Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 54
  1. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    5,383
    Like
    325
    Liked 269 Times in 203 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Zico View Post
    At last... someone unbiased, able to apply logic and who really understands the status quo in F1. Thank you for restoring my faith in this forum!
    I wholeheartedly agree with 99% of everything you have written, our views are so similar its unreal.

    The only tiny thing that I might disagree on is your statement on the car being 50-60% of the equation. I'm of the opinion that it is not a fixed percentage and actually a variable percentage and more in line with just how much better the dominant car is as well as simply being quicker than your team mate.


    Could all of the drivers on the grid win the WDC in a hugely dominant car? Of course not... simple maths, of any 2 drivers in a team, someone has to finish 2nd which automatically rules out half the grid.

    Open ended question... Is luck just luck? I think in most cases it is... Although I guess if you are super well connected with a finger on the pulse and able to have half an insight on which team is likely to dominate, one might reasonably argue that to be a skill... It is clearly not a driver skill though, if anyone really wants to argue otherwise please do go for it... I've got some popcorn in the cupboard.

    What does this 'GOAT' word I keep reading on here actually mean? Greatest what of all time?

    Lets face it, until F1 is a one make series with far more equality between machinery, this constant crowing from the one winning drivers fanboy fanbase is quite frankly an embarrassment to true F1 fans... normal people who just love great wheel to wheel racing regardless of who it is.
    Well as far as the car percentage, I'd have to agree that it's just "needed" at the top of the field. Until you are in that hardware, you're not winning titles.

    As for the "GOAT" I've never figured that out much myself. Maybe the Greatest (Record) Of All Time, regardless of the luck of the car? Maybe the claim to be the best driver, even in inferior hardware? Maybe the person with the largest fanboy base?

    I watch for the show and to appreciate all the talented drivers, along with seeing the teams efforts and the improvements in the cars. I've watched F1 far too long to think that luck isn't a big part of the equation. And sometimes the luck of lack of with certain drivers is what levels the playing field some, and when you see the better drivers really display their ability, even when in a lesser car.

    I also feel that people take it over the top in making any of these guys superhuman when they win.

  2. Likes: Zico (7th January 2020)
  3. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Greenwich, London UK
    Posts
    1,704
    Like
    0
    Liked 398 Times in 323 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by airshifter View Post
    Well as far as the car percentage, I'd have to agree that it's just "needed" at the top of the field. Until you are in that hardware, you're not winning titles.

    As for the "GOAT" I've never figured that out much myself. Maybe the Greatest (Record) Of All Time, regardless of the luck of the car? Maybe the claim to be the best driver, even in inferior hardware? Maybe the person with the largest fanboy base?

    I watch for the show and to appreciate all the talented drivers, along with seeing the teams efforts and the improvements in the cars. I've watched F1 far too long to think that luck isn't a big part of the equation. And sometimes the luck of lack of with certain drivers is what levels the playing field some, and when you see the better drivers really display their ability, even when in a lesser car.

    I also feel that people take it over the top in making any of these guys superhuman when they win.
    Ok now l am confused. If l read you correctly, luck has nothing to do with it, it just pure skill that win races. Or you are saying that the luck is about being in th fastest car in the first place and everything else is the level of talent available to the individual. But you also say that drivers performing above what the car or inferior car can produce is a display of talent above sheer luck. And l agree with this last bit actually.

    But l also agree that luck is not a big part of it as well. But it is a part of winning more times than not. Like Hamilton driving his tyres for a longer run than would otherwise be ideal with the hope for a safety car situation that materializes against the odds, giving him a win that would have otherwise been a win for Bottas that had driven a flawless race but to be deprived of the win due to the safety car. This is what l mean by making luck.

    You also say that machinery is a big part of it. But Ferrari had the fastest car this season and last. And probably for some time now since 2017. Yet Mercedes has won both driver and constructors title inspite of it. Which disproves the argument that better machinery has alot to do with success. Unfortunately, that statement undermines the immense amount of work that Mercedes has put into finding a solution to overcome Ferrari and their mighty engine.

    The level of excellence that brings a driver and a team above a competitor with a superior machinery is not ordinary by any means. It is that bit above what even the best of the time can produce. That l say is superhuman.

    In terms of Schumacher and Hamilton, is not ordinary talent that makes a driver win more than 5 F1 driver's title. Having a superior car is not the full answer either because there is another driver in a similar car racing against him. It is that very special talent that separates that driver from the rest. Because not all drivers on the grid can be world champions in that car. Be it a Mercedes or a Ferrari. If that was the case, the other driver would win just as much titles as the him [Schumacher, Hamilton, Prost].

    I would not go as far as to say GOAT, as l find such terms unequivocal, but l certainly think it is not ordinary talent. And you can see how it separates the up and coming from their peers. Verstapenn and Leclerc stand out immediately because we could see that very special quality in them.

    The reason we are having this discussion is the comparison of Bottas to Verstapenn and Leclerc as implied by Hakkinen. Bottas is fast but lacks that very particular quality that we associate with Verstapenn and Leclerc.
    Last edited by Nitrodaze; 9th January 2020 at 17:37.
    Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
    William Shakespeare

  4. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    2,493
    Like
    97
    Liked 132 Times in 86 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    You also say that machinery is a big part of it. But Ferrari had the fastest car this season and last. And probably for some time now since 2017. Yet Mercedes has won both driver and constructors title inspite of it. Which disproves the argument that better machinery has alot to do with success. Unfortunately, that statement undermines the immense amount of work that Mercedes has put into finding a solution to overcome Ferrari and their mighty engine.


    Ferrari having the highest top speed in the straight speed traps does not equal fastest car. That is only one single parameter and a very simplistic view.
    Mercedes had advantages in other key areas such as highest fast and slow corner cornering speeds of everyone on the grid... which you really shouldnt ignore when looking at the bigger picture.



    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    In terms of Schumacher and Hamilton, is not ordinary talent that makes a driver win more than 5 F1 driver's title. Having a superior car is not the full answer either because there is another driver in a similar car racing against him. It is that very special talent that separates that driver from the rest. Because not all drivers on the grid can be world champions in that car. Be it a Mercedes or a Ferrari. If that was the case, the other driver would win just as much titles as the him [Schumacher, Hamilton, Prost].
    .
    A few contradictions there...

    Dominating your team mate is not exclusive to Hamilton and it certainly does not set him apart from the rest of the grid.
    No of course not all other drivers can be world champions in that car.. as some wouldnt beat Bottas but the main, super obvious big reason is that they aren't driving it!


    I rate Hamilton very highly but having the most amount of WDC's does not automatically make him the best on the grid. That logic is absurd and actually quite niave.
    If that was the case, shouldnt Vettel with his 4 WDC's have destroyed LeClerc (Zero WDC's btw) last year?
    It is not the real measure of any driver on the grid and simply cannot be as long as machinery disparity exists... and that is not in any way disparaging to Hamilton.
    The emergence of the new 'Rainmaster' - Mad Max at Interlagos 2016!

  5. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Greenwich, London UK
    Posts
    1,704
    Like
    0
    Liked 398 Times in 323 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Zico View Post
    Ferrari having the highest top speed in the straight speed traps does not equal fastest car. That is only one single parameter and a very simplistic view.
    Mercedes had advantages in other key areas such as highest fast and slow corner cornering speeds of everyone on the grid... which you really shouldnt ignore when looking at the bigger picture.
    I think you should read my post again. My point was Mercerdes could not match Ferrari on straightline speed but had to find speed in the corners to get ahead of Ferarri. This is a demonstration of the technology competition that makes F1 unique in its formula and DNA. The intellectual innovative competition between the brains in one team against the brains in other teams.


    Quote Originally Posted by Zico View Post
    I rate Hamilton very highly but having the most amount of WDC's does not automatically make him the best on the grid. That logic is absurd and actually quite niave.
    If that was the case, shouldnt Vettel with his 4 WDC's have destroyed LeClerc (Zero WDC's btw) last year?
    It is not the real measure of any driver on the grid and simply cannot be as long as machinery disparity exists... and that is not in any way disparaging to Hamilton.
    I am not sure why you are making this about Hamilton. But if we go with your post. Schumacher was not the best of his time, neighter was Prost or Fangio. How do you work out who was the best? If you do not go with acheivements, then you are left with subjective criterias such as, you have to like the guy or he is your countryman etc.

    You say they have to be in equal machinery to say who is the best. Even that is not possible, if we have learnt anything from F2. There would still be superior machinery and more than one tier of performances between the teams depending on their ability to build the car to the highest efficiency of the specification. Attaining equality is not going to be automatic or even attainable. There would always be some differences.

    As with life, the best drivers would end up in the best machinery. And they would perform exceptionally in those machinery which would translate to points, records and World Championship titles. That is just the way it is. You cannot deprive them of their status because they ended up in the fastest machinery. And it is nonsense to equate Vettel to Hamilton. They are two individuals dealing with their respective situations differently. Vettel has struggled to find the level of hungar that won him 4 WDCs. Yet Hamilton, due to the draught after his first WDC at Mclaren has found a way to sustain his hungar and keep at his best.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zico View Post
    A few contradictions there...

    Dominating your team mate is not exclusive to Hamilton and it certainly does not set him apart from the rest of the grid.
    No of course not all other drivers can be world champions in that car.. as some wouldnt beat Bottas but the main, super obvious big reason is that they aren't driving it!
    You also miss the point on this one. My post was not neccessarily about dominating his teammate. It was the fact that his teammate had access to the same machinery available to him. Hence, had equal chance to win as many WDC as he has won. Proving the point that, not everyone can win WDC in the fastest car.

    Yes, the other drivers are not driving the Mercedes because they are not good enough by Mercedes standard to drive their car, Simple!.

    We must respect the achievement of those that excel. It shows we understand what it took to excel and appreciate the difficulties involved in being the best of the best drivers in the world.
    Last edited by Nitrodaze; 11th January 2020 at 08:36.
    Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
    William Shakespeare

  6. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    2,493
    Like
    97
    Liked 132 Times in 86 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    I think you should read my post again. My point was Mercerdes could not match Ferrari on straightline speed but had to find speed in the corners to get ahead of Ferarri. This is a demonstration of the technology competition that makes F1 unique in its formula and DNA. The intellectual innovative competition between the brains in one team against the brains in other teams.
    I've read your post again, it does not read that way at all, sorry.



    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    I am not sure why you are making this about Hamilton. But if we go with your post. Schumacher was not the best of his time, neighter was Prost or Fangio. How do you work out who was the best? If you do not go with acheivements, then you are left with subjective criterias such as, you have to like the guy or he is your countryman etc.
    Yep.. thats exactly my whole point, the cream does rise to the surface in a lot of cases.. but until they are racing in the same team you cannot definatively or objectively say for sure who is the best.
    Personally, I dont need a driver to idolise but if I was that way minded, F1 would be the wrong sport for me.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    You say they have to be in equal machinery to say who is the best. Even that is not possible, if we have learnt anything from F2. There would still be superior machinery and more than one tier of performances between the teams depending on their ability to build the car to the highest efficiency of the specification. Attaining equality is not going to be automatic or even attainable. There would always be some differences.
    100% Agree. I do think it would be a lot easier to discern a pecking order when there is a closer performance baseline though.



    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    As with life, the best drivers would end up in the best machinery. And they would perform exceptionally in those machinery which would translate to points, records and World Championship titles. That is just the way it is. You cannot deprive them of their status because they ended up in the fastest machinery. And it is nonsense to equate Vettel to Hamilton. They are two individuals dealing with their respective situations differently. Vettel has struggled to find the level of hungar that won him 4 WDCs. Yet Hamilton, due to the draught after his first WDC at Mclaren has found a way to sustain his hungar and keep at his best.
    For me Vettel has shown some flashes of desperation against a very quick LeClerc which I dont see happening without there being the underlying hunger there.



    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    You also miss the point on this one. My post was not neccessarily about dominating his teammate. It was the fact that his teammate had access to the same machinery available to him. Hence, had equal chance to win as many WDC as he has won. Proving the point that, not everyone can win WDC in the fastest car.
    I dont think I missed your point at all and of course not everyone can win in the fastest car as I've stated a few times now.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    Yes, the other drivers are not driving the Mercedes because they are not good enough by Mercedes standard to drive their car, Simple!.
    Are you saying you think Valteri is the 2nd best driver on the grid now?
    No, it really is not that simple at all, not even close.. There are quite a few drivers on the grid who are good enough, you can only pick 2 though... your number 1 and a support driver. Or if you have the luxury of a healthy performance advantage, give them equal status and allow them to duke it out for a spectacle for the fans.

    Some will be seen to be more marketeable than others/have an image that the decision makers at the top see as more fitting to the Mercedes brand. Other suitable candidates will be under contract and unavailable. There will also be other politics such as drivers management teams, their links with manufacturers etc all at play too.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    We must respect the achievement of those that excel. It shows we understand what it took to excel and appreciate the difficulties involved in being the best of the best drivers in the world.

    I do respect them, I just think the difference between us is that I dont need an idol and this allows me to appreciate the many different strengths, but also able to criticise any weaknesses, in all of them.
    Conversely, I get the feeling that any comment made by anyone that is not in addulation of Lewis, or could even be construed as negative, is taken to heart in a really negative way by the Lewis superfans that think he's the messiah of F1. I'm really glad I'm just a general fan of the sport.
    The emergence of the new 'Rainmaster' - Mad Max at Interlagos 2016!

  7. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    5,383
    Like
    325
    Liked 269 Times in 203 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    But l also agree that luck is not a big part of it as well. But it is a part of winning more times than not. Like Hamilton driving his tyres for a longer run than would otherwise be ideal with the hope for a safety car situation that materializes against the odds, giving him a win that would have otherwise been a win for Bottas that had driven a flawless race but to be deprived of the win due to the safety car. This is what l mean by making luck.
    I've always seen this more as a roll of the dice. If the deciding factor is the "luck" of the safety car, it's just luck. In this example without a safety car the strategy of going long doesn't work. And IMO to some extent pure luck plays a part in many a drivers standings as far as results. Ricciardo at RB is a good example. I personally don't buy into any of the theories that they were intentionally allowing his car to fail, but his bad luck at RB with reliability was just that.... bad luck.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    You also say that machinery is a big part of it. But Ferrari had the fastest car this season and last. And probably for some time now since 2017. Yet Mercedes has won both driver and constructors title inspite of it. Which disproves the argument that better machinery has alot to do with success. Unfortunately, that statement undermines the immense amount of work that Mercedes has put into finding a solution to overcome Ferrari and their mighty engine.
    I'm glad you further clarified your context in a follow up post on this one, because I don't think for a second Ferrari had the fastest car in either season unless we count only straight line speed. But based
    on your follow up post, sure they are all constantly fighting to keep a superior car. And in my view this year showed that in some aspects both Ferrari and RB made up some ground on Mercedes this year. Since all cars are a compromise hoping to suit the overall season, the characteristics of certain strengths and weaknesses are most apparent on specific tracks that exploit both strengths and weaknesses within the grid.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    The level of excellence that brings a driver and a team above a competitor with a superior machinery is not ordinary by any means. It is that bit above what even the best of the time can produce. That l say is superhuman.

    In terms of Schumacher and Hamilton, is not ordinary talent that makes a driver win more than 5 F1 driver's title. Having a superior car is not the full answer either because there is another driver in a similar car racing against him. It is that very special talent that separates that driver from the rest. Because not all drivers on the grid can be world champions in that car. Be it a Mercedes or a Ferrari. If that was the case, the other driver would win just as much titles as the him [Schumacher, Hamilton, Prost].

    I would not go as far as to say GOAT, as l find such terms unequivocal, but l certainly think it is not ordinary talent. And you can see how it separates the up and coming from their peers. Verstapenn and Leclerc stand out immediately because we could see that very special quality in them.

    The reason we are having this discussion is the comparison of Bottas to Verstapenn and Leclerc as implied by Hakkinen. Bottas is fast but lacks that very particular quality that we associate with Verstapenn and Leclerc.
    In my view the total effort of any team can only set the bar higher, but I can't consider it superhuman. It is a combination of the great driving talent and the great efforts of the teams to provide that driver the best possible chance to win races or otherwise gain as many points as possible on that day. And without doubt some rise to the top of both sides of the equation, that we can agree on.

    As for driver pairings, IMO often all the outside factors along with team factors make it a lopsided comparison to say that there was equal chance to win titles and such. If all the teams always got the driver they wanted, and always opted to pick what they felt the two strongest drivers were, we [i]might[i] see a better comparison there. But only one team can get any driver, and often teams choose to allow a #1 driver and "wingman" status within the team. Though we agree that Bottas lacks that special talent we often see in the very top level drivers, he has upped his game. But Lewis has continued to refine his game as well, so there is no real challenge there. But I think we could probably agree that Seb, Leclerc maybe even Ricciardo and a couple others would have made for a much tighter battle at Merc if they were paired with Lewis. Vettel was proven to not be as strong as some think by the up and coming Leclerc, but not without some team tensions and problems due to the fact that they have two very solid drivers.

  8. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Greenwich, London UK
    Posts
    1,704
    Like
    0
    Liked 398 Times in 323 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Zico View Post
    I've read your post again, it does not read that way at all, sorry.





    Yep.. thats exactly my whole point, the cream does rise to the surface in a lot of cases.. but until they are racing in the same team you cannot definatively or objectively say for sure who is the best.
    Personally, I dont need a driver to idolise but if I was that way minded, F1 would be the wrong sport for me.




    100% Agree. I do think it would be a lot easier to discern a pecking order when there is a closer performance baseline though.





    For me Vettel has shown some flashes of desperation against a very quick LeClerc which I dont see happening without there being the underlying hunger there.





    I dont think I missed your point at all and of course not everyone can win in the fastest car as I've stated a few times now.




    Are you saying you think Valteri is the 2nd best driver on the grid now?
    No, it really is not that simple at all, not even close.. There are quite a few drivers on the grid who are good enough, you can only pick 2 though... your number 1 and a support driver. Or if you have the luxury of a healthy performance advantage, give them equal status and allow them to duke it out for a spectacle for the fans.

    Some will be seen to be more marketeable than others/have an image that the decision makers at the top see as more fitting to the Mercedes brand. Other suitable candidates will be under contract and unavailable. There will also be other politics such as drivers management teams, their links with manufacturers etc all at play too.





    I do respect them, I just think the difference between us is that I dont need an idol and this allows me to appreciate the many different strengths, but also able to criticise any weaknesses, in all of them.
    Conversely, I get the feeling that any comment made by anyone that is not in addulation of Lewis, or could even be construed as negative, is taken to heart in a really negative way by the Lewis superfans that think he's the messiah of F1. I'm really glad I'm just a general fan of the sport.
    I have not suggested anywhere that you have to idolize any driver. I have stated that you must respect multiple world champions for their achievements. One thing is certain, the people who make the decision about who gets the drive in their team, look hard and long at each driver available and choose the best driver for their team. They are not stupid.

    If a driver do not get selected, it is because they did not think he is good enough or they have found better or they have already found a winner. Any argument not based on facts is pointless. My view is, if a driver do not find a seat in a top car thoroughout their career, it is because the top teams did not rate him as a good enough driver. Therefore, we can certainly surmise that they are not as good as the drivers that did well in the top cars. Hence, we must respect those drivers [MWDCs] and their achievements because they delivered to the teams expectations. And justified the team's decision to select them above other drivers in the first place.

    So yes, we do know Schumacher, Hamilton, Prost and Fangio were the best of their time. There is no doubt about it.

    Your problem appears to me to be that you do not like Hamilton who happens to be the current best on the grid. And you are trying to diminish his achievement by saying he is not the best on the grid because other drivers did not get the same chance as he did in a fast Mercedes. I think that is crap. If Mercedes thought for one moment that there was any other driver on the current grid better, they would sign him up without delay. Mercedes are not fools.

    They have a driver that delivers championship year in year out successfully, l don't know why they would want to consider anyone else at this point. That said, Mercedes would be looking for a driver to replace Hamilton when he either retires or stops being competitive.
    Last edited by Nitrodaze; 12th January 2020 at 07:53.
    Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
    William Shakespeare

  9. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Greenwich, London UK
    Posts
    1,704
    Like
    0
    Liked 398 Times in 323 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by airshifter View Post
    In my view the total effort of any team can only set the bar higher, but I can't consider it superhuman. It is a combination of the great driving talent and the great efforts of the teams to provide that driver the best possible chance to win races or otherwise gain as many points as possible on that day. And without doubt some rise to the top of both sides of the equation, that we can agree on.
    No team in the history of the sport has won both the Drivers and Constructors title six times in a row. That is kind of special. It is above what we have seen as humanly possible in the past and qualifies as superhuman. Because all the people at Mercedes that made this happen dug deeper than any other before them to ensure they achieved this feat. To call it anything else is to belittle the incredible achievement.

    Quote Originally Posted by airshifter View Post
    As for driver pairings, IMO often all the outside factors along with team factors make it a lopsided comparison to say that there was equal chance to win titles and such. If all the teams always got the driver they wanted, and always opted to pick what they felt the two strongest drivers were, we [i]might[i] see a better comparison there. But only one team can get any driver, and often teams choose to allow a #1 driver and "wingman" status within the team. Though we agree that Bottas lacks that special talent we often see in the very top level drivers, he has upped his game. But Lewis has continued to refine his game as well, so there is no real challenge there. But I think we could probably agree that Seb, Leclerc maybe even Ricciardo and a couple others would have made for a much tighter battle at Merc if they were paired with Lewis. Vettel was proven to not be as strong as some think by the up and coming Leclerc, but not without some team tensions and problems due to the fact that they have two very solid drivers.
    The Hamilton - Rosberg pairing was the strongest at Mercedes up until 2016. It was a very close and highly competitive pairing. Unfortunately, Bottas has not measured up to that standard. That does not takeaway anything from Hamilton, in my opinion.

    I suppose it would be nice to have someone in the other car to give Hamilton a harder run. But Ferrari and Redbull are much closer to the Mercedes now, they cannot afford in fighting that could cost them the championship. From that perspective, Bottas is a great driver to occupy the other seat at Mercedes.
    Last edited by Nitrodaze; 12th January 2020 at 07:55.
    Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
    William Shakespeare

  10. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    5,383
    Like
    325
    Liked 269 Times in 203 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    No team in the history of the sport has won both the Drivers and Constructors title six times in a row. That is kind of special. It is above what we have seen as humanly possible in the past and qualifies as superhuman. Because all the people at Mercedes that made this happen dug deeper than any other before them to ensure they achieved this feat. To call it anything else is to belittle the incredible achievement.



    The Hamilton - Rosberg pairing was the strongest at Mercedes up until 2016. It was a very close and highly competitive pairing. Unfortunately, Bottas has not measured up to that standard. That does not takeaway anything from Hamilton, in my opinion.

    I suppose it would be nice to have someone in the other car to give Hamilton a harder run. But Ferrari and Redbull are much closer to the Mercedes now, they cannot afford in fighting that could cost them the championship. From that perspective, Bottas is a great driver to occupy the other seat at Mercedes.
    Without a doubt Merc and the drivers have made a lot of impressive records. Overall I think statistics shows them as the most dominant team of Formula 1 when adjusted for time in the sport. And in many cases they have already surpassed the overall totals of teams that have been around a lot longer.

    No sense in us debating the semantics of the use of a word on this one. It has been without a doubt an incredible team.


    Rosberg and Alonso have been the toughest team competition for Lewis, but this brings up another prime example of statistics not always telling the entire story. Bottas is probably the weakest team mate Lewis has had in Formula 1. He beat (on count back) Alonso at Mclaren and missed that WDC by a couple of points. Points that he would have easily had if someone the caliber of Bottas (or at least not as strong as Alonso!) we driving in the team with him. In comparison Schumacher didn't have those really fast team mates, and when he did they were still demoted to a #2 status and often team orders were employed to assist him with his dominance. Most likely if he had not been paired with such high caliber drivers Lewis would already have matched or exceeded Schumacher in WDC titles.

    All across the grid this happens, and at times it can diminish the record of one driver while assisting the record of another. The balance of driver skill within teams is a big factor in that, along with any team orders a team might make.

  11. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Greenwich, London UK
    Posts
    1,704
    Like
    0
    Liked 398 Times in 323 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by airshifter View Post
    Without a doubt Merc and the drivers have made a lot of impressive records. Overall I think statistics shows them as the most dominant team of Formula 1 when adjusted for time in the sport. And in many cases they have already surpassed the overall totals of teams that have been around a lot longer.

    No sense in us debating the semantics of the use of a word on this one. It has been without a doubt an incredible team.


    Rosberg and Alonso have been the toughest team competition for Lewis, but this brings up another prime example of statistics not always telling the entire story. Bottas is probably the weakest team mate Lewis has had in Formula 1. He beat (on count back) Alonso at Mclaren and missed that WDC by a couple of points. Points that he would have easily had if someone the caliber of Bottas (or at least not as strong as Alonso!) we driving in the team with him. In comparison Schumacher didn't have those really fast team mates, and when he did they were still demoted to a #2 status and often team orders were employed to assist him with his dominance. Most likely if he had not been paired with such high caliber drivers Lewis would already have matched or exceeded Schumacher in WDC titles.

    All across the grid this happens, and at times it can diminish the record of one driver while assisting the record of another. The balance of driver skill within teams is a big factor in that, along with any team orders a team might make.
    You touch on one of the contentions of Schumacher's acheivemnents which is an unfortunate way that Ferrari operates. Yes, Eddie Irvine came close to stealing one of Schumacher's titles. In true Schumacher fashion, he did as little as possible to assist Irvine to win the title that year.

    But a team that fosters a number one and two status for their driver lineup would styme the chances of the number two driver in the interest of the team and the number one driver. But initially, they are given the chance to prove themselves worthy of the number one status at the early stages of the season in most teams. If they are not able to muster up enough points to get ahead, they naturally get relegated to the number two status. And that is because the better driver gets the requisite number of points to claim the number one status.

    Even in the case of Schumacher, the number two driver was given all the tools and support to get pole positions and win races. But Schumacher always did something special to ensure he was well ahead of his teammates. The relative numbers of pole positions tells the true story of how Schumacher always keeps ahead of his teammates, as there are no team orders during qualification.

    I really don't like team orders, but they become unquestionably necessary when used in a situation that could make a significant impact or difference to the championship prospect of the team or the driver with the highest points in the fight for the driver's championship.
    Last edited by Nitrodaze; 12th January 2020 at 16:55.
    Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
    William Shakespeare

  12. Likes: Zico (13th January 2020)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •