Posts by steelmaker83

Alright, since you’ve gone through all the trouble of setting up those pictures, why don't you pull up the one showing Rosberg exiting the pits? I want to see exactly where Hamilton was positioned at that precise moment—roughly the same second Rosberg was sitting in the pit lane...

Also, the sheer fact that Rosberg was pulling those lap times on old tires during those four laps before his stop just proves my point: old rubber can hold up. Hamilton was slower on his own old set, sure, but he was still faster than what Rosberg managed during that single lap after switching to new ones.

Just look at everyone else's data regarding that first out-lap on a fresh set. They are consistently over a second slower than the guy finishing his stint on old tires. It's obvious that unless the tires are completely shot, a driver can absolutely milk that one extra lap on the old set.

So, we are talking about a margin of a single lap. In Canada, that's those 80 seconds you find so hilarious. And in F1, 80 seconds is an eternity.

stormybadger8 said:Clearly, you weren't paying attention...
Like I told you last time, just check fia.com and you'll see the facts for yourself...

How can you watch races and miss the pit stops?
It should be obvious that if two drivers are running within about a second of each other for the whole race, and the leader's pit stop takes 3 seconds longer than usual, it’s perfectly normal for the guy behind to jump ahead...
But honestly, it's just embarrassing for Hamilton that Rosberg managed to overtake him again, even after that massive blunder by the team.🤣

Give me a break. Where on earth did you get those 3 seconds from? Rosberg's second pit stop was only 1.5s longer, and when Hamilton pulled ahead, the gap was roughly the same. So, a longer pit stop isn't the reason here...

There is only one explanation. Hamilton's tires (just like Alonso's) held up, and he was faster on his old tire. Something you previously claimed was impossible.

graniteharbor502 said:Fair enough. 😁

Look, I’ll be honest. Sure, calling certain drivers frauds is idiotic, but there’s a certain charm to it—it gets people riled up, which keeps the forum lively. It’s part of that thirsty little bit of online folklore we have here, and I can live with it. As long as people don't start attacking the fundamental logic of the conversation, it's fine. Once they do, it just becomes exhausting.

graniteharbor502 said:I know you watched the race. What I don't get is why someone who hasn't even seen it has the nerve to trash one of the few drivers left who actually managed to win a championship in an inferior car.

Because we love to troll. Let's be honest here.
Sometimes I just enjoy stirring the pot, especially when dealing with certain personalities.

That doesn't mean I can't handle a serious discussion—on the contrary, I'd much rather have one. But sometimes trolling is just a reaction to... (I won't finish that thought because people might take offense, and God knows how many sensitive egos are floating around this place).

stormybadger8 said:Since when have Vergne and Alonso been teammates running the exact same tires and strategy?

As for Rosberg and Hamilton, when exactly did Hamilton pull ahead of Rosberg, and based on what?

Did you even watch the race? How else do you think Hamilton ended up ahead of Rosberg?

stormybadger8 said:What exactly did you see at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway that makes you think there’s something wrong with my quote? 😕

Beyond that, he's actually gaining ground on the guy ahead by pitting earlier, rather than trying to play the waiting game by staying out an extra lap or two.

And?

There is no theory that supports being faster on old tires than on new ones, unless you count the scenario where the guy who exits the pits first gets stuck behind a slower car or runs into some other random issue.

Who exactly was Vergne stuck behind when Alonso blew past him? Later on. When Rosberg finally called it quits to head into the boxing ring, what exactly was the bottleneck? What was the specific hurdle he hit when Lewis pushed him? Later on. Did he push his luck too far by heading to the pits?

darkmarlin16 said:Why was Rosberg let off the hook when he cut the chicane and powered through at full throttle?

And what was the alternative? Hand him a five-second penalty? He didn't steal that much time. Order him to let Hamilton past? That would be an excessive punishment.
It’s perfectly reasonable to overlook a first mistake with a warning (which he received), especially early in the race.

The real question is what happens if a driver does that—for the first and only time—right at the end of the race, two or three laps out, or on the final lap? Suddenly, the narrative changes...

However, you have to admit Rosberg is cunning. More cunning than Hamilton, actually. And remarkably composed under pressure. He might be slower than Lewis, but not so slow that he can't compensate for his driving deficit with stunts like this.

Rosberg is good, damn good, and Lewis is going to have to bring his absolute A-game if he wants to beat him. I have to admit, Rosberg surprised me; I wasn't expecting this level of resistance. I still think Lewis will take it in the end, but it's now crystal clear that his job won't be easy.

stormybadger8 said:What exactly did you see at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway that makes my quote so wrong? 😕

How many times has a driver who pits LATER ended up ahead of everyone else at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway?

stormybadger8 said:And there’s zero hope to be found in having a teammate either☕
which is something the crowd hasn't been able to grasp for years; they're so blind they could easily start a fan club called "The Moles"🤣

If hala ako RB actually manages to outpace Mercedes in terms of raw speed and performance, then having a guy like Ricci as a teammate is a massive bonus for Vettel—basically a gift wrapped in gold.☕
zakaj ??? What kind of nonsense are you talking about?
Because, for starters, a guy like Ricci in a decent car is capable of consistently beating the Mercedes drivers...
So, the gap in race wins comes down to him being +10 instead of +7... and once you factor in Hamilton, we're looking at +13 compared to Rosberg.☕

Besides, if Vettel needs to beat Ricci to prove himself, that's actually a huge advantage for him. If he can't pull it off, then fine—he doesn't deserve the title anyway.

You could have just summed all of that up in one sentence (and I won't go as far as saying you should have used the plural...)

Jason Campbell70 said:Go back and read my original post.
It was pretty concise.

No. You weren't concise. Your syntax implies something else entirely:

So how did "brilliant" Fernando Alonso manage '10 and/or '12?
Alonso again—he was just picking up points at the end of the '12 season.
He essentially put himself in a spot where he wasn't in control of his own fate.

Then you clarified later:

Alonso spent the second half of that season scavenging points because he had no other choice.
Red Bull Racing and McLaren were simply faster cars, and he took what he could get.
And in the end, he blew the title.

See the difference?

Jason Campbell70 said:And here we go again, for the third time.
"Stupidity", "lack of intelligence", and all the usual insults.

You're arrogant, and you have nothing to back it up.

Arrogant? No, I'm being honest.
Backing it up? Everything I said is a fact. It’s not my fault you weren't clear.

Since that thread is locked, I have to move the conversation here. Just making sure this doesn't get buried. So:

stormybadger8 said:Get it through your head: there is no theory where old tires run faster laps than new ones during those first couple of laps...
What happened with Massa was an anomaly that almost never occurs. The reason wasn't Massa himself; it was Bottas dealing with engine issues and traffic.
For heaven's sake, if old tires were actually faster than new ones, nobody would bother changing them in the first place.

Furthermore, in Formula 1, you overtake the car ahead by pitting earlier, not by staying out a lap or two longer. :facepalm2:
There is zero logic behind being faster on old rubber than on new rubber, unless the guy coming out of the pits gets stuck behind a slower car or hits some other issue.

And then we have the Canada incident...

Jason Campbell70 said:Fernando Alonso was just picking up points in the second half of that season because he had nothing else left to go after.
Both Red Bull Racing and McLaren were simply faster cars, so he took whatever he could get.

And in the end, he blew the championship.

Well, now you're being more precise. There’s a massive difference between someone picking up points because it's their only option, versus driving conservatively by choice. In 2012, Fernando Alonso wasn't collecting points because he decided to play it safe; he did it because it was the only way he could compete. Big difference.

Jason Campbell70 said:Moderators?

What do you mean "moderators"? Don't start whining now... where is this nonsense even coming from?

graniteharbor502 said:You, me, and Tibi all know Vettel would have taken the win if he hadn't gotten stuck behind Hülkenberg. Besides, wasn't the German ahead of the Australian in qualifying?

I'm not impressed by Vettel's performance this season (not by a long shot), and certainly not here at the GP Canada. From lap 27 onwards, Ricci absolutely tore him apart during those pit cycles....

Vettel wasn't any better or faster yesterday.

And in the end, after Ricci sorted out his issue, it took Vettel three laps to do the exact same thing......

Jason Campbell70 said:What paradigm are you even talking about?

Stick to arguments, not ad hominem attacks.

The idea that Fernando Alonso was just cruising through 2012 to collect easy points is a complete myth. It’s pure nonsense born from a lack of understanding. We can dive into the specifics on the appropriate thread.

John Ross55 said:Ahem. Listen up, colleagues. I want to offer some recognition—since apparently nobody else will—for the constructive and productive coverage of this race. We haven't seen anything like it in a long, long time. Kudos to us all; I’m sure the mods are beaming with pride at this level of quality. 🙂 😂 The frauds remain frauds, the mercenaries remain mercenaries, and everyone else can stay exactly where they are.

Karma is karma.

Jason Campbell70 said:So how did the brilliant Fernando Alonso manage through '10 and/or '12?

Your intelligence doesn't mean a thing if you don't have pace.
Pace in the car, or pace as a driver.
Was Jenson Button any less intelligent or resourceful in the seasons before Ross Brawn arrived?

When faced with the choice between a pure racer and a points collector, I'll take the former every single time.
Look at Alonso again—he spent the end of the 2012 season just scavenging for points.
He put himself in a position where he wasn't even in control of his own destiny.

Lewis Hamilton relies on himself.
Nico Rosberg relies on Lewis Hamilton.

And that is precisely the point.

I’m surprised that you, supposedly one of the more intelligent members of this forum, are pushing this narrative about Alonso playing it safe at the end of 2012.

It is sheer nonsense—a display of superficiality and lack of insight comparable to that entire mess regarding the Monaco Grand Prix.

stormybadger8 said:Basically, my takeaway regarding engine power after this race is...

General Motors has made significant strides with their power units; Mercedes-Benz hasn't caught up yet, but Ford has definitely overtaken them.
It’s interesting that at a track where engine performance is everything, Ford isn't just sitting behind Red Bull Racing anymore—they're actually being hunted by STR...

Sure, Kvyat retired, and Vergne only had one Ford and didn't have an incredible race, but regardless, the speed trap reveals something intriguing:
both STR cars are ahead of Ford, Vettel is ahead of both Fords, Ricciardo is for some strange reason slightly behind Alonso and Kimi, and Grosjean is basically neck-and-neck with Ford...
And that's despite the fact that Kvyat and Grosjean DNF'd, so they likely didn't even record what their engines or cars are truly capable of...
The rest of the General Motors drivers retired right at the start, so they're irrelevant to these results.

But the biggest indicator for me is Sauber; one finished the race, and the other drove almost to the end, and essentially, they were the slowest of everyone who actually made it to the finish or close to it...

Also, Mercedes-Benz showed they aren't invincible; when they floor it, things can go sideways...

All in all, maybe nobody will actually overtake Germany before the season ends, but it looks to me like Red Bull Racing could give them a serious run for their money.
It also seems that regardless of the points standings, it's clear that Alonso no longer has even a theoretical shot at the title; it's simply over.
Still, there's a tiny glimmer of hope left for Ricciardo and Vettel...

What a joke of a hope for Vettel. He has to outperform his teammate first, then he has to deal with those two from Mercedes.

And he's slower than all three of them.

Total joke.

By the way, since we've closed the topic, how many anomalies did you spot in this race?

stormybadger8 said:Canada is a track that really suits his driving style, and he consistently delivers his best performances there...

As precise as always....

http://youtu.be/o9jPvPS_xHk

jadeseal7 said:God, I can't stand watching Kimi in that red bucket. Let Alonso drive that thing until he retires.

And... exactly.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/114273

If they have half a brain, they'll catch on. If not, there's no helping them...