FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[overboost]

Do you have a difficulty in retaining or processing info?

I just posted the link where I helped you see that for a company like Merc Lewis is not just a driver but a marketeer and therefore its irrelevant what he gets paid and what he does on track as long as his marketeability remains high which is of course dependent on what he does on track. And I even posted a link for you to discover why and how he is the biggest marketing draw on the grid, i.e bigger than Nico

yet you react like you forgot engage both parts of your brain and launch into a useless discussion we had months ago

Are you on drink? or on drugs? because this is beyond mere short term memory loss or uncontrollable biogotry and bias, you dont even know what you already argued about??

Cooking that link is to a sports magazine survey! Do you actually think that Mercedes bases their business decisions on a sports magazine fan survey. Most of those names are rather unknown anyway.

Merc is in F1 for one reason only - to sell cars, not racing as they don't have an F1 racing heritage, it is all about sales data to them. If they think Hamilton is selling cars then they will keep him if not then he will go. It isn't complicated!

Ps. Are those insults what you call 'ad hominem' attacks? I understand that you claim to be above that kind of thing. Is that so?
And you choose drug abuse and bigotry as your form of abuse?? Please stop.

[CookinFlat6]

Due to your memory loss, I asked you for clarification on your condition, not claimed you were in any condition. A question is not an insult.

Although in some cases it can be argued that an intent to insult was the motivation for a question.

e.g. If I ask 'are you stupid?' thats a question, if I said 'you are stupid' thats an insult

However if I asked if you were stupid, then it could be an insult because, If I really thought you were stupid, i wouldnt ask the question, because if you are stupid then you would be too stupid to answer the question correctly, therefore asking the question could mean I was really out to insult you because I assumed you were stupid. so this would be a stupid insult unless you were actually stupid in which case you wouldnt be offended, if you were not stupid enough not to fully understand the question

So asking simple question about your memory loss can be regarded a simple question and therefore part of the debate and not ad hominem as I am not attacking your credibility instead of your argument

Now if I had just said you were a with and of in

that would clearly be an insult

[overboost]

Due to your memory loss, I asked you for clarification on your condition, not claimed you were in any condition. A question is not an insult.

Although in some cases it can be argued that an intent to insult was the motivation for a question.

e.g. If I ask 'are you stupid?' thats a question, if I said 'you are stupid' thats an insult

However if I asked if you were stupid, then it could be an insult because, If I really thought you were stupid, i wouldnt ask the question, because if you are stupid then you would be too stupid to answer the question correctly, therefore asking the question could mean I was really out to insult you because I assumed you were stupid. so this would be a stupid insult unless you were actually stupid in which case you wouldnt be offended, if you were not stupid enough not to fully understand the question

So asking simple question about your memory loss can be regarded a simple question and therefore part of the debate and not ad hominem as I am not attacking your credibility instead of your argument

Now if I had just said you were a with and of in

that would clearly be an insult

Yes and it is also true that the question itself is an insult.

As well, If you think adding a question mark gives you any sort of leeway you are wrong. Please stop.

[CookinFlat6]

Due to your memory loss, I asked you for clarification on your condition, not claimed you were in any condition. A question is not an insult.

Although in some cases it can be argued that an intent to insult was the motivation for a question.

e.g. If I ask 'are you stupid?' thats a question, if I said 'you are stupid' thats an insult

However if I asked if you were stupid, then it could be an insult because, If I really thought you were stupid, i wouldnt ask the question, because if you are stupid then you would be too stupid to answer the question correctly, therefore asking the question could mean I was really out to insult you because I assumed you were stupid. so this would be a stupid insult unless you were actually stupid in which case you wouldnt be offended, if you were not stupid enough not to fully understand the question

So asking simple question about your memory loss can be regarded a simple question and therefore part of the debate and not ad hominem as I am not attacking your credibility instead of your argument

Now if I had just said you were a with and of in

that would clearly be an insult

Yes and it is also true that the question itself is an insult.

As well, If you think adding a question mark gives you any sort of leeway you are wrong. Please stop.

OB, OB, OB, I know you are in pain and have been unable to sit down properly since Sunday afternoon, but please calm down and relax, ad hominem has not been offered to you. A simple question about the possible cause of your memory lapse. As you can see I have demonstrated that we had exactly the same discourse 6 months ago, and thereofre it is a little unsettling to find you asking exactly the same questions again and offering the same response to the same link.

Its entirely reasonable to raise the question of the physiological ability of a member to conduct a debate. This is different to questioning your credibility to offer any particular type of debate. So a simple answer would do, although the fact that a lot of time has passed since that Mea Culpa (when you couldnt even remember that you had already discuused the post that I copied and pasted for you) that the question of being on drink or drugs at that time would be irrelevant now

So whatever you were on, its gone, over, done and dusted, and you can stop having your feelings hurt and continue to tell us why Lewis is so B.A.D and so H.A.M

[overboost]

Why are you throwing up so much flak cooking? Is something bothering you about Stewart's comments? Yes I think so.

It is an interesting point that Stewart is essentially making - that Hamilton did not have so easy a time beating Rosberg. A good driver but never considered top tier, similar to Button imo.

Any one of many less expensive drivers would be wdc in that car. Rosberg of course and Hulk, Bottas, Massa, Ricciardo, Perez, Grosjean even Vergne! all could have won.

And isn't it Mercedes who is so very concerned about costs? So concerned in fact that they are refusing to allow even the smallest in season engine updates? All in the name of fiscal responsibility of course!

So then why pay top driver dollars when you have that 2 sec/lap wdc/wcc machine that flatters all who drive it? A car that wins big on Sunday and sells big on Monday!

ps. I did notice on the Merc website a really big pic of the car on the front page and they are tagging Hamilton as the "#WO5LD CHAMPION"! Is it all about the car with them? Yes I think so.

[CookinFlat6]

Good point, but not many would be WDC in 2 different teams, once is a coincidence of competent driver in a 2 second car - Button is the classic example of this random and shallow aspect of F1, 1 minute without a job in F1, no-one wanted him at all not even back markers, then by that quirke of fate common in F1 - he is in a Ross Brawn winning team, with rebens shackled and not allowed to race, and Button makes a mess of it but the 2 sec advantage is too much, so he wins a WDC

Seb, lucky to be in a Newey car at a time mcLaren and ferrari lamely allowed a drinks company to come along and get special favours allowing them to win, so we have Seb, the second most ridiculed WDC ever, struggles to beat Webber one year, untill the team build Seb some downforce at the back to avoid him crapping his pants when the back end steps out (like in the previous race)

And ofcourse the biggest fake of all time MS himself - we dont need to go into the advantages he had over the others including traction control

So these fakers win multi WDCS as they get lucky and are attractive enought to house wifes and hairdressers to sell some drinks or whatever and the farce is maintained till an actually talnted driver comnes along then shows how its about sitting in right car by accident for the 'WDC streak in same team fakers'
Now Button was so lame he could only manage 2 with Seb and MS managing 4 and 5 pop idol style cheat fests

Now with lewis 2 WDCS in 2 teams 6 years apart - theres no pop idol there

go on wiki and find out which drivers have done this- won WDCs in 2 different teams years apart

then think about applying your next dose of anusol ahead of schedule

cos yu gonna need it bro

[CookinFlat6]

So then why pay top driver dollars when you have that 2 sec/lap wdc/wcc machine that flatters all who drive it? A car that wins big on Sunday and sells big on Monday!

because you silly member, who is pretending to be a thicko of epic dimensions, Lewis, just by wearing his Merc hats ultimately increases the sales revenue of mercedes by around 16x his salary, so he could come last and Merc would still want him

you really convinced us that you were dumber than a baboon with a permanent headache, hehe, you rascal, you

You almost had me believing Rosberg of course and Hulk, Bottas, Massa, Ricciardo, Perez, Grosjean even Vergne! all could have increased the global sales of Mercedes due to their marketing reach and Tiger Woods like appeal

You really are good at pretending to be a thicko of the order of interest to the Guinness book of records

[overboost]

So then why pay top driver dollars when you have that 2 sec/lap wdc/wcc machine that flatters all who drive it? A car that wins big on Sunday and sells big on Monday!

because you silly member, who is pretending to be a thicko of epic dimensions, Lewis, just by wearing his Merc hats ultimately increases the sales revenue of mercedes by around 16x his salary, so he could come last and Merc would still want him

you really convinced us that you were dumber than a baboon with a permanent headache, hehe, you rascal, you

You almost had me believing Rosberg of course and Hulk, Bottas, Massa, Ricciardo, Perez, Grosjean even Vergne! all could have increased the global sales of Mercedes due to their marketing reach and Tiger Woods like appeal

You really are good at pretending to be a thicko of the order of interest to the Guinness book of records

Once again cooking you find yourself at odds with F1 insiders, this time it is Peter Windsor. His info is that an internal Merc Board survey identified that the benefits of a Rosberg championship would outweigh a Hamilton championship by a factor of 10 to 1! Watch at the 3:00 minute mark. And this comes after Windsor spends the first 3 mins berating Rosberg for Spa.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EQBry3 ... EJVw#t=183

Also if Hamilton putting a Merc hat on is so valuable as you say it is then why doesn't Merc even have one pic of Hamilton's smiling face in a Merc hat on their website. Their car is well featured though, the W05LD CHAMPION as Merc calls it.

ps. You shouldn't use Tiger as an example of Hamilton's marketing appeal! He destroyed $12 Billion of stock market value. Do try and keep up cooking.

http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2009/12/28/h ... ket-value/

[overboost]

Good point, but not many would be WDC in 2 different teams, once is a coincidence of competent driver in a 2 second car - Button is the classic example of this random and shallow aspect of F1, 1 minute without a job in F1, no-one wanted him at all not even back markers, then by that quirke of fate common in F1 - he is in a Ross Brawn winning team, with rebens shackled and not allowed to race, and Button makes a mess of it but the 2 sec advantage is too much, so he wins a WDC

Seb, lucky to be in a Newey car at a time mcLaren and ferrari lamely allowed a drinks company to come along and get special favours allowing them to win, so we have Seb, the second most ridiculed WDC ever, struggles to beat Webber one year, untill the team build Seb some downforce at the back to avoid him crapping his pants when the back end steps out (like in the previous race)

And ofcourse the biggest fake of all time MS himself - we dont need to go into the advantages he had over the others including traction control

So these fakers win multi WDCS as they get lucky and are attractive enought to house wifes and hairdressers to sell some drinks or whatever and the farce is maintained till an actually talnted driver comnes along then shows how its about sitting in right car by accident for the 'WDC streak in same team fakers'
Now Button was so lame he could only manage 2 with Seb and MS managing 4 and 5 pop idol style cheat fests

Now with lewis 2 WDCS in 2 teams 6 years apart - theres no pop idol there

go on wiki and find out which drivers have done this- won WDCs in 2 different teams years apart

then think about applying your next dose of anusol ahead of schedule

cos yu gonna need it bro

^ Does this post mean anything?

Anyway, so you are agreeing then that a host of other drivers would have won the wdc in that car this year?

[CookinFlat6]

Once again cooking you find yourself at odds with F1 insiders, this time it is Peter Windsor. His info is that an internal Merc Board survey identified that the benefits of a Rosberg championship would outweigh a Hamilton championship by a factor of 10 to 1! Watch at the 3:00 minute mark. And this comes after Windsor spends the first 3 mins berating Rosberg for Spa.

ps. You shouldn't use Tiger as an example of Hamilton's marketing appeal! He destroyed $12 Billion of stock market value. Do try and keep up cooking.

http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2009/12/28/h ... ket-value/

Peter Windsor knows about as much as you about how to analyse or understand the information he has access to - he is not an expert at this. He is just another beacon for clingons in a sea of ignorance. It is no surprise that he hasnt been given his own TV show

i am sure you feel qualified to use the workings of the stock market to prove a logical fallacy, but with the stock market, using data that is 5 years old can sometimes have a way of pulling your pants down in public.

See, markets go up and down all the time, in fact theres a disclaimer at the bottom of the WSJ that you quoted from saying the info you read must not be used to make decisions because value of your stock can do the opposite to the implication of what you read in their editorial. This is small print for those that need to be reminded not to cross roads when cars are driving past.
Alas this small print is never read by many who get headaches reading anything more than a headline and then jumping up to project this headline into reality, and even worse tell others

The value of the collective market Cap of Tigers Sponsors went down by a grand total of 2.3%. Now in the first period of sponsoring Tiger, their average value rose 18.3%, and check this out, the market cap recovered the 2.3% in a matter of a week or 2 .

Heres the interesting part in the report you posted but didnt understand how to make sense of-

Of course, caveats abound. Woods’s sponsors are mostly subsidiaries of larger parent companies and the statistical margin of error is particularly large. Still, “the overall pattern of losses at the parent companies is unlikely to stem from ordinary day-to-day variation in their stock prices,” the professors say.

Ok so lets say the 2.% fall that disappeared soon after was not within the realms of any statistical error tolerance and is all down to a bunch of bible bashing country dwelling red necks who stop buying Nike because they are so disgusted that a young rich golfer would cheat on his wife and are so choked with indignation that they are unable to resume any meaningful sexual relationship with their siblings for a few days - who cares? they have no effect on the market cap, only the major stockholders do IF they sell their profitable stocks because tiger cheated on his wife ( )

You wont understand any of this part so dont worry, but Imma gonna leave it here so it can be read by those who know what to do with data and info before shooting off fallacies ending in the obligatory Mea Culpa

The following are the amount of new record stock market closing prices - Tiger caused his blip in 2009
2008 - 2012 (0 record closes)
2013 (52 record closes)
2014 (29 record closes)

Ok Ob, you may now do your Mea Culpa

[CookinFlat6]

Also if Hamilton putting a Merc hat on is so valuable as you say it is then why doesn't Merc even have one pic of Hamilton's smiling face in a Merc hat on their website. Their car is well featured though, the W05LD CHAMPION as Merc calls it.

On the Merc site, people are there generally to find out about Merc CARS - thats why you have a picture of a CAR,

Now, on a GP weekend when 100s of millions watch on Tv, thats when Lewis wearing his Merc cap causes the fixing of the mental image for these 100s of millions

mental image they are paying the big money to project is ofcourse, Lewis + Winner gene x Mercedes brand + winner gene = person watching + Mercedes car = winner gene

Dont worry about the maths, its complicated and therefore meaningless

[overboost]

Once again cooking you find yourself at odds with F1 insiders, this time it is Peter Windsor. His info is that an internal Merc Board survey identified that the benefits of a Rosberg championship would outweigh a Hamilton championship by a factor of 10 to 1! Watch at the 3:00 minute mark. And this comes after Windsor spends the first 3 mins berating Rosberg for Spa.

ps. You shouldn't use Tiger as an example of Hamilton's marketing appeal! He destroyed $12 Billion of stock market value. Do try and keep up cooking.

http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2009/12/28/h ... ket-value/

Peter Windsor knows about as much as you about how to analyse or understand the information he has access to - he is not an expert at this. He is just another beacon for clingons in a sea of ignorance. It is no surprise that he hasnt been given his own TV show

i am sure you feel qualified to use the workings of the stock market to prove a logical fallacy, but with the stock market, using data that is 5 years old can sometimes have a way of pulling your pants down in public.

See, markets go up and down all the time, in fact theres a disclaimer at the bottom of the WSJ that you quoted from saying the info you read must not be used to make decisions because value of your stock can do the opposite to the implication of what you read in their editorial. This is small print for those that need to be reminded not to cross roads when cars are driving past.
Alas this small print is never read by many who get headaches reading anything more than a headline and then jumping up to project this headline into reality, and even worse tell others

The value of the collective market Cap of Tigers Sponsors went down by a grand total of 2.3%. Now in the first period of sponsoring Tiger, their average value rose 18.3%, and check this out, the market cap recovered the 2.3% in a matter of a week or 2 .

Heres the interesting part in the report you posted but didnt understand how to make sense of-

Of course, caveats abound. Woods’s sponsors are mostly subsidiaries of larger parent companies and the statistical margin of error is particularly large. Still, “the overall pattern of losses at the parent companies is unlikely to stem from ordinary day-to-day variation in their stock prices,” the professors say.

Ok so lets say the 2.% fall that disappeared soon after was not within the realms of any statistical error tolerance and is all down to a bunch of bible bashing country dwelling red necks who stop buying Nike because they are so disgusted that a young rich golfer would cheat on his wife and are so choked with indignation that they are unable to resume any meaningful sexual relationship with their siblings for a few days - who cares? they have no effect on the market cap, only the major stockholders do IF they sell their profitable stocks because tiger cheated on his wife ( )

You wont understand any of this part so dont worry, but Imma gonna leave it here so it can be read by those who know what to do with data and info before shooting off fallacies ending in the obligatory Mea Culpa

The following are the amount of new record stock market closing prices - Tiger caused his blip in 2009
2008 - 2012 (0 record closes)
2013 (52 record closes)
2014 (29 record closes)

Ok Ob, you may now do your Mea Culpa

^ Please stop cooking you are embarrassing yourself!

Tiger isn't even in golfs Top 10 endorsers in 2014. Not that Tiger Woods has any bearing at all on this discussion anyway as he had suffered a reputation disaster whereas Hamilton has not.



Lets do a quick tally:

On financial matters cooking claims to know better that the Wall Street Journal
On F1 matters cooking claims to know better than John Watson, Jackie Stewart, Damon Hill, Peter Windsor, David Coulthard, Kimi Raikkonen, Felipe Massa, Gary Anderson, and Lewis Hamilton himself.

Why don't you have a TV show cooking??

Getting back on track, so I guess you are conceding then that any one of the midfield drivers listed earlier would have been champion in the W05?

[CookinFlat6]

Nice change of subject OB, that helps confirm to any one interested the level of effort you put into your increasingly worthless links or 'research'

So before we move on to your next Mea Culpa (assuming you were man enough to actually have one like people like sagi did at one timor other)

Whats Golf top earners in 2014 got to do with your previous claim that Tiger 'destroyed' 2billion of share value, beyond the normal meaningless random fluctuations in the stock price during a cycle of stagnation? Strawman

next going back to the focus - just to conclude it, you said Merc could get a cheaper driver to drive the W05 or W06 to a Wdc, and it was pointed out to you that a driver like Lewis almost uniquely on the grid was worth several times his pay for the marketing reach and asociation he brought - along the lines of the ground breaking tiger - to which you went of on your strawman detour - which we have shown to mean sweet FA -'destroyed market value?' thats the kind of crap only academics come up with to be lapped up by certain people
No investors or serious people gives a sh!t about Tiger doing whatever he did beyond a few rednecks who have about as much impact on the long term value as you do on fans of the current world champion

You are barely even a mild irritant in the scheme of things, but to be fair that makes you a very important part of the membership

So forget the lewis is not worth the money cos his car is so good, even max Chilton could win in that car - but max aint in that car, and he aint in that car because he aint got the followers and fans Lewis has. The type that includes a subset of diehards who beat the facts, the bigotry and lies of his critics like Ike beat Tina

[Ferrari man 009]

Now with lewis 2 WDCS in 2 teams 6 years apart - theres no pop idol there

go on wiki and find out which drivers have done this- won WDCs in 2 different teams years apart

Funnily enough, Michael Schumacher was the last to do so. 1995 Benetton and 2000 Ferrari. So maybe less slagging off MS, one of the greatest F1 drivers of all time is in order.

[CookinFlat6]

Exactly MS was the last one to do so, yet OD places MS and Lewis along with Seb, Button who have only won in a 2 sec car in one team.

MS as far as I am concerned has achieved the feat of winning a WDC with 2 different teams and is therefore proven to be a real champion and not a 2sec car lucky place lucky time champion,. However when it comes to the other 4 in row at Ferrari with all the extra help - those mean next to zero as far as I am concerned- They have not a single bearing on how great i think he is

And any driver, no matter how great he is and no matter how good I think he is is not and will never be immune of being slagged of when his misdemeanours are being discussed

F1 is a waste for blind hero worship and teenage angst and pop idol swooning

i will try and warn you before hand next time I rip into your idols and cherished memories, but I cant guarantee this each time