8. What happens if a competitor fails to submit a fresh prediction, or perhaps submits one only after the official deadline has already passed? In such an instance, the "Joker" rule will be triggered. You see, while it is mandatory for every participant to provide a new prediction for every single race, the rules allow for three "Jokers" per season; these are activated automatically whenever someone misses a submission, at which point their most recent official prediction will be credited for those specific races. However, once a player has exhausted all three of their "Jokers," no further points will be awarded to them, meaning they would be required to submit a new prediction if they truly wish to remain in the competition. If a competitor fails to submit a fresh prediction for two consecutive races, their teammate is granted the authority to remove them from the team if they see fit; should this occur, that individual will simply proceed through the rest of the competition as a solo entrant, unless they explicitly state otherwise.
9. Is there any clarity regarding the protocols for submitting predictions? To ensure everything remains orderly, a participant may only post their predictions using the specific username they utilized when registering for the competition—unless, of course, an administrator has seen fit to modify that handle. Furthermore, we must establish that any participant facing a ban is ineligible to participate in the specific round during which the ban is active. This regulation applies to anyone whose suspension lasts at least until the submission deadline for that particular round; however, an exception exists if the individual managed to submit a fresh prediction prior to the ban being enforced, in which case that prediction will be honored regardless of their status. Additionally, should a banned participant possess an unused Joker prediction and fail to submit a standard entry for the round in question, that Joker prediction will still be applied to their score, just as it would for any other competitor. Does this sufficiently outline the expectations for everyone involved?
10. Is it not a fascinating thought that competitors might move between teams without any restriction whatsoever? In the event that such a transfer occurs, one must consider how the scoring functions; specifically, a competitor does not carry over the collective team points earned during their tenure with a previous squad, though their individual points remain entirely intact. Does this not seem like a fair distinction to maintain? This same logic applies to those who have been eliminated from the competition as well. Essentially, team points begin accumulating anew from the very moment a fresh team is established, whereas a simple change in a team's name carries no weight regarding the point totals. Each team is permitted two name changes throughout the duration of the season, yet prior to the start of the season, they may alter their designation as often as they see fit. Is there not a certain freedom in that level of flexibility?
11. If a participant chooses to include a driver in their prediction who doesn't actually appear on the official FIA entry list for a specific race, will they receive any points for that selection? The answer is a firm no; if the driver isn't part of the official roster, they simply don't count. Furthermore, one cannot claim points for drivers omitted from their submitted ranking, regardless of how logical or seemingly necessary it might feel to have left a specific individual out. The scoring process follows the exact positions a participant assigns to their chosen drivers; therefore, should there be a clerical error or a typo in those numerical rankings, the standings will be calculated strictly according to the numbers provided, however flawed they may be. If certain positions are left blank, no points will be awarded for them. Additionally, if a participant happens to list the same position number or the same driver more than once, all points associated with those duplicate entries will be forfeited entirely. What occurs if someone lists more drivers than would normally be expected to start a race under standard circumstances? In such an instance, no points will be granted for those surplus drivers or extra positions. For any driver where a position hasn't been specified, they shall be treated as NOP. However, if the entire ranking is submitted without any position numbers at all, the list will be processed as a ranking without any NOPs. Is it not essential that we maintain this level of precision to ensure fairness for everyone involved?
12. Is it not worth noting that copying someone else's prediction is strictly prohibited? It is a matter we take quite seriously, though we only move to investigate and issue penalties if a participant files a formal complaint, and even then, only once the deadline for submitting predictions on this thread has officially passed. For those wondering what constitutes plagiarism in this context, it is defined as posting more than 75% of the drivers—including all groups, rounded up to the nearest whole number—in the exact same positions as another prediction already submitted for that specific race. Naturally, any previous predictions being utilized as Jokers are excluded from this calculation. Should anyone be found guilty of such copying, the penalty is straightforward: the prediction will simply be disregarded entirely.
13. How exactly are the standings calculated? Well, they are determined strictly based on the official results released by the FIA immediately following the conclusion of the race—that initial preliminary order is what counts. Any subsequent corrections or adjustments made by the FIA after that moment are simply not taken into account for our purposes. As for the Non-Points scorers, we consider any driver listed on the official FIA entry list who fails to secure a finishing position, regardless of whether their status is marked as a DNF, NC, or Retired. Furthermore, if we look at the standard FIA regulations, a driver is technically considered to have retired if they complete less than 90% of the total race distance. And of course, the race itself consists of however many laps the FIA deems necessary, whether they decide that through their standard procedure or via some extraordinary ruling. Drivers who fail to qualify during the qualifying sessions and therefore do not participate in the race will be calculated as NOP, provided they were officially included on the FIA entry list.
3. Should any controversial situation arise during the competition that isn't explicitly covered by the specific points within these Regulations, the Race Director shall make the final call, relying upon common sense and adhering to the fundamental moral principle of fair play. These Regulations take effect upon their publication within the Championship thread designated for rules and standings, though they may be subject to amendments if, as the season progresses, it becomes evident that such changes are absolutely necessary to ensure the smooth and effective operation of the competition.
4. It remains possible to replace the Race Director at any point during the competition, should a majority of the competitors elect a new director who is willing to accept the position. In much the same manner, any disputed rules may be modified, though under no circumstances can such changes be applied retroactively to previous events.
1. Is it not fascinating how the Formula 1 Championship Forum operates as such an expansive arena? It truly functions as a competition with virtually limitless entries, allowing both individual players and entire teams to join the fray at any point throughout the entire season. Registrations: In order for any player to be officially considered registered within the league, there is a mandatory requirement to submit a post explicitly stating which team you will be representing; furthermore, if you were not part of last year's lineup, you must also designate your own unique personal number—any integer ranging from 2 to 99 that hasn't already been claimed—which shall serve as your permanent identifier through the conclusion of this championship. The selection process for choosing numbers will be handled by the championship director, who intends to follow a strictly "first come, first served" policy. Is there any other fair way to manage such things? It seems to me that once you've claimed your spot, it belongs to you. In addition to that primary number, he should probably provide two extra backup numbers just in case his first choice is already taken; furthermore, wouldn't it be only fair that the right to claim the number one spot belongs exclusively to the reigning champion of the individual series? Is it not fundamentally important that we maintain some semblance of order within our ranks? It stands to reason that one cannot simply wander into an existing team without first securing the blessing of at least one player from that very same squad who competed during the previous season. After all, wouldn't you agree that continuity and mutual consent are the bedrock of any cohesive group? The competition is structured around two-driver teams, which means we’ll be keeping a very close eye on both the individual standings and the official Team Hall of Fame rankings as they develop. Is it not a fundamental truth that those who fail to register themselves with their respective squads essentially forfeit any claim to participating in the team-based portion of the competition? One has to wonder, if an individual chooses not to formally join the ranks, how can they possibly expect to contribute to the collective effort of the group? One can only consider an individual a true participant if they actually register for the competition and ensure their prediction is submitted within the designated timeframe. Is it not, after all, the basic requirement for entry? Should a competitor fail to select their own racing number, the race director will simply assign one at his own discretion. Is it not perhaps a bit arbitrary, though I suppose efficiency must sometimes take precedence over preference?
The official race results and the updated standings will be released by the director, after which a moderator will post them right here on the front page of this thread; once that happens, they shall be considered final and absolute. Will all competitors please ensure that they submit their predictions, entries, and any other necessary documentation strictly within this specific thread? It is vital to remember that only submissions made here will be counted toward the official championship standings; any attempts to register or provide forecasts through different threads simply won't be considered valid. Is there any doubt that staying within this single topic is the only way to ensure your participation is officially recognized?
2. How exactly does this championship function? Well, the premise is quite straightforward: a participant must submit their predicted finishing order for the entire starting grid within a designated timeframe. This includes ranking every driver as they believe they will cross the finish line, along with two specific bonus picks—namely, the driver who secures pole position and the one who manages to clock the fastest lap of the race. Once a previous deadline has passed, competitors are free to post their predictions, provided they do so no later than the scheduled commencement of the third official practice session of the upcoming race weekend; this rule remains constant for every single race throughout the season. Furthermore, should one feel the need to adjust their outlook, participants may revise their entries or submit entirely new ones an unlimited number of times, right up until that final deadline expires.
3. The scoring system is organized as follows: How exactly does the scoring work for each race? Well, the primary points are distributed according to the current Formula 1 system—that 25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1 structure we all know—while the top ten finishers also accumulate those additional secondary points based on their performance during the event. When considering how the secondary points are distributed during each race, one must look at the specific structure used to award them; they are allocated according to the following system: Groups 1 through 3—that’s five points plus one extra. Group 4-10 – 3 points + 1 bonus Group 11-16 – 2 points + 2 Group 17-22 – 1 point + 2 Group NOP - 3 points Pole position and the fastest lap—that’s a total of six points up for grabs, isn't it? Four for taking the top spot on the grid, plus an additional two for snatching that fastest lap during the race.
4. Points are distributed according to the specific groups outlined in Section 3 of the official regulations. Furthermore, additional points for predicting exact positions are awarded within two distinct categories: Group 1: Positions 1 through 3, and then 4 through 10—each earns a single point for their standing. Group 2: 11th through 16th, 17th through 22nd, and the PP + FL bracket—each earns two points toward the final standing. Regarding the additional points—specifically those two extra points allocated to the PP + FL group—they are only awarded if a participant manages to correctly predict both drivers within that specific grouping. In the official standings, these are recorded individually, with one point assigned to each driver hit; essentially, each successful prediction earns you one correct position, which ultimately nets you a total of two points for the group. Does that clarify the scoring logic for everyone?
5. What exactly are the criteria we should be using when determining the final standings for the race? It seems to me that we need to establish some clear guidelines, so I propose the following parameters: Is it not more logical to conclude that a driver who consistently accumulates those additional secondary points is actually the superior competitor? In the event that we find ourselves facing a tie following the first step, the deciding factor will be determined by which competitor holds the lower sum when calculating the differences between their actual finishing position and their predicted ranking within the overall standings. In such a scenario, all drivers shall be evaluated based strictly on the official order established by the FIA and the competitors themselves. Is there not something inherently profound about the "Bjesomar criterion"? One finds oneself pondering whether such a standard truly captures the essence of what we seek, or if it merely serves as a fleeting metric in an ever-shifting landscape. How exactly does one determine the driver standings? Well, the order is established based on the preliminary race results, though for those drivers who don't actually make it into the official scoring, the standing is dictated by the entry list found on the FIA website. It is important to note that any driver omitted from the initial prediction pool simply isn't factored into the calculations at all. Furthermore, the PP and FL groups aren't considered within this specific criterion. As for those unfortunate souls who drop out of the race early without securing a finishing position, they are accounted for as the very last driver under the crazy criteria—meaning the first person to retire is treated as the final finisher, the next person to drop out becomes the penultimate one, and so on. Isn't it a curious way to structure such things? c) In the event of a tie following step b), the advantage goes to the player who submitted their updated prediction first; if no one has sent an update, we look to whoever submitted their initial prediction earliest. Furthermore, should one participant fail to submit a new prediction entirely, their opponent shall be deemed the winner by default.
6. The criteria used to establish the final individual standings are as follows: a) The competitor holding the higher number of primary points is ranked higher. b) Should a tie occur after applying rule a), the competitor with the greater number of wins takes precedence. c) In the case of a tie following rule b), the competitor with more secondary points will be favored. d) If a tie persists after rule c), we move to the next available metric, favoring the competitor with more second-place finishes, then third-place, and so forth.
6.1. The criteria for determining the overall Team Standings are defined as follows: a) The team accumulating the most primary points is ranked higher. b) In the event of a tie after rule a), the team with the most wins is prioritized. c) Following a tie under rule b), the team with the highest number of secondary points prevails. d) If ties remain after rule c), priority is given to the team with more second-place finishes, followed by third-place, and so on.
6.2. The criteria for determining the overall Exact Position Trophy standings are as follows: a) The player with the highest number of exact position hits is ranked higher. b) Should a tie occur after rule a), the player who participated in fewer total rounds is favored. c) In the event of a tie following rule b), the player with the highest count of maximumly accurate positions achieved in a single round takes the lead. d) If a tie remains after rule c), we look to the player with the highest count of maximumly accurate positions achieved over two rounds (and subsequently three, four, etc.). 7. Should there be any fluctuation in the number of teams competing during the season, only the final group of teams will be adjusted accordingly. For instance, rather than covering positions 17-22, the group might shift to cover 17-20 or 17-24. Any adjustments to scoring groups pursuant to this article take effect automatically—without prior notice—the moment the FIA or a specific team officially announces they will participate in, or withdraw from, one or all Formula 1 races. This also applies if such a decision is announced before Friday's free practice sessions and a team fails to show up for those sessions. It is important to note that this specific article and its subsequent changes will not be triggered if a team or driver misses practice, qualifying, or the race due to other unforeseen circumstances, such as a shortage of spare parts or driver injuries.
bluecyclist64 said:And honestly, leaving without a signature is just weak.🎉
Is there anything more profoundly aggravating than dealing with someone who lacks even the most basic sense of accountability? I find myself wondering, quite sincerely, what becomes of a society when people refuse to sign their names to their actions? It truly makes one question the very foundation of professional integrity. Honestly, you might as well be shouting into a void when you're dealing with such blatant negligence.
stormytiger4 said:I’ve gotta give Reddit some props because: 1. the whole vibe here actually fights back against those shallow communication styles you see on modern social media. the focus stays on the actual writing rather than just chasing likes through photos or videos. 2. there aren't any populist gimmicks like a "Like" button cluttering things up, which keeps us from turning into one of those low-quality platforms I mentioned earlier. 3. even with a few hiccups here and there, the moderation team still does an incredible job. honestly, having a solid crew of mods is just as vital for the long-term survival of a community as having a reliable server. 4. the server hasn't been more stable than it has over the last couple of years. 5. we have rustydrifter10.
What is even the point of Reddit if rustydrifter10 isn't around to see it!
My sincerest congratulations to Tyler Bennett5 and the rookies! 👍 And I must extend a particular note of gratitude to Kyle Edwards5 for essentially rescuing the entire competition from disaster! 👍
1. Valtteri Bottas 2. Lewis Hamilton 3. Max Verstappen 4. Sergio Perez 5. Lance Stroll 6. Daniel Ricciardo 7. Lando Norris 8. Charles Leclerc 9. Carlos Sainz 10. Sebastian Vettel 11. Pierre Gasly 12. Kimi Raikkonen 13. Antonio Giovinazzi 14. George Russell 15. Kevin Magnussen 16. Emerson Fittipaldi 17. Nicholas Latifi NOP Esteban Ocon NOP Daniil Kvyat NOP Alex Albon PP Valtteri Bottas FL Valtteri Bottas
ruggedscout76 said:Congratulations to everyone, though I find myself feeling that I really ought to extend my most sincere congratulations to my own teammate, because it was solely due to his efforts that we actually managed to secure a spot in the top five in the end. 🎉
I suppose even I have to step in and take a side once in a while, don't I? One simply cannot maintain a neutral stance indefinitely, as it would be quite impossible to constantly be the one providing the consensus for everyone else. 😁 🙂
Kenneth Cruz67 said:I don't think Lewis Hamilton actually made a mistake there; it honestly feels more like Felipe Massa was just on a mission of his own! 😁
I guess I have to wonder, are we actually attempting to provide some sort of objective value judgment here, or are we all just cheering for our favorites?
I guess if we aren't going to beat around the bush, I’d love to hear what you think, because I honestly find myself wondering who you would personally pick as the superior driver and the more successful competitor in the world of Formula 1?
I find myself constantly weighing this one in my mind, though I suppose there isn't really a single right answer, is there? If you're asking me whether I'd rather see Jenson Button or Lewis Hamilton take the glory, it’s such a tough call! On one hand, you have the sheer, effortless brilliance of Lewis Hamilton, which is just staggering to watch, but then you have Jenson Button's incredible finesse and that smooth style that always seemed to make racing look so easy. It’s a bit of a toss-up for me, I guess, depending on what kind of driving you personally find more captivating!
If you find yourself in a position where your front tire makes contact with a rival's rear tire while navigating the track, haven't you essentially committed a fundamental error that effectively dismantles the race for both yourself and your competitor? Is it not true that such an incident serves to ruin the competitive integrity of the moment for everyone involved?
Kenneth Cruz67 said:I don't think Lewis Hamilton actually made a mistake there; it honestly feels more like Felipe Massa was just on a mission of his own! 😁
I guess I have to wonder, are we actually attempting to provide some sort of objective value judgment here, or are we all just cheering for our favorites?
I guess if we aren't going to beat around the bush, I’d love to hear what you think, because I honestly find myself wondering who you would personally pick as the superior driver and the more successful competitor in the world of Formula 1?
I find myself constantly weighing this one in my mind, though I suppose there isn't really a single right answer, is there? If you're asking me whether I'd rather see Jenson Button or Lewis Hamilton take the glory, it’s such a tough call! On one hand, you have the sheer, effortless brilliance of Lewis Hamilton, which is just staggering to watch, but then you have Jenson Button's incredible finesse and that smooth style that always seemed to make racing look so easy. It’s a bit of a toss-up for me, I guess, depending on what kind of driving you personally find more captivating!
Lewis Hamilton. It’s a nuanced point, isn't it? One might argue that Jenson Button never once hesitated to acknowledge who the greatest driver of his era truly was, which highlights the core of the issue surrounding Lewis Hamilton. Is it perhaps because he hasn't always been paired with the absolute pinnacle of driving talent within the same car—with the possible exception of 2007, I suppose—yet somehow still finds himself losing races to drivers who simply don't belong in that conversation? If we look at Michael Schumacher, for instance, that particular struggle didn't really manifest until his first retirement; by the time he made his comeback, age had already begun to take its toll. Still, even if we consider all that, can we honestly say that Schumacher was the GOAT?
If you look closer, Lewis really outclassed Button in qualifying, especially since Lewis managed to grab pole positions throughout the year while Button didn't, and even when Button wasn't grabbing podiums, Lewis was usually still finishing quite respectably, so there is a bit more to the story than just those numbers.
In fact, I believe the only drivers who really managed to push Lewis aside that year were Felipe Massa in Singapore, Monaco, Silverstone, India, and Japan.
Does anyone else happen to remember that stretch? :zubo
I honestly can't imagine why it would be so incredibly difficult to wrap one's head around a simple table with maybe seven or eight columns.🤔
Why is it honestly such a monumental struggle for some people to interpret a simple table consisting of seven or eight rows?🤔[/I]
Now we are expected to believe that Massa is somehow to blame because Lewis Hamilton made his own driving errors.🙏 🙏 🙏 Why couldn't he just drive like Jenson Button, with far fewer mistakes, back when he was actually performing at a higher level?🤣
Kenneth Cruz67 said:If we're deciding the greatest based solely on championship titles, then Lewis Hamilton is undoubtedly the GOAT.
However, if you look at it through the lens of having lost the fewest championships, Lewis Hamilton still takes the crown, since he won 7 out of 14 seasons—which is a 50% success rate—while Michael Schumacher comes in second, winning 7 out of 17 seasons, which is arguably a bit lower than Hamilton's 50%.
The table I shared is actually a pretty detailed numerical breakdown of their head-to-head matchups, which I think tries to account for things like luck or mechanical failures, aiming to answer who the better driver truly is rather than just who has been more successful in Formula 1.
But isn't that not quite the case, considering Michael Schumacher also holds seven titles to his name?
Kenneth Cruz67 said:If we're deciding the greatest based solely on championship titles, then Lewis Hamilton is undoubtedly the GOAT.
However, if you look at it through the lens of having lost the fewest championships, Lewis Hamilton still takes the crown, since he won 7 out of 14 seasons—which is a 50% success rate—while Michael Schumacher comes in second, winning 7 out of 17 seasons, which is arguably a bit lower than Hamilton's 50%.
The table I shared is actually a pretty detailed numerical breakdown of their head-to-head matchups, which I think tries to account for things like luck or mechanical failures, aiming to answer who the better driver truly is rather than just who has been more successful in Formula 1.
🤣 If one were to sit down and meticulously examine the statistics based strictly on the criterion of drivers who piloted the specific car that ultimately secured the World Championship, one begins to wonder how many titles actually slipped through their fingers. It is a fascinating, if somewhat melancholy, way to look at racing history, isn't it? For instance, if we look at Lewis Hamilton, how many championships did he miss out on despite being behind the wheel of the car that eventually claimed the crown? And then, if we shift our gaze toward the legends—how does that tally compare for someone like Michael Schumacher, or perhaps the incomparable Juan Manuel Fangio, or even Jim Clark? One can't help but ponder whether the driver or the machine holds the true weight of destiny in such moments.
Kenneth Cruz67 said:If we're deciding the greatest based solely on championship titles, then Lewis Hamilton is undoubtedly the GOAT.
However, if you look at it through the lens of having lost the fewest championships, Lewis Hamilton still takes the crown, since he won 7 out of 14 seasons—which is a 50% success rate—while Michael Schumacher comes in second, winning 7 out of 17 seasons, which is arguably a bit lower than Hamilton's 50%.
The table I shared is actually a pretty detailed numerical breakdown of their head-to-head matchups, which I think tries to account for things like luck or mechanical failures, aiming to answer who the better driver truly is rather than just who has been more successful in Formula 1.
One cannot help but reflect upon the sheer statistical weight of Jenson Button's performance during that 2011 season, can one? When you truly sit down to examine the data, he clearly holds the advantage in terms of both fastest laps and superior finishing positions. It brings to mind an astute observation made by RC da Kookee regarding his podium consistency—specifically that notable 12-to-6 ratio—but even that seems almost secondary when we consider the most vital metric of all. After all, isn't the ultimate measure of a driver's brilliance found simply in the total points amassed throughout the championship? At this point, one has to wonder if we have truly reached the threshold of the absurd, as the situation is beginning to feel quite frankly ridiculous. 🤦
Kenneth Cruz67 said:Well, maybe it's just because I'm trying to look at the bigger picture here instead of obsessing solely over the points tally.
Everything you need to know is right there in the link, which shouldn't be too hard to wrap your head around; just take a look, and if it still feels a bit fuzzy, I'd be more than happy to walk you through it.
Honestly, I'm not quite sure why you're acting like this is some unsolvable mystery.
It’s almost like asking me—by what logic or what kind of warping of reality and common sense could anyone possibly argue that Lewis Hamilton isn't the greatest of all time, especially when he holds the record for most titles, most wins, most poles, and really just most everything else? 🤔
What relevance does a link comparing two drivers based on arbitrary criteria hold when the primary metric should undoubtedly be the total number of points earned? When placed in the exact same car during the same season, Jenson Button actually holds 43 more points. Nuff said.
Kenneth Cruz67 said:Well, maybe it's just because I'm trying to look at the bigger picture here instead of obsessing solely over the points tally.
Everything you need to know is right there in the link, which shouldn't be too hard to wrap your head around; just take a look, and if it still feels a bit fuzzy, I'd be more than happy to walk you through it.
Honestly, I'm not quite sure why you're acting like this is some unsolvable mystery.
It’s almost like asking me—by what logic or what kind of warping of reality and common sense could anyone possibly argue that Lewis Hamilton isn't the greatest of all time, especially when he holds the record for most titles, most wins, most poles, and really just most everything else? 🤔
If we are talking strictly about results, then yes, that is true. However, is it not also true that he was fortunate enough to pilot the most dominant machine in history for seven consecutive seasons? Even during those seven years, he still managed to lose a championship to a driver who had never been a world champion before. That certainly gives one pause when considering the claim that he is the greatest of all time...
Kenneth Cruz67 said:Honestly, I find it a little bit baffling that it’s actually this difficult for some people to just click a link and see what's going on. I mean, really, the link is right there along with a description of the content, and we're all following the forum rules perfectly fine, so I suppose I shouldn't necessarily have to provide a detailed diagram explaining every single thing just because someone might be feeling a bit too lazy to spend thirty seconds glancing at it themselves, don't you think?
1 Sebastian Vettel GER Red Bull Racing Renault 392 2 Jenson Button GBR GBR McLaren Mercedes 270 3 270 3 Mark Webber AUS Red Bull Racing Renault 258 4 Fernando Alonso ESP Ferrari 257 5 Lewis Hamilton GBR GBR McLaren Mercedes 227 227
By what strange distortion of space and time could one possibly claim that a forty-three point advantage held by Button constitutes a lesser achievement? 🙄
Well, here are the stats on his teammates, broken down and totaled up for you.
I suppose Alonso was marginally better during that first and only year they shared a garage.
As for Rosberg, he managed to be the stronger driver in 2016, but I guess he was trailing behind in all the other years.
And then there's Button, who seemed to be the slower one throughout their time together.
So, looking at the big picture, he wasn't necessarily better than Alonso—though it was a tiny margin—and since they only overlapped for that very first year of Hamilton's career, it's a bit lopsided, but technically speaking, I think you might have been a little off there.
How on earth could you claim that Button was inferior in 2011? What kind of nonsense is that?
Amanda Kelly said:I don't see how those blunders in the Mercedes pit lane actually changed anything today. Not a damn thing, if you ask me.
Everything was pretty much set in stone before that even happened. You can't just erase 60 laps of Russell dominating the field. Or, to put it another way, those final 20 or 30 laps—and the eventual result—don't change the fact that Russell was absolutely crushing it all weekend long. With a Mercedes car this good, you could drop in some rookie who hasn't scored a single point in his last 35 races and he’d likely take the win. He’d be paid about what a benchwarmer on a bottom-tier MLS team makes. Give him a day or two to get used to the seat, and he's golden.
Mercedes really screwed Lewis over. Not specifically today, though. They did that the moment they decided someone else was stepping into his seat for this race. You could see how that test would play out from the very beginning.
Lewis shouldn't have let himself get too comfortable with the crown. A pro at his level really should have seen that coming.
What a mess! 👍
Congratulations to Sergio Perez! Driver of the Day!
I find myself wondering if Charles Leclerc is simply lacking the necessary intuition 👎 Is it even remotely possible for him to secure a championship title at this stage?
Linda Peterson43 said:What a total joke that Valtteri Bottas is being...
Driver of the Day Russell was definitely the one...
Honestly, anyone currently on the grid could win in this Mercedes-Benz, though perhaps not Kimi Räikkönen.. 🙂
On another note, I wonder if Louie will be driving in seven days? If Russell ends up driving again, his reputation is going to be absolutely trashed... 🙂
And it isn't just his reputation either; he'll likely see that final zero wiped right off his paycheck.