Bahrain Grand Prix (Outer Loop) | December 4-6, 2020

stormybadger8 said:So, in whatever imaginary universe you're living in, Hamilton lost the title because of a blown engine in Malaysia, yet somehow he was "maximizing" the car in every other race to pull in even more points? 🤦

The only conclusions I can draw from this are:

A.) You're either a DMW clone or his younger brother who hasn't even started elementary school yet.
B.) You've never encountered basic math in your life.
C.) You don't know the first thing about Formula 1.
D.) [censored]🙂

With a dominant beast like that Mercedes, especially during the early hybrid era, winning wasn't "maximizing the car"—it was a total cakewalk...
The competition outside of Mercedes was practically non-existent. At the end of the day, Mercedes had 20/21 poles and 19/21 wins that season.😳

Look, the 2016 season had 21 races, and the gap between first and second place was only 7 points. Lewis finished 19 races, while Rosberg finished 20.

Now, go ahead and explain the math to me: how does finishing 19 races with a 7-point gap mean Hamilton "maximized" everything else so much that he suddenly lost less than the 25 points he supposedly missed out on due to that busted engine in Malaysia?
🤦
If we follow your logic, Helio, 19 x 7 gives a massive advantage...
And yet, according to you, Hamilton lost the championship by just 25 points?
Since when is 133 less than 25?
😵

I've read plenty of nonsense on this forum, but this is hands down the stupidest take I've ever seen.🤦

Man, you just keep dropping these ridiculous takes—honestly, it feels like you're just nitpicking tiny details now just to distract everyone from your actual bad logic... you might as well just call it quits at this point.

I honestly think Charles Leclerc could pull a 0.5s gap on those two guys from the Bahrain Grand Prix.

shadowmarlin22 said:Faster on the track how, exactly?

More wins? Nope.
More pole positions? Nope.

More DNFs due to mechanical failures? Yeah, sure.

Honestly, it shouldn't be that hard to see why he let that championship slip away...
Look, there's no denying Rosberg had an incredible season, and credit where credit is due—he earned that title. But as usually happens, it all came down to the tiniest details.

Man, some of you guys just don't get how the sport works—maybe stick to the knitting forums instead! It’s common sense that staying at the top is way harder than actually getting there. Sometimes a driver like Lewis Hamilton just has a run of bad luck, but the point is, it happened once, and it's certainly not happening seven times...

darkmarlin16 said:Bottas basically pulled the exact same stunt on Ham that he always does

Lewis Hamilton is still beating him—just by a slightly wider margin.

I mean, pulling off a gap of just two tenths in a car that isn't even built for his driving style? Young George is definitely making an impression. But tomorrow comes the points split...

shadowmarlin22 said:Good grief, what a mathematical circus 🙏🙏🙏

You started off with this thesis that if Lewis Hamilton had just squeezed out every bit of potential, he would have snatched the 2016 title. Well, let me set the record straight—he lost that championship by five points because his engine gave up during a race where he was leading, which allowed Rosberg to finish fourth (though Rosberg ended up third since Lewis had already dropped out). The gap between first and fourth place alone is more than five points.

Talk about mental gymnastics 🙏🙏

If you really need me to spell it out, nobody ever consistently extracts absolute maximum performance—that should be a given.

No need to draw anything; this link
is enough. I don't even know why we're debating this. Hamilton lost his title chance that year, period.

However, that data from 2016—much like this total distortion of the Russell-Hamilton-Bottas-Mercedes era—won't erase Vettel-esque rookie mistakes, nor does it make the situations involving Kimi irrelevant.

It won't change the fact that he ended up in a FedEx commercial, nor will it wipe away the numerous errors caused by nerves, or subtract the titles he should have secured in 2017 and 2018. ☕

I guess it was expected that Valtteri Bottas would take pole, though I really thought we might see a bit more of a showdown between him and Max, but Charles did some pretty great work in qualifying

Here’s just one more reason why I’m losing interest in NASCAR. Instead of disqualifying both Mercedes cars, they just slapped them with a measly $20,000 fine.

Pathetic.

Charles ☕

So, you gonna quit watching this NASCAR junk then?

Honestly, Valtteri Bottas v3.4 is a total game changer—it’s practically medicinal at this point...

Sent from my HD1903 via Tapatalk

shadowmarlin22 said:Faster on the track how, exactly?

More wins? Nope.
More pole positions? Nope.

More DNFs due to mechanical failures? Yeah, sure.

Honestly, it shouldn't be that hard to see why he let that championship slip away...
Look, there's no denying Rosberg had an incredible season, and credit where credit is due—he earned that title. But as usually happens, it all came down to the tiniest details.

Clearly you can't even wrap your head around this...
But whatever, since I'm clearly being stubborn, let's try one more time...

Simple math says that any race a Mercedes driver maxes out during that season earns at least 7 points more than their teammate...
Let me be clear: we're talking at least a 7-point gap per race 🙂
That's the theoretical maximum this car could provide.

So, if Lewis had actually driven to the limit and squeezed everything out of the car, he would have won the title that year, even if he completely tanked the last four races...
Because 17 x 7 = 119 points advantage versus a loss of 4 x 25 = 100 points still leaves a massive lead. He didn't lose the title just because of Malaysia.🙂
If you can't see that—especially after a season where Hamilton was genuinely right on the edge of his limit—😳
Look, the guy will probably miss two races in this noticeably shorter season and still be over 100 points ahead of Bottas...
If you don't see that, then you're hopeless.🤦

Actually, that's not even the main issue. The problem is that for half of that 2016 season, Hamilton wasn't even close to the minimum the car was capable of, let alone the maximum!
The plain truth is that Rosberg drove very close to his absolute ceiling that year, while Hamilton was basically playing backup to Bottas.☕

People like you, who are hopelessly obsessed with Hamilton, just can't see the difference in how they handled being losers when their teammate was winning instead of them...
That's how Rosberg took it. In the races he lost to Hamilton, he still hit the maximum he could manage and the minimum the car allowed.☕

Hamilton, on the other hand, acted like a spoiled brat and threw those races away. The gap didn't happen solely because of DNFs...
It happened primarily because of all those mediocre finishes behind the winner.🙂

Rosberg:
5 x 2nd place
2 x 3rd place
2 x 4th place
...
159 points

Hamilton:
3 x 2nd place
4 x 3rd place
1 x 5th place
1 x 7th place
...
130 points

So, it's 9 lost races either way. Do you see any difference now?🙂

Look, you're acting like it's nothing that when Rosberg was winning, Hamilton would lose out to Perez, Max, Vettel, Kimi, Mass, Perez, Kvijat...
But I guess specialists like you need to be told that the Mercedes was supposedly such a junker that it couldn't even beat Perez, Kvijat, Mass, Kimi, Vettel, Max, or Perez...
Sure, Mercedes was a total junk heap, and Hamilton was basically pulling miracles out of thin air just to stay competitive, but that engine failure in Malaysia completely snatched the championship away from him. 🙂

Ladies and gentlemen, it appears we have a Mercedes-Benz front row! Can you even believe how unexpected this turn of events is? 🙏

If you’re going to log off, please just stay offline—it’s better for everyone involved.
@Nicholas Newman2 👍 This link explains everything perfectly.

But hey, go ahead and keep living in your own little bubble. That one line—“Mainly because of all those places worse than first”—pretty much proves you don't get how this sport works.

Coming in second is just being the first loser.

And then there's this new brand of mathematical gymnastics: claiming someone won more points outside of their victories 🤣 damn math, right? 🙏🙏🙏 Trying to compare total points when the number of races isn't even the same—that's some pretty weak early-morning mental gymnastics.
Hamilton averaged 14.44 points in races where he finished but didn't win, while Rosberg sat at 14.54. It's basically the same thing—one point difference over ten races. And most importantly, what kind of logic is it to discount wins? Wins are the whole point of motorsports.

Dana Murphy4 said:I guess it was expected that Valtteri Bottas would take pole, though I really thought we might see a bit more of a showdown between him and Max, but Charles did some pretty great work in qualifying

The top three are all within 0.056, which is just insane.

So, you think you’re being clever with this logic that the championship was decided by a single race. Honestly, that whole biased, "I discovered fire" attitude is a bit much.

Sure, a title can be settled in one final showdown, but we had a 21-race season here.
This TBF-style math actually holds up.
That calculation accounts for 18 races (about 85% of the season), while your argument only covers one (roughly 5%).

With a 5-point gap at the end, Hamilton really could have closed that distance with just one better finish in any of those races TBF mentioned. He didn't need to win them all; he just needed to jump up a few spots—say, moving from P7 to P4, or P5 to P3.

On the flip side, Lewis did deal with some mechanical issues, and there's no denying that part of it.

copperdrifter26 said:I honestly think Charles Leclerc could pull a 0.5s gap on those two guys from the Bahrain Grand Prix.

But if that were the case, how much of an advantage would Max Verstappen have? Would we be looking at a full second difference?

The quality of the argument always depends on the quality of the people having it.
We’ve drifted into this circular, pointless debate—honestly, the whole thing is nonsense. Situations like Rosberg-Hamilton have popped up plenty of times throughout history. So, yeah, this is my last word on the matter...

shadowmarlin22 said:Lewis Hamilton is still beating him—just by a slightly wider margin.

I mean, pulling off a gap of just two tenths in a car that isn't even built for his driving style? Young George is definitely making an impression. But tomorrow comes the points split...

hundredths

shadowmarlin22 said:If you’re going to log off, please just stay offline—it’s better for everyone involved.
@Nicholas Newman2 👍 This link explains everything perfectly.

But hey, go ahead and keep living in your own little bubble. That one line—“Mainly because of all those places worse than first”—pretty much proves you don't get how this sport works.

Coming in second is just being the first loser.

And then there's this new brand of mathematical gymnastics: claiming someone won more points outside of their victories 🤣 damn math, right? 🙏🙏🙏 Trying to compare total points when the number of races isn't even the same—that's some pretty weak early-morning mental gymnastics.
Hamilton averaged 14.44 points in races where he finished but didn't win, while Rosberg sat at 14.54. It's basically the same thing—one point difference over ten races. And most importantly, what kind of logic is it to discount wins? Wins are the whole point of motorsports.

Pure empty rhetoric

That was a bold move by Charles Leclerc and Ferrari.

Final thoughts after qualifying.
George Russell👎
Unfortunately, he’s performing below expectations. He lost out to Valtteri Bottas—it was only by a tiny fraction, but still, losing to Bottas is tough.🤦

At the end of the day, it comes down to the car. You can't expect this kind of performance from a driver sitting on the front row.