2017 Italian Grand Prix - Monza, 1-3 September

[f1316]

I want to put it into a spreadsheet when I get the chance between the work I'm supposed to be doing but working it through in my mind I have:

- if all goes how I would expect, Ham wins by 16 points
- if Vettel manages 2nd at the strongest Merc tracks & Kimi gets 2nd in what I see as Ferrari tracks (Sing + AD) then Ham wins by Six points

So all being what I'd call 'normal', Ham wins either way, in my mind. The X factor is whether Ham has the same kind of quali struggles in the low speed high downforce package as he did in Monaco + to a slightly lesser extent Hungary.

As you say, what if an RB gets ahead? What if Bottas and the RBs are ahead on the grid in Singapore?

To me, it kinda needs that kind of thing and/or other unforeseen circumstances for Merc - with zero issues or grid penalties for Vettel - for Ferrari to win the WDC. I personally think it's unlikely that a new PU will bridge the gap we've seen on low downforce unless allied to a much more effective low df package, but this is also based around current relative strengths and weaknesses (for all we know Merc could be stronger in Sing or Ferrari's Spa compromise with a new PU could be the fastest package in Suzuka).

Like I say, I'll try and formulate thoughts into something a bit more illustrative later.

I'd like to know what sorts of variables are in your spreadsheet? For me, I don't have a good source of whether a track is high or low downforce, as there are some compromise tracks, that have long straights but also significant twisty, mid-speed corners (e.g., China)

Yeah, I probably made it sound more grandiose than I meant to!

I just meant to track what place finishes I expect each of them to take in each race and, depending on what those are, how many points they'd end up with at the end.

Nothing fancy (but I still haven't got to it anyway )

[TAG]

Look at it this way: Hamilton has 2 more wins than Vettel (6 vs 4), but they are virtually tied in points (3 points in Hamiltons favor). One would think given he has two more victories to his name, he'd be more ahead than he is. This shows the strength of the Ferrari in performing on tracks where the Mercedes was quicker.

I disagree, what this points to is a couple of things. Ferrari treating their driver as a number 1 versus Mercedes making their driver give positions back. In Hungary, last year with Rosberg and Hamilton competing, would Mercedes have held back Rosberg from attacking Hamilton they way Ferrari held back Raikkonen from attacking Vettel? In Baku, we all know Vettel should have been disqualified, but again there, Mercedes cost their driver a win, instead Hamilton wound up giving up points.

Mercedes has also had to start Hamilton five positions down due to a gear box change, Ferrari has yet to see a grid position.

So it's not the Ferrari performing better on track, it's the Mercedes giving away points whereas Ferrari has not given away any.

[TAG]

First time some "fans" booed Rosberg was after Spa 2014. I have seen many times actions like the one we saw on that race and never the fans started to boo a driver for that. It was the hysteric reaction of some(ehem British) media and fans who made that fight much worse than it really was.

Rosberg parking his car in Monaco, remember that? Every driver on the grid said it was obvious he'd done it on purpose. The media didn't even touch the subject for how prickly is was. Spa was the icing on the cake. Again, I keep my judgement of drivers by what they do on track. It works for me. Baku is very much an example of a very long dossier to choose from as to why I dislike Vettel. The booing for Vettel came after the Multi 2-1 event.

[Vasconia]

No different from Vettel then. I assume you dislike him too?

The fans booed Rosberg because of his actions ON TRACK. Pure and simple.
Hamilton did NOTHING to generate that reaction yesterday.

First time some "fans" booed Rosberg was after Spa 2014. I have seen many times actions like the one we saw on that race and never the fans started to boo a driver for that. It was the hysteric reaction of some(ehem British) media and fans who made that fight much worse than it really was.

I agree with the fact that Hamilton did not deserve to be booed. In fact, as I have said I dont like when people boo another drivers, its a total lack of respect. F1 used to be much better than this.

I won't boo myself, but I honestly find this pure hate against booing very trivial. I think Formula 1 already is very PR'd and we don't need more of it. If a crowd wants to express themselves, let them. Who the hell is anyone to judge right or wrong? They don't have any right to touch or harm anyone or throw stuff at them but voicing opinion is fine. I'm a Vettel fan and his arse was booed everywhere he went in 2013 and for some reason it became an issue. Why?

I absolutely loved the podium yesterday. You could just sense the tension and feel the pulse of the crowd. That's what SPORT is about!

F1 has been a true sport many years without booing. This trend makes F1 more similar to the footballs "hooliganism".

I can judge it, its my right to express what I think. I wouldnt outlaw it even if I could do it. But I want to express my disgust with it.

[Vasconia]

First time some "fans" booed Rosberg was after Spa 2014. I have seen many times actions like the one we saw on that race and never the fans started to boo a driver for that. It was the hysteric reaction of some(ehem British) media and fans who made that fight much worse than it really was.

Rosberg parking his car in Monaco, remember that? Every driver on the grid said it was obvious he'd done it on purpose. The media didn't even touch the subject for how prickly is was. Spa was the icing on the cake. Again, I keep my judgement of drivers by what they do on track. It works for me. Baku is very much an example of a very long dossier to choose from as to why I dislike Vettel. The booing for Vettel came after the Multi 2-1 event.

If we start to boo with all we don´t like, Perez should be booed for his SPA manouvre for decades.

Controversial moves have existed always and I have not seen the crow booing every single time.

[TAG]

Controversial moves have existed always and I have not seen the crow booing every single time.

Don't you have to get on the podium to be booed?

[Phil]

So it's not the Ferrari performing better on track, it's the Mercedes giving away points whereas Ferrari has not given away any.

I think my point is much simpler actually:

Hamilton: Wins (6), 2nd (2), 3rds (0), 4th and worse (5)
Vettel: Wins (4), 2nd (5), 3rds (1), 4th and worse (3)

It's easily seen that Vettel has far more podiums than Hamilton (10 vs 8 including wins, 6 vs 2 excluding wins). Evident by the fact that Mercedes has won 8 gps this year over Ferrari/Vettels 4 is quite astounding too, but it also highlights that Vettel has been very consistent so far.

Yes, Hamilton did have the headrest issue and the gearbox penalty, but Vettel also had a tire blowout and his short-circuit of rage moment in Baku also cost him a lot of points too, which I think equals itself out rather nicely. My point is, at the end of it, Vettel has been far more in 2nd when Hamilton has won, than the other way around.

Mercedes has admitted themselves that their car is very sensitive. Understanding the narrow operating window is key to extracting the potential of the car. This has led to a couple of races where either Bottas or Hamilton were severely off the pace. Perhaps they understand the car better now, but I still think the tire performance is one of the key factors that may still play its part. On slower circuits, I think Pirelli is ready to be more relaxed on tire pressures and camber, which may hurt Mercedes. If and how much, we will see... and Bottas may still get to play his role. Hamilton may be strong, but I wouldn't discount Bottas beating Hamilton in one of the upcoming GPs yet. And team-orders will only play a role if Hamilton is right behind. If he isn't... well, it may just be a bit more complicated.

[TAG]

his short-circuit of rage moment in Baku also cost him a lot of points too, which I think equals itself out rather nicely. My point is, at the end of it, Vettel has been far more in 2nd when Hamilton has won, than the other way around.

This equals itself nicely to make your point from a mathematical standpoint but it goes a long way towards explaining the gap in point. This should have been 25 points in Hamilton's favor, it wasn't for many reasons but that's not the point of discussion. Additionally there's 3 more points with the Bottas position switch in Hungary if Ferrari treated their race the way Mercedes is, perhaps another 10 or more point shift had Kimi not been bridled by his team.

I think your explanation has a lot of gaps, I'm not trying to be argumentative I'm simply saying that you can't lump it as Mercedes "performance" when it's been more of a Mercedes shooting themselves in the foot, not their performance.

[Vasconia]

Controversial moves have existed always and I have not seen the crow booing every single time.

Don't you have to get on the podium to be booed?

They could boo someone in the paddock.

[Phil]

This equals itself nicely to make your point from a mathematical standpoint but it goes a long way towards explaining the gap in point. This should have been 25 points in Hamilton's favor, it wasn't for many reasons but that's not the point of discussion. Additionally there's 3 more points with the Bottas position switch in Hungary if Ferrari treated their race the way Mercedes is, perhaps another 10 or more point shift had Kimi not been bridled by his team.

I think your explanation has a lot of gaps, I'm not trying to be argumentative I'm simply saying that you can't lump it as Mercedes "performance" when it's been more of a Mercedes shooting themselves in the foot, not their performance.

Sorry, I don't quite get the 25 points swing. Hamilton was leading ahead of Vettel. That's a 7 point swing, not 25. The gearbox penalty influenced qualifying, so it's hard to argue how much of an impact that had. Vettels tire blow out was rather costly, instead of finishing 3rd (which I'm sure would have been handed to him) he finished 7th. That's a point-swing of 9 points.

I'm not trying to muddle my numbers by political influences but trying only to concentrate on car and team performance. Bottas is more competitive than Kimi. Can't change that. Also can't change that Mercedes wants to give equal opportunity to both drivers.

[TAG]

Controversial moves have existed always and I have not seen the crow booing every single time.

Don't you have to get on the podium to be booed?

They could boo someone in the paddock.

If they're not good enough to get on a podium they're not worth bothering with booing. When was the last time you hears someone boo Palmer or Ericsson?

[TAG]

This equals itself nicely to make your point from a mathematical standpoint but it goes a long way towards explaining the gap in point. This should have been 25 points in Hamilton's favor, it wasn't for many reasons but that's not the point of discussion. Additionally there's 3 more points with the Bottas position switch in Hungary if Ferrari treated their race the way Mercedes is, perhaps another 10 or more point shift had Kimi not been bridled by his team.

I think your explanation has a lot of gaps, I'm not trying to be argumentative I'm simply saying that you can't lump it as Mercedes "performance" when it's been more of a Mercedes shooting themselves in the foot, not their performance.

Sorry, I don't quite get the 25 points swing. Hamilton was leading ahead of Vettel. That's a 7 point swing, not 25. The gearbox penalty influenced qualifying, so it's hard to argue how much of an impact that had. Vettels tire blow out was rather costly, instead of finishing 3rd (which I'm sure would have been handed to him) he finished 7th. That's a point-swing of 9 points.

I'm not trying to muddle my numbers by political influences but trying only to concentrate on car and team performance. Bottas is more competitive than Kimi. Can't change that. Also can't change that Mercedes wants to give equal opportunity to both drivers.

The 25 points is that Vettel should have been DQ'd and Hamilton should have won. But it wasn't the case, that's not something you can put on Mercedes' lack of performance. And likewise the way the two drivers are treated, you can't put that down to performance either. You're saying the gap should be bigger due to Mercedes' performance over Ferrari. I agree, but it sounds to me that you're saying that it's only due to the performance, where that's not the case, Mercedes have given away points, way more point from their errors and policies than they have from any performance gaps to Ferrari. Vettel's results would have been just as inconsistent as Hamilton's.

[Phil]

Tag, sorry, but arguing about Vettels DSQ is pointless. I didn't agree with the FIA/stewards verdict either, but I am not going to undermine the pace of the Ferrari because Vettel had 2 seconds of rage. If they hadn't collided, we'd have seen Hamilton win the race ahead of Vettel, meaning 7 point swing. If Vettel hadn't raged and Hamilton still would have had his headrest issue, he'd have won the race.

I'm not saying the Ferrari is the faster car. I simply think that Ferrari have done an exceptional job and IMO have been performing a bit better in the races where Mercedes has been on top of things than the other way around. Meaning that every time a Mercedes won, Vettel was right there in 2nd. When Ferrari won, Mercedes was fighting some issue on either drivers or both. Some of it is down to how Ferrari run the team, some of it, yes, is also down to Vettel beating Kimi comprehensively.

I'm looking wearily to Singapore because I see the potential there for Mercedes to lose valuable points. Ferrari have supposedly built a car that is easy to set-up and perform close to its potential. Mercedes arguably built the faster car, but for it to work and perform better than the Ferrari, they need to be on top of things. That's how I see it anyway and I think this is what will make the remainder of the season so exciting.

[Vasconia]

Don't you have to get on the podium to be booed?

They could boo someone in the paddock.

If they're not good enough to get on a podium they're not worth bothering with booing. When was the last time you hears someone boo Palmer or Ericsson?

Dont be hard with Ericsson, at least he doesn´t ruin others races. Palmer has enough too with Alonso and his evil karma´s merciless revenge.

[The_table]

And saying that the Merc engine was better than the Ferrari engine in Monza was bound to get a response.(He was speaking the truth, but still.)

The comment about the Merc engine was after the booing not before.

Ah i stand corrected, i'm sorry.
Did Schumacher ever get booed? (If he never got booed than my dominant driver theory falls apart pretty hard..)

I have never noticed that...etc.....

I didn't mean the accent. I literally mean what he says. (you got guys in the UK with different accents in clubs? ), I also said he looks like that type of half brain people that you find in any club. I didn't mean he is one of them, or that he has half a brain...
He looks the type, and it is a type that is general doesn't win you any favors when it comes to people perceiving you.
Anybody forgetting "Must be because I am black" and refusing to take his hat of for the one minute silence (because he dyed is hair blond and was waiting for a big "reveal" of his hair?).

I always imagine guys in clubs to look like this


In all seriousness, i really don't think Hamilton looks dumb or stupid, he dresses quite well and he's not that nuts with his outfits, if he shows up with a mink coat, no shirt and trousers with a curtain pattern on them then i might retract that statement....
And 99.9% of the time i see him in the mercedes gear both drivers wear, just with a gold chain...
Could you give some examples of "what he says" that makes him sound dumb?

btw: "must be because i'm black" was sarcasm... the British are good at that...