We mostly got a wet podium here last year.
We mostly got a wet podium here last year.
F1 shuffled the races to avoid rain as much as possible
Hulk didn't crash with, he crashed INTO Hamilton.tpeman wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 13:19This might be an unpopular one, but there's something making me think that with modern cars rain isn't making the gaps closer, exactly the opposite, they become bigger. And I'll provide some examples. We all know Lewis' stunning drive from 2008 in Silverstone, but less than a year later in China he was spinning constantly and also finished behind Kovalainen. The very same year during the Malaysian GP he was fighting with Webber for p5-p7 or something like that. Meanwhile Vettel won the Chinese grand prix (in the wet), with the track suiting the Red Bull car the most. In 2010 and 2011 he was leading in Korea and Canada when it was wet. Because of his certain circumstances, he ended up losing the race. Button won in Brazil 2012, when it was obvious that McLaren were the fastest. My points is, I don't remember a wet race in the past 10 or so years, where a driver didn't win a race with a top-tier car (maximum +0.3 from the fastest car). The closest I remember was Hulkenberg in 2012 Brazil, but he crashed with Hamilton.
On the current topic, it seems that Williams have improved (still last but much closer) and now can actually run with Alfa Romeo. Pleasantly surprised by Grosjean's time as well as Racing Point.
Torro Rosso at Monza in 2008 with Vettel. A wet race with a weaker team winning.tpeman wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 13:19This might be an unpopular one, but there's something making me think that with modern cars rain isn't making the gaps closer, exactly the opposite, they become bigger. And I'll provide some examples. We all know Lewis' stunning drive from 2008 in Silverstone, but less than a year later in China he was spinning constantly and also finished behind Kovalainen. The very same year during the Malaysian GP he was fighting with Webber for p5-p7 or something like that. Meanwhile Vettel won the Chinese grand prix (in the wet), with the track suiting the Red Bull car the most. In 2010 and 2011 he was leading in Korea and Canada when it was wet. Because of his certain circumstances, he ended up losing the race. Button won in Brazil 2012, when it was obvious that McLaren were the fastest. My points is, I don't remember a wet race in the past 10 or so years, where a driver didn't win a race with a top-tier car (maximum +0.3 from the fastest car). The closest I remember was Hulkenberg in 2012 Brazil, but he crashed with Hamilton.
On the current topic, it seems that Williams have improved (still last but much closer) and now can actually run with Alfa Romeo. Pleasantly surprised by Grosjean's time as well as Racing Point.
Yeah, I agree, although the Torro Rosso wasn't a bad car during that race. Proved by Bourdais, but I agree Vettel made the difference, he was stunning the whole weekend and deserved to win. I was talking about seasons after 2008, especially those with the refuelling ban.Jester Maroc wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 14:25Torro Rosso at Monza in 2008 with Vettel. A wet race with a weaker team winning.tpeman wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 13:19This might be an unpopular one, but there's something making me think that with modern cars rain isn't making the gaps closer, exactly the opposite, they become bigger. And I'll provide some examples. We all know Lewis' stunning drive from 2008 in Silverstone, but less than a year later in China he was spinning constantly and also finished behind Kovalainen. The very same year during the Malaysian GP he was fighting with Webber for p5-p7 or something like that. Meanwhile Vettel won the Chinese grand prix (in the wet), with the track suiting the Red Bull car the most. In 2010 and 2011 he was leading in Korea and Canada when it was wet. Because of his certain circumstances, he ended up losing the race. Button won in Brazil 2012, when it was obvious that McLaren were the fastest. My points is, I don't remember a wet race in the past 10 or so years, where a driver didn't win a race with a top-tier car (maximum +0.3 from the fastest car). The closest I remember was Hulkenberg in 2012 Brazil, but he crashed with Hamilton.
On the current topic, it seems that Williams have improved (still last but much closer) and now can actually run with Alfa Romeo. Pleasantly surprised by Grosjean's time as well as Racing Point.
I didn't write that to disprove Hamilton's wet weather driving, but to present a theory. I wrote that from a purely neutral point of view. Besides, I wasn't talking only about Hamilton, I just used him as an example. As you can see I mentioned Vettel and Button as well. Also, you mentioned that McLaren lacked downforce in the early part of the season, which further proves the theory.mkay wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 14:19Hulk didn't crash with, he crashed INTO Hamilton.tpeman wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 13:19This might be an unpopular one, but there's something making me think that with modern cars rain isn't making the gaps closer, exactly the opposite, they become bigger. And I'll provide some examples. We all know Lewis' stunning drive from 2008 in Silverstone, but less than a year later in China he was spinning constantly and also finished behind Kovalainen. The very same year during the Malaysian GP he was fighting with Webber for p5-p7 or something like that. Meanwhile Vettel won the Chinese grand prix (in the wet), with the track suiting the Red Bull car the most. In 2010 and 2011 he was leading in Korea and Canada when it was wet. Because of his certain circumstances, he ended up losing the race. Button won in Brazil 2012, when it was obvious that McLaren were the fastest. My points is, I don't remember a wet race in the past 10 or so years, where a driver didn't win a race with a top-tier car (maximum +0.3 from the fastest car). The closest I remember was Hulkenberg in 2012 Brazil, but he crashed with Hamilton.
On the current topic, it seems that Williams have improved (still last but much closer) and now can actually run with Alfa Romeo. Pleasantly surprised by Grosjean's time as well as Racing Point.
As for 2009, the Mercedes was severely lacking in downforce in the early part of the season. His performance in Malaysia was good (RBR had a much faster car in the wet, as China proved), whilst in China he easily had the measure of his teammate but kept pushing too hard and spinning the car. Not sure how that disproves anything. If this is all you can bring to the table to disprove that Hamilton is the best wet weather driver of his generation...
Ted on Mercedes' pace
"Mercedes quickest by four tenths... and what's particularly impressive is that this is the bigger, and supposedly slower bodywork.
"This is the 'we've got to cool the car down' bodywork they've got on today, which they've got to run because it is absolutely roasting hot. That is slower, the team confirmed that because it's bigger and less aerodynamically efficient.
"So not only have they got the pace, but also the improvements they've made in other areas of the car have made up for the deficit they are giving away by having bigger bodywork to improve the car."
yup what a sucky management!
Yeah I get this vibe as well. Why bother when these won't be even remotely close to race day conditions?
Plus their engine is probably also turned down. May I say 1 sec advantage when they can run their normal bodywork and engine modes?F1Fan2018 wrote: ↑26 Jul 2019, 15:41From Sky
Ted on Mercedes' pace
"Mercedes quickest by four tenths... and what's particularly impressive is that this is the bigger, and supposedly slower bodywork.
"This is the 'we've got to cool the car down' bodywork they've got on today, which they've got to run because it is absolutely roasting hot. That is slower, the team confirmed that because it's bigger and less aerodynamically efficient.
"So not only have they got the pace, but also the improvements they've made in other areas of the car have made up for the deficit they are giving away by having bigger bodywork to improve the car."