What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848That has been the subject of much discussion here, already. I tend to believe the car is the biggest factor; the Jenson Button - Brawn GP championship is my biggest argument for that. But most years, you need the complete package: quick car, top-notch driver, well-drilled crew.
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
Nah, Alan knows better.
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 14:26:25 +0100, Philip <invalid@nospam.org> wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
Nah, Alan knows better.
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
Than you? Obviously.
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
Than you? Obviously.
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent shot at winning.
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an answer.
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:26:28 AM UTC-7, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1?
An eight-season study has offered up an answer.
Money.
You didn't understand the question... but then neither did Toyota.
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >shot at winning.
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent
shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
And you know it.
XYXPDQ wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:26:28 AM UTC-7, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1?
An eight-season study has offered up an answer.
Money.You didn't understand the question... but then neither did Toyota.
--
Bozo Bin
Alan Baker
Texasgate
And you know it.
On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 2:48:13 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
XYXPDQ wrote:
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:26:28 AM UTC-7, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in
Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an answer.
Money.You didn't understand the question... but then neither did Toyota.
Even with the new spending cap it's still about the money (which some
teams reportedly don't even have). Look what at the difference in
what the teams are paying drivers.
<sigh>
You can lead a horse...
You can lead a horse...
You can lead a horse...
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they
said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between
the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>> shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best drivers out there currently.
But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.
Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try were it not for a mechanical problem.
If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he might
have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might not even have
been able to do that.
And you know it.
Alan's statement
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
by this years current standings.
a425couple wrote:
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
by this years current standings.
I think a case could be made that Max would still be leading in a
Ferrari.
On 7/9/2022 4:17 AM, Bigbird wrote:
a425couple wrote:
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
by this years current standings.
I think a case could be made that Max would still be leading in a
Ferrari.
I agree.
A case could be made for that.
Both Red Bull and Ferrari are very good cars
this year and oftentimes close in performance.
But more to the point, of which is more important,
car or driver,
I don't think that us an argument which any serious F1 would be having.
a425couple wrote:
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
by this years current standings.
I think a case could be made that Max would still be leading in a
Ferrari.
Which would only be possible, because the Ferrari is pretty close to as
good a car as the Red Bull.
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts,
On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they >>>>> said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between >>>>> the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>> shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best
drivers out there currently.
But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.
Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being able to fit
properly, he would have won in it on his first try were it not for a
mechanical problem.
If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he might
have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might not even have
been able to do that.
And you know it.
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
by this years current standings.
How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be
first and second, other than them being in
the best car, Red Bull.
How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be
3rd and 4th, other than them being in the second
best car, Ferrari.
How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton
be 5th and 6th, other than them being in
the third best car, Mercedes.
Year after year, the grids quite often have
the team mates side by side.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple <a425c...@hotmail.com>People say that the best car is more important than the driver, but the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car. Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be in the top teams.
wrote:
On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they >>>>> said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between >>>>> the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent
shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best
drivers out there currently.
But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.
Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being able to fit >> properly, he would have won in it on his first try were it not for a
mechanical problem.
If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he might
have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might not even have >> been able to do that.
And you know it.
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
by this years current standings.
How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be
first and second, other than them being in
the best car, Red Bull.
How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be
3rd and 4th, other than them being in the second
best car, Ferrari.
How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton
be 5th and 6th, other than them being in
the third best car, Mercedes.
Year after year, the grids quite often havePoints scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:
the team mates side by side.
2021
Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190
Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226
2020
Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223
Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125
2019
Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326
Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187
So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for winning
but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite which is why
the very best drivers always outstrip their not-so-very-best
teammates.
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 5:10:48 PM UTC+10, martin... wrote:
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
Martin,
Maybe I missed Alan saying that "he really isn't all that exceptional", but I have certainly read him saying that "Lewis is exceptional". It seems you missed or ignored those comments.
build
that are subtle (or not so subtle)
On 11/07/2022 3:08 am, build wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 5:10:48 PM UTC+10, martin... wrote:
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
Martin,
Maybe I missed Alan saying that "he really isn't all that
exceptional", but I have certainly read him saying that "Lewis is
exceptional". It seems you missed or ignored those comments.
build
He just drops that every so often in order to deflect from the other 90% that are subtle (or not so subtle) swipes.
geoff
sunnuntai 10. hein|nkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com kirjoitti:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple <a425c...@hotmail.com>People say that the best car is more important than the driver, but the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car. Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be in the top teams.
wrote:
On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:Points scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of the
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they >>>>>>> said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between >>>>>>> the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>>>
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>>>> shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported >>>>> above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best >>>> drivers out there currently.
But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.
Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being able to fit >>>> properly, he would have won in it on his first try were it not for a
mechanical problem.
If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he might
have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might not even have >>>> been able to do that.
And you know it.
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
by this years current standings.
How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be
first and second, other than them being in
the best car, Red Bull.
How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be
3rd and 4th, other than them being in the second
best car, Ferrari.
How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton
be 5th and 6th, other than them being in
the third best car, Mercedes.
Year after year, the grids quite often have
the team mates side by side.
difference between teammates. The last 3 years:
2021
Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190
Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226
2020
Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223
Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125
2019
Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326
Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187
So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for winning
but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite which is why
the very best drivers always outstrip their not-so-very-best
teammates.
sunnuntai 10. hein|nkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com kirjoitti:team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
<a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in
Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car
and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the
skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes
called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the
team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly
validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been
greatly overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
accounts for roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
interaction between the driver and the team, which
accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>>>
People say that the best car is more important than the driver, butPoints scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance
of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least
a very decent shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study
reported above; where you differ from others is your
insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor
and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver,
he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have
had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one
of the very best drivers out there currently.
But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.
Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being
able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try
were it not for a mechanical problem.
If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he
might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might
not even have been able to do that.
And you know it.
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the
driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
standings.
How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second,
other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.
How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other
than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.
How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other
than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.
Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side
by side.
the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:
2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226
2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125
2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187
So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite
which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
not-so-very-best teammates.
the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon
would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car.
Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be
in the top teams.
You're a liar
I don't know
On 2022-07-10 15:53, geoff wrote:
On 11/07/2022 3:08 am, build wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 5:10:48 PM UTC+10, martin... wrote:
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
Martin,
Maybe I missed Alan saying that "he really isn't all that
exceptional", but I have certainly read him saying that "Lewis is
exceptional". It seems you missed or ignored those comments.
build
He just drops that every so often in order to deflect from the other
90% that are subtle (or not so subtle) swipes.
geoff
You're a liar.
Quote one single time I've ever supposedly dropped that in.
You're a liar, Geoff. A no balls, pissant liar.
On 11/07/2022 12:28 pm, Alan wrote:
On 2022-07-10 15:53, geoff wrote:
On 11/07/2022 3:08 am, build wrote:
On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 5:10:48 PM UTC+10, martin... wrote:
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported >>>>> above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
Martin,
Maybe I missed Alan saying that "he really isn't all that
exceptional", but I have certainly read him saying that "Lewis is
exceptional". It seems you missed or ignored those comments.
build
He just drops that every so often in order to deflect from the other
90% that are subtle (or not so subtle) swipes.
geoff
You're a liar.
Quote one single time I've ever supposedly dropped that in.
You're a liar, Geoff. A no balls, pissant liar.
Instead of the Pool 'guesses' on F1 races, maybe we should do a
verifiable 'pool' on the number of time MasturBaker has inferred HAM is
one if the best, and the number of times he has inferred just another
good driver. Or ideas to that effect.
On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:26:28 AM UTC-7, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
Money.
+1
Wait...
+...1,000,000.
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>>
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>> shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best >drivers out there currently.
But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.--- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being able to fit >properly, he would have won in it on his first try were it not for a >mechanical problem.
If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he might
have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might not even have
been able to do that.
And you know it.
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >shot at winning.
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:09:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>>>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>>>
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>>>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>>>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>> shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best
drivers out there currently.
Funny how so many posters here see you with an intense bias against
Hamilton yet you insist they are wrong Maybe Willie really is the only
one in step or maybe you might want to rethink the stuff you post
about him.
But please: post the absolute worst thing you can find me saying about Hamilton.
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they
said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between
the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>> shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Was it hard become that tedious?
Was it hard become that tedious?
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>>
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>> shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
On 2022-07-13 10:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:09:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>>>>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>>>>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>>
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>>> shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best
drivers out there currently.
Funny how so many posters here see you with an intense bias against
Hamilton yet you insist they are wrong Maybe Willie really is the only
one in step or maybe you might want to rethink the stuff you post
about him.
Funnier still that none of them can produce a single quote that supports >their belief.
But please: post the absolute worst thing you can find me saying about >Hamilton.
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 10:24:27 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-13 10:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:09:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>>>
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>>>> shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported >>>>> above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
just fortunate to have had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best >>>> drivers out there currently.
Funny how so many posters here see you with an intense bias against
Hamilton yet you insist they are wrong Maybe Willie really is the only
one in step or maybe you might want to rethink the stuff you post
about him.
Funnier still that none of them can produce a single quote that supports
their belief.
OK, everyone is out of step except Willie.
But please: post the absolute worst thing you can find me saying about
Hamilton.
"Damning with faint praise" is clearly another concept that is beyond
your comprehension.
That's it. It is on that issue that some have declared they understand
my opinion about Hamilton.
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>>>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>>>
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>>>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>>>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>> shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
"second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula
1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts >>>>>> for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>>
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>> what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
"second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why the
fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>> 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>> decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>> what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
"second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>> 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>> making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>> they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>> decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>>> what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>
obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
"second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>> 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>> making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>> they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>> winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>> decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>>>> what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>>
obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
"second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>> 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>> decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>> what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
"second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>> 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>> making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>> they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>> winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>> decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>>>> what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>>
obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
"second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
On 7/15/2022 5:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>> 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>> making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>> they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>> winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>> decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>>>>> what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>>>
obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
"second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
Admits he doesn't appreciate the requirement.
QED
On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>> 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>> making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>> they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>> winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>> decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>>>>> what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>>>
obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
"second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
And?
That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
And?
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>>> 1? AnI know what they're saying and why.
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>> making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>> they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>> winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>>> decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>>>>
obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
"second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
And?
That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
I'd say
Happy now?
Happy now?
On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>>>> 1? AnI know what they're saying and why.
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>>> making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>>> they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>> winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>>>> decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
And?
That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his
own horn.
That was an F1 driveruas a class, not known for having small
egosutalking about himself.
Happy now?
I don't have a 'thing' about him.
On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1? AnI know what they're saying and why.
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>>>> making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>>>> they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>>>>>> Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>>> winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>>>>> decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>>
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
And?
That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his
own horn.
That was an F1 driverrCoas a class, not known for having small
egosrCotalking about himself.
Happy now?
I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I
don't have a 'thing' about him.
On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1? AnI know what they're saying and why.
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>>>>> making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>>>> winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>>>>>> decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>>>
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
And?
That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his
own horn.
That was an F1 driveruas a class, not known for having small
egosutalking about himself.
Happy now?
I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I
don't have a 'thing' about him.
'oBut in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >with the characteristics of the driver, thatAs my job and IAd say IAm >definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people donAt get to
see all that in the background.o'
And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good >development driver.
So you want to both say it supports that claim...
...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his
ability in this area.
Did I miss anything?
Did I miss anything?
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in FormulaI know what they're saying and why.
1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>>>>
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
And?
That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his >>>> own horn.
That was an F1 driverrCoas a class, not known for having small
egosrCotalking about himself.
Happy now?
I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I
don't have a 'thing' about him.
'rCLBut in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >> with the characteristics of the driver, thatrCOs my job and IrCOd say IrCOm >> definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people donrCOt get to
see all that in the background.rCY'
And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good
development driver.
Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in development of the best car. I specifically said:
"Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not
sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"
So you want to both say it supports that claim...
...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his
ability in this area.
He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers
must play in car development before he joined his current team as Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping
develop the car, thatrCOs something that I think that drivers rCo and as IrCOm approaching where Michael was rCo I never fully understood.rCY
I don't see anything boastful in that.
Did I miss anything?
Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in
regard to Hamilton.
...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
You ignore what is clearly there.
On 2022-07-18 02:26, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in FormulaI know what they're saying and why.
1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>>>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>>>>>
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
And?
That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his >>>>> own horn.
That was an F1 driver-as a class, not known for having small
egos-talking about himself.
Happy now?
I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I
don't have a 'thing' about him.
'"But in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >>> with the characteristics of the driver, that's my job and I'd say I'm
definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people don't get to
see all that in the background."'
And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good
development driver.
Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in
development of the best car. I specifically said:
"Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not
sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"
You said that earlier in the thread perhaps...
...but the new text in the post you chose to reply to said:
'Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. '
Your reply was to that, so it is reasonable to infer that you posted to >rebut that.
So you want to both say it supports that claim...
...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his
ability in this area.
He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers
must play in car development before he joined his current team as
Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping
develop the car, that's something that I think that drivers - and as
I'm approaching where Michael was - I never fully understood."
I don't see anything boastful in that.
"and as I'm approaching where Michael was".
Did I miss anything?
Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in
regard to Hamilton.
You ignore what is clearly there.
The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >driver.
You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only
Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
"approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by
many as among the very best for helping develop the car...
...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
George Russel
2021 Williams 22 races 16 points
2022 Mercedes 11 races 128 points.
Spot the difference.
What exactly WHAT changed?
On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 10:43:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-18 02:26, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his >>>>>> own horn.
On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in FormulaI know what they're saying and why.
1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>>>>>>
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
And?
That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton. >>>>>>
That was an F1 driver-as a class, not known for having small
egos-talking about himself.
Happy now?
I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I
don't have a 'thing' about him.
'"But in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >>>> with the characteristics of the driver, that's my job and I'd say I'm
definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people don't get to >>>> see all that in the background."'
And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good
development driver.
Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in
development of the best car. I specifically said:
"Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not
sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"
You said that earlier in the thread perhaps...
...but the new text in the post you chose to reply to said:
'Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. '
Your reply was to that, so it is reasonable to infer that you posted to
rebut that.
So you want to both say it supports that claim...
...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his
ability in this area.
He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers
must play in car development before he joined his current team as
Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping
develop the car, that's something that I think that drivers - and as
I'm approaching where Michael was - I never fully understood."
I don't see anything boastful in that.
"and as I'm approaching where Michael was".
Did I miss anything?
Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in
regard to Hamilton.
You ignore what is clearly there.
The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development
driver.
You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only
Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
"approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by
many as among the very best for helping develop the car...
...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits
that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a
clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So,
do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution
and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
On 2022-07-19 10:34, Martin Harran wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 10:43:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-18 02:26, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his >>>>>>> own horn.
On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in FormulaI know what they're saying and why.
1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
And?
That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton. >>>>>>>
That was an F1 driver-as a class, not known for having small
egos-talking about himself.
Happy now?
I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I >>>>>> don't have a 'thing' about him.
'"But in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >>>>> with the characteristics of the driver, that's my job and I'd say I'm >>>>> definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people don't get to >>>>> see all that in the background."'
And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good
development driver.
Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in >>>> development of the best car. I specifically said:
"Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not
sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"
You said that earlier in the thread perhaps...
...but the new text in the post you chose to reply to said:
'Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. '
Your reply was to that, so it is reasonable to infer that you posted to
rebut that.
So you want to both say it supports that claim...
...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his
ability in this area.
He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers
must play in car development before he joined his current team as
Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping
develop the car, that's something that I think that drivers - and as
I'm approaching where Michael was - I never fully understood."
I don't see anything boastful in that.
"and as I'm approaching where Michael was".
Did I miss anything?
Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in
regard to Hamilton.
You ignore what is clearly there.
The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development
driver.
You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only
Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
"approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by
many as among the very best for helping develop the car...
...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits
that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a
clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that >isn't "tooting his own horn".
Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability!
I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So,
do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution
and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a
contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
I completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.
And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a >contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.
Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
On 2022-07-10 15:50, Andrew Karlsson wrote:
sunnuntai 10. heinEkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.comteam-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
kirjoitti:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
<a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in
Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car
and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the
skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes
called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the
team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly
validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been
greatly overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
accounts for roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
interaction between the driver and the team, which
accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
People say that the best car is more important than the driver, butPoints scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance
of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least
a very decent shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study
reported above; where you differ from others is your
insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor
and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver,
he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have
had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one
of the very best drivers out there currently.
But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.
Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being
able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try
were it not for a mechanical problem.
If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he
might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might
not even have been able to do that.
And you know it.
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the
driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
standings.
How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second,
other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.
How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other
than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.
How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other
than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.
Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side
by side.
the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:
2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226
2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125
2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187
So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite
which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
not-so-very-best teammates.
the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon
would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car.
Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be
in the top teams.
I don't know about Latifi...
..but how are you so sure that Albon couldn't win a title in a top car?
On 2022-07-14 00:46, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 10:24:27 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-13 10:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:09:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>>>>> roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>>>>
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent
shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported >>>>>> above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional, >>>>>> just fortunate to have had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating >>>>> that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best >>>>> drivers out there currently.
Funny how so many posters here see you with an intense bias against
Hamilton yet you insist they are wrong Maybe Willie really is the only >>>> one in step or maybe you might want to rethink the stuff you post
about him.
Funnier still that none of them can produce a single quote that supports >>> their belief.
OK, everyone is out of step except Willie.
Sometimes, yes.
But it doesn't actually apply to not being able to provide the quotes.
But please: post the absolute worst thing you can find me saying about
Hamilton.
"Damning with faint praise" is clearly another concept that is beyond
your comprehension.
I don't damn him with faint praise, so that won't wash either.
The fact of the matter is that all I take issue with is declaring him
the GOAT simply based on his race record when he was clearly in what was
an utterly dominant car.
That's it. It is on that issue that some have declared they understand--- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
my opinion about Hamilton.
On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 07:53:08 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-14 00:46, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 10:24:27 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-13 10:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:09:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>> overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent
shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported >>>>>>> above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>>>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst >>>>>>> Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional, >>>>>>> just fortunate to have had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating >>>>>> that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best >>>>>> drivers out there currently.
Funny how so many posters here see you with an intense bias against
Hamilton yet you insist they are wrong Maybe Willie really is the only >>>>> one in step or maybe you might want to rethink the stuff you post
about him.
Funnier still that none of them can produce a single quote that supports >>>> their belief.
OK, everyone is out of step except Willie.
Sometimes, yes.
But it doesn't actually apply to not being able to provide the quotes.
But please: post the absolute worst thing you can find me saying about >>>> Hamilton.
"Damning with faint praise" is clearly another concept that is beyond
your comprehension.
I don't damn him with faint praise, so that won't wash either.
The fact of the matter is that all I take issue with is declaring him
the GOAT simply based on his race record when he was clearly in what was
an utterly dominant car.
How many posters declared him GOAT?
On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 19:28:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-10 15:50, Andrew Karlsson wrote:
sunnuntai 10. hein|nkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.comteam-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
kirjoitti:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
<a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in
Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car
and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the
skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes
called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the
team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly
validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been
greatly overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
accounts for roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
interaction between the driver and the team, which
accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
People say that the best car is more important than the driver, butPoints scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance
of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least
a very decent shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study
reported above; where you differ from others is your
insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor
and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver,
he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have
had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one
of the very best drivers out there currently.
But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.
Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being
able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try
were it not for a mechanical problem.
If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he
might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might
not even have been able to do that.
And you know it.
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the
driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
standings.
How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second,
other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.
How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other
than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.
How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other
than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.
Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side
by side.
the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:
2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226
2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125
2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187
So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite
which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
not-so-very-best teammates.
the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon
would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car.
Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be
in the top teams.
I don't know about Latifi...
..but how are you so sure that Albon couldn't win a title in a top car?
No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?
On 2022-07-20 02:11, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 19:28:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-10 15:50, Andrew Karlsson wrote:
sunnuntai 10. heinEkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.comteam-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
kirjoitti:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
<a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in
Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car
and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the
skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes
called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the
team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly
validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been
greatly overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
accounts for roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
interaction between the driver and the team, which
accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
People say that the best car is more important than the driver, butPoints scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance
of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least
a very decent shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study
reported above; where you differ from others is your
insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor
and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver,
he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have
had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one
of the very best drivers out there currently.
But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.
Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being
able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try
were it not for a mechanical problem.
If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he
might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might
not even have been able to do that.
And you know it.
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the
driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
standings.
How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second,
other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.
How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other
than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.
How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other
than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.
Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side
by side.
the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:
2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226
2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125
2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187
So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite
which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
not-so-very-best teammates.
the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon
would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car.
Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be
in the top teams.
I don't know about Latifi...
..but how are you so sure that Albon couldn't win a title in a top car?
No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?
Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...
...and never heard of:
team number 1 drivers,
or
team orders.
That is some amazing ignorance.
Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown
by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.
Tacit admission that you have no other example of any issue that I have specifically with Hamilton.
That is some amazing ignorance.
On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 09:20:14 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-20 02:11, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 19:28:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-10 15:50, Andrew Karlsson wrote:No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?
sunnuntai 10. hein|nkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com >>>>> kirjoitti:team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
<a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in >>>>>>>>>>> Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car
and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the
skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes
called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the >>>>>>>>>>> team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly >>>>>>>>>>> validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been
greatly overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>> accounts for roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
interaction between the driver and the team, which
accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
People say that the best car is more important than the driver, butPoints scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance >>>>>>>>>> of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least >>>>>>>>>> a very decent shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study
reported above; where you differ from others is your
insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor >>>>>>>>> and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver,
he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have >>>>>>>>> had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one >>>>>>>> of the very best drivers out there currently.
But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.
Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being
able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try >>>>>>>> were it not for a mechanical problem.
If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he >>>>>>>> might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might >>>>>>>> not even have been able to do that.
And you know it.
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the >>>>>>> driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
standings.
How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second,
other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.
How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other >>>>>>> than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.
How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other >>>>>>> than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.
Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side
by side.
the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:
2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226
2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125
2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187
So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite
which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
not-so-very-best teammates.
the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon >>>>> would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car.
Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be >>>>> in the top teams.
I don't know about Latifi...
..but how are you so sure that Albon couldn't win a title in a top car? >>>
Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...
...and never heard of:
team number 1 drivers,
or
team orders.
That is some amazing ignorance.
My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of
Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in
the running for WDC.
Sure.
Seriously
On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 11:28:50 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-19 10:34, Martin Harran wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 10:43:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-18 02:26, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his >>>>>>>> own horn.
On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in FormulaI know what they're saying and why.
1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. >>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
And?
That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton. >>>>>>>>
That was an F1 driver-as a class, not known for having small
egos-talking about himself.
Happy now?
I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I >>>>>>> don't have a 'thing' about him.
'"But in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >>>>>> with the characteristics of the driver, that's my job and I'd say I'm >>>>>> definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people don't get to >>>>>> see all that in the background."'
And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good >>>>>> development driver.
Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in >>>>> development of the best car. I specifically said:
"Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not >>>>> sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"
You said that earlier in the thread perhaps...
...but the new text in the post you chose to reply to said:
'Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. '
Your reply was to that, so it is reasonable to infer that you posted to >>>> rebut that.
So you want to both say it supports that claim...
...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his >>>>>> ability in this area.
He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers >>>>> must play in car development before he joined his current team as
Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping >>>>> develop the car, that's something that I think that drivers - and as >>>>> I'm approaching where Michael was - I never fully understood."
I don't see anything boastful in that.
"and as I'm approaching where Michael was".
Did I miss anything?
Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in
regard to Hamilton.
You ignore what is clearly there.
The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development
driver.
You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only
Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
"approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by >>>> many as among the very best for helping develop the car...
...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits
that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a
clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that
isn't "tooting his own horn".
Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability!
Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown
by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.
I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So,
do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution
and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a
contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
I completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.
Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstated
due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his achievements, not takes away from them.
And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a
contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.
Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
As I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in
the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development
"Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him, working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his
team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the
visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do
not deliver."
...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.
On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 07:53:08 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 20/07/2022 9:12 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 07:53:08 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
blah blah blah blah blah....
Martin you're fast becoming background noise. I think a troll may have caught you. You know you can never change it's mind yeah?
He could change my mind...
...if he presented a cogent argument based on facts.
On 20/07/2022 9:12 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 07:53:08 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:blah blah blah blah blah....
Martin you're fast becoming background noise. I think a troll may have caught you. You know you can
never change it's mind yeah?
On 2022-07-20 00:39, Martin Harran wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 11:28:50 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-19 10:34, Martin Harran wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 10:43:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-18 02:26, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his
On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:Please.
On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:
On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in FormulaI know what they're saying and why.
1? An
eight-season study has offered up an answer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
making up
the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
Canada,
said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
between the
driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
decent
shot at winning.
What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
what the study above showed.
Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
"second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".
geoff
Exactly.
Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. >>>>>>>>>>>>
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
And?
That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton. >>>>>>>>>
own horn.
That was an F1 driver-as a class, not known for having small >>>>>>>>> egos-talking about himself.
Happy now?
I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I >>>>>>>> don't have a 'thing' about him.
'"But in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work
with the characteristics of the driver, that's my job and I'd say I'm >>>>>>> definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people don't get to >>>>>>> see all that in the background."'
And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good >>>>>>> development driver.
Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in >>>>>> development of the best car. I specifically said:
"Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not >>>>>> sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"
You said that earlier in the thread perhaps...
...but the new text in the post you chose to reply to said:
'Please.
You don't have the slightest clue...
(Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>
...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. '
Your reply was to that, so it is reasonable to infer that you posted to >>>>> rebut that.
So you want to both say it supports that claim...
...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his >>>>>>> ability in this area.
He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers >>>>>> must play in car development before he joined his current team as
Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping >>>>>> develop the car, that's something that I think that drivers - and as >>>>>> I'm approaching where Michael was - I never fully understood."
I don't see anything boastful in that.
"and as I'm approaching where Michael was".
Did I miss anything?
Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in >>>>>> regard to Hamilton.
You ignore what is clearly there.
The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >>>>> driver.
You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only
Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
"approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by >>>>> many as among the very best for helping develop the car...
...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits
that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a
clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that
isn't "tooting his own horn".
Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability!
Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown
by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.
I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So, >>>> do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution
and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a
contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
I completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.
Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstated
due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his
achievements, not takes away from them.
Nope. The car is still the car and all you have is "if".
And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a
contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.
Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
As I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in
the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.
Really? "Widely recognized"... ...by whom?
Up to this moment the only supporting cite you made was Hamilton blowing
his own horn.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development
"Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him,
working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them
afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his
team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the
visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do
not deliver."
"He has grown into his role and Mercedes emphasise the time and effort
he puts into developing the car and his team."
"Time and effort" is less than a ringing endorsement.
You or I (ok, I could) put in time and effort...
...but that says nothing about the quality of his contribution.
And seriously, do you think the team would ever say anything else?
And Hamilton hasn't exactly been "scrupulously fair" on track...
'This is not to belittle Schumacher's achievements but Hamilton's career
has been marked by his hard but scrupulously fair performances. He has
made mistakes and held his hands up. He has been tested but not resorted
to what Villeneuve pointedly referred to as "dirty tricks".'
(I think there are more than a few drivers who would disagree with that >assessment.)
...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.
On 2022-07-20 10:49, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 09:20:14 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-20 02:11, Martin Harran wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 19:28:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-10 15:50, Andrew Karlsson wrote:No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?
sunnuntai 10. heinEkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com >>>>>> kirjoitti:team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
<a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
wrote:
On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
What is the most important factor to securing success in >>>>>>>>>>>> Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
answer.
According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car >>>>>>>>>>>> and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the >>>>>>>>>>>> skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes >>>>>>>>>>>> called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.
It's actually the interaction between the driver and the >>>>>>>>>>>> team, they said.
Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly >>>>>>>>>>>> validating for drivers".
The professor added: "The car and team's input has been >>>>>>>>>>>> greatly overestimated.
"Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for roughly 15%.
"The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
interaction between the driver and the team, which
accounts for 30-40%.
https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
People say that the best car is more important than the driver, but >>>>>> the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon >>>>>> would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car. >>>>>> Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be >>>>>> in the top teams.Points scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
I know what they're saying and why.
But the simple facts remain:
The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance >>>>>>>>>>> of winning.
The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least >>>>>>>>>>> a very decent shot at winning.
Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study >>>>>>>>>> reported above; where you differ from others is your
insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor >>>>>>>>>> and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver, >>>>>>>>>> he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have >>>>>>>>>> had a great car.
I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one >>>>>>>>> of the very best drivers out there currently.
But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.
Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being >>>>>>>>> able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try >>>>>>>>> were it not for a mechanical problem.
If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he >>>>>>>>> might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might >>>>>>>>> not even have been able to do that.
And you know it.
Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the >>>>>>>> driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
standings.
How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second, >>>>>>>> other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.
How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other >>>>>>>> than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.
How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other >>>>>>>> than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.
Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side >>>>>>>> by side.
the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:
2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226
2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125
2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187 >>>>>>>
So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite >>>>>>> which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
not-so-very-best teammates.
I don't know about Latifi...
..but how are you so sure that Albon couldn't win a title in a top car? >>>>
Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...
...and never heard of:
team number 1 drivers,
or
team orders.
That is some amazing ignorance.
My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of
Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in
the running for WDC.
Sure.
Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...
...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.
Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in
the season?
Same question for Perez.--- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that >>>> isn't "tooting his own horn".You ignore what is clearly there.A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >>>>>> driver.
You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only >>>>>> Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
"approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by >>>>>> many as among the very best for helping develop the car...
...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits >>>>> that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a >>>>> clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability! >>> Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown
Nope. The car is still the car and all you have is "if".
Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstatedI also note that you have made no comment about the driver'sI completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.
contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So, >>>>> do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution >>>>> and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a >>>>> contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his
achievements, not takes away from them.
Really? "Widely recognized"... ...by whom?And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of aAs I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in
contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.
Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.
Up to this moment the only supporting cite you made was Hamilton blowing
his own horn.
Obviously not to you.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development"He has grown into his role and Mercedes emphasise the time and effort
"Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him,
working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them
afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his
team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the
visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do
not deliver."
he puts into developing the car and his team."
"Time and effort" is less than a ringing endorsement.
You or I (ok, I could) put in time and effort...
...but that says nothing about the quality of his contribution.
I haven't seen many teams saying that about their - or Mercedes about
And seriously, do you think the team would ever say anything else?
drivers other than Schumacher and Hamilton - feel free to give
examples.
And Hamilton hasn't exactly been "scrupulously fair" on track...Once again, you are out of line with the majority of opinion; no
surprises there when it involves Hamilton.
'This is not to belittle Schumacher's achievements but Hamilton's careerSo you dismiss a piece by one of the UK's top sports reporters with a specialist interest in F1, writing in one of the UK's top newspapers
has been marked by his hard but scrupulously fair performances. He has
made mistakes and held his hands up. He has been tested but not resorted
to what Villeneuve pointedly referred to as "dirty tricks".'
(I think there are more than a few drivers who would disagree with that
assessment.)
...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.
is just a puff piece - but you don't have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
ROFLMAO.
First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever beingSure.My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples ofNo comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...
...and never heard of:
team number 1 drivers,
or
team orders.
That is some amazing ignorance.
Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in
the running for WDC.
Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...
...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.
Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in
the season?
given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you
can't produce any examples either.
On 2022-07-21 01:08, Martin Harran wrote:
by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that >>>>> isn't "tooting his own horn".You ignore what is clearly there.A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >>>>>>> driver.
You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only >>>>>>> Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
"approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by >>>>>>> many as among the very best for helping develop the car...
...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits >>>>>> that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a >>>>>> clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability! >>>> Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown
What boasts have I made?
Be specific, liar.
Nope. The car is still the car and all you have is "if".
Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstatedI also note that you have made no comment about the driver'sI completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.
contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So, >>>>>> do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution >>>>>> and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a >>>>>> contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his
achievements, not takes away from them.
Unaddressed.
Really? "Widely recognized"... ...by whom?And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of aAs I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in
contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.
Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.
Up to this moment the only supporting cite you made was Hamilton blowing >>> his own horn.
Unaddressed.
Obviously not to you.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development"He has grown into his role and Mercedes emphasise the time and effort
"Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him, >>>> working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them
afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his
team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the
visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do
not deliver."
he puts into developing the car and his team."
"Time and effort" is less than a ringing endorsement.
To anyone?
Do you think there is a single driver in the field who DOESN'T put time
and effort into developing the car?
You or I (ok, I could) put in time and effort...
...but that says nothing about the quality of his contribution.
Unaddressed.
I haven't seen many teams saying that about their - or Mercedes about
And seriously, do you think the team would ever say anything else?
drivers other than Schumacher and Hamilton - feel free to give
examples.
You haven't looked.
But what you've shown only says he puts in "time and effort".
There is literally not a single word about whether he is particularly
good OR bad at it.
And Hamilton hasn't exactly been "scrupulously fair" on track...Once again, you are out of line with the majority of opinion; no
surprises there when it involves Hamilton.
I'll bet Albon agrees with me...
'This is not to belittle Schumacher's achievements but Hamilton's career >>> has been marked by his hard but scrupulously fair performances. He hasSo you dismiss a piece by one of the UK's top sports reporters with a
made mistakes and held his hands up. He has been tested but not resorted >>> to what Villeneuve pointedly referred to as "dirty tricks".'
(I think there are more than a few drivers who would disagree with that
assessment.)
...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.
specialist interest in F1, writing in one of the UK's top newspapers
is just a puff piece - but you don't have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
ROFLMAO.
So top sports reporters can't have biases?
And let's remember, he doesn't actually quote anyone saying that
Hamilton is a great or even good development driver.
I don't have a thing with Hamilton. I have a thing with Hamilton
fanbois; a class of which you clearly are a member.
Hamilton is clearly one of the very best current drivers. He may even be
the best. I don't pretend to know.
But there are fanbois here who have stated that simply because he has
won a lot of championships me must therefore be the GOAT...
...and that's simply not true.
Go ahead, give any example of me denigrating Hamilton.
Just one, liar.
On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever beingSure.My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples ofNo comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates? >>>>> Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...
...and never heard of:
team number 1 drivers,
or
team orders.
That is some amazing ignorance.
Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in
the running for WDC.
Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...
...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.
Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in
the season?
given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you
can't produce any examples either.
Seriously?
At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the >running"?
I'll even help.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship>
On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever beingSure.My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples ofNo comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates? >>>>>> Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...
...and never heard of:
team number 1 drivers,
or
team orders.
That is some amazing ignorance.
Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>> the running for WDC.
Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...
...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.
Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in
the season?
given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you
can't produce any examples either.
Seriously?
At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the
running"?
I'll even help.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship>
All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway
point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4
years plus last year:
2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260
2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208
2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286
Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to
the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again,
I won't hold my breath.
On 2022-07-22 02:44, Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever beingSure.My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples ofNo comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates? >>>>>>> Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...
...and never heard of:
team number 1 drivers,
or
team orders.
That is some amazing ignorance.
Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>>> the running for WDC.
Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...
...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.
Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in >>>>> the season?
given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you >>>> can't produce any examples either.
Seriously?
At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the >>> running"?
I'll even help.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship>
All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway
point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4
years plus last year:
2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
Except in race three of that year, Bottas was told to give way to Hamilton.
2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260
2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208
2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286
Sorry, but "Points still available" isn't the metric.
If your teammate has that many more points than you have, you're not "in
the running" against your teammate.
Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to
the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again,
I won't hold my breath.
You were set up, lad.
Bahrain:--- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
'Vettel won from Hamilton who was let through into 2nd by Bottas with 10 >laps to go.[7]'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Bahrain_Grand_Prix#Race
On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:47:32 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-21 01:08, Martin Harran wrote:
He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that >>>>>> isn't "tooting his own horn".You ignore what is clearly there.A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an >>>>>>> important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits >>>>>>> that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a >>>>>>> clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >>>>>>>> driver.
You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only >>>>>>>> Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is >>>>>>>> "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by >>>>>>>> many as among the very best for helping develop the car...
...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability! >>>>> Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown >>>>> by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.
What boasts have I made?
========================
On Fri, 20 May 2022 08:51:56 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
"Running in the Camaro all day, I gave 22 people huge thrills and some insight into what it's like to drive a car at speed." =============================
Do I really have to go back further and dig out some more?
Be specific, liar.
I won't hold my breath waiting for your apology.
Nope. The car is still the car and all you have is "if".
Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstated >>>>> due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to hisI also note that you have made no comment about the driver'sI completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.
contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So, >>>>>>> do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution >>>>>>> and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a >>>>>>> contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
achievements, not takes away from them.
Unaddressed.
Unaddressed nonsense.
Really? "Widely recognized"... ...by whom?And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a >>>>>> contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.As I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in
Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.
Up to this moment the only supporting cite you made was Hamilton blowing >>>> his own horn.
Unaddressed.
So what, I gave you another cite from a journalist when you whined.
Obviously not to you.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development"He has grown into his role and Mercedes emphasise the time and effort >>>> he puts into developing the car and his team."
"Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him, >>>>> working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them >>>>> afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his >>>>> team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the
visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do >>>>> not deliver."
"Time and effort" is less than a ringing endorsement.
To anyone?
Whether "ringing" or not, I'd say it's an endorsement to those who
aren't biased against Hamilton.
Do you think there is a single driver in the field who DOESN'T put time
and effort into developing the car?
You or I (ok, I could) put in time and effort...
...but that says nothing about the quality of his contribution.
Unaddressed.
Much more than the zero you seem to think it is
I haven't seen many teams saying that about their - or Mercedes about
And seriously, do you think the team would ever say anything else?
drivers other than Schumacher and Hamilton - feel free to give
examples.
You haven't looked.
Rather weak way of trying to avoid that you can't produce any
examples.
But what you've shown only says he puts in "time and effort".
There is literally not a single word about whether he is particularly
good OR bad at it.
And Hamilton hasn't exactly been "scrupulously fair" on track...Once again, you are out of line with the majority of opinion; no
surprises there when it involves Hamilton.
I'll bet Albon agrees with me...
People beaten on track aren't generally the best judges of whether
they were beaten fairly.
'This is not to belittle Schumacher's achievements but Hamilton's career >>>> has been marked by his hard but scrupulously fair performances. He has >>>> made mistakes and held his hands up. He has been tested but not resorted >>>> to what Villeneuve pointedly referred to as "dirty tricks".'So you dismiss a piece by one of the UK's top sports reporters with a
(I think there are more than a few drivers who would disagree with that >>>> assessment.)
...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.
specialist interest in F1, writing in one of the UK's top newspapers
is just a puff piece - but you don't have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
ROFLMAO.
So top sports reporters can't have biases?
They won't last long as top reporters if they let those biases
influence their writing.
And let's remember, he doesn't actually quote anyone saying that
Hamilton is a great or even good development driver.
You accusing him of making stuff up?
I don't have a thing with Hamilton. I have a thing with Hamilton
fanbois; a class of which you clearly are a member.
Absolutely not. Let's see you produce a single example of anything I
ever posted that could be considered "fanbois".
Hamilton is clearly one of the very best current drivers. He may even be
the best. I don't pretend to know.
But there are fanbois here who have stated that simply because he has
won a lot of championships me must therefore be the GOAT...
You still haven't identified any of them.
...and that's simply not true.
It might or might not be true, we have no real way of comparing
drivers of different generations. Hamilton's 7 WDcs with two different
teams would certainly put him into any list of all-time greats.
Go ahead, give any example of me denigrating Hamilton.
Just one, liar.
This thread is a pretty good example of you trying to belittle his achievements by trying to play down any significance of his
contribution to car development.
On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:51:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-22 02:44, Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever beingSure.My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of >>>>>>> Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>>>> the running for WDC.No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates? >>>>>>>> Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...
...and never heard of:
team number 1 drivers,
or
team orders.
That is some amazing ignorance.
Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...
...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.
Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in >>>>>> the season?
given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you >>>>> can't produce any examples either.
Seriously?
At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the >>>> running"?
I'll even help.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship>
All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway
point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4
years plus last year:
2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
Except in race three of that year, Bottas was told to give way to Hamilton.
LOL, a race where Bottas tyres were fucked and Hamilton was clearly
faster. I suggest you go back to the drawing board.
2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260
2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208
2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286
Sorry, but "Points still available" isn't the metric.
It's the metric everybody except you uses, including Toto Wolff who
said he would allow his drivers to race as long as they could both mathematically win the championship.
If your teammate has that many more points than you have, you're not "in
the running" against your teammate.
Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to
the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again,
I won't hold my breath.
You were set up, lad.
Trying to use a race where Bottas's tyres were fucked - you've just
set yourself up.
Bahrain:
'Vettel won from Hamilton who was let through into 2nd by Bottas with 10
laps to go.[7]'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Bahrain_Grand_Prix#Race
On 2022-07-22 12:01, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:51:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-22 02:44, Martin Harran wrote:LOL, a race where Bottas tyres were fucked and Hamilton was clearly
On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being >>>>>> given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you >>>>>> can't produce any examples either.Sure.My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of >>>>>>>> Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>>>>> the running for WDC.No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates? >>>>>>>>> Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...
...and never heard of:
team number 1 drivers,
or
team orders.
That is some amazing ignorance.
Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...
...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.
Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in >>>>>>> the season?
Seriously?
At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the >>>>> running"?
I'll even help.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship>
All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway
point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4
years plus last year:
2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
Except in race three of that year, Bottas was told to give way to Hamilton. >>
faster. I suggest you go back to the drawing board.
2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260
2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208
2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286
Sorry, but "Points still available" isn't the metric.
It's the metric everybody except you uses, including Toto Wolff who
said he would allow his drivers to race as long as they could both
mathematically win the championship.
And if he said that,
he lied.
If your teammate has that many more points than you have, you're not "in >>> the running" against your teammate.
Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to >>>> the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again,
I won't hold my breath.
You were set up, lad.
Trying to use a race where Bottas's tyres were fucked - you've just
set yourself up.
Got any proof of that, Liar?
--- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
Bahrain:
'Vettel won from Hamilton who was let through into 2nd by Bottas with 10 >>> laps to go.[7]'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Bahrain_Grand_Prix#Race
On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 12:08:41 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-22 12:01, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:51:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-22 02:44, Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being >>>>>>> given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you >>>>>>> can't produce any examples either.Sure.My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of >>>>>>>>> Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>>>>>> the running for WDC.No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...
...and never heard of:
team number 1 drivers,
or
team orders.
That is some amazing ignorance.
Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...
...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.
Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in >>>>>>>> the season?
Seriously?
At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the >>>>>> running"?
I'll even help.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship> >>>>>>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship> >>>>>
All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway >>>>> point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4
years plus last year:
2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
Except in race three of that year, Bottas was told to give way to Hamilton.
LOL, a race where Bottas tyres were fucked and Hamilton was clearly
faster. I suggest you go back to the drawing board.
2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260
2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208
2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286
Sorry, but "Points still available" isn't the metric.
It's the metric everybody except you uses, including Toto Wolff who
said he would allow his drivers to race as long as they could both
mathematically win the championship.
And if he said that,
He did, several times..
he lied.
LOL, you claearly don't see how pathetic your arguments have become.
If your teammate has that many more points than you have, you're not "in >>>> the running" against your teammate.
Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to >>>>> the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again, >>>>> I won't hold my breath.
You were set up, lad.
Trying to use a race where Bottas's tyres were fucked - you've just
set yourself up.
Got any proof of that, Liar?
Bottas's own words:
"In the first stint it was quite a big issue for sure," he said.
"Sebastian and Lewis were putting quite a lot of pressure and I
couldn't control the race. I had to try and build a gap but there was
no grip to build it. Then I had to really take everything out of the
tyres and the tyre life was shorter.
"We were also a bit unlucky with the safety car pit stop - it was a
bit slow, so I lost a place to Sebastian. And then in the second and
third stint still the pace wasn't there and the car didn't feel as it
did yesterday, so we'll have to find out what the problem was."
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.bottas-accepting-team-orders-tough.2TAwqblZsIq6AgSmqgys08.html
But then again, according to your reckoning Toto Wolff is a liar, I'm
a liar so maybe Bottas is a liar too!
Funny you don't provide any quotes
On 2022-07-22 12:37, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 12:08:41 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-22 12:01, Martin Harran wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:51:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-22 02:44, Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being >>>>>>>> given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you >>>>>>>> can't produce any examples either.Sure.My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of >>>>>>>>>> Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>>>>>>> the running for WDC.No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...
...and never heard of:
team number 1 drivers,
or
team orders.
That is some amazing ignorance.
Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...
...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.
Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in >>>>>>>>> the season?
Seriously?
At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the
running"?
I'll even help.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship> >>>>>>>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship> >>>>>>
All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway >>>>>> point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4 >>>>>> years plus last year:
2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
Except in race three of that year, Bottas was told to give way to Hamilton.
LOL, a race where Bottas tyres were fucked and Hamilton was clearly
faster. I suggest you go back to the drawing board.
2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250
2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260
2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208
2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286
Sorry, but "Points still available" isn't the metric.
It's the metric everybody except you uses, including Toto Wolff who
said he would allow his drivers to race as long as they could both
mathematically win the championship.
And if he said that,
He did, several times..
Funny you don't provide any quotes, then...
he lied.
LOL, you claearly don't see how pathetic your arguments have become.
If your teammate has that many more points than you have, you're not "in >>>>> the running" against your teammate.
Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to >>>>>> the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again, >>>>>> I won't hold my breath.
You were set up, lad.
Trying to use a race where Bottas's tyres were fucked - you've just
set yourself up.
Got any proof of that, Liar?
Bottas's own words:
"In the first stint it was quite a big issue for sure," he said.
"Sebastian and Lewis were putting quite a lot of pressure and I
couldn't control the race. I had to try and build a gap but there was
no grip to build it. Then I had to really take everything out of the
tyres and the tyre life was shorter.
"We were also a bit unlucky with the safety car pit stop - it was a
bit slow, so I lost a place to Sebastian. And then in the second and
third stint still the pace wasn't there and the car didn't feel as it
did yesterday, so we'll have to find out what the problem was."
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.bottas-accepting-team-orders-tough.2TAwqblZsIq6AgSmqgys08.html
But then again, according to your reckoning Toto Wolff is a liar, I'm
a liar so maybe Bottas is a liar too!
But he let Hamilton through... ...twice:
'Valtteri Bottas has admitted it was hard to accept being asked to move >aside for Mercedes team mate Lewis Hamilton not once, but twice '
He didn't defend his position:
'"I think there would have been a possibility," he said. "I would have
had to defend hard and that could have meant some risky situations, but
like I said the team thought he had the chance to catch Sebastian
possibly, and we tried it."'
Further:
'And Mercedes, in a very difficult position in only the third race of
the year, waited until just short of half-distance
to order the slower
Bottas to let Hamilton by for the first time.'
https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/39615516
On 2022-07-22 02:30, Martin Harran wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:47:32 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
On 2022-07-21 01:08, Martin Harran wrote:
He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that >>>>>>> isn't "tooting his own horn".You ignore what is clearly there.A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an >>>>>>>> important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits >>>>>>>> that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a >>>>>>>> clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >>>>>>>>> driver.
You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only >>>>>>>>> Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is >>>>>>>>> "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by
many as among the very best for helping develop the car...
...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability! >>>>>> Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown >>>>>> by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.
What boasts have I made?
========================
On Fri, 20 May 2022 08:51:56 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
"Running in the Camaro all day, I gave 22 people huge thrills and some
insight into what it's like to drive a car at speed."
=============================
Do I really have to go back further and dig out some more?
That's it? That's the best you could come up with?
I've got one more question:
How is that boasting about my "racing achievements"?
First, I wasn't boasting. There is literally no "boast" in there. Do you >know what "boast" even means?
I just thought I got to do something pretty cool, and while expensive, I >thought I might mention that such things exist to an audience that might >enjoy doing something similar.
Second, there is no "racing achievement" in it.
Be specific, liar.
I won't hold my breath waiting for your apology.
Because you didn't find anything I need to apologize FOR.
Nope. The car is still the car and all you have is "if".
Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstated >>>>>> due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his >>>>>> achievements, not takes away from them.I also note that you have made no comment about the driver'sI completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.
contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So, >>>>>>>> do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution >>>>>>>> and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a >>>>>>>> contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
Unaddressed.
Unaddressed nonsense.
LOL!
Really? "Widely recognized"... ...by whom?And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a >>>>>>> contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.As I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in >>>>>> the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.
Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
Up to this moment the only supporting cite you made was Hamilton blowing >>>>> his own horn.
Unaddressed.
So what, I gave you another cite from a journalist when you whined.
A journalist who only got that Hamilton puts in "time and effort"...
...just like every other F1 driver.
Obviously not to you.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development"He has grown into his role and Mercedes emphasise the time and effort >>>>> he puts into developing the car and his team."
"Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him, >>>>>> working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them >>>>>> afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his >>>>>> team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the >>>>>> visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do >>>>>> not deliver."
"Time and effort" is less than a ringing endorsement.
To anyone?
Whether "ringing" or not, I'd say it's an endorsement to those who
aren't biased against Hamilton.
"No true Scotsman": look it up.
Also look up, "damning with faint praise".
They ALL put in "time and effort".
Do you think there is a single driver in the field who DOESN'T put time
and effort into developing the car?
You or I (ok, I could) put in time and effort...
...but that says nothing about the quality of his contribution.
Unaddressed.
Much more than the zero you seem to think it is
I don't think it's zero.
So you're either ignorant or a liar.
I haven't seen many teams saying that about their - or Mercedes about
And seriously, do you think the team would ever say anything else?
drivers other than Schumacher and Hamilton - feel free to give
examples.
You haven't looked.
Rather weak way of trying to avoid that you can't produce any
examples.
Sorry, but I don't need to look.
The fact is that the strongest "endorsement" YOU have been able to
produce is:
"time and effort".
But what you've shown only says he puts in "time and effort".
There is literally not a single word about whether he is particularly
good OR bad at it.
Unaddressed.
And Hamilton hasn't exactly been "scrupulously fair" on track...Once again, you are out of line with the majority of opinion; no
surprises there when it involves Hamilton.
I'll bet Albon agrees with me...
People beaten on track aren't generally the best judges of whether
they were beaten fairly.
The FIA that penalized Hamilton (twice!):
Are they good judges do you think?
'This is not to belittle Schumacher's achievements but Hamilton's career >>>>> has been marked by his hard but scrupulously fair performances. He has >>>>> made mistakes and held his hands up. He has been tested but not resorted >>>>> to what Villeneuve pointedly referred to as "dirty tricks".'So you dismiss a piece by one of the UK's top sports reporters with a
(I think there are more than a few drivers who would disagree with that >>>>> assessment.)
...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.
specialist interest in F1, writing in one of the UK's top newspapers
is just a puff piece - but you don't have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
ROFLMAO.
So top sports reporters can't have biases?
They won't last long as top reporters if they let those biases
influence their writing.
Bullshit.
And let's remember, he doesn't actually quote anyone saying that
Hamilton is a great or even good development driver.
You accusing him of making stuff up?
I'm accusing him of being a Brit who is going doe-eyed over a Brit.
I don't have a thing with Hamilton. I have a thing with Hamilton
fanbois; a class of which you clearly are a member.
Absolutely not. Let's see you produce a single example of anything I
ever posted that could be considered "fanbois".
How about pretending "time and effort" is an endorsement of Hamilton's >excellence as a development driver?
Hamilton is clearly one of the very best current drivers. He may even be >>> the best. I don't pretend to know.
But there are fanbois here who have stated that simply because he has
won a lot of championships me must therefore be the GOAT...
You still haven't identified any of them.
How about someone who declared him:
'A class of his own' and went on to say:
'He makes it look easy which is the hallmark of a true craftsman.'
Do you recall who said that?
--- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
...and that's simply not true.
It might or might not be true, we have no real way of comparing
drivers of different generations. Hamilton's 7 WDcs with two different
teams would certainly put him into any list of all-time greats.
Go ahead, give any example of me denigrating Hamilton.
Just one, liar.
This thread is a pretty good example of you trying to belittle his
achievements by trying to play down any significance of his
contribution to car development.
I didn't try and belittle a single thing, Liar.
I pointed outucorrectlyuthat you have only produced Hamilton boasting
about himself and Mercedes saying he puts in "time and effort".
I'm outa here.
| Sysop: | Nitro |
|---|---|
| Location: | Portland, OR |
| Users: | 3 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 02:16:47 |
| Calls: | 136 |
| Files: | 751 |
| Messages: | 89,382 |