Autosport reporting that Alonso will retire at the end of 2018!
CONFIRMED by Fernando Twitter!
If you want to make a comparison with the median as a better indicator than average, ok, that´s great. But please do not claim the average numbers are wrong, and then show your own as a proof, but comparing a different indicatormakecry wrote: ↑14 Aug 2018, 15:17Median is a better indicator. Average is not a good indicator when there are outliers.rscsr wrote: ↑14 Aug 2018, 15:03The median is not the average.makecry wrote: ↑14 Aug 2018, 14:19
I did.
The numbers are not accurate at all.
The Stoffel's number for 0.195% is not accurate. Alonso out-qualified Vandoorne 16-3 with a median gap of 0.445%.The gap between them was significantly larger in the first half of the season (0.630% vs. 0.195%), while the tallies were similar (8-1 vs. 8-2).
He has pulled the number out of thin air after applying some really weird performance equalizers to his entire equation.
True..... for top cars wich go into Q3 easily. Not true for McLaren I´m afraidGPR-A wrote: ↑14 Aug 2018, 16:14Does it make sense to compare Q1 and Q2? Unless, there are some situations like a driver couldn't move into Q2 or Q3 because of some weird issues. But otherwise, drivers typically leave a tenth or two in Q1 and Q2, just to keep some cards close to their chest, away from their team mate. It's always the Q3 (or Q2 for cars that find it hard to get into Q3) that reveals the ultimate potential of the driver-car combo.turbof1 wrote: ↑14 Aug 2018, 16:05I personally came to a difference of 0.354%. I included every qualifying session they both drove, so Q1 and Q2. I compared Q1 times to Q1 times and Q2 times to Q2 times. If for instance Vandoorne got knocked out in Q1 and Alonso did not, I would not factor in Alonso's Q2 time. Which is fair, conditions can quickly vary between Q sessions and to omit as many variables as possible, only the times they set in roughly the same period should matter.makecry wrote: ↑14 Aug 2018, 14:19
I did.
The numbers are not accurate at all.
The Stoffel's number for 0.195% is not accurate. Alonso out-qualified Vandoorne 16-3 with a median gap of 0.445%.The gap between them was significantly larger in the first half of the season (0.630% vs. 0.195%), while the tallies were similar (8-1 vs. 8-2).
He has pulled the number out of thin air after applying some really weird performance equalizers to his entire equation.
Note I counted for every such session including the ones where Vandoorne had a readable downforce handicap. If I omit those, it drops to 0.268%
Kubica/Kimi alongside Sainz/Vandoorne/Norris?Jackles-UK wrote: ↑14 Aug 2018, 18:07Exactly what Jenson did in 2016; confirm he won’t race the following year but kept an option open for the year after and remain heavily linked to the team as an ambassador/reserve driver. As it happens he decided against that in the end but if McLaren can turn things around I wouldn’t rule out Fernando coming back full time in 2020.
Curious to see what McLaren come up with now. They have said this week that they want experienced drivers to help them out of their funk, where are they going to go for that now? A do-or-die lunge for Kimi alongside Sainz/Vandoorne?
+1, I couldn't say it better myself.zeph wrote: ↑14 Aug 2018, 19:12I stopped following F1 when Schuey/Ferrari were winning everything, the most boring era in the sport ever.
I for one will always be grateful Alonso/Renault ended their reign. Sad to see him leave, but better than seeing him struggle in the back of the field for scraps. While not reflective of his ability, two WDC’s and 39 victories isn’t all that bad.
So long, Fred. F1 won’t be the same without you.
Watching f1 seriously for over two decades, I completely understand - the predictability and boredom of races in that Era is still unmatched, it was beyond frustrating.
What I do not understand is that if you have stopped following F1 why are you taking time out of your life commenting on a dedicated F1 forum which is a lot more effort than casually watching it on tv? If you have stopped following it ( which is totally acceptable and obviously your prerogative) why enter an area of discussion filled with people that still love it and follow it with these statements? If you were not following it you would not know enough to comment on the latest events!? Not following it and being less enthusiastic about it recently are two different things. If you are genuinely not following it anymore then do us a favour and do exactly that and we would not have your negative statements here.