FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[Roth]

So why was Hamilton stuck behind Vettel for so long? I mean i know why I think he was, I said so earlier, but I'm curious what other people think.

[CookinFlat6]

So why was Hamilton stuck behind Vettel for so long? I mean i know why I think he was, I said so earlier, but I'm curious what other people think.

because of his psychological weakness

why not stick to your guns, you said something about having a right to your opinion, continue to amaze us, be generous, give us the chance to rough you up some more, we promise not to bully you, just give us advance warning when its not fun anymore

[RyRy]

The fact Nico was overtaken by a Toro Rosso and failed to overtake consistently was bad enough and then when Lewis got his turn he instantly managed to make the pass, it was beyond embarrassing for Nico.

Ignoring the fact that Nico and Vergne were on the same tyre strategy, that those track conditions play into weaker team's hands, that Hamilton couldn't get past Vettel either, and would probably not have done so until the pitstops, was only in the position to pass Vergne because Vettel spun so handed him the place, and that he was on fresher tyres which all afternoon proved to be the decisive thing in overtaking. Vergne pitted on the lap Hamilton overtook him, which was in an unusual spot, with a brave move after he had failed at turn one. I'm not saying Rosberg did a great job but let's not ignore the context of the situation and just say he was rubbish.

I have no idea what planet you are on, even more hate for Hamilton and love for Rosberg...

1) Hamilton pitted lap 8 for softs, lap 39 for mediums.
2) Rosberg pitted lap 9 for softs, lap 33 for softs, 52 for softs
3) Vergne pitted lap 8 for softs, lap 34 for mediums

The race restarted on lap 13, Rosberg was overtaken by Vergne on lap 15, they were BOTH on fresh tyres so Rosberg should NOT have lost out and should have easily past Vergne again, he made an attempt on lap 16, passed him and then lost the place to him straight after.

The only reason Hamilton couldn't overtake was because Vettel had DRS CONSISTENTLY due to Rosberg being under a second ahead EVERY SINGLE LAP. Now we turn to Rosberg who DID have DRS and Vergne did NOT have DRS.

Lap 33 Rosberg pitted, Vettel mess up and instantly Hamilton quickly cut the 1.5 second gap down to under 1 second so he was right on the back of Vergne and then iinto the first DRS zone he made a move that was much better than Rosbergs, failed to get by, he then did another move into the next corner, couldn't get past again and then non-DRS zone he made a third move and masterfully passed on the outside and then by the end of the lap he was already 1.5 seconds ahead.

So Hamilton was NOT on much fresher tyres, the driver that had the fresher tyres out of those four was Rosberg and Vettel by 1 lap, the driver that should of had the best tyres out of the four was Vergne as he had no dirty air.

Rosberg WAS rubbish, FACT.

Have fun trying to make a rebuttal on that one...

[Roth]

So why was Hamilton stuck behind Vettel for so long? I mean i know why I think he was, I said so earlier, but I'm curious what other people think.

because of his psychological weakness

why not stick to your guns, you said something about having a right to your opinion, continue to amaze us, be generous, give us the chance to rough you up some more, we promise not to bully you, just give us advance warning when its not fun anymore

Look at you avoiding the question.

[RyRy]

So why was Hamilton stuck behind Vettel for so long? I mean i know why I think he was, I said so earlier, but I'm curious what other people think.

because of his psychological weakness

why not stick to your guns, you said something about having a right to your opinion, continue to amaze us, be generous, give us the chance to rough you up some more, we promise not to bully you, just give us advance warning when its not fun anymore

Look at you avoiding the question.

I'll answer for him, because Vettel had DRS every single lap.

[Roth]

I have no idea what planet you are on, even more hate for Hamilton and love for Rosberg...

1) Hamilton pitted lap 8 for softs, lap 39 for mediums.
2) Rosberg pitted lap 9 for softs, lap 33 for softs, 52 for softs
3) Vergne pitted lap 8 for softs, lap 34 for mediums

The race restarted on lap 13, Rosberg was overtaken by Vergne on lap 15, they were BOTH on fresh tyres so Rosberg should NOT have lost out and should have easily past Vergne again, he made an attempt on lap 16, passed him and then lost the place to him straight after.

The only reason Hamilton couldn't overtake was because Vettel had DRS CONSISTENTLY due to Rosberg being under a second ahead EVERY SINGLE LAP. Now we turn to Rosberg who DID have DRS and Vergne did NOT have DRS.

Lap 33 Rosberg pitted, Vettel mess up and instantly Hamilton quickly cut the 1.5 second gap down to under 1 second so he was right on the back of Vergne and then iinto the first DRS zone he made a move that was much better than Rosbergs, failed to get by, he then did another move into the next corner, couldn't get past again and then non-DRS zone he made a third move and masterfully passed on the outside and then by the end of the lap he was already 1.5 seconds ahead.

So Hamilton was NOT on much fresher tyres, the driver that had the fresher tyres out of those four was Rosberg and Vettel by 1 lap, the driver that should of had the best tyres out of the four was Vergne as he had no dirty air.

Rosberg WAS rubbish, FACT.

Have fun trying to make a rebuttal on that one...

You've picked up on cookies tricks well. Rosberg had brake issues after the SC, allowing Vergne past. Then he didn't do a great job of trying to get back past Vergne, partly due to extenuating track circumstances, partly because he didn't handle different phases of the race as well as he could have. I said that earlier. OK, Hamilton handled his tyres better, good driving, so he was on grippier tyres. You added the 'much' when you didn't have to. You can't say Hamilton was great at passing Vergne and shows what a superb driver he was, then knock Nico for not getting past him. Your Rosberg accusation supposes any normal driver, just average, would have gotten past Vergne easily because Rosberg was rubbish. If you say, Rosberg didn't do a good job and Hamilton did and perhaps that highlights the difference in skill between the two, that's a fair assessment. Putting RUBBISH in capital letters like that makes you look like you have an axe to grind.

And even if the DRS of SV and LH cancel each other out, the power of the Merc engine has usually got the legs on a Renault. But because Merc were running more downforce they couldn't make the most of that power so Rosberg would not have had it as easy as you all assume he should have. Both Mercs were stuck behind slower cars for long stretches of the race. That's part of the reason for RB and Ferrari were one and two. SC was another. There were lots of factors in the races outcome. Not simply Rosberg was rubbish. That's selective nonsense.

[RyRy]

You've picked up on cookies tricks well. Rosberg had brake issues after the SC, allowing Vergne past. Then he didn't do a great job of trying to get back past Vergne, partly due to extenuating track circumstances, partly because he didn't handle different phases of the race as well as he could have. I said that earlier. OK, Hamilton handled his tyres better, good driving, so he was on grippier tyres. You added the 'much' when you didn't have to. You can't say Hamilton was great at passing Vergne and shows what a superb driver he was, then knock Nico for not getting past him. Your Rosberg accusation supposes any normal driver, just average, would have gotten past Vergne easily because Rosberg was rubbish. If you say, Rosberg didn't do a good job and Hamilton did and perhaps that highlights the difference in skill between the two, that's a fair assessment. Putting RUBBISH in capital letters like that makes you look like you have an axe to grind.

And even if the DRS of SV and LH cancel each other out, the power of the Merc engine has usually got the legs on a Renault. But because Merc were running more downforce they couldn't make the most of that power so Rosberg would not have had it as easy as you all assume he should have. Both Mercs were stuck behind slower cars for long stretches of the race. That's part of the reason for RB and Ferrari were one and two. SC was another. There were lots of factors in the races outcome. Not simply Rosberg was rubbish. That's selective nonsense.

You can't be serious...

Hamilton had less downforce due to the lap 1 cold brakes, he was also in a brand new car that he hadn't raced in before, he was also nursing brakes too because they were overheating running behind multiple cars.

He didn't "allow" him past, what the hell are you talking about, he got outraced by a Toro Rosso, you can see that because the lap after he was first overtaken he still attempted to make two moves on Vergne but failed.

Hamilton was NOT on grippier tyres, they had the same tyres and he just performed better with what he had. He passed Vergne in style, both were on old tyres and he did one of the hardest overtakes on this track, smashing Rosberg. Hamilton, Alonso, Riccardo would have all easily of passed Vergne if they were in Rosbergs car.

DRS does not cancel eachother out, that's a beyond foolish statement, the track isn't long enough for a DRS pass to happen but it gives you plenty of space on the short start finish straight if you're the car ahead.

Your arguments are really quite worthless, I don't know if I can take you serious or not, either way I know I'm correct and plenty of others agree with me.

[What's Burning?]

We sometimes lose sight of the forest for the trees...

Lewis Hamilton starts from pit lane, behind Mags no less, in an untried car that had not even done the installation lap afforded to the rest of the grid. He finishes the race on the podium ahead of his WDC point leading teammate, that starts from pole position with what is demonstratively the fastest car on the grid and ends up in P4.

The rest is noise ladies and gents. Just noise.

[Roth]

You can't be serious...

Hamilton had less downforce due to the lap 1 cold brakes, he was also in a brand new car that he hadn't raced in before, he was also nursing brakes too because they were overheating running behind multiple cars.

I wasn't knocking Hamilton. Why have you made it about Hamilton. We're talking about Nico.

He didn't "allow" him past, what the hell are you talking about, he got outraced by a Toro Rosso, you can see that because the lap after he was first overtaken he still attempted to make two moves on Vergne but failed.

He had brake issues straight after the SC. I'm not making this up. That's how Vergne got by. I thought this was just generally understood, and the issue was with Nico's inability to regain the place.

Hamilton was NOT on grippier tyres, they had the same tyres and he just performed better with what he had. He passed Vergne in style, both were on old tyres and he did one of the hardest overtakes on this track, smashing Rosberg. Hamilton, Alonso, Riccardo would have all easily of passed Vergne if they were in Rosbergs car.

That's what I meant by 'grippier'. He made them last better. I complimeted him on that fact.

DRS does not cancel eachother out, that's a beyond foolish statement, the track isn't long enough for a DRS pass to happen but it gives you plenty of space on the short start finish straight if you're the car ahead.

What? That doesn't make sense. DRS is supposed to give you an advantage. If you both have the same ability to take that advantage, it's not an advantage anymore. And if the "track isn't long enough for a DRS pass to happen" why have a go at Rosberg for it. But then apparently on the main straight, where it's deployed it does give you an advantage? Draw me a diagram because your words are confusing me.

Your arguments are really quite worthless, I don't know if I can take you serious or not, either way I know I'm correct and plenty of others agree with me.

As long as you know you're correct, that's the important thing.

[Hammer278]

What lame arguments Roth....

Can't touch this:

>Starts from pits
>Behind teammate after the "lucky" SC
>FInishes 3rd while Rosberg (from pole) finishes 4th

Even Rosberg was embarrassed after the race, his tomato red face said it all. Seeing his teammate own him so completely and still, we have Roth talk sh!t about how he had brake issues, etc....while ignoring Hamilton started from the PITLANE, had to short shift to aid the fuel pump for half the race, got the shorter end of the strategy stick, and still kicked a$$.

Deny it all you want Roth, bottom line: PITLANE - 3rd VS POLE - 4th.

No reliability issues, both cars finish the race. If you can't stand Hamilton its okay, really, there's no rule you gotta like the guy....just stop pretending to be objective. It's just lame.

[Roth]

Calm down, Hammy. It's all shout, shout, shout, from a lot of people lately. I've repeatedly said it was a great drive by Hamilton. Hamilton himself didn't think it was a great drive, go and have a rant at him.

[racechick]

Hamilton didn't think it was a great RESULT, because he could have won. His driving was fine, other things lost the win. That would have been five wins from that track to Lewis, a record. And he would have been the only driver ever to have won from the pitlane . That was achievable had he been on the faster strategy. I think he was also a little peeved at the team orders.

[Roth]

I understand he was peeved, but when asked about it on the podium interview...

MB - One of your finest ever drives?
LH - I don't think so.

[racechick]

He doesn't THINK it's one of his FINEST DRIVES EVER. That's different to saying he doesn't think it's a great drive. He made an error at the beginning on cold tyres. His greatest ever drives I imagine would be error free.

[Hammer278]

I understand he was peeved, but when asked about it on the podium interview...

MB - One of your finest ever drives?
LH - I don't think so.

LOL are you serious....so if he doesn't think this drive is one of the best he's done, it means its crap?

Maybe the guy has quite a few drives which were outstanding, and the one in Hungary doesn't measure up to those in his head....and how does this translate to him thinking it wasn't a great comeback?

The moment he says something like "yeah it was a great comeback" we'll have the haters talking about how arrogant he is and how he should be thankful to have a car rebuilt in 1 day and how he "cheated his teammate of 3rd place".