FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[spankyham]

There is one very clear answer as to why Seb was so fast that day. It has been well documented that the softer tires were 2.2 secs per lap quicker than the prime tires. Seb was the only driver to have kept a completely fresh set of super softs. Alonso was on well worn primes.

Perhaps Vettel's brilliance around Singapore could account for the remaining 3 tenths of second. So I believe that answers the question of why Seb was so fast that day. Bam! Case closed!

I'm not sure that's accurate. Compare the times at the very start of the race. Even cars, on same rubber. First two laps Seb pulls out over 2 seconds per lap on Rosberg - and that's after Rsoberg actually headed him very briefly off the line.

Also - after the 2nd safety car, Rosberg eventually pits for a set of fresh rubber - Seb is still faster on 20+ lap old tires than Rosberg on fresh tires.

[spankyham]

... If Vettel is nearly as dominant as in Singapore, you lot will say "There, we told you so - the car should be impounded"

Red Bull are now on the record with Autosports saying that Singapore was a one-off and that won't happen again. Don't you find it at least enough to raise an eyebrow that the team somehow already "knows" they won't be that dominant again?

.... If there was indeed such an obvious infringement, surely someone else would have independently noticed it?

Being obvious somehow doesn't prevent people from doing crazy/stupid things - and sometimes it takes quite a while for the truth to come out. Remember crashgate, Stepneygate, Toyota's flimsy 09 rear wings in Australia (well this didn't take long but it was incredibly obvious) ....... need I continue?

[Zekenwolf]

Spankyham, that same article had this attached to it.

WHY VETTEL'S PACE LOOKED SO GOOD
By Jonathan Noble


The extent of Sebastian Vettel's advantage over the rest of the field left many in F1 shocked.

At times during the race - most notably after the safety car period – he was in a class of his own.

But while some fear that such a gap to the Red Bull has been there all season – and was only exposed in Singapore because Vettel was unleashed to build up a big lead – other factors did make his speed look more impressive.

After the safety car, Vettel was on brand new medium tyres while the cars right behind him that had not stopped were all on well-used super softs that they had started the race on.

Vettel was also going on the attack well aware that he needed to build a big enough margin to the cars that had stopped.

Furthermore, the car right behind him, Nico Rosberg, was struggling with understeer caused by rubber debris lodged in his front wing.

That meant his pace had dropped away and the lack of overtaking opportunities ensured that his pursuers were all being held up behind him – allowing Vettel to get away.

I guess it all depends on who or what one chooses to believe. Including myself, of course.

[What's Burning?]

They gave Vettel a new toy to play with, and he used it as he saw fit. Pity he won't be using it again.

[1Lemon]

Spankyham, that same article had this attached to it.

Furthermore, the car right behind him, Nico Rosberg, was struggling with understeer caused by rubber debris lodged in his front wing.

That meant his pace had dropped away and the lack of overtaking opportunities ensured that his pursuers were all being held up behind him – allowing Vettel to get away.

But you cannot attribute his incredible relative speed to that alone as he was faster than every car on the grid, that article seems to forget that some drivers had pitted for fresh tyres and not all had rubber wedged in their aero parts (painful).

There is probably something up with the Red Bull, but that's fair enough, it is the whole engineering point of F1 to innovate above your rivals.

[Zekenwolf]

They gave Vettel a new toy to play with, and he used it as he saw fit. Pity he won't be using it again.

Supposing he wins the next race by, say, 8 seconds from Hamilton with no major hold-ups. By your book is that:

- Red Bull took away Vettel's toy;
- Red Bull took away vettel's toy but gave him another to play with;
- They instructed him to use only part of the toy;
- OK, maybe he never had a toy?

[What's Burning?]

They gave Vettel a new toy to play with, and he used it as he saw fit. Pity he won't be using it again.

Supposing he wins the next race by, say, 8 seconds from Hamilton with no major hold-ups. By your book is that:

- Red Bull took away Vettel's toy;
- Red Bull took away vettel's toy but gave him another to play with;
- They instructed him to use only part of the toy;
- OK, maybe he never had a toy?

I'm not trying to convince you, because your mind is seemingly made up. I'm just curious why you won't accept the possibility of it given the volume of circumstantial evidence on hand, and given the specific examples I've offered you, Red Bull having done just that over the last two years.

My comment is very consistent with Vettel's win at all cost and dominate all aspects of a GP weekend philosophy.

[Zekenwolf]

I'm not trying to convince you, because your mind is seemingly made up. I'm just curious why you won't accept the possibility of it given the volume of circumstantial evidence on hand, and given the specific examples I've offered you, Red Bull having done just that over the last two years.

My comment is very consistent with Vettel's win at all cost and dominate all aspects of a GP weekend philosophy.

Almost anything can be quoted as 'circumstantial evidence' in this game. Until you or someone can provide irrefutable proof that an infingement has taken place, I DO NOT have to accept yout your argument any more than you have to accept mine. And we have already agreed that should things be proven one way or the other, the 'loser' will accept it gracefully (lest you forget).

[What's Burning?]

Also - after the 2nd safety car, Rosberg eventually pits for a set of fresh rubber - Seb is still faster on 20+ lap old tires than Rosberg on fresh tires.

That's just circumstantial.

I do raise the same eyebrow however as you do about Red Bull already knowing how their dominance in Singapore won't carry over to Korea. Just be the magnanimous guy I am and give them the benefit of the doubt. It's possible that every other team will pick up two seconds of pace while Red Bull stays flat.

At least we'll be racing on equal footing. And since there are no fans in Korea, there will be no booing. Things are looking up.

[Zekenwolf]

Quite frankly WB, this meaningless ongoing argument has become pointless and boring to me. Your idea of a debate is to talk around something that I have said and pretend that you have come-up with a smart rejoinder while really not coming to the point raised. That's sort of charade can be carried on by anyone on any subject and I am not prepared to go on and on about it for no purpose. That was in all probability your plan all along and you'll be happy to know that you have succeeded. You can believe whatever you like and stand in front of a mirror and pat yourself on the back as the victor. Congratulations.

Since you are one of the mods, I request you to please remove my name from the active members list with immediate effect. Thanks.

[LRW]

[1Lemon]

with a smart rejoinder

Can you have a "smart" rejoinder? Considering rejoinder means smart response?

[spankyham]

with a smart rejoinder

Can you have a "smart" rejoinder? Considering rejoinder means smart response?

Perhaps the first smart refers to the rejoinder being fashionable


Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 4

[Big Azza]

Why are people arguing over this? Minardi's speculated something and forum members have formed an opinion and are getting worked up over others not agreeing with their opinion?

It's speculation. We're welcome to to an opinion on a forum, but no point trying to get others to agree with you, and then get worked up when they don't?

[LewEngBridewell]

Since you are one of the mods, I request you to please remove my name from the active members list with immediate effect. Thanks.

Another one bites the dust? BRILLIANT.

FFS guys.