Bootstrap Framework 3.3.6

[What's Burning?]

I give up Overboost, I guess I'll just have to live with the fact that the slower guy won in the inaugural Sochi Grand Prix only because the faster guy made a "bonehead" mistake according to your description. I hope I can come to grips with that until Austin and see if the slower guy makes it five in a row.

[The Second Coming]

I give up Overboost, I guess I'll just have to live with the fact that the slower guy won in the inaugural Sochi Grand Prix only because the faster guy made a "bonehead" mistake according to your description. I hope I can come to grips with that until Austin and see if the slower guy makes it five in a row.

I wonder, WB, is it possible...more significantly, has there ever been, in the history of F1, a case where the slower driver on a team, with the same car win 9 races to his faster team-mate's 4, with his team-mate using his setup and data to try and beat him (the slower driver)? I feel like this is a prime case for the Bizarro World where the opposite of everything that makes sense is the reality. Seems like someone needs to prove a point.

[sagi58]

...Put aside your bias and stop pretending to be onjective - there is nothing wrong with bias, just dont try and pretend you are coming from an intellectual pov instead of an emotional one...

Who are you?? And, what have you done with Cookin'??

[Nin-Chin]

Let's face it, Lewis didn't need to push that hard when he was leading. The fact that after Rosberg cleared Bottas he was lapping a few tenths faster than Lewis before Lewis suddenly did a lap time a tenth off fastest lap and then set a fastest lap later indicating that he was just tapping into his speed to to keep the gap. When you rode onboard with Lewis throughout the race he was lifting and coasting and Rosberg did none of this from the onboards I have.

[CookinFlat6]

I give up Overboost, I guess I'll just have to live with the fact that the slower guy won in the inaugural Sochi Grand Prix only because the faster guy made a "bonehead" mistake according to your description. I hope I can come to grips with that until Austin and see if the slower guy makes it five in a row.

The funniest thing is that he is no longer arguing that Nico was a faster driver, its Nicos setup that is faster

and he seems to have forgotten about Ricc who was the best driver on the grid a couple races ago

[CookinFlat6]

To bad cookin but you already gave up that argument with your clever analysis of the timing data. According to you Rosberg had to stop pushing in the corners to keep the deg under control. So basically he maxed out his tires but still got 30 extra laps and managed to set a time 3 tenths quicker than Hamilton. Amazing drive I would say proven by your most intelligent analysis.

Oh and he did all this while moving from virtually last to second place passing 18 cars while his teammate had the open road.

That's what I would call a winning setup if not for his bonehead mistake giving the lead back to Hamilton.

[CookinFlat6]

all very fancy and dandy and clever as you are, how comes you are unable to answer a simple question????

You told us earlier in the season that Lewis was mentally weak and had met his nemesis in Nicos superior mindset

Is this still the case, yes or no? no blahdeblah required, simple yes or no? were you wrong or is it more complicated than that blah blahdeblah etc

I didn't say that middle line but that almost goes without saying now.

And as for the yes or no, it's the wrong question, extended from the wrong sound bites you've got ringing in your ears. You lead yourself down the wrong path. That's why I can't answer it.

It feels now that the extra speed Hamilton has is no longer an advantage because he finds a way of negating it. I'm starting to feel we've seen this before in Hamilton, this psychological weakness we pretend is misfortune.

Does this statement still hold, yes or no

[Roth]

It held true at the time. We discussed it at length. Do you want me to drag out all the finer points on my position, instead of this sound bite?

This is exactly the point i'm making, you have that sentence in your head, and that's it. It was the starting point of a discussion not an end point.

Now find where I said Nico was stronger mentally.

[CookinFlat6]

It held true at the time. We discussed it at length. Do you want me to drag out all the finer points on my position, instead of this sound bite?

This is exactly the point i'm making, you have that sentence in your head, and that's it. It was the starting point of a discussion not an end point.

Now find where I said Nico was stronger mentally.

If it held at the time it must still hold 'the mental weakness we have seen before' - its just hidden now, if he had bad luck in a race it would be the same mental weakness roth?

so the mental weakness that held true because he made a couple of mistakes in quali, that disguises itself as misfortune - can come back at some point - yes or no?

[Roth]

It held true at the time. We discussed it at length. Do you want me to drag out all the finer points on my position, instead of this sound bite?

This is exactly the point i'm making, you have that sentence in your head, and that's it. It was the starting point of a discussion not an end point.

Now find where I said Nico was stronger mentally.

If it held at the time it must still hold 'the mental weakness we have seen before' - its just hidden now, if he had bad luck in a race it would be the same mental weakness roth?

so the mental weakness that held true because he made a couple of mistakes in quali, that disguises itself as misfortune - can come back at some point - yes or no?

That's a bit of a shift from...

"You told us earlier in the season that Lewis was mentally weak and had met his nemesis in Nicos superior mindset. Is this still the case, yes or no?"

Can you stick to one question at a time, yes or no?

[What's Burning?]

I never understand why people say things then are surprised when held accountable to what they said. There seems to always be a reason for what they're saying now superseding what they said then.

1) lying
2) changing ones mind
3) ulterior motive (trolling)
4) lack of intelligence
5) amnesia
6) hypocrisy

Can anyone help me out here, I'm trying to make sense of something that to me seems illogical so it's difficult to grasp.

[What's Burning?]

I never understand why people say things then are surprised when held accountable to what they said. There seems to always be a reason for what they're saying now superseding what they said then.

1) lying
2) changing ones mind
3) ulterior motive (trolling)
4) lack of intelligence
5) amnesia
6) hypocrisy

Can anyone help me out here, I'm trying to make sense of something that to me seems illogical so it's difficult to grasp.

Just had another thought on this... Being wrong was left off the list because it never occurs to said people that it could be a possibility. We'd have 3/4 less content here otherwise.

[LRW]

I never understand why people say things then are surprised when held accountable to what they said. There seems to always be a reason for what they're saying now superseding what they said then.

1) lying
2) changing ones mind
3) ulterior motive (trolling)
4) lack of intelligence
5) amnesia
6) hypocrisy

Can anyone help me out here, I'm trying to make sense of something that to me seems illogical so it's difficult to grasp.

Just had another thought on this... Being wrong was left off the list because it never occurs to said people that it could be a possibility. We'd have 3/4 less content here otherwise.

Doesnt changing your mind come under same heading as being wrong? You change your mind because you know you were wrong?

[What's Burning?]

I never understand why people say things then are surprised when held accountable to what they said. There seems to always be a reason for what they're saying now superseding what they said then.

1) lying
2) changing ones mind
3) ulterior motive (trolling)
4) lack of intelligence
5) amnesia
6) hypocrisy

Can anyone help me out here, I'm trying to make sense of something that to me seems illogical so it's difficult to grasp.

Just had another thought on this... Being wrong was left off the list because it never occurs to said people that it could be a possibility. We'd have 3/4 less content here otherwise.

Doesnt changing your mind come under same heading as being wrong? You change your mind because you know you were wrong?

You're wrong. That's actually a wholesome one and you could see it that way but... You could have come to a decision based on ignorance or not having all the facts or being misled. Changing your mind shows a willingness to learn the truth is more important than being right or proving a point.

[LRW]

Changing your mind shows a willingness to learn the truth is more important than being right or proving a point.

I dont have the energy to always be right - mainly because Im so often wrong on things, its easier just to accept it, than to bullpoo and try to save face .