Isn't this calling the kettle black??? So it's not great that Max wins the championship on Sunday (SingaporeGP2022) but when Lewis does it, as he has done in the past numerous times, it's okay. Tweet— Twitter API (@user) date
For once I fully agree with sir Lewis. Verstappen clinching the title in the last lap of the last race - far better for the sport
A driver managing to clinch the championship well before the last few races gives a measure of his domination, IMO. In the case of Verstappen and Red Bull, it would be well deserved this year; they have been head and shoulders above the rest.
Yup! And here is what Lewis said when they where dominating, their 2nd year: Lewis Hamilton laughs off worries over dominant Mercedes ruining F1 season | Formula One 2015 | The Guardian Biggest. Hypocrite. Ever. What a ****.
Max said anybody can win in the Mercedes then. He has not said that about his car now. That guy is a hypocrite.
That's because the Mercedes held a SIGNIFICANT pace advantage, whereas the red bull does not. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login In case you struggle to decypher these simple charts, Red Bull advantage until Monza (so really only overtook in pace at Spa onwards) is 0.015 thousands. The smallest advantage Mercedes had 2014-2020 was 0.18 0.15 (17-18), all other years it was over half a second. So yes, Max is entirely correct that anyone could've won in those cars with over half a second advantage. Not exactly a huge stretch. Winning with just 0.015 advantage though (that's 10 times smaller advantage that lewis enjoyed in the years with his closest competition)? Quite a stretch.
Can somebody explain what would be wrong in winning because you have an advantage over your opponents. Is it not the goal of any team serious about winning? I fail to see what is the issue here.
There is nothing wrong. Teams and drivers have had an advantage since beginning of F1. Senna's Mclaren was 3 seconds faster than 5th place. But the haters don't like it when Hamilton has it.
^^^ But, don't you see that Senna's McLaren being 3 seconds faster was due to Senna's brilliance and Lewis' Mercedes being faster is the Mercedes brilliance...
Nothing "wrong" with winning when you have dominant equipment! But the simple point is this ... pretty much all through the twenty-teens, the Mercedes car itself was positively dominant (as the data clearly shows). In contrast, the Red Bull car itself has not demonstrated anywhere near that level of dominance, while Max has been driving. Unlike Hamilton's years of dominance, Verstappen has been dominating ... and winning ... with equipment that is on-par with, or barely-better than, the nearest competitors. That's all.
LOL Verstappen, just like Hamilton or Schumacher before, won and dominated because he had the best car, the best engine, the best team, the best strategist, the best mechanics, the best tyre management, the best team principal, and benefited from the full support of his team and sponsors. As soon as you don't tick all these boxes, you find yourself challenging at best. So far this year, apart from 2 reliability problems early on, Red Bull has been the best team, and able to react quickly (like Mercedes used to do) to any obstacles like rule change thrown at them. Add Verstappen's indeniable talent to that, and you have a winning combo. Ferrari has been the opposite: promising initially, only to deceive later, They didn't progress through the season. In fact, it got worse! As for Mercedes, they brought the wrong car and never recovered from such a blunder. 2022 was the year they collapsed.
Personally I will be alright with that. Any driver, any team that wins on merit is OK with me, be it one year, 5 or 10 years. Beside, it happens in other sports too: tennis, cycling, skying, etc ... When you are successful, I don't see any reason why you should make way for others.
If you can't even see a difference between the actual numbers posted then you are beyond help and just shows how utterly meaningless your inputs are. This is not opinion, this is literal fact. You're arguing 0.015 is as big a gap as 0.800. Go take a basic math class and if you learned something, come back with a reasonable argument.
LOL So the driver has NOTHING to do with it? You don't even acknowledge the driver ... at all? News flash: these cars don't drive themselves. Unbelievable Obviously, the driver isn't the ONLY parameter in the equation for success. But to even suggest that the driver has no impact at all, is beyond ridiculous You need to read post #5229 again. And again.
Read my post again; I did acknowledge Max Verstappen's part in the success. "Add Verstappen's undeniable talent to that, and you have a winning combo". It's not the first time that you read only what you want to see, I have noticed. But never mind ...
You need to re-read what you wrote: "Verstappen, just like Hamilton or Schumacher before, won and dominated because he had the best car, the best engine, the best team, the best strategist, the best mechanics, the best tyre management, the best team principal, and benefited from the full support of his team and sponsors." I would add driver talent to that list, too. Not just Verstappen's (which you do recognize), but Schumacher's and Hamilton's as well. It's not the first time you've been confused by what you, yourself, wrote But the simple point remains: During many years when Hamilton was dominating, the car had a substantial performance advantage over the competition. The same can simply not be said for Verstappen's dominating performance. No one is saying that Hamilton cheated, no one is saying that his championships should be taken away ... the data simply demonstrates that his car had a huge performance advantage during those years.
