Trig formula explaining why Lewis has been handed an advantage, but math isn't my strong point and it's much harder when I'm laughing and can't concentrate.

Rather than try to come up with some statistical analysis and go back to 2007, the facts are obvious. Both drivers have had failures, both drivers have overcome potential DNFs on track.

[Doc Austin]

In the end, if Rosberg does not win the championship by more than the second place points he gained at Spa, critics can rightfully point to his slicing Hamilton's tire as the championship winning move.

Not so curiously, Rosberg went off again in qualifying this weekend, but there was none of the wild sawing back and forth on the wheel that we saw at Monaco. He went off at Hungary too (and some other place I can't remember), all without the dramatics. I think if people look at the offs and compare what Nico's hands are doing in each, the Monaco incident looks especially bizarre and even staged. After Spa I think all doubt has been removed that Nico planned to sail down the escape road at Monaco all along, and the wild hand motions were to make it look believable.

You know, Schumacher secures the 94 championship by taking out Damon Hill, and then Schumacher stalls the car on purpose in Monoco qualifying to bring out a yellow. Kind of makes you wonder what Nico might have picked up in his years as Schumacher's teammate.

[journeyman racer]

Clearly, my analysis has pinched a nerve with airshifter. I know you attempt to be impartial airshifter. However, you just expose yourself as a fanboy.

I fail to understand how anybody who has an interest in motorsport, expects to see an equal number of mechanical failure for drivers in the same team. It never works out like that. In motorsport, it's what you do, despite the adversity you face that makes your reputation, not your speed over a short distance (which is a lower level of driving). It's the single biggest reason why Alonso is considered the best driver overall. If anything, he gets more credit for finishing 2nd in 10 and 11, than he does for winning the 05/06 titles.

My analysis is based on what happened, and reasonable extrapolation. I've not attempted to guess what result Hamilton/Rosberg would've got at Australia/Singapore, because they both retired too early to make a reasonable The fact is, Rosberg had pole and led the whole way in Britain. He definitely would've won it. That's 25pts gone and 7 extra gained by Hamilton. Hamilton did have a blown engine at Q1. but still had an opportunity to make up for it. Which he did the best job possible. Ideally, you wouldn't have a mechanical failure at all. But that's naive from anybody to have that expectation.

If you said to Rosberg "Hey Nico, your engine will definitely blow up this weekend. Would you prefer it to happen halfway through the race while leading, having led all the way til that point, or would you rather it happen in the first lap of q1, and take your chances to score points?" What would he say?

If you asked Hamilton. "Hey Lewis. Your engine will defnitley blow up this week. Would you much rather it occur during the first lap of q1, or would you prefer it to occur halfway through the race?" What would his answer be?

Obviously Hamilton fans like yourself are more interested in Hamilton being the victim, rather than genuine discussion. But that's your prerogative.

[journeyman racer]

Since my previous post. Doc Austin has made a contribution.. After having Tazio expose his attempt to diminish Rosberg with that article, he's made another attempt at diminishing him. Comparing Rosberg's off in Singapore and Monaco. Is there an article for Tazio to dismantle with that one?


Broadly speaking, the preciousness of Hamilton fans is bizarre. The sense of entitlement smacks of the most arrogant fans going around, since I've come across following F1. The only positive of Vettel knocking off 4 titles on the trot , has been he's shut down these starfish. The hole history of motorsport is of cars breaking down, denying drivers of wins and good positions. But Hamilton fans think he's entitled to some compensation. Rosberg's problems in Singapore is seen as ome kind of comeuppance. It's ridiculous.

I compare to myself as a kid. I was a huge Nigel Mansell fan. In 91, Mansell's car broke down every second race. He either was in a winning position, or challenging for the win (Including Canada. Leading the whole race. Leading by a lap on the last lap, and the car broke down) Senna maybe only had one problem, and benefitted a lot out of others problems. The points Mansell potentially could've got would've easily bridged the gap Senna won the title by. But I don't cry about how Mansell didn't win, or that there should be some equality. Nor do I hold it against Senna for winning it, and try to diminish him. ****! Even in Adelaide in 92, when Senna slammed into Mansell. It was disappointing, since I'd have like to see Mansell win in Aus. But **** happens.

But these hyper sensitive Hamilton fans? Geesh! I reckon Mansell may've Had more mechanical issues in 91, than Hamilton in his whole career so far. In fact, I reckon Mansell, in his dominant 92 season, would've easily had more mechanical issues than Hamilton this year. Maybe even more than Hamilton and Rosberg put together!

How you can put that much emphasis on driving for a short period (qualifying) really is weird. No wonder the WRC threads on this site, kick our arse for reasonable discussion.