Phil wrote:
I would have rather see them fail trying, then failing doing nothing. Having that said, the Mercedes clearly has better tire deg, so they do have more options in regards to pitting more aggressive. Perhaps Williams is still psychologically in "survival mode" (maximizing points), rather than actually with the mindset of a front-running team fighting for wins.
Amen.
Phil wrote:I think Hungary is exaggerated to a degree. He was racing his team-mate and especially on a track like Hungary, passing is extremely difficult. You see an opportunity, you take it - especially when you are racing the sister car. Brazil last year showed nicely that on certain tracks, overtaking a similar paced car becomes nigh on impossible. Passing your team-mate is even more difficult, because you can't use strategy as a differentiator. He was never going to pass him on the straights, so he took a risk and ended up in the gravel. Tough luck. He came through the field again. The later crash he had on cold tires perhaps was unfortunate, but he did pay for that with the drive-through too.
I don't think it's exaggerated. I think Hamilton has always had Rosberg in his back pocket at wheel to wheel racing and in their time together if he's had the pace, he's passed Rosberg on track. I thought he made a desperate lunge and in my opinion if he had bided his time he would have got him. At least, he wouldn't have put himself out of sync in terms of a race win. Sometimes, on somedays you rather lose 3 points than 18 which Hamilton was on course for at Hungary. I'm all for overtaking and aggressive driving but what separates a Hamilton from your average driver is his judgement to complete the pass 'cleanly.' His judgement was off that day and I feel it wasn't down to luck.
Phil wrote:He was perhaps 'lucky' that Rosberg clashed with Ricciardo, but I am having a hard time feeling sorry for him given that it was his driving that put him into that path of collision (a bit like Spa 2011 when Hamilton dived back onto the racing line and into Kobayashi's front wing). Extremely unlucky, but, it didn't cost him that much point wise (only a handful of points).
Okay, again, I don't feel Hamilton was lucky that day. I've always believed that Rosberg is very clumsy at racing against drivers of repute. His hesitation, haste and desperation is all too evident. In my mind, Ricciardo did nothing wrong and the blame completely lay with Rosberg for feeling the need to close the door so vehemently without being spatially aware of where his car was relative to Ricciardo's. Again, before I rub some people reading this the wrong way, this is my opinion and I also have some consideration for the people who feel that Ricciardo was being over optimistic there.
Phil wrote: Silverstone. Some call it luck, some call it perfect timing. I see no reason how that could be any sort of equalizer, not even close, with a race where Hamilton lead the race by what 20+ seconds and then came in for a set of tires that were never needed and gave up one of the most dominant wins with it as it propelled him back to 3rd and promoted Rosberg for the win that was never his. Sorry, I really don't. Also considering Rosberg was only quicker when the conditions changed and he was in a car with much better grip (as a result of aggressive driving to pass the Williams that lead to much higher tire temperatures). I agree Hamilton was lucky to come in the right time - but I don't believe in being masters of changeable conditions like Button is always hyped up to be - as there is no way to predict how the weather will turn out - you take a gamble, it either works out or it doesn't. Hamilton did, and it worked out. Changeable conditions is always a thing of luck to a degree. Worst case scenario; he would have came 2nd to Rosbergs first which would have been 7 points. How can his win and lead by another 7 points be considered any sort of equalizer from a race that lost him 17 points?
Okay, first of all, Hamilton at the start made an uncharacteristic mistake against Bottas at the restart if I remember correctly. Because the Mercedes is so much faster than anyone else, it masked his shortcomings that day. Secondly Phil, you're a very knowledgable poster and you know it's not a big deal for a driver of Hamilton's calibre to maintain a 20+ gap when the likes of Rosberg and Vettel were floundering around in the mid field and like you and I have discussed, his only threat in the dry conditions that day were the toothless Williams. Again, on pure pace without any weather randomness, Hamilton would have eaten them alive. The race was split wide open when the weather changed and I'm sorry but a driver of Hamilton's ability is expected to keep temperatures in the tires. If he couldn't adapt to that on that day and in that moment, then it's more to do with driver than luck.
Unlike you, I feel it requires enormous skill to drive in those slippery conditions. It also requires a lot of intelligence and along with Button, Alonso and Vettel I feel Hamilton too drives the best when it's most difficult. My point is that when he boxed on Lap 43 (I know this precisely because I've seen the race four times, liked it a lot), it was still dry. After he crossed the line having put inters, it started to pour. It was very different from another driver who boxed on lap 43, because when Hamilton boxed he was half a lap behind. When he fitted the tyres it was already raining. When Hamilton did, it wasn't. Had it not poured at that precise moment or say for another one minute, god knows where Hamilton would have ended up. It's for this reason I felt Rosberg was in that moment of the race stronger.
Changeable conditions do have an element of luck, but also a lot of skill and intelligence. While Hamilton on all counts is a better driver than Rosberg, at Silverstone Rosberg was better, just like Hamilton at Monaco.
Also, when I say that Hamilton hasn't had a flawless season, I'm simply comparing Hamilton to Hamilton and not Rosberg. Errors at Silverstone, Hungary and Spain (crossed the white line while exiting the pits but in effect took no penalty) would have been far more punishing against a closely contested field or a better team mate.
I'll also like to say that I stand corrected on the reliability front when comparing Hamilton and Rosberg. Hamilton had far many more issues last year.
To conclude, I respect your opinion greatly, but disagree on some fronts.
"Sebastian there's very, you're a member of a very select few.. Stewart, Lauda, Piquet, Senna, Prost, Schumacher, Fangio.. VETTEL!"
