2014 Canadian GP - Montreal (June 8)

Hamilton drives with so much raw passion, whereas Nico stays incredibly composed.

Only time will tell if this championship is won by a cool head or pure heart.

jadeseal7 said:Hamilton brings the passion, while Nico stays cool under pressure.

But there can only be one winner.

Gary Palmer8 said:so are you one of those people screaming from the stands and throwing bananas?

Since you asked, I'll give you an answer.

No. I’m not one of those people yelling from the bleachers and tossing bananas.

I don't even watch football. I haven't been to a single game in my entire life—honestly, I don't even know if a football team has 10 or 11 players.

Football just isn't my thing. It’s a sport for commoners. For the masses. For both the spiritually and materially bankrupt—people I affectionately call "peasants."

To me, football is like burnt soup or living on credit. I’m an aristocrat; I have no need for burnt soup, credit... or football.

But I see where you're going with this. No, I'm not a racist. I firmly believe all people are equally valuable, and I never judge anyone by their skin color. To me, skin color is a totally irrelevant detail. We’re all equals here.

However, I *do* see differences between people, but they have nothing to do with skin color. I see the difference in poverty—specifically spiritual poverty. You see it in a lack of education, in narrow, one-dimensional worldviews, in following dogmas, or believing in luck and fortune tellers.

I’m a firm believer in science and anything that can be proven. Luck isn't a scientific category. Saying Rosberg has a massive points lead because he's "lucky" is nonsense. Rosberg has a huge lead because he's the better driver—a more complete driver. That’s what his points show. Lewis, on the other hand, is the faster driver—which is obvious from his pole positions and wins. But at the end of the day, it's the points that count. So, Rosberg is the better driver, while Lewis is simply faster.

Alain Prost was the better driver; Ayrton Senna was the faster one. When they were teammates, Prost always walked away with more points than Senna. If the 2014 rules were the same as back in 1988—where not every point counted toward the championship—Lewis would have had a much better shot. But under today's rules, where every single point matters, every zero Lewis gets goes straight to Rosberg.

And Rosberg knows that, which is why he plays it that way. He’s smart. He knows he’s slower, so he knows if he tries to outrun Lewis, he loses. Instead, he plays the reliability card.

Unlike Lewis, Rosberg is more calculated, more thorough, and more intellectually grounded. Rosberg's father is a legend in global motorsports and a world champion. Lewis's father is a legendary third-shift worker. It's pretty obvious that Rosberg's father could provide a higher quality of upbringing and psychological development.

And none of this has anything to do with skin color; it's about approach to life. Some people live beyond their means and neglect proper education and a child's development just to chase elite athletic results. Others balance sports with a solid upbringing. Rosberg balanced it well. Lewis's father didn't balance it as well. And now we're left with an unbalanced, poorly educated Lewis who's prone to incidents—both on the track and off.

ruggedhawk20 said:Since you’ve gone ahead and asked me directly, I suppose I really ought to provide you with an answer, shouldn't I?

No, I am certainly not one of those people who spends their time shouting from the stands or throwing bananas at the track.

To be perfectly honest, I don't follow football at all. In fact, I have never once stepped foot inside a stadium to watch a live match in my entire life. I find myself wondering, quite sincerely, if anyone actually knows the specifics—for instance, does a football team even consist of ten players or eleven?

I find myself utterly uninterested in the spectacle of football. Is it not, perhaps, a rather pedestrian pursuit for a rather pedestrian populace? It seems to be a pastime reserved exclusively for the masses—those burdened by both spiritual emptiness and material scarcity. I suppose I should be more charitable, but I cannot help but view those who live for such trivialities as nothing more than simpletons, though I say that with all the affection in my heart.

To me, football feels somewhat akin to a bowl of burnt soup or perhaps living one's life entirely on credit. I find myself wondering, is there any true substance left once the char takes over? For someone like myself, who considers himself an aristocrat, such trifles are quite unnecessary; I have no need for burnt soup, nor do I require the burden of debt... and certainly, I have no need for football.

I believe I see the point you are attempting to make, though I must respectfully disagree. No, I am certainly not a racist. I hold the firm conviction that every single individual possesses equal worth, and I have never once allowed skin color to influence my perceptions or actions. To me, the specific shade of an individual's skin is a completely inconsequential detail. We are all fundamentally equal, are we not? In my eyes, every person stands on level ground, possessing the exact same inherent value.

I find myself contemplating the various distinctions that exist between people, yet I am increasingly convinced that these differences have absolutely nothing to do with skin color. Instead, I perceive a profound divide rooted in poverty—specifically, a certain spiritual impoverishment. Is it not evident in those who possess a narrow, one-dimensional perspective on the world around them? One sees it in a lack of intellectual cultivation, in an unyielding adherence to rigid dogmas, or in those who place their faith in mere superstition and fortune-telling rather than reason. Does such a shallow way of existing not represent the truest form of deprivation?

I hold a firm, unwavering belief in the principles of science and in everything that can be rigorously proven through empirical evidence. Luck, if one is being honest, simply isn't a scientific category, is it? To suggest that Rosberg holds such a commanding lead in the standings merely because he has been blessed by fortune is, quite frankly, an absurdity. If we look at the data, why else would Rosberg maintain this significant points advantage unless it were because he is the superior driver—a more complete driver, if you will? His position in the championship standings clearly reflects this reality. On the other hand, one cannot deny that Lewis is the faster driver—significantly faster, in fact—which is evidenced by his impressive tally of pole positions and race wins. But when all is said and done, what truly matters in this sport? It is the points. And therefore, it follows that Rosberg is the better driver, while Lewis remains the faster one.

One could argue that Alain Prost was arguably the superior driver, even if Ayrton Senna possessed a raw, blistering speed that was second to none. When they were teammates, it was always the case that Prost managed to amass more points than Senna did. It makes one wonder, though—if the regulations from 1988 were still in effect today, where not every single point counted toward the total, wouldn't Lewis have had a much better shot at securing the championship? Under those old rules, he might actually be able to afford a few zeros in his tally. But under our current system, where every single point is weighted so heavily, every time Lewis fails to score, those lost points go directly into Rosberg's pocket.

Rosberg knows exactly which hand he’s playing, and that is precisely why he remains such a formidable force. Is it not obvious that his intellect is his greatest asset? He possesses the keen awareness that attempting to outpace his rivals through raw speed alone would be a losing gamble, so instead, he chooses to master the art of reliability. Why chase a fleeting moment of velocity when one can secure victory through sheer, unwavering consistency?

When one considers the fundamental differences between the two, it seems quite evident that Rosberg possesses a certain calculated precision—a thoroughness of mind, perhaps even a deeper spiritual richness—that stands in stark contrast to Lewis. One cannot ignore the lineage at play here, can one? Rosberg’s father is a true icon of global motorsport, a world champion whose very presence commands respect. Meanwhile, Lewis’s father remains a legend of the third shift. It stands to reason, does it not, that growing up under the guidance of a world champion would allow Rosberg to experience a more refined upbringing, providing him with a distinct advantage in his psychological and physical development?

Does it not strike one as curious how often we misattribute fundamental character flaws to superficial traits like skin color, when in reality, the true culprit is almost always an individual's underlying philosophy toward life? Is it not more likely that the divergence in performance stems from how one manages their priorities? One might see a parent who chooses to live far beyond their means, sacrificing a child’s essential education and holistic psychological development just to chase some fleeting, elite athletic glory. On the other hand, there are those who understand the necessity of equilibrium, carefully balancing rigorous training with a solid academic foundation. If we look at the history of the sport, did Rosberg not demonstrate this very sense of balance between his sporting pursuits and his intellectual growth, ultimately finding a successful middle ground? In contrast, was Lewis's father not somewhat lacking in that particular area of stability? It seems to me that we are left with a rather unbalanced and undereducated Lewis today, someone whose temperament leads to frequent incidents both on the track and in his life off it.

There are many points where I find myself in complete agreement with you, yet when you assert that Ayrton Senna possessed a superior raw pace compared to Alain Prost, one cannot ignore the undeniable evidence found in Senna's staggering dominance during qualifying sessions. I simply do not witness that same level of singular brilliance from Lewis Hamilton this season—nor, if my memory serves me correctly, did we see him absolutely overpowering Nica in qualifying last year either. While Rosberg certainly possesses remarkable speed, he also brings an exceptional level of intelligence and consistency to the cockpit; conversely, it seems to me that Lewis lacks those latter two qualities when measured against Rosberg. Ultimately, isn't it precisely those specific attributes that will decide the outcome of the championship?

darkmarlin16 said:So far this season, Rosberg hasn't been the better driver. It’s only now, in this 7th race, that he’s done something worth noting—specifically how he managed to handle a race car that's struggling.

What kind of "struggles" are we talking about? Even Michael Schumacher at his absolute peak couldn't defend himself with a 120 kW deficit... especially against drivers on the level of Esteban Ocon.

And don't even get me started on comparing Rosberg to Sergio Perez.

Pure fairy tales for the gullible.

ruggedhawk20 said:Rosberg knows that, too, and that's exactly why he's playing that card. He's smart. He knows he's slower, and he knows if he tries to play the speed card, he'll lose. So, he plays the reliability card instead.

Interesting.
Do you honestly believe reliability rests solely on the driver's shoulders?

Or is there a bit of force majeure involved here?

Look, when someone starts leaning on "reliability," it's usually a sign that things are falling apart.
The race car isn't the problem; the machine is a bullet.
The driver... well, that's where the real issue lies.

Hamilton is in a different league entirely. There is no way the son of that Finnish fraud can match him in a fair fight.
So, they turn to external factors.
There is no third option.

ruggedhawk20 said:Since you asked, I’ll give you an answer.

No. I’m not one of those people shouting from the bleachers or throwing snacks onto the field.

I don't watch football at all. In my entire life, I’ve never even been to a game. I don’t even know if a football team has ten or eleven players.

Football holds zero interest for me. It’s a sport for the common man. For the masses. For both the spiritually and materially impoverished. For those I charitably refer to as the unwashed.

To me, football is like burnt soup or living on credit. I am an aristocrat; I have no need for burnt soup, nor credit... nor football.

But I see what you’re implying. No. I am not a racist. I firmly believe that all people are equally valuable, and I never make distinctions based on skin color. To me, a person's complexion is entirely irrelevant. We are all equal.

However, I do see differences between people, but they have nothing to do with skin color. I see the difference in poverty—specifically spiritual poverty, which manifests as a lack of education, narrow-mindedness, following dogma, or believing in luck and superstitions.

I believe in science and anything that can be proven empirically. Luck is not a scientific category. Claiming Rosberg has a massive points lead because he's "lucky" is nonsense. Rosberg has a large lead because he is the better driver—a more complete driver. His points prove that. Lewis, on the other hand, is the faster driver—significantly faster—which his pole positions and wins demonstrate. But in the end, the points are what count. So, Rosberg is the better driver, while Lewis is simply faster.

Alain Prost was the better driver; Ayrton Senna was the faster one. When they were teammates, Prost always walked away with more points than Senna. If the 2014 rules applied back in 1988—where not every point counted toward the championship—Lewis would have a better chance. Under today's rules, where every single point matters, every time Lewis scores a zero, it goes directly to Rosberg.

And Rosberg knows this; he plays that card because he is smart. He knows he is slower, and he knows if he tries to outrun Lewis on pure speed, he will lose. So, he plays the reliability card.

Unlike Lewis, Rosberg is more calculated, more thorough, and more intellectually grounded. Rosberg's father is a legend of motorsport and a world champion. Lewis's father is a legend of the third shift. It’s obvious that Rosberg's father could provide his son with a higher quality of upbringing and psychological maturity.

And none of this has anything to do with skin color; it’s about approach to life. Some people live beyond their means and neglect a child's proper education and development in pursuit of elite athletic results. Others balance sports with education. Rosberg balanced them well. Lewis's father failed to find that balance. And now we have an unbalanced, poorly educated Lewis prone to incidents—both on the track and off.

Terrible.

Jamie Hall said:Terrible.

He's just bored and trolling.

I get it. I used to have that same modus operandi myself.

Jason Campbell70 said:And now, when you start talking about reliability—that’s the sign that the whole thing is just a total joke.
That car's just not it—period. That car is absolute lightning.
The driver... yeah, that's where the problem's at.

The car wasn't a bullet. It was only a bullet during those first 5 or 6 races when they were actually pushing it at like 80% capacity—

Look, the competition is catching up—especially Red Bull. I’m telling you, they’re gonna close that gap by the end of the season, performance-wise, even if the points don't show it yet. Mercedes can't just coast around anymore; they actually have to start pushing. Under these conditions, they aren't untouchable—and yesterday proved it.

Mark my words—that car is gonna be falling apart by the end of the season.

ruggedhawk20 said:The car isn't a bullet. It was a bullet during those first 5 or 6 races when they were only running at 80% capacity.

But look, as the competition closes in—specifically Red Bull, who I'm convinced will catch them entirely by the end of the season (performance-wise, not necessarily points)—Mercedes can't just coast anymore. They have to start pushing. And under those conditions, they aren't invincible. We saw that yesterday.

Regarding qualifying:
Mercedes pulled a lead of about 6 or 7 tenths.
On a track where a single lap takes less than 80 seconds.

As for the race:
In the opening laps after the SC, the Mercedes duo pulls away from the rest of the field by over a second per lap.
Then, after about thirty laps, they’ve built a gap of 25 to 30 seconds. AFAIR.

Again—on a track where a lap is under 80 seconds.

To borrow that fail term used by the youngster —that is a massive
advantage.

ruggedhawk20 said:So that car is just going to keep falling apart this season.

Red Bull would certainly have an opinion on that.

Actually, if you want to see how things really stand, just look at the number of engines and power unit components being burned through.

Anyway, what are we even talking about here?
Is the W05 not a space shuttle compared to the other cars?
Total nonsense.

Jason Campbell70 said:I mean, what are we even talking about here?
Is the W05 not basically a space shuttle compared to the rest of the grid?
Total nonsense.

Yeah—but that lead is shrinking. The gap between Mercedes and Red Bull in Australia was massive compared to yesterday at the Canadian Grand Prix. That’s my point: Red Bull is catching up every single day.

And they haven't even "unlocked" the Renault engine yet.

Once that potential actually hits... well, we'll see.

A bunch of people mocked me for saying the Renault engine is mechanically superior to the Mercedes one—that it's got better, punchier torque. They just need to fix the software—that's the only real issue.

ruggedhawk20 said:Yeah, but that lead is shrinking. The gap between Mercedes and Red Bull back in Australia was massive compared to yesterday at the Circuit of the Americas. That's my point—Red Bull is closing in on them every single day.

And they haven't even "unlocked" the Renault engine yet.

We'll see what happens once that potential actually hits.

A lot of people mocked me for claiming the Renault engine is mechanically superior to the Mercedes one—that it has better, punchier torque. It’s just a matter of fixing the software; that's the only real bottleneck right now.

Joe, let's be real—they've still got plenty of room to improve and close that gap.

ruggedhawk20 said:True. But that advantage is evaporating. The gap between Mercedes and Red Bull in Australia was massive compared to what we saw yesterday at the Canadian Grand Prix. That's my point—Red Bull is closing the distance every single day.

Compare the pace Nico Rosberg had pulling away from Red Bull in Australia
to the pace he had pulling away from Red Bull in Canada.

ruggedhawk20 said:And the Renault engine hasn't even been "unlocked" yet.

What happens when that potential finally gets unleashed? We'll see.

Plenty of people mocked me for claiming the Renault engine was mechanically superior to the Mercedes one. Claimed it had better, more robust torque. It’s just a matter of waiting for the software issues to be resolved—that's the only hurdle left.

So, the argument falls apart on "I could tell by the sound that the Renault had more torque."

Here is how that extra torque actually translates on the track:


Even though Lewis Hamilton was hitting over 330 at the end of the straight, I couldn't catch a screenshot.

I've watched F1 for years, and this is the first time I've seen someone fighting for a top three spot clocking in at over 19 miles/h on the speed trap against a driver in a car with zero mechanical issues.

Over 19 miles/h.

Absolutely brutal.

But no, the Renault engine apparently has that "better, healthier torque."
Imagine if the Renault engine was actually mechanically inferior to the Mercedes.

@Jason Campbell70/">@@Jason Campbell70

Come on, take another look at that photo and tell us—why on earth does Mercedes have such a massive pace advantage?

jadeseal7 said:@Jason Campbell70/">@@Jason Campbell70

Take another look at that photo. Tell us, why does Mercedes have such a massive speed advantage?

DRS.

It’s common knowledge that DRS accounts for that entire thirty km/h gap.
Sometimes even more.

ruggedhawk20 said:Exactly—but that lead is shrinking fast. The gap between Mercedes and Red Bull back in Australia was massive compared to what we saw yesterday at the Canadian Grand Prix. That’s my point—Red Bull is closing in on them with every single lap passed.

And they haven't even fully "unlocked" the Renault engine yet.

Once that potential is actually unleashed—well, then we'll see what happens.

A lot of people gave me grief when I insisted that, mechanically speaking, the Renault engine is actually superior to the Mercedes one. To me, it just feels like it has better, more consistent torque. It's really just a matter of waiting for them to fix the software side of things—that's the only real hurdle left.

😂🤣

Jason Campbell70 said:DRS.

It’s pretty much common knowledge at this point that DRS provides just that sweet spot of about thirty km/h difference.
Sometimes it's even more than that—depending on the track, of course.

Let's say Mercedes is roughly 2.8 miles/h faster than Red Bull under normal conditions, and then you factor in the extra boost from DRS.

jadeseal7 said:Let's assume the Mercedes is roughly 2.8 miles/h faster than the Red Bull, otherwise, we're just talking about DRS.

Exactly.

And did anyone happen to notice that the Mercedes pulls about 1,000 more RPM than the Renault?

If you missed the highlights on RTL2, here they are:

Honestly, I swear Blažičko still can't wrap his head around saying Daniil Kvyat or Gutierrez correctly. 🤦

Jason Campbell70 said:OMB.

By any chance, haven't you noticed that the Mercedes-Benz engine seems to be sitting at about 1,000 RPM higher than the Renault one?

OMB

Just take a look at what gear they're actually running in 😉

jadeseal7 said:OMB

Just look at those gear selections 😉

What's going to be the verdict on how the Mercedes-Benz engine stacks up against the Renault one?