FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[geetface9]

All I have to say about the issue is that rosberg and hamilton would be on the same level of consistency if hamilton hadn't $#@!*& qualifying up for himself in austria and great britain. hamilton's race "inconsistency" is obviously not actual inconsistency, it's his car failing. Rosberg has only made one big mistake in qualifying compared to hamilton's two, so rosberg edges out hamilton by a slim margin. if hamilton won 11 races in a row and rosberg came 2nd 11 race in a row or vice versa, they would be on the same level of consistency. in this year's case rosberg is on top in regards to consistency because he has made less critical qualifying errors, and that still holds true if you take out the races in which hamilton's car failed in qualifying, i.e. germany and hungary.

[racechick]

So one qualifying error compared to two qualifying errors. Not much is it. Not much to say one of those drivers is more consistent than the other. A championship won't hinge on that, it will hinge on the car failures. Rosberg is perceived as more consistent because of all the bad luck Hamilton has had. It sways perception.

[Roth]

That's more Hamilton's poor luck than Rosberg's good luck. It shouldn't be lucky for your car not to catch fire or whatever.

It is Rosberg's good fortune that his championship contender is suffering worse luck than him.

If Alonso was suffering Hamilton's failures, it makes no difference for Rosberg since Alonso is not in his story. In THIS case, Rosberg is not experiencing good fortune.

How is this so hard to understand.

You're arguing semantics about Rosberg's position. For various reasons he's been consitent. Neither spectacular nor shoddy, just getting the job done.

Someone's poor luck dribbles good luck down the grid. Rosberg is usually the greatest beneficiary of Hamilton's poor luck, yes, and vice versa, but it's good fortune by default. It's part of racing and was accepted as possibly deciding the championship before the season began. It still doesn't mean Rosberg hasn't been consistent.

[CookinFlat6]

Lewis has been at least as consistent, if we consider all races and the outcomes despite his much bigger issues and unrelaibility

[geetface9]

So one qualifying error compared to two qualifying errors. Not much is it. Not much to say one of those drivers is more consistent than the other. A championship won't hinge on that, it will hinge on the car failures. Rosberg is perceived as more consistent because of all the bad luck Hamilton has had. It sways perception.

I agree that rosberg is perceived as more consistent because of the bad luck hamilton has. A keen observer will not perceive rosberg as being more consistent because of hamilton's bad luck. A keen observer will know rosberg has hamilton beat in consistency due to having 50% less critical qualifying errors and not because of mechanical failures.

[racechick]

So one qualifying error compared to two qualifying errors. Not much is it. Not much to say one of those drivers is more consistent than the other. A championship won't hinge on that, it will hinge on the car failures. Rosberg is perceived as more consistent because of all the bad luck Hamilton has had. It sways perception.

I agree that rosberg is perceived as more consistent because of the bad luck hamilton has. A keen observer will not perceive rosberg as being more consistent because of hamilton's bad luck. A keen observer will know rosberg has hamilton beat in consistency due to having 50% less critical qualifying errors and not because of mechanical failures.

That 50% figure is also misleading. Over the course of the next two races it could reverse completely . Three 'events' errors, are not enough to base consistency on.

Unfortunately he isn't consistently quicker and the keen observer will note that when they go head to head Hamilton wins out. When Hamilton has to race from the back, he catches him up. Being consistently a little bit too slow to beat the other guy isn't a good consistency.

[Roth]

Lewis has been at least as consistent, if we consider all races and the outcomes despite his much bigger issues and unrelaibility

Rosberg has only had consistency going for him though. And to his credit it has been fairly high. Qualifies well, finishes well. It was the only way of saying something nice about him really; he's leading the championship afterall despite not having done anything very memorable. Well, apart from Monaco. The Hamilton highlight reel on the other hand is already getting lengthy.

[What's Burning?]

Oh no! not this again.

[Roth]

Somebody really needs just to shut the internet down.

[What's Burning?]

No, we can't do that. Making fun of your outlandish claims is so much fun.

[Hammer278]

Somebody really needs just to shut MY internet down.

Fixed.

[CookinFlat6]

at least roth doesnt run away and refuse to allow us to 'test' his outlandish claims, would be worse if he made his 'rothisms' then legged it ignoring all requests for clarification

[CookinFlat6]

Lewis has been at least as consistent, if we consider all races and the outcomes despite his much bigger issues and unrelaibility

Rosberg has only had consistency going for him though. And to his credit it has been fairly high. Qualifies well, finishes well. It was the only way of saying something nice about him really; he's leading the championship afterall despite not having done anything very memorable. Well, apart from Monaco. The Hamilton highlight reel on the other hand is already getting lengthy.

you got it, like Seb Nico has done what is to be expected in the best car, whereas Lewis has done things to be expected in the best car as well as things not expected in damaged/dodgy/unreliable/combusting/brakeless/undriveable cars

that is the difference between a Lewis (and to a lesser degree an Alonso) and your garden variety Sebs/Nicos/Buttons/Chiltons

[geetface9]

So one qualifying error compared to two qualifying errors. Not much is it. Not much to say one of those drivers is more consistent than the other. A championship won't hinge on that, it will hinge on the car failures. Rosberg is perceived as more consistent because of all the bad luck Hamilton has had. It sways perception.

I agree that rosberg is perceived as more consistent because of the bad luck hamilton has. A keen observer will not perceive rosberg as being more consistent because of hamilton's bad luck. A keen observer will know rosberg has hamilton beat in consistency due to having 50% less critical qualifying errors and not because of mechanical failures.

Unfortunately he isn't consistently quicker

You find this unfortunate? I knew you secretly preferred rosberg

[racechick]

So one qualifying error compared to two qualifying errors. Not much is it. Not much to say one of those drivers is more consistent than the other. A championship won't hinge on that, it will hinge on the car failures. Rosberg is perceived as more consistent because of all the bad luck Hamilton has had. It sways perception.

I agree that rosberg is perceived as more consistent because of the bad luck hamilton has. A keen observer will not perceive rosberg as being more consistent because of hamilton's bad luck. A keen observer will know rosberg has hamilton beat in consistency due to having 50% less critical qualifying errors and not because of mechanical failures.

Unfortunately he isn't consistently quicker

You find this unfortunate? I knew you secretly preferred rosberg

Unfortunately for him my dear And you