[rcracin]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

RUS drove a BRILLIANT race and fully deserves the race seat next to HAM. That has been most likely proven. With 3 days notice, he matched BOT and but for a couple of anomalies, he may have won the race. The unknowns, in my view are as follows:

How would he perform on a more traditional track? This track is completely unlike anything on the current schedule.

How much better would RUS have performed in a properly fitted car, properly fitted clothing (boots) and a couple of hundred test laps? I daresay much better and would have been on pole.

How much longer will BOT have the best seat in F1 and not perform to the expected level? Wolff is his manager but this drive will no longer allow him to hide behind Wolff's metaphorical skirt. BOT stock in free-fall.

Lastly, please don't start a conspiracy theory about the tire!!!!

We can ask how would he perform at a traditional track, but he was arguably the best on a track that nobody has ever driven. I think that says even more about his racecraft. If he can be the best at the unknown, I think he can be the beat at the known tracks.

[e90335e36m3]

Based on how Russell was able to get to the front several times during the race, and given his relative inexperience, it's evident to me that most of Hamilton's talent is actually the car. Even though Russell didn't finish P1, he was the clear winner of the race. Imagine if as Hamilton has, Russell had a few years experience in the car, he'd be winning championships left and right.

McLaren knows how to build race cars like they do street cars. Hamilton is a great driver, but he's winning because he has a superior car. Put him in a Red Bull, he'd be on par with Verstappen.

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by e90335e36m3

Hamilton is a great driver, but he's winning because he has a superior car. Put him in a Red Bull, he'd be on par with Verstappen.

Yes and no....yes Hamilton is winning because he is in the best car.
But Hamilton also wins races when he is not in the best car.
Verstappen can't even always win the races when he has the best car.

[e90335e36m3]

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants

Yes and no....yes Hamilton is winning because he is in the best car.
But Hamilton also wins races when he is not in the best car.
Verstappen can't even always win the races when he has the best car.

Maybe take away the Verstappen as an example, but the point still holds, there is definitely talent out there on par with HAM, that just don't have the right set of wheels. Not that this hasn't always been the case in F1, but at least in the analog days (MT, fewer electronics) the driver was more of a variable. Now you have people riding HAM's nuts, but is he really that good? Russell's performance this weekend definitely serves as a counter that it's HAM's talent that got him where he is.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by e90335e36m3

Based on how Russell was able to get to the front several times during the race, and given his relative inexperience, it's evident to me that most of Hamilton's talent is actually the car. Even though Russell didn't finish P1, he was the clear winner of the race. Imagine if as Hamilton has, Russell had a few years experience in the car, he'd be winning championships left and right.

McLaren knows how to build race cars like they do street cars. Hamilton is a great driver, but he's winning because he has a superior car. Put him in a Red Bull, he'd be on par with Verstappen.

Originally Posted by e90335e36m3

Maybe take away the Verstappen as an example, but the point still holds, there is definitely talent out there on par with HAM, that just don't have the right set of wheels. Not that this hasn't always been the case in F1, but at least in the analog days (MT, fewer electronics) the driver was more of a variable. Now you have people riding HAM's nuts, but is he really that good? Russell's performance this weekend definitely serves as a counter that it's HAM's talent that got him where he is.

This is an interesting point of view that actually belies the facts. Here are two videos for you to watch. One is the 2009 season recap and the 2006 Turkish GP. HAMs talent is apparent in both. I have also included an interview by Paddy Lowe who has worked with more WDCs than you can shake a stick at. Do you honestly believe that he has lucked into 7 titles? It's absolutely insane to believe that.

Are you going to take one data point and weigh it more heavily than 14 years of excellence in F1 and several more in the lesser formulae?

https://www.planetf1.com/news/paddy-...lton-analysis/

[e90335e36m3]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

This is an interesting point of view that actually belies the facts. Here are two videos for you to watch. One is the 2009 season recap and the 2006 Turkish GP. HAMs talent is apparent in both. I have also included an interview by Paddy Lowe who has worked with more WDCs than you can shake a stick at. Do you honestly believe that he has lucked into 7 titles? It's absolutely insane to believe that.

Are you going to take one data point and weigh it more heavily than 14 years of excellence in F1 and several more in the lesser formulae?

https://www.planetf1.com/news/paddy-...lton-analysis/

Not saying HAM is not talented, just saying if a comparatively amateur driver can take his car to P1 the first time out, TO ME this speaks volumes about one of two things, either Russell is a talent the likes of which we've never seen or the car he's provided with is mechanically superior to every other car on the field. TO ME, it's likely the latter. We can go back and forth, but without first hand knowledge and experience there are no facts to belie, each of us is stating an opinion. I'm not as hardcore a fan of F1 as many on this forum, including yourself, nor do I show bias for any driver, regardless of possible conflicting evidence. However, let's not make opinions facts.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by e90335e36m3

Not saying HAM is not talented, just saying if a comparatively amateur driver can take his car to P1 the first time out, TO ME this speaks volumes about one of two things, either Russell is a talent the likes of which we've never seen or the car he's provided with is mechanically superior to every other car on the field. TO ME, it's likely the latter. We can go back and forth, but without first hand knowledge and experience there are no facts to belie, each of us is stating an opinion. I'm not as hardcore a fan of F1 as many on this forum, including yourself, nor do I show bias for any driver, regardless of possible conflicting evidence. However, let's not make opinions facts.

This is why I posted evidence. And first hand accounts from persons who actually worked with HAM. Did you even bother to read the article from Paddy Lowe?

[Bartledoo]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

P.S. I'm actually an objective race observer that has been watching F1 longer than you have probably been alive. Now THAT is condescending.

You are not even close to objective.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by Bartledoo

You are not even close to objective.

Please show me where I wasn't. I post and add factual and sourced information to back up my assertions.

Can you say the same?

[e90335e36m3]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

This is why I posted evidence. And first hand accounts from persons who actually worked with HAM. Did you even bother to read the article from Paddy Lowe?

Sure I have but given the confidentiality of the F1 team programs, and the steps they take to maintain a competitive advantage only those at the highest levels can truly speak intelligently on such issues, but then they're all subject to ironclad NDAs, so they won't.

If the fact that a rookie can jump into a seasoned veteran's car for the first time and annihilate the field doesn't speak to the superiority of the car, nothing will. Is Hamilton talented? Yes. Can a rookie with all of 3 points take his car and get to P1? Yes. Not taking anything away from HAM's accolades but let's give the car a lot more credit.

Put HAM in a Williams, let's see how many races he wins.

We can debate on what proportion of winning is car vs. driver, but the argument for the car just made a big leap forward. If you can't accept that, even in part well then I don't know what to say.

[Bartledoo]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

Please show me where I wasn't. I post and add factual and sourced information to back up my assertions.

Can you say the same?

Haha speaking of reading comprehension, maybe you should read the definition of "objectivity" a few more times.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by e90335e36m3

Sure I have but given the confidentiality of the F1 team programs, and the steps they take to maintain a competitive advantage only those at the highest levels can truly speak intelligently on such issues, but then they're all subject to ironclad NDAs, so they won't.

If the fact that a rookie can jump into a seasoned veteran's car for the first time and annihilate the field doesn't speak to the superiority of the car, nothing will. Is Hamilton talented? Yes. Can a rookie with all of 3 points take his car and get to P1? Yes. Not taking anything away from HAM's accolades but let's give the car a lot more credit.

Put HAM in a Williams, let's see how many races he wins.

We can debate on what proportion of winning is car vs. driver, but the argument for the car just made a big leap forward. If you can't accept that, even in part well then I don't know what to say.

Thank you!

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by e90335e36m3

Sure I have but given the confidentiality of the F1 team programs, and the steps they take to maintain a competitive advantage only those at the highest levels can truly speak intelligently on such issues, but then they're all subject to ironclad NDAs, so they won't.

If the fact that a rookie can jump into a seasoned veteran's car for the first time and annihilate the field doesn't speak to the superiority of the car, nothing will. Is Hamilton talented? Yes. Can a rookie with all of 3 points take his car and get to P1? Yes. Not taking anything away from HAM's accolades but let's give the car a lot more credit.

Put HAM in a Williams, let's see how many races he wins.

We can debate on what proportion of winning is car vs. driver, but the argument for the car just made a big leap forward. If you can't accept that, even in part well then I don't know what to say.

No one is taking credit from the car. The car is amazing. It is probably the best car ever built but not the most successful over 1 year. The MP4/4 still has that title.

The rookie is jumping into a finished product and ALL current Formula One drivers are in the top 100 drivers in the world. Even GRO and ALB.

HAM may not win in the Williams but he would score points in it. Again, look at 2009 and look at his GP2 season.

And on your assertion with regard to those at the highest levels in F1: Paddy Lowe ticks all of your boxes. Why isn't his information valid?

You as well as many others are behaving as if HAM rolled out of bed in April, was called by Mercedes and given the W11. This is ridiculous in the extreme. He has been at Merc since 2013 and has been integral to the final product what we see before us.

Mercedes was a midfield team when he arrived with them having finished the 2012 season in 5th place. HAM deserves the same accolades that MSC has with regard to developing the team. When he arrived the car was a tire-eater that had good one-lap pace but went backwards in the races.

The car that you are seeing is the result of a team, lead by the best driver of this generation and probably of all time assisting in the development based on the feedback and experiences that he has accumulated over a quarter century of racing.

And if you want to see the difference in results...look where the Red Bull currently resides. They have the most successful designer in F1 on the payroll and can't build a car that is highly effective with respect to different driving styles. Only Max can extract maximum performance from the vehicle. It's operating window is narrow and very peaky because it is designed based on his feedback.

I suggest reading the last 3 or 4 articles regarding Lewis from Paddy Lowe, Pedro De La Rosa and a few others. They may provide a viewpoint that is a bit better than the inferences you are making from a single data point.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by Bartledoo

Haha speaking of reading comprehension, maybe you should read the definition of "objectivity" a few more times.

I'm still waiting...

I back up my assertions with evidence. Please show me where you do the same or I haven't.

[EdM5]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

It is probably the best car ever built but not the most successful over 1 year. The MP4/4 still has that title.

Well, obviously the MP4/4 was driven by the greatest driver pair ever: Prost and Senna (2 GOATs). They won all but one races in the 1988 campaign.

However the 2020 MB W11 is driven by 1 GOAT and a donkey . So no fair comparison.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by e90335e36m3

Sure I have but given the confidentiality of the F1 team programs, and the steps they take to maintain a competitive advantage only those at the highest levels can truly speak intelligently on such issues, but then they're all subject to ironclad NDAs, so they won't.

If the fact that a rookie can jump into a seasoned veteran's car for the first time and annihilate the field doesn't speak to the superiority of the car, nothing will. Is Hamilton talented? Yes. Can a rookie with all of 3 points take his car and get to P1? Yes. Not taking anything away from HAM's accolades but let's give the car a lot more credit.

Put HAM in a Williams, let's see how many races he wins.

We can debate on what proportion of winning is car vs. driver, but the argument for the car just made a big leap forward. If you can't accept that, even in part well then I don't know what to say.

It has to be said but HAM's positive covid test brought in the reluctant decision by Wolff to bring in Russell knowing the probable outcome would be Russell winning putting the onus on a far superior car.
The mix up of tyres in the pits was strange unlike Merc's usual mastery of pit stops and Russell's slow puncture after that suspicious as if part of a previously thought up plan.

[MKSixer]

Originally Posted by EdM5

Well, obviously the MP4/4 was driven by the greatest driver pair ever: Prost and Senna (2 GOATs). They won all but one races in the 1988 campaign.

However the 2020 MB W11 is driven by 1 GOAT and a donkey . So no fair comparison.

[fanatic1]

George continues to impress and in case anyone missed it, he is no average rookie:

[Bartledoo]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

I'm still waiting...

I back up my assertions with evidence. Please show me where you do the same or I haven't.

Please show me where I've made assertions of somebody being better than somebody else without evidence?

You're the one doing this. The Hamilton vs Russell comments are a perfect example.

[e90335e36m3]

Originally Posted by MKSixer

No one is taking credit from the car. The car is amazing. It is probably the best car ever built but not the most successful over 1 year. The MP4/4 still has that title.

The rookie is jumping into a finished product and ALL current Formula One drivers are in the top 100 drivers in the world. Even GRO and ALB.

HAM may not win in the Williams but he would score points in it. Again, look at 2009 and look at his GP2 season.

And on your assertion with regard to those at the highest levels in F1: Paddy Lowe ticks all of your boxes. Why isn't his information valid?

You as well as many others are behaving as if HAM rolled out of bed in April, was called by Mercedes and given the W11. This is ridiculous in the extreme. He has been at Merc since 2013 and has been integral to the final product what we see before us.

Mercedes was a midfield team when he arrived with them having finished the 2012 season in 5th place. HAM deserves the same accolades that MSC has with regard to developing the team. When he arrived the car was a tire-eater that had good one-lap pace but went backwards in the races.

The car that you are seeing is the result of a team, lead by the best driver of this generation and probably of all time assisting in the development based on the feedback and experiences that he has accumulated over a quarter century of racing.

And if you want to see the difference in results...look where the Red Bull currently resides. They have the most successful designer in F1 on the payroll and can't build a car that is highly effective with respect to different driving styles. Only Max can extract maximum performance from the vehicle. It's operating window is narrow and very peaky because it is designed based on his feedback.

I suggest reading the last 3 or 4 articles regarding Lewis from Paddy Lowe, Pedro De La Rosa and a few others. They may provide a viewpoint that is a bit better than the inferences you are making from a single data point.

Where we agree is that it takes a team to get to where HAM and McLaren have gotten. Regardless, my OPINION is that technology has far outpaced driver talent, largely eliminating the driver as variable compared to the technology itself, at least in McLaren's case. F1 is a technological showcase in every respect, and HAM has been an integral part of developing that technology. Perhaps, HAM is the reason why RB has not caught up to McLaren's technological success. Maybe Verstappen's input is just not good enough to get it over the top.

I would say HAM is the best strategist, he is able to translate driver feedback and apply it to technology. At some point he had to do less with more but not for the better part of the past decade. So to me, that doesn't make you the best driver. Best drivers do more with less. At some point HAM did more with less, but today his experience plus the best technology is what's winning it, not pure talent.

[wdb]

Originally Posted by e90335e36m3

If the fact that a rookie can jump into a seasoned veteran's car for the first time and annihilate the field doesn't speak to the superiority of the car, nothing will.

Russell is at the end of his second full season in F1. Prior to that he had 5 years' experience in the feeder series, F3/F2 etcetera. Not a rookie. Plus he has consistently placed the Williams ahead of purportedly faster cars and more experienced drivers. He's an extremely talented driver.

Yes the Merc is the fastest car on the grid. But please stop discounting the skill and talent required to put it at the front.

[racerbruce]

-Objectivity begins and ends with empirical data
-The data does not suggest, but documents wins, losses, DNFs, poles, fast laps, laps led

-Subjectivity is variable
-People get subjective data by communicating with others
-They can also collect it by making assumptions and judgments based on communications
-The characteristics of the data can vary from person to person or even change based on how one individual feels at a given moment in time

-Using data, one can now look at and process, dissect, equate and compare F1 driver performance
-Data proves there is only two F1 drivers to achieve seven (7) WDC's
-Equating and comparing F1 driver performance for the period of the last five (5) years* proves HAM has achieved the highest percentage of F1 driver performance

* = data comparison of HAM and VER