|
|
Post by Red_Hercules on Dec 8, 2020 9:35:45 GMT -8
I know you want to think that he sucks but he's pretty damn good. If you think he isn't then fine. His peers seem to think he is elite and I think they know better than fans. Lewis is nowhere near being the GOAT. Schumacher probably wasn't nowhere near being the GOAT either. They both were in the right car at the right time. When there is parity in a field, the GOAT can win in any car he drives. And he can jump from car to car to achieve these wins. In today's F1 (and in F1 in general the last 20 years), TEAMS go after whoever they perceive as a great talent. The car then determines if they're really good. In the case of Lewis the only "great" thing he ever did was leave McLaren for Mercedes when he saw the writing on the wall. Remember, another, supposed GOAT drove the Mercedes when he came back to F1 (Schumacher), but he didn't manage to win in it, because the car did not suit him.... With time, and development, under his belt, would that have changed for Scu? Who knows? In the case of Vettel or LeClerc, put them in the Mercedes for the past 7 years and would Lewis have had so many wins and WDCs? Then of course a case can be made that the car might not have suited Vettel and LeClerc either. But that's a theoretical conversation as it never happened. In the past 7 years, it's been the car. Lewis won 6 time and Nico Rosberg (1) once. Yeah, keep telling me how good the driver is..... I read an analysis of Schumacher's winning championships at Ferrari. Except for 3 WDCs there, the field was very competitive. 1999 and 2003, especially so. True, three of these WDCs were almost uncompetitive, hence the moniker that even then it was the car and not the driver. But this is also a discussion of eras, and when you discuss different eras, valuable trends appear. Look at this video below. In looking at the trends in the past 40 years or so, one thing becomes clear. The engineers (the car) have taken over F1. The only truly great driver was Juan Manuel Fangio who won over 50% of the races he entered. But the most points are owned by drivers in the past 40 years, and more specifically, in the past 20 years. (While I love this video, I'd like someone to take the points totals shown and normalize them for races entered or raced. Because the drivers of the older eras did not race as often as we do today. I suspect, these numbers would shift, severely, if that was case...i.e., if you compare a Lewis Hamilton/Mercedes 20 race year with a Juan Manuel Fangio 6 - 8 race year.) I don't think Hamilton sucks, and I have many friends and family who love him. I may dislike him as a human being but I do not hate his driving, except when he complains that he is not at fault... He then sounds like a petulant child. But his driving, based on the tools he's been given, is almost unparalleled and almost matches what I saw from Prost and Schumacher. (So I know all this might seem like a labored point, but look, I am more interested in a competitive F1 than one where Mercedes dominates. F1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of motor sport, where no other car can do what these machines do.If it's only one machine that does it, the spectacle is worthless.) |
|
|
|
Post by pushtopass on Dec 8, 2020 9:51:51 GMT -8
Regarding your point about cars that suit certain drivers (Vettel with the RB, for instance, with a well-planted rear end) I wonder if Fangio would succeed in today's F1. The same skill set may not be as useful today.
The other issue that cannot be ignored is the higher reliability of cars today. Random breakages are less common now and those can rob victories (they still do, of course, but with less frequency). Past champions may have won even more with higher reliability (I'm sure someone has done the analysis but I am WAY too lazy to do so!). Of course the ability of the driver to be easy on equipment came into play as does tire management now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carlo_Carrera on Dec 8, 2020 9:54:13 GMT -8
F1 is designed to have a mountainous playing field. The best cars (and organization) attract the best drivers and the best drivers are attracted to the best cars - it has always been this way and it will always continue. Having said the above, some times the best drivers aren't always the best judge of what will be the best cars 'next year' as they can only base their decision on this year's cars and they have to hope their assessment of the organization's ability to build next year's car to be the best is the correct decision. Sir Sterling Moss seemed to have the ability to leave a manufacturer just as they were 'about' to become a solid winner. Moss is considered to be one of the best drivers to have never won the WDC. Yep; if you are looking for parity then this is not the sport for you. It is only coincidental that there are times when the cars are fairly equal for any length of time. Keep in mind that just two years ago Ferrari was pretty close to on par with Merc and was not far out of the WCC race. Sure, we can hamstring some teams and then you'd have a series that is not F1. The problem, I think, is that it is currently stuck between "do whatever you want" and "do exactly this" so it kind of has the worst of both worlds. And yet again when I lay out the facts you with change the subject. Here are the facts again.
All Ronnie addresses is the lack of a level playing field. And yes, the F1 playing field has been much more level than is has been over the past seven years. The period from 2004 to 2013 there were more varied pole positions, more fastest laps and more winning drivers from different teams ever in Formula 1 history. And in that balanced performance period Lewis won exactly one WDC. This isn't about diminishing Lewis achievements. It is about putting them in the proper context. |
|
|
|
Post by pushtopass on Dec 8, 2020 10:28:28 GMT -8
Yep; if you are looking for parity then this is not the sport for you. It is only coincidental that there are times when the cars are fairly equal for any length of time. Keep in mind that just two years ago Ferrari was pretty close to on par with Merc and was not far out of the WCC race. Sure, we can hamstring some teams and then you'd have a series that is not F1. The problem, I think, is that it is currently stuck between "do whatever you want" and "do exactly this" so it kind of has the worst of both worlds. And yet again when I lay out the facts you with change the subject. Here are the facts again.
All Ronnie addresses is the lack of a level playing field. And yes, the F1 playing field has been much more level than is has been over the past seven years. The period from 2004 to 2013 there were more varied pole positions, more fastest laps and more winning drivers from different teams ever in Formula 1 history. And in that balanced performance period Lewis won exactly one WDC. This isn't about diminishing Lewis achievements. It is about putting them in the proper context. My point was simple; he has zero qualifications to assess this. You might as well just say "I think" rather than trying to appeal to authority. I agree it is not a particularly level playing field and never really has been. But I don't pull out some snooker player to make the case. |
|
|
|
Post by mmi16 on Dec 8, 2020 13:34:35 GMT -8
F1 is designed to have a mountainous playing field. The best cars (and organization) attract the best drivers and the best drivers are attracted to the best cars - it has always been this way and it will always continue. Having said the above, some times the best drivers aren't always the best judge of what will be the best cars 'next year' as they can only base their decision on this year's cars and they have to hope their assessment of the organization's ability to build next year's car to be the best is the correct decision. Sir Sterling Moss seemed to have the ability to leave a manufacturer just as they were 'about' to become a solid winner. Moss is considered to be one of the best drivers to have never won the WDC. Yep; if you are looking for parity then this is not the sport for you. It is only coincidental that there are times when the cars are fairly equal for any length of time. Keep in mind that just two years ago Ferrari was pretty close to on par with Merc and was not far out of the WCC race. Sure, we can hamstring some teams and then you'd have a series that is not F1. The problem, I think, is that it is currently stuck between "do whatever you want" and "do exactly this" so it kind of has the worst of both worlds. F1 is stuck at 'Do whatever you want' until you actually make it work and then they ban it. DAS is the current example. Blown Diffusers was another - the list goes on and on and on. Then they follow that up with specifications so narrow that the result is near Spec Cars (and as we see from virtually every 'Spec' series - some car/driver combinations are head and shoulders above the rest in getting results from their 'Spec' car. |
|
|
|
Post by Carlo_Carrera on Dec 8, 2020 14:10:17 GMT -8
And yet again when I lay out the facts you with change the subject. Here are the facts again.
All Ronnie addresses is the lack of a level playing field. And yes, the F1 playing field has been much more level than is has been over the past seven years. The period from 2004 to 2013 there were more varied pole positions, more fastest laps and more winning drivers from different teams ever in Formula 1 history. And in that balanced performance period Lewis won exactly one WDC. This isn't about diminishing Lewis achievements. It is about putting them in the proper context. My point was simple; he has zero qualifications to assess this. You might as well just say "I think" rather than trying to appeal to authority. I agree it is not a particularly level playing field and never really has been. But I don't pull out some snooker player to make the case. He is a champion athlete commenting on what he feels makes someone a true champion or GOAT. You admit his not level playing field comment is correct but somehow it should be ignored because he isn't qualified? That is a stretch. Here is an bonafide F1 journalist saying exactly the same thing. formula1news.co.uk/george-russell-proves-lewis-hamilton-definitely-isnt-the-goat-of-f1/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=george-russell-proves-lewis-hamilton-definitely-isnt-the-goat-of-f1 Verstappen comments, is he qualified? www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/1369151/George-Russell-Max-Verstappen-Lewis-Hamilton-MercedesSainz, is he qualified? www.gpfans.com/en/articles/60155/russell-pace-showed-why-machine-driven-f1-needs-to-change-sainz/And as I pointed out in an earlier post that you continue to ignore. There was, supported by actually race results and actual facts, practically broad parity in F1 2005 to 2013 and Lewis won one WDC in that period. |
|
|
|
Post by wilmywood8455 on Dec 8, 2020 14:40:49 GMT -8
Jolyon Palmer’s Analysis: Breaking down the huge mental and physical challenge Russell faced in SakhirGeorge Russell was arguably the star of the Sakhir Grand Prix weekend, driving at a standard nobody could realistically have expected beforehand, in a car he had never driven before and barely even fitted into. In some respects the Bahrain race was the perfect time for Russell to make his Mercedes debut. He had just driven the track's original layout, so was fully dialled into Formula 1 machinery around half of the new layout at least. On top of that the new layout was extremely short, with drivers lapping it in under a minute from the word go, meaning that everybody had a lot of laps to get up to speed. Russell also had the benefit of finding out he’d be driving the car on Tuesday, which gave him slightly more time to get his head around his new surroundings than a reserve or stand-in driver often gets. All of this can help the stand-in driver, but still Russell’s performance was absolutely remarkable, taking the battle to, and beating regular Mercedes driver Valtteri Bottas in a straight fight. www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.jolyon-palmers-analysis-breaking-down-the-huge-mental-and-physical-challenge.0VtkhGrPJBpl1GVh9w9mg.html
|
|
|
|
Post by pushtopass on Dec 8, 2020 16:10:31 GMT -8
My point was simple; he has zero qualifications to assess this. You might as well just say "I think" rather than trying to appeal to authority. I agree it is not a particularly level playing field and never really has been. But I don't pull out some snooker player to make the case. He is a champion athlete commenting on what he feels makes someone a true champion or GOAT. You admit his not level playing field comment is correct but somehow it should be ignored because he isn't qualified? That is a stretch. Here is an bonafide F1 journalist saying exactly the same thing. formula1news.co.uk/george-russell-proves-lewis-hamilton-definitely-isnt-the-goat-of-f1/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=george-russell-proves-lewis-hamilton-definitely-isnt-the-goat-of-f1 Verstappen comments, is he qualified? www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-autosport/1369151/George-Russell-Max-Verstappen-Lewis-Hamilton-MercedesSainz, is he qualified? www.gpfans.com/en/articles/60155/russell-pace-showed-why-machine-driven-f1-needs-to-change-sainz/And as I pointed out in an earlier post that you continue to ignore. There was, supported by actually race results and actual facts, practically broad parity in F1 2005 to 2013 and Lewis won one WDC in that period. Well, of course Lewis didn't win a WDC in 2005 and 2006 since he was not in F1. And to call the 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 seasons where RB won four straight WCC and Vettel won four straight WDC "practically broad parity" seems a bit of a stretch. Even 2009 was the Brawn one-shot wonder with the blown diffuser where Button won six out of the first seven races. Not exactly parity (until they banned the diffuser). So sure, finishing as a runner up WDC in your first year of F1 (beating your 2X WDC teammate) and winning the WDC in your second year of F1 is pretty ordinary. |
|
|
|
Post by Carlo_Carrera on Dec 8, 2020 16:38:15 GMT -8
Well, of course Lewis didn't win a WDC in 2005 and 2006 since he was not in F1. And to call the 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 seasons where RB won four straight WCC and Vettel won four straight WDC "practically broad parity" seems a bit of a stretch. Even 2009 was the Brawn one-shot wonder with the blown diffuser where Button won six out of the first seven races. Not exactly parity (until they banned the diffuser). So sure, finishing as a runner up WDC in your first year of F1 (beating your 2X WDC teammate) and winning the WDC in your second year of F1 is pretty ordinary. Yet again you can't dispute the level playing field facts the drivers speak of so you change the subject. I include the parity in 2005 and 2006 to make a point about how F1 had a decade of level playing field before this Mercedes fiasco. Go back and review the years Vettel won. If you look closely in two of those years Lewis and other drivers were leading the championship at different points in the season. Multiple drivers wining races and taking pole. RedBulls were not dominant. Vettel just happened to come out on top. Sometimes because of skill sometime because of luck, like Grosjean taking Alonso out at Spa. And even the Brawn car was not dominant in 2009 Jenson only won six races out of 17 that season. Five other drivers, including Lewis also won races and took poles. Not domination. If Vettel hadn't screwed up and crashed in Hungary and Europe GPs he might have won the WDC that year. . The Mercedes car and doormat Bottas are the major and primary factors Lewis is a 7xWDC. |
|
|
|
Post by mmi16 on Dec 8, 2020 16:56:33 GMT -8
There hasn't been a level playing field in F1 this century.
The thing that mimicked parity in prior years was the unreliability of the 'fast cars'.
Since the hybrid era the ICE are barely stressed, with with the fuel flow regulations and the limited fuel capacity on the cars. I believe the ICE's are rules limited to 15K revs, the fuel flow restrictions have them out of fuel at 12K. The unreliability that exists in the hybrid F1 cars is in the MGU-K and MGU-H and brake by wire. How many times have we had the entire starting field finish, and even when there are DNF it is more likely to be account the results of the various forms of contact than it is from 'mechanical failure'
Back in the 'golden era' of F1 in the past it wasn't uncommon to have less than a dozen cars still running at the checkered flag no matter how many laps down to the winner they were. More than once there weren't enough cars running at the checker to be included in the point system that was in effect - all the way down to 6th place.
|
|
r60man
Full Member
Posts: 1,273
|
Post by r60man on Dec 8, 2020 17:46:55 GMT -8
I know you want to think that he sucks but he's pretty damn good. If you think he isn't then fine. His peers seem to think he is elite and I think they know better than fans. Lewis is nowhere near being the GOAT. Schumacher probably wasn't nowhere near being the GOAT either. They both were in the right car at the right time. When there is parity in a field, the GOAT can win in any car he drives. And he can jump from car to car to achieve these wins. In today's F1 (and in F1 in general the last 20 years), TEAMS go after whoever they perceive as a great talent. The car then determines if they're really good. In the case of Lewis the only "great" thing he ever did was leave McLaren for Mercedes when he saw the writing on the wall. Remember, another, supposed GOAT drove the Mercedes when he came back to F1 (Schumacher), but he didn't manage to win in it, because the car did not suit him.... With time, and development, under his belt, would that have changed for Scu? Who knows? In the case of Vettel or LeClerc, put them in the Mercedes for the past 7 years and would Lewis have had so many wins and WDCs? Then of course a case can be made that the car might not have suited Vettel and LeClerc either. But that's a theoretical conversation as it never happened. In the past 7 years, it's been the car. Lewis won 6 time and Nico Rosberg (1) once. Yeah, keep telling me how good the driver is..... I read an analysis of Schumacher's winning championships at Ferrari. Except for 3 WDCs there, the field was very competitive. 1999 and 2003, especially so. True, three of these WDCs were almost uncompetitive, hence the moniker that even then it was the car and not the driver. There is a huge difference here. Micheal joined Ferrari in 1996 and instantly took a mediocre car and made it a threat to win. His work in developing the car is what was credited for making the car so dominant. Remember testing was not limited those days and Micheal would be flogging the car around the Ferrari test track a lot. People have often said that Lewis is not technically knowledgeable about the car, and is not great in development. |
|
|
|
Post by boiler on Dec 8, 2020 18:15:35 GMT -8
F1 tried to cripple Ferrari more in any two year period from 2001-2006, how many times have they tried to stop the Merc dominance over the last seven years? F1 at times made it blatantly clear they were trying to slow Ferrari down and failed a lot until they finally got it "right" in 05 and 06, even in 06 Ferrari damn near got it back.
Face it F1/Liberty allowed this monster to grow into what it has become today, god forbid they admit they made a mistake with their "green plan".
With all that said Fred is the GOAT of this generation someone mentioned the ability to jump around and win with different teams, how many drivers in the last 20 years have won races with more than two teams (Fed and Kimi?) He never had a dominant Ferrari like Seb did in 18 and 19 only to have himself and the team loose those championships.
Had Fred won a championship with Ferrari we probably wouldn't be having this conversation right now, those cars were never the favorite when he drove them but he was right there with the Redbulls in an inferior car.
In the four years he drove for Ferrari two of those years he lost the championship by a combined total of seven points
in 2010 he won five races compared to Redbull at nine and Mclaren with five. The two years they got embarrassed he won races as well, where was Massa during all this?
In 2012 he only won three races, Mclaren and redbull at seven and finished three points back.
|
|
|
|
Post by Carlo_Carrera on Dec 8, 2020 18:16:31 GMT -8
There hasn't been a level playing field in F1 this century. You are ignoring the facts. Go back and review 2005-2013. There were multiple winning drivers leading the championships at various times during the season in multiple winning cars. |
|
|
|
Post by Carlo_Carrera on Dec 8, 2020 18:19:32 GMT -8
Face it F1/Liberty allowed this monster to grow into what it has become today, god forbid they admit they made a mistake with their "green plan". Liberty had zero to do with this current Mercedes domination. This is all Jean Todt's and Bernie's fault. |
|
|
|
Post by boiler on Dec 8, 2020 18:36:15 GMT -8
Face it F1/Liberty allowed this monster to grow into what it has become today, god forbid they admit they made a mistake with their "green plan". Liberty had zero to do with this current Mercedes domination. This is all Jean Todt's and Bernie's fault. They have had three years to to something, anything and the best they could come up with was a plan three years in the future that got pushed a year. Merc has been leading the rules makers around by the nose for the entire period and yet people still claim Ferrari are getting away with murder.... |
|
|
|
Post by chernaudi on Dec 8, 2020 18:42:37 GMT -8
Only reason why Ferrari was stymied in '05 was because the Bridgestone tires were junk all season. That was the year where tire changes in race weren't allowed except for punctures or changing weather conditions. With the exception of Indy, and even then I heard that Bridgestone was having problems and their runners changed tires multiple times during the race, Michelin had Bridgestone on the ropes.
Remember, Michelin had Le Mans and the ALMS, whose pit stop rules encouraged wringing the most out of the tires over a long duration. Bridgestone was only in sprint races with multiple tire changing stops (Super GT/JGTC, Indy Car, CART).
|
|
|
|
Post by chernaudi on Dec 8, 2020 18:46:49 GMT -8
And as far as the Green rules, look at what the ACO and FIA are doing with the WEC. They've admitted defeat there with the fuel flow and hybrid systems. Now hybrid systems are limited to 200-250bhp (or about 3.5 megajoules, similar to 2011-2013) and fuel flow won't be used for greening, but for BOP, along with turbocharger boost and possibly air restrictors (sort of like in GTE or IMSA's GTLM and DPI classes).
This is also maybe the FIA trying out rules for the post-Todt future, since isn't this supposed to be his last term and it's going to expire in a year or two?
|
|
|
|
Post by Carlo_Carrera on Dec 8, 2020 19:06:33 GMT -8
Liberty had zero to do with this current Mercedes domination. This is all Jean Todt's and Bernie's fault. They have had three years to to something, anything and the best they could come up with was a plan three years in the future that got pushed a year. Merc has been leading the rules makers around by the nose for the entire period and yet people still claim Ferrari are getting away with murder.... Liberty could do nothing until the old Concorde Agreement expired this year and a new one was signed. Liberty jammed through some changed for next season and there are huge changes coming in 2022. Jean Todt and Bernie are solely responsible for this mess. |
|
jmjgt
Member
Posts: 3,311
|
Post by jmjgt on Dec 8, 2020 19:54:40 GMT -8
They have had three years to to something, anything and the best they could come up with was a plan three years in the future that got pushed a year. Merc has been leading the rules makers around by the nose for the entire period and yet people still claim Ferrari are getting away with murder.... Liberty could do nothing until the old Concorde Agreement expired this year and a new one was signed. Liberty jammed through some changed for next season and there are huge changes coming in 2022. Jean Todt and Bernie are solely responsible for this mess. The little king wanted his market driven manufacturer bases series, the toad his high profile social/political platform. Merc waltzed right in and did what Ferrari had been trying to for decades, take control while letting the people running the sport think they were actually still in charge. |
|
|
|
Post by Pistola on Dec 8, 2020 21:32:22 GMT -8
Well one thing is for certain Bottas is not responsible for this mess. Merc should sign him long term and make a run on Latifi for Hamilton's seat. For the life of me why anybody would trash Mercedes and in the same breath want them to have another talented driver on the team is beyond me.
|
|
Korean cable TV is lousy. no more NASCAR nor NHRA