Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Motorsport' started by SVT Cobra GT, Jun 28, 2016.
A lot of jumping to conclusions in this thread.
Well yes its an internet forum thread, its what happens with any sport, sometime speculation is all you got.
How about the fact he's a three times WDC, he's in the quickest car and has won more times at Silverstone that anybody else on the current grid?
Yes but apart from that, what chance does he have?
LOL, a punchline that always delivers!
Not sure anyone can say Rosberg is the current form driver of 2016. He started well, but the likes of Verstappen and (dare I say it) Hamilton are currently looking stronger. Verstappen just happens to be in a slower car.
Nico Rosberg was the championship leader, in the quickest car, and had won more times than anyone else at the Red Bull Ring, and he wasn't guaranteed victory.
Who was guaranteeing him a victory? You seem to have real problem with interpretation. Both with what people post and with what stares you in the face when watching F1 on tv.
Plus Hamilton generally doesn't bottle it under pressure like Rosberg generally does and did in Austria.
Nobody, and that's the point. You're expecting that Hamilton should win at Silverstone based on his car and his form at the circuit. I was simply pointing out that Rosberg had the best car in Austria, and a previous run of success at the circuit; by your logic, he should have won - and yet he didn't, and I don't think that you can say that Hamilton should win at Silverstone. His team-mate has the same car and has been the strongest driver this season, while Hamilton has the threat of grid penalties for engine changes and reprimands hanging over his head. Based on that, we could also say that Rosberg should win this weekend.
I'm not expecting Hamilton should win at all. Point out where I said that. He has a much better chance than most of the other drivers on the grid. The bookies have him 1/1 and have Rosberg 9/4. They don't let emotion come into it. They are playing with lots money so look at the facts. They have him the overwhelming favourite. What do you think they base that on?
All will be revealed on Sunday. What I can be pretty sure of and I'd bet my house on it, that it will be a Merc on pole.
So just to be absolutely clear, you believe the Merc is the best car and should be 1-2 every race? Because you've not really mentioned it much.
Well, to be fair, if everything goes right, Merc usually are fronting the party.
I know, he just seems to mention it a heck of a lot, as if we don't know.
Kinda been the case for 3 seasons now so can't really escape it. Keep meaning to look at the stats of the Red Bull dominance days that sections of the F1 fan base used to moan about, pretty sure others were in with a shot despite it.
edit seems james allen has been onto this already!
While qualifying may be a measure of absolute speed, race results are a more accurate gauge of true dominance – requiring a combination of drivers, car, reliability and strategy working together in harmony.
Red Bull’s 2010-2013 seasons saw them take 9, 12, 7 and 13 victories respectively for a total of 41 wins from 77 races (53%) across their four championship seasons. Of these 41 victories, only 12 (29%) were 1-2 finishes, with the four 1-2s secured in 2010 and 2013 representing the team’s best haul on this front. This figure, allied to the fact that Sebastian Vettel secured 34 of Red Bull’s 41 wins (83%) during this time, suggests that the team’s dominance was sustained to a certain extent by Vettel’s performance levels – with Webber failing on the whole to back the German up as would be expected in a truly dominant car.
Since the start of 2014, Mercedes have taken 22 victories from 26 races (85%). The 2014 season saw them take 16 wins from 19 races (84%), compared to Red Bull’s ‘winningest’ season of 13 wins from 19 races (68%) in 2013.
Mercedes have also delivered 15 1-2 finishes from their 22 wins (68%), indicating that the team is enjoying a larger performance advantage than Red Bull ever did due to their ability to bring both cars home at the front on a consistent basis.
This notion is backed up by the fact that Mercedes in 2014 had an average race finishing position across both cars of 1.98 – averaging better than a 1-3 finish at each race. This year, that figure has improved to 1.79. Red Bull’s highest average team finishing position was 2.44 in 2011, again suggesting that their performance advantage was never as substantial as Mercedes’ is now.
As expected Pirelli say the Vettel failure was not wear related but kerb related.
“And, of course, the tyre is part of the suspension, so it is very likely that whatever is loading the suspension was loading the tyre as well.”
July 6th Pirelli confirmed the Pirelli tire failed because of debris. July 15th Pirelli they are now think the curbs caused the Pirelli tire to fail.
I guess we will never know why the Pirelli tires really failed will we.
When you have a body which in there best interest is to not blame the tyre, you can't expect an impartial investigation even if it's true or not.
I know it's popular to rag on Pirelli, but when you look at how many tires were run the entire weekend and only a single one failed...I think they have a point.
Do you remember when Vettel was furious at Pirelli when his tyre failed at Spa because he'd never gone off track so it was obviously the tyre's fault - only it turned out he was four-wheels off just about every lap at Radillon?
Well, he was furious at Pirelli when his tyre failed in Austria because he'd never gone off track...
You should share your insight with Pirelli then because they clearly have no idea what the problem is.
Given that he did run off track on both occasions - and on both occasions he did so most egregiously the corner immediately before the tyre failed - it looks like Pirelli has a handle on it just fine.