Faulty on what basis?
Stronger or weaker car means little, as F1 is a ever evolving sport and one car that might be fast one weekend might be slow another, combine that with all the different talents in each car means it's a lot more complex then saying ''he is elite because he beat someone driving this car because that car is better.''
No one said that, and the R&D of any engineering endeavor isn't that exponentially fast to see such a dramatic change if it worked out that easily we should all bet on Mc-Honda being able to fight higher up due to the three weeks they have to work right now.
I always try to focus on the team mate first, then look else where as that is much easier to understand since they are using the same equipment at any given time(Mostly).
If that's the case then why compare Massa to Alonso when it's well seen that the same measuring stick wasn't used.
I didn't say that, you did.
I said: ''Beating Vettel was lets be honest after a massive Vettel error and then a pit stop afterwards, not that it wasn't a good drive but using it as a point is kinda useless, unless your just looking at the results on Autosport rather then actually watching the race.''
Which to most people would be an indirect saying "so you looked up the post race results and not watched the race"
This is a weak basis for argument because:
1. His race was compromised by damage
2. He had to do another whole pit stop on top putting his car where it wouldn't of been.
But I didn't say it wasn't a good drive because he did keep Vettel behind him.
He compromised his own race, and his weekend was already in dire position when he collided with Perez and never really seemed to have a grip on what he wanted out of the weekend. More so the only flash of him showing that maybe that was fixed was in Quali. But soon as the race started he showed more of what he had prior to Quali.
He destroyed himself on Sunday and due to that he had to pit because of it. But the damage was not severe enough to make it seem as if he couldn't challenge Bottas. In fact he could be was held off simple as that.
Say what you want about that particular situation, but he continued to stay there which means he obviously wasn't treated as bad as you think he was, and all those moments of ''2nd driverness'' happened after mid season.
Also I didn't count 2009, because he wasn't Alonso team mate(I said 4 years Straight 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013) and he had a severe head injury which is much more severe then the back injuries mentioned(Massive injuries like this have destroyed careers).
He stayed there because Alonso wanted him too, knowing he'd follow orders and not challenge his number 1 status. Also no you said five years he has under performed, I've quoted you as such and since you're a bit fickle I'll quote it again. Also Massa stayed cause he had no offers that were worth the switch (or money) Ferrari were giving, and he was lucky the move to Williams proved as fruitful as it has.
What wasn't Calculated though was the Pace difference and the Run Massa had in the last half of the season, Massa was basically the guy with higher Highs and Lower lows last season. Ricciardo on the other Hand had a Steady Pace advantage allthrought the entire season and even When Vettel finished ahead he looked faster, keep in mind he wasn't beating a no body this was the defending 4 times World champion.
I calculated it, the problem was this is a Massa trait which runs counter to why Ferrari told him more and more second half to pull over to Fernando. Massa has always been a faster presence during the second half of a season than the first, point is Bottas was consistently fast over the entire season and this allowed him to stay ahead of his team mate in points by more than 50.
The car is different yes, but the Talent is not going to wildly change every-time there is new regulations, Also saying Bottas beating him is a bit premature considering all the races done soo far and the fact he is still behind in the points.
Sure there is, Webber enjoyed the 2010 car over subsequent cars because it had less trick electronics and aero bits that suited the style of Vettel. Does that mean his talent was never there? Schumacher enjoyed much more speed with the Bridgestones of 2004 and prior and the newer tires for 05 and 06 weren't as fast as their competitor so should it be said he speed was mainly based on this? The point is yes, talent does take a hit when rules are changed to curve such talent or styles. The 2014 RBR seemed to be a more driver oriented car, rather than one reliant on innovative aero.
Also I haven't said Bottas has beat him this season, last season yes...this season no because it's not over. And the second half of the season where Massa really shines. Also Bottas is behind Massa due to Massa having finished four races in the points and Bottas only being able to race 3 of the 4 due to an injury in one side lining him. If he was behind because he got beat then sure I could see the point of saying "still behind in points".
Also what is with the stuck up attitude?
Everything Im putting up here is just my analysis of what im seeing in F1 it's not aimed at attacking people.
What stuck up attitude because I'm actually challenging you? It's funny cause you make comments out of irritation (at least it seems so) for what PM says, but complain when others do it to you. I never said you made comments to attack people, but now that you mention it...it could be conveyed in certain cases that you're trying to.
Problem is your analysis just like anyone's analysis is flawed I'm simply asking or was asking, why the back injury of Bottas isn't an excuse but a time frame for another driver in which you claim was sublime is allowed (directly or indirectly).
) he was beat by a weaker car because he didn't do what he was capable of. Either way if you want to divulge into petty comments with no basis just to help end this, that's fine.
)
/sarcasm
