• What's most important for F1 success - car and team, or driver?

    From Philip@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 6 14:26:25 2022
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Dan the Man@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 6 07:20:33 2022
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 9:26:28 AM UTC-4, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848
    That has been the subject of much discussion here, already. I tend to believe the car is the biggest factor; the Jenson Button - Brawn GP championship is my biggest argument for that. But most years, you need the complete package: quick car, top-notch driver, well-drilled crew.
    Dan
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 6 16:57:45 2022
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 14:26:25 +0100, Philip <invalid@nospam.org> wrote:

    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848


    Nah, Alan knows better.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 6 09:01:37 2022
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 9:57:47 AM UTC-6, martin...@gmail.com wrote:

    Nah, Alan knows better.

    hey harry martin.
    thanks for logging in and trolling.
    you fucking useless twat.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 6 12:30:38 2022
    On 2022-07-06 08:57, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 14:26:25 +0100, Philip <invalid@nospam.org> wrote:

    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848


    Nah, Alan knows better.


    Than you? Obviously.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 6 12:38:33 2022
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent
    shot at winning.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 6 15:11:23 2022
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 1:30:40 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Than you? Obviously.

    you numb trolling brain dead piece of shit loser
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 6 15:12:48 2022
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 1:38:35 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    I know what they're saying and why.

    you know fuck all
    proven over and over
    fuck off stupid
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 6 15:13:43 2022
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 1:38:35 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    But the simple facts remain:

    speaking of simple
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 6 16:00:43 2022
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 1:30:40 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Than you? Obviously.

    it aint obvious.
    you numb cunt
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 6 16:14:56 2022
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 1:38:35 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent shot at winning.

    this from the biggest loser on the planet
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From XYXPDQ@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 7 09:33:47 2022
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:26:28 AM UTC-7, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an answer.


    Money.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Bigbird@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 7 21:48:11 2022
    XYXPDQ wrote:

    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:26:28 AM UTC-7, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1?
    An eight-season study has offered up an answer.


    Money.

    You didn't understand the question... but then neither did Toyota.

    --
    Bozo Bin
    Alan Baker
    Texasgate
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 7 16:09:02 2022
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 3:48:13 PM UTC-6, Bigbird wrote:

    You didn't understand the question... but then neither did Toyota.

    fuck you
    you miserable fucking cunt
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 8 08:10:45 2022
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
    far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 8 09:09:09 2022
    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>
    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent
    shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
    far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
    that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best
    drivers out there currently.

    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try were it not for a mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he might
    have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might not even have
    been able to do that.

    And you know it.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 8 09:17:41 2022
    On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 10:09:12 AM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    And you know it.

    kill yourself
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From XYXPDQ@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 8 10:15:53 2022
    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 2:48:13 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
    XYXPDQ wrote:

    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:26:28 AM UTC-7, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1?
    An eight-season study has offered up an answer.


    Money.
    You didn't understand the question... but then neither did Toyota.

    --
    Bozo Bin
    Alan Baker
    Texasgate

    Even with the new spending cap it's still about the money (which some teams reportedly don't even have). Look what at the difference in what the teams are paying drivers.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 8 11:39:24 2022
    On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 10:09:12 AM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    And you know it.

    You are a fucking idiot,
    and now a psychic too?
    Or just a psycho?
    You sick fuck.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Bigbird@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 8 18:54:04 2022
    XYXPDQ wrote:

    On Thursday, July 7, 2022 at 2:48:13 PM UTC-7, Bigbird wrote:
    XYXPDQ wrote:

    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:26:28 AM UTC-7, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in
    Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an answer.


    Money.
    You didn't understand the question... but then neither did Toyota.


    Even with the new spending cap it's still about the money (which some
    teams reportedly don't even have). Look what at the difference in
    what the teams are paying drivers.

    <sigh>

    You can lead a horse...

    --
    Bozo Bin
    Alan Baker
    Texasgate
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 8 12:23:50 2022
    On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 12:54:06 PM UTC-6, Bigbird wrote:

    <sigh>

    You can lead a horse...

    fuck off
    you miserable cock sucker
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 8 17:48:02 2022
    On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 12:54:06 PM UTC-6, Bigbird wrote:

    You can lead a horse...

    cant finish a sentence?
    you numb useless cunt
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 8 17:59:00 2022
    On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 12:54:06 PM UTC-6, Bigbird wrote:

    You can lead a horse...

    right to your mothers vagina
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From a425couple@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 8 20:06:35 2022
    On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they
    said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
    Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between
    the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>> shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
    far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
    that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best drivers out there currently.

    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try were it not for a mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he might
    have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might not even have
    been able to do that.

    And you know it.

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
    factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
    by this years current standings.

    How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be
    first and second, other than them being in
    the best car, Red Bull.

    How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be
    3rd and 4th, other than them being in the second
    best car, Ferrari.

    How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton
    be 5th and 6th, other than them being in
    the third best car, Mercedes.

    Year after year, the grids quite often have
    the team mates side by side.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 8 20:23:40 2022
    On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 9:06:36 PM UTC-6, a425couple wrote:

    Alan's statement

    fuck alan
    he is a piece of shit troll here
    wake the fuck up
    like i said before
    you are desperate for friends
    the guy is a deluxe cunt
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Bigbird@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 9 11:17:03 2022
    a425couple wrote:

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
    factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
    by this years current standings.


    I think a case could be made that Max would still be leading in a
    Ferrari.


    --
    Bozo Bin
    Alan Baker
    Texasgate
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From a425couple@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 9 07:47:12 2022
    On 7/9/2022 4:17 AM, Bigbird wrote:
    a425couple wrote:

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
    factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
    by this years current standings.


    I think a case could be made that Max would still be leading in a
    Ferrari.


    I agree.
    A case could be made for that.
    Both Red Bull and Ferrari are very good cars
    this year and oftentimes close in performance.

    But more to the point, of which is more important,
    car or driver, Max would not be leading
    in a Mercedes, McLaren, Alpine, Alfa, Alpha Tauri,
    Hass, Aston Martin, nor Williams.


    In considering the 'Car or driver question',
    I think it is worth considering Bottas.
    In 5 years he was with Williams, which was
    a pretty decent car those years. He had no wins.
    Then he was with Mercedes for 5 years.
    He won 10 races, and was the WDC runner-up twice,
    and in 3rd place twice. Is it conceivable that
    he could have finished that high in anything
    other than the car that won the Constructors Championship
    for the first 4 of those years?

    Now in 2022, after Mercedes dropped Bottas,
    (he is still a quite fine driver) he is scrapping
    for points for places 5th through 10th
    in the 6th place car.

    My opinion is there are about 12 top notch drivers,
    and the difference between them on each of their
    best days is very small.

    But meanwhile, the difference between the constructors,
    say from best to mid-field, is fairly large.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Bigbird@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 9 15:10:26 2022
    a425couple wrote:

    On 7/9/2022 4:17 AM, Bigbird wrote:
    a425couple wrote:

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
    factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
    by this years current standings.


    I think a case could be made that Max would still be leading in a
    Ferrari.


    I agree.
    A case could be made for that.
    Both Red Bull and Ferrari are very good cars
    this year and oftentimes close in performance.

    But more to the point, of which is more important,
    car or driver,

    I don't think that us an argument which any serious F1 would be having.


    --
    Bozo Bin
    Alan Baker
    Texasgate
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 9 08:18:12 2022
    On Saturday, July 9, 2022 at 9:10:28 AM UTC-6, Bigbird wrote:

    I don't think that us an argument which any serious F1 would be having.

    you drunk?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 9 12:38:44 2022
    On 2022-07-09 04:17, Bigbird wrote:
    a425couple wrote:

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
    factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
    by this years current standings.


    I think a case could be made that Max would still be leading in a
    Ferrari.

    Which would only be possible, because the Ferrari is pretty close to as
    good a car as the Red Bull.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 9 12:52:24 2022
    On Saturday, July 9, 2022 at 1:38:47 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Which would only be possible, because the Ferrari is pretty close to as
    good a car as the Red Bull.

    fuck you
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Edmund@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 10 08:39:41 2022
    On 7/6/22 15:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts,

    experts sure :-)





    --
    rCLThe further a society drift from the truth,
    the more it will hate those who speak itrCY

    George Orwell
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 10 09:50:19 2022
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple <a425couple@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they >>>>> said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
    Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between >>>>> the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>
    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>> shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
    far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
    that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best
    drivers out there currently.

    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being able to fit
    properly, he would have won in it on his first try were it not for a
    mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he might
    have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might not even have
    been able to do that.

    And you know it.

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
    factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
    by this years current standings.

    How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be
    first and second, other than them being in
    the best car, Red Bull.

    How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be
    3rd and 4th, other than them being in the second
    best car, Ferrari.

    How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton
    be 5th and 6th, other than them being in
    the third best car, Mercedes.

    Year after year, the grids quite often have
    the team mates side by side.

    Points scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of the
    difference between teammates. The last 3 years:

    2021
    Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190
    Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226

    2020
    Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223
    Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125

    2019
    Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326
    Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187

    So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for winning
    but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite which is why
    the very best drivers always outstrip their not-so-very-best
    teammates.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From build@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 10 08:08:38 2022
    On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 5:10:48 PM UTC+10, martin... wrote:


    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
    far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    Martin,

    Maybe I missed Alan saying that "he really isn't all that exceptional", but I have certainly read him saying that "Lewis is exceptional". It seems you missed or ignored those comments.

    build
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Andrew Karlsson@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 10 15:50:52 2022
    sunnuntai 10. hein|nkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com kirjoitti:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple <a425c...@hotmail.com>
    wrote:
    On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they >>>>> said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between >>>>> the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>
    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent
    shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
    that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best
    drivers out there currently.

    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being able to fit >> properly, he would have won in it on his first try were it not for a
    mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he might
    have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might not even have >> been able to do that.

    And you know it.

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
    factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
    by this years current standings.

    How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be
    first and second, other than them being in
    the best car, Red Bull.

    How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be
    3rd and 4th, other than them being in the second
    best car, Ferrari.

    How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton
    be 5th and 6th, other than them being in
    the third best car, Mercedes.

    Year after year, the grids quite often have
    the team mates side by side.
    Points scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:

    2021
    Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190
    Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226

    2020
    Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223
    Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125

    2019
    Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326
    Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187

    So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for winning
    but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite which is why
    the very best drivers always outstrip their not-so-very-best
    teammates.
    People say that the best car is more important than the driver, but the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car. Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be in the top teams.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From geoff@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Mon Jul 11 10:53:36 2022
    On 11/07/2022 3:08 am, build wrote:
    On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 5:10:48 PM UTC+10, martin... wrote:


    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
    far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    Martin,

    Maybe I missed Alan saying that "he really isn't all that exceptional", but I have certainly read him saying that "Lewis is exceptional". It seems you missed or ignored those comments.

    build

    He just drops that every so often in order to deflect from the other 90%
    that are subtle (or not so subtle) swipes.

    geoff
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 10 16:34:58 2022
    On Sunday, July 10, 2022 at 4:53:46 PM UTC-6, geoff wrote:

    that are subtle (or not so subtle)

    sitting on the fence as usual.
    a trait of spineless NZ useless idiots.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 10 17:28:57 2022
    On 2022-07-10 15:53, geoff wrote:
    On 11/07/2022 3:08 am, build wrote:
    On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 5:10:48 PM UTC+10, martin... wrote:


    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
    far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    Martin,

    Maybe I missed Alan saying that "he really isn't all that
    exceptional", but I have certainly read him saying that "Lewis is
    exceptional". It seems you missed or ignored those comments.

    build

    He just drops that every so often in order to deflect from the other 90% that are subtle (or not so subtle) swipes.

    geoff


    You're a liar.

    Quote one single time I've ever supposedly dropped that in.

    You're a liar, Geoff. A no balls, pissant liar.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From ~misfit~@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Mon Jul 11 14:25:35 2022
    On 11/07/2022 10:50 am, Andrew Karlsson wrote:
    sunnuntai 10. hein|nkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com kirjoitti:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple <a425c...@hotmail.com>
    wrote:
    On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they >>>>>>> said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between >>>>>>> the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>>>
    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>>>> shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported >>>>> above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
    that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best >>>> drivers out there currently.

    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being able to fit >>>> properly, he would have won in it on his first try were it not for a
    mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he might
    have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might not even have >>>> been able to do that.

    And you know it.

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger
    factor than the driver, would seem to be supported
    by this years current standings.

    How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be
    first and second, other than them being in
    the best car, Red Bull.

    How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be
    3rd and 4th, other than them being in the second
    best car, Ferrari.

    How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton
    be 5th and 6th, other than them being in
    the third best car, Mercedes.

    Year after year, the grids quite often have
    the team mates side by side.
    Points scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of the
    difference between teammates. The last 3 years:

    2021
    Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190
    Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226

    2020
    Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223
    Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125

    2019
    Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326
    Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187

    So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for winning
    but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite which is why
    the very best drivers always outstrip their not-so-very-best
    teammates.
    People say that the best car is more important than the driver, but the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car. Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be in the top teams.

    I think you underestimate Albon. IMO his results at RBR weren't a true indication if his ability,
    he was given too much too soon (and a car that was designed for a driver with a different style to
    him).
    --
    Shaun.

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
    in the DSM"
    David Melville

    This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 10 19:28:05 2022
    On 2022-07-10 15:50, Andrew Karlsson wrote:
    sunnuntai 10. hein|nkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com kirjoitti:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
    <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
    wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in
    Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
    answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car
    and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the
    skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes
    called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the
    team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
    Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly
    validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been
    greatly overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
    accounts for roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
    interaction between the driver and the team, which
    accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>>>

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance
    of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least
    a very decent shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study
    reported above; where you differ from others is your
    insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor
    and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver,
    he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have
    had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
    repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one
    of the very best drivers out there currently.

    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being
    able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try
    were it not for a mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he
    might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might
    not even have been able to do that.

    And you know it.

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the
    driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
    standings.

    How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second,
    other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.

    How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other
    than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.

    How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other
    than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.

    Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side
    by side.
    Points scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
    the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:

    2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226

    2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125

    2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187

    So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
    winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite
    which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
    not-so-very-best teammates.
    People say that the best car is more important than the driver, but
    the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon
    would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car.
    Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be
    in the top teams.


    I don't know about Latifi...

    ..but how are you so sure that Albon couldn't win a title in a top car?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 10 21:47:52 2022
    On Sunday, July 10, 2022 at 6:29:00 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    You're a liar

    and you a trolling dumb cunt
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 10 21:48:57 2022
    On Sunday, July 10, 2022 at 8:28:08 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    I don't know

    What is fucking new?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From geoff@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Mon Jul 11 17:11:24 2022
    On 11/07/2022 12:28 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-10 15:53, geoff wrote:
    On 11/07/2022 3:08 am, build wrote:
    On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 5:10:48 PM UTC+10, martin... wrote:


    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    Martin,

    Maybe I missed Alan saying that "he really isn't all that
    exceptional", but I have certainly read him saying that "Lewis is
    exceptional". It seems you missed or ignored those comments.

    build

    He just drops that every so often in order to deflect from the other
    90% that are subtle (or not so subtle) swipes.

    geoff


    You're a liar.

    Quote one single time I've ever supposedly dropped that in.

    You're a liar, Geoff. A no balls, pissant liar.

    Instead of the Pool 'guesses' on F1 races, maybe we should do a
    verifiable 'pool' on the number of time MasturBaker has inferred HAM is
    one if the best, and the number of times he has inferred just another
    good driver. Or ideas to that effect.

    geoff
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 10 22:59:51 2022
    On 2022-07-10 22:11, geoff wrote:
    On 11/07/2022 12:28 pm, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-10 15:53, geoff wrote:
    On 11/07/2022 3:08 am, build wrote:
    On Friday, July 8, 2022 at 5:10:48 PM UTC+10, martin... wrote:


    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported >>>>> above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    Martin,

    Maybe I missed Alan saying that "he really isn't all that
    exceptional", but I have certainly read him saying that "Lewis is
    exceptional". It seems you missed or ignored those comments.

    build

    He just drops that every so often in order to deflect from the other
    90% that are subtle (or not so subtle) swipes.

    geoff


    You're a liar.

    Quote one single time I've ever supposedly dropped that in.

    You're a liar, Geoff. A no balls, pissant liar.

    Instead of the Pool 'guesses' on F1 races, maybe we should do a
    verifiable 'pool' on the number of time MasturBaker has inferred HAM is
    one if the best, and the number of times he has inferred just another
    good driver. Or ideas to that effect.

    So you've immediately backed of your claim, liar...

    ...and misused "infer" when you meant "imply".
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Mon Jul 11 13:37:10 2022
    On 2022-07-07 09:33, XYXPDQ wrote:
    On Wednesday, July 6, 2022 at 6:26:28 AM UTC-7, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.


    Money.

    +1

    Wait...

    +...1,000,000.

    :-)
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Mon Jul 11 17:00:21 2022
    On Monday, July 11, 2022 at 2:37:12 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    +1

    Wait...

    +...1,000,000.

    moron
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 13 18:10:56 2022
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:09:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>>
    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>> shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
    far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
    that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best >drivers out there currently.

    Funny how so many posters here see you with an intense bias against
    Hamilton yet you insist they are wrong Maybe Willie really is the only
    one in step or maybe you might want to rethink the stuff you post
    about him.


    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being able to fit >properly, he would have won in it on his first try were it not for a >mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he might
    have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might not even have
    been able to do that.

    And you know it.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 13 18:16:02 2022
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 13 10:24:27 2022
    On 2022-07-13 10:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:09:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>>>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>>>
    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>>>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>>>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>
    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>> shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is
    far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
    that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best
    drivers out there currently.

    Funny how so many posters here see you with an intense bias against
    Hamilton yet you insist they are wrong Maybe Willie really is the only
    one in step or maybe you might want to rethink the stuff you post
    about him.

    Funnier still that none of them can produce a single quote that supports
    their belief.

    But please: post the absolute worst thing you can find me saying about Hamilton.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 13 10:36:51 2022
    On Wednesday, July 13, 2022 at 11:24:31 AM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    But please: post the absolute worst thing you can find me saying about Hamilton.

    fuck off you fucking cunt
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From News@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 13 13:47:58 2022
    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>
    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 13 12:57:55 2022
    On 2022-07-13 10:47, News wrote:
    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they
    said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
    Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between
    the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>> shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Was it hard become that tedious?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 13 13:40:31 2022
    On Wednesday, July 13, 2022 at 1:57:58 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Was it hard become that tedious?

    fuck off you trolling, piece of shit,
    cunt face, cock sucker
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 13 13:48:07 2022
    On Wednesday, July 13, 2022 at 1:57:58 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Was it hard become that tedious?

    What's it to you?
    You creepy fuck.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 14 08:44:28 2022
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>>
    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>> shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 14 08:46:29 2022
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 10:24:27 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-13 10:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:09:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>>>>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>>>>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>>
    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>>> shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported
    above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
    that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best
    drivers out there currently.

    Funny how so many posters here see you with an intense bias against
    Hamilton yet you insist they are wrong Maybe Willie really is the only
    one in step or maybe you might want to rethink the stuff you post
    about him.

    Funnier still that none of them can produce a single quote that supports >their belief.

    OK, everyone is out of step except Willie.


    But please: post the absolute worst thing you can find me saying about >Hamilton.


    "Damning with faint praise" is clearly another concept that is beyond
    your comprehension.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 14 07:53:08 2022
    On 2022-07-14 00:46, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 10:24:27 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-13 10:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:09:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>>>
    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>>>> shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported >>>>> above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional,
    just fortunate to have had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating
    that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best >>>> drivers out there currently.

    Funny how so many posters here see you with an intense bias against
    Hamilton yet you insist they are wrong Maybe Willie really is the only
    one in step or maybe you might want to rethink the stuff you post
    about him.

    Funnier still that none of them can produce a single quote that supports
    their belief.

    OK, everyone is out of step except Willie.

    Sometimes, yes.

    But it doesn't actually apply to not being able to provide the quotes.



    But please: post the absolute worst thing you can find me saying about
    Hamilton.


    "Damning with faint praise" is clearly another concept that is beyond
    your comprehension.

    I don't damn him with faint praise, so that won't wash either.

    The fact of the matter is that all I take issue with is declaring him
    the GOAT simply based on his race record when he was clearly in what was
    an utterly dominant car.

    That's it. It is on that issue that some have declared they understand
    my opinion about Hamilton.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 14 11:33:08 2022
    On Thursday, July 14, 2022 at 8:53:10 AM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    That's it. It is on that issue that some have declared they understand
    my opinion about Hamilton.

    yawn
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From geoff@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 15 09:24:05 2022
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up >>>>> the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said. >>>>>
    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada, >>>>> said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the >>>>> driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>
    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent >>>> shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why the
    fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From News@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 15 14:39:57 2022
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula
    1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
    they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts >>>>>> for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
    between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>>
    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
    winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
    decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>> what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why the
    fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 15 12:57:48 2022
    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>> 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
    they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
    accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
    between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
    winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>> decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>> what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
    the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 15 13:20:53 2022
    On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 1:57:50 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Please.

    please go fuck yourself
    you fucking buffoon
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 15 13:33:30 2022
    On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 1:57:50 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    this from the village idiot
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 15 22:07:34 2022
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>> 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>> making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>> they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
    accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
    between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
    winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>> decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>>> what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>
    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
    the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From News@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 15 17:13:26 2022
    On 7/15/2022 5:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>> 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>> making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>> they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
    accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>> winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>> decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>>>> what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>>
    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
    the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/



    Admits he doesn't appreciate the requirement.

    QED
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From geoff@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 16 11:59:20 2022
    On 16/07/2022 6:39 am, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>> 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
    they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
    accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
    between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and- >>>>>>> team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
    winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>> decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>> what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
    the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Um, no. Just baffled at inexplicable inept strategy decisions.

    geoff
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 15 19:10:25 2022
    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>> 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>> making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>> they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
    accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>> winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>> decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>>>> what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>>
    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
    the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 16 09:38:21 2022


    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 17:13:26 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/15/2022 5:07 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>> 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>> making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>> they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
    accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>> winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>> decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>>>>> what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>>>
    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
    the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/



    Admits he doesn't appreciate the requirement.

    QED

    The QED is that Hamilton has the ability to recognise a skill
    shortfall and work on getting rid of it - the opposite of you.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 16 09:40:31 2022
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>> 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>> making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>> they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
    accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>> winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>> decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with >>>>>>>> what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>>>
    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
    the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.

    And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 16 05:05:55 2022
    On Friday, July 15, 2022 at 8:10:27 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    And?

    and you are a fucking moron
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 16 20:23:43 2022
    On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>
    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>>> 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>> making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>> they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>
    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>> winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>>> decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count? >>>>>>>
    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.

    And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.

    I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his
    own horn.

    That was an F1 driverrCoas a class, not known for having small
    egosrCotalking about himself.

    Happy now?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 16 21:09:15 2022
    On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 9:23:48 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    I'd say

    I never read any further.
    Fuck off asshole.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 16 22:47:17 2022
    On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 9:23:48 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Happy now?

    you fucking piece of shit,
    cock sucking, rotten,
    cunt hole, ass fucker.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 16 22:52:13 2022
    On Saturday, July 16, 2022 at 9:23:48 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Happy now?

    Well you aint happy.
    Crying about your dead brother here.
    You fucking idiot.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 17 12:54:24 2022
    On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>>>> 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>>> making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>>> they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>
    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>> winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>>>> decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that >>>>>>>>>> league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an
    obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way >>>>>>>> to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>
    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.

    And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.

    I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his
    own horn.

    That was an F1 driveruas a class, not known for having small
    egosutalking about himself.

    Happy now?


    I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I
    don't have a 'thing' about him.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 17 08:23:15 2022
    On Sunday, July 17, 2022 at 5:54:27 AM UTC-6, martin...@gmail.com wrote:

    I don't have a 'thing' about him.

    but you do have twisted thing about alice baker
    fuck get a life
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sun Jul 17 18:19:29 2022
    On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>>>> making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>>>> they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in >>>>>>>>>>>>> Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>
    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>>> winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>>>>> decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>>
    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.

    And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.

    I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his
    own horn.

    That was an F1 driverrCoas a class, not known for having small
    egosrCotalking about himself.

    Happy now?


    I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I
    don't have a 'thing' about him.

    'rCLBut in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work with the characteristics of the driver, thatrCOs my job and IrCOd say IrCOm definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people donrCOt get to
    see all that in the background.rCY'

    And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good
    development driver.

    So you want to both say it supports that claim...

    ...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his
    ability in this area.

    Did I miss anything?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Mon Jul 18 10:26:15 2022
    On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>>>>> making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
    Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>>>> winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very >>>>>>>>>>>>> decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that >>>>>>>>>>>> with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>>>
    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.

    And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.

    I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his
    own horn.

    That was an F1 driveruas a class, not known for having small
    egosutalking about himself.

    Happy now?


    I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I
    don't have a 'thing' about him.

    'oBut in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >with the characteristics of the driver, thatAs my job and IAd say IAm >definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people donAt get to
    see all that in the background.o'

    And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good >development driver.

    Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in development of the best car. I specifically said:

    "Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not
    sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"

    So you want to both say it supports that claim...

    ...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his
    ability in this area.

    He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers
    must play in car development before he joined his current team as
    Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping
    develop the car, thatAs something that I think that drivers u and as
    IAm approaching where Michael was u I never fully understood.o

    I don't see anything boastful in that.


    Did I miss anything?

    Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in
    regard to Hamilton.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Mon Jul 18 07:17:59 2022
    On Sunday, July 17, 2022 at 7:19:32 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Did I miss anything?

    a life
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Mon Jul 18 10:43:16 2022
    On 2022-07-18 02:26, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula
    1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
    Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
    decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with >>>>>>>>>>>>> engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>>>>
    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.

    And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.

    I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his >>>> own horn.

    That was an F1 driverrCoas a class, not known for having small
    egosrCotalking about himself.

    Happy now?


    I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I
    don't have a 'thing' about him.

    'rCLBut in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >> with the characteristics of the driver, thatrCOs my job and IrCOd say IrCOm >> definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people donrCOt get to
    see all that in the background.rCY'

    And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good
    development driver.

    Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in development of the best car. I specifically said:

    "Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not
    sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"

    You said that earlier in the thread perhaps...

    ...but the new text in the post you chose to reply to said:

    'Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. '

    Your reply was to that, so it is reasonable to infer that you posted to
    rebut that.


    So you want to both say it supports that claim...

    ...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his
    ability in this area.

    He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers
    must play in car development before he joined his current team as Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping
    develop the car, thatrCOs something that I think that drivers rCo and as IrCOm approaching where Michael was rCo I never fully understood.rCY

    I don't see anything boastful in that.

    "and as I'm approaching where Michael was".



    Did I miss anything?

    Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in
    regard to Hamilton.

    You ignore what is clearly there.

    The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development
    driver.

    You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only
    Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
    "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by
    many as among the very best for helping develop the car...

    ...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Mon Jul 18 12:16:30 2022
    On Monday, July 18, 2022 at 11:43:19 AM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    ...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.

    you simple, fucking idiot, troll
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Mon Jul 18 12:54:53 2022
    On Monday, July 18, 2022 at 11:43:19 AM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    You ignore what is clearly there.

    you rotten fucking pig hole
    fuck off back to rec.sport.golf
    you fucking cock sucking moron
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From keithr0@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Tue Jul 19 19:27:47 2022
    George Russel
    2021 Williams 22 races 16 points

    2022 Mercedes 11 races 128 points.

    Spot the difference.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Tue Jul 19 18:34:04 2022

    On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 10:43:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-18 02:26, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula
    1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
    Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
    decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why >>>>>>>>>>> the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>>>>>
    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.

    And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton.

    I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his >>>>> own horn.

    That was an F1 driver-as a class, not known for having small
    egos-talking about himself.

    Happy now?


    I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I
    don't have a 'thing' about him.

    '"But in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >>> with the characteristics of the driver, that's my job and I'd say I'm
    definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people don't get to
    see all that in the background."'

    And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good
    development driver.

    Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in
    development of the best car. I specifically said:

    "Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not
    sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"

    You said that earlier in the thread perhaps...

    ...but the new text in the post you chose to reply to said:

    'Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. '

    Your reply was to that, so it is reasonable to infer that you posted to >rebut that.


    So you want to both say it supports that claim...

    ...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his
    ability in this area.

    He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers
    must play in car development before he joined his current team as
    Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping
    develop the car, that's something that I think that drivers - and as
    I'm approaching where Michael was - I never fully understood."

    I don't see anything boastful in that.

    "and as I'm approaching where Michael was".



    Did I miss anything?

    Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in
    regard to Hamilton.

    You ignore what is clearly there.

    The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >driver.

    You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only
    Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
    "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by
    many as among the very best for helping develop the car...

    ...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.

    A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
    important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits
    that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a
    clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.

    I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
    contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So,
    do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution
    and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Tue Jul 19 10:59:24 2022
    On 2022-07-19 02:27, keithr0 wrote:
    George Russel
    2021 Williams 22 races 16 points

    2022 Mercedes 11 races 128 points.

    Spot the difference.

    Bingo.


    2020 Bahrain Grand Prix

    Nicolas Latifi: 13th

    George Russell: 12th


    2020 Sakhir Grand Prix

    Nicolas Latifi: retired from 13th

    George Russell: had a puncture while running 2nd.


    Now:

    What exactly WHAT changed?

    :-)
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Tue Jul 19 11:25:59 2022
    On Tuesday, July 19, 2022 at 11:59:26 AM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    What exactly WHAT changed?

    you got dumber
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Tue Jul 19 11:28:50 2022
    On 2022-07-19 10:34, Martin Harran wrote:

    On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 10:43:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-18 02:26, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula
    1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
    they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
    Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
    decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
    the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>>>>>>
    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.

    And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton. >>>>>>
    I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his >>>>>> own horn.

    That was an F1 driver-as a class, not known for having small
    egos-talking about himself.

    Happy now?


    I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I
    don't have a 'thing' about him.

    '"But in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >>>> with the characteristics of the driver, that's my job and I'd say I'm
    definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people don't get to >>>> see all that in the background."'

    And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good
    development driver.

    Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in
    development of the best car. I specifically said:

    "Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not
    sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"

    You said that earlier in the thread perhaps...

    ...but the new text in the post you chose to reply to said:

    'Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. '

    Your reply was to that, so it is reasonable to infer that you posted to
    rebut that.


    So you want to both say it supports that claim...

    ...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his
    ability in this area.

    He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers
    must play in car development before he joined his current team as
    Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping
    develop the car, that's something that I think that drivers - and as
    I'm approaching where Michael was - I never fully understood."

    I don't see anything boastful in that.

    "and as I'm approaching where Michael was".



    Did I miss anything?

    Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in
    regard to Hamilton.

    You ignore what is clearly there.

    The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development
    driver.

    You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only
    Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
    "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by
    many as among the very best for helping develop the car...

    ...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.

    A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
    important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits
    that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a
    clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.

    He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that
    isn't "tooting his own horn".

    Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability!


    I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
    contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So,
    do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution
    and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?

    I completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.

    And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.

    Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Tue Jul 19 11:32:14 2022
    On Tuesday, July 19, 2022 at 12:28:52 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?

    you fucking piece of shit, cock sucking.
    mother fucking, loser
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 08:39:35 2022
    On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 11:28:50 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-19 10:34, Martin Harran wrote:

    On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 10:43:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-18 02:26, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula
    1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
    they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
    Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
    winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
    decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
    the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not.


    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.

    And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton. >>>>>>>
    I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his >>>>>>> own horn.

    That was an F1 driver-as a class, not known for having small
    egos-talking about himself.

    Happy now?


    I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I >>>>>> don't have a 'thing' about him.

    '"But in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >>>>> with the characteristics of the driver, that's my job and I'd say I'm >>>>> definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people don't get to >>>>> see all that in the background."'

    And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good
    development driver.

    Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in >>>> development of the best car. I specifically said:

    "Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not
    sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"

    You said that earlier in the thread perhaps...

    ...but the new text in the post you chose to reply to said:

    'Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. '

    Your reply was to that, so it is reasonable to infer that you posted to
    rebut that.


    So you want to both say it supports that claim...

    ...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his
    ability in this area.

    He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers
    must play in car development before he joined his current team as
    Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping
    develop the car, that's something that I think that drivers - and as
    I'm approaching where Michael was - I never fully understood."

    I don't see anything boastful in that.

    "and as I'm approaching where Michael was".



    Did I miss anything?

    Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in
    regard to Hamilton.

    You ignore what is clearly there.

    The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development
    driver.

    You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only
    Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
    "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by
    many as among the very best for helping develop the car...

    ...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.

    A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
    important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits
    that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a
    clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.

    He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that >isn't "tooting his own horn".

    Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability!

    Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown
    by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.



    I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
    contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So,
    do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution
    and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a
    contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?

    I completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.

    Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstated
    due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his achievements, not takes away from them.


    And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a >contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.

    Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?

    As I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in
    the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development

    "Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him,
    working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
    similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
    emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his
    team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the
    visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do
    not deliver."
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 10:11:10 2022
    On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 19:28:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-10 15:50, Andrew Karlsson wrote:
    sunnuntai 10. heinEkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com
    kirjoitti:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
    <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
    wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in
    Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
    answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car
    and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the
    skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes
    called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the
    team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
    Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly
    validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been
    greatly overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
    accounts for roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
    interaction between the driver and the team, which
    accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-


    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance
    of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least
    a very decent shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study
    reported above; where you differ from others is your
    insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor
    and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver,
    he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have
    had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
    repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one
    of the very best drivers out there currently.

    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being
    able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try
    were it not for a mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he
    might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might
    not even have been able to do that.

    And you know it.

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the
    driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
    standings.

    How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second,
    other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.

    How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other
    than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.

    How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other
    than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.

    Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side
    by side.
    Points scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
    the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:

    2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226

    2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125

    2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187

    So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
    winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite
    which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
    not-so-very-best teammates.
    People say that the best car is more important than the driver, but
    the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon
    would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car.
    Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be
    in the top teams.


    I don't know about Latifi...

    ..but how are you so sure that Albon couldn't win a title in a top car?

    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 10:12:08 2022
    On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 07:53:08 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-14 00:46, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 10:24:27 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-13 10:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:09:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An >>>>>>>> eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for >>>>>>>> roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning. >>>>>>>
    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent
    shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported >>>>>> above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst
    Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional, >>>>>> just fortunate to have had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating >>>>> that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best >>>>> drivers out there currently.

    Funny how so many posters here see you with an intense bias against
    Hamilton yet you insist they are wrong Maybe Willie really is the only >>>> one in step or maybe you might want to rethink the stuff you post
    about him.

    Funnier still that none of them can produce a single quote that supports >>> their belief.

    OK, everyone is out of step except Willie.

    Sometimes, yes.

    But it doesn't actually apply to not being able to provide the quotes.



    But please: post the absolute worst thing you can find me saying about
    Hamilton.


    "Damning with faint praise" is clearly another concept that is beyond
    your comprehension.

    I don't damn him with faint praise, so that won't wash either.

    The fact of the matter is that all I take issue with is declaring him
    the GOAT simply based on his race record when he was clearly in what was
    an utterly dominant car.

    How many posters declared him GOAT?


    That's it. It is on that issue that some have declared they understand
    my opinion about Hamilton.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 08:53:21 2022
    On 2022-07-20 02:12, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 07:53:08 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-14 00:46, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 10:24:27 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-13 10:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:09:09 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula 1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team >>>>>>>>> contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate. >>>>>>>>>
    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers". >>>>>>>>>
    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly >>>>>>>>> overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-
    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very decent
    shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study reported >>>>>>> above; where you differ from others is your insistence that the car is >>>>>>> far and away the *biggest* factor and your obsession that whilst >>>>>>> Hamilton is a 'good' driver, he really isn't all that exceptional, >>>>>>> just fortunate to have had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop repeating >>>>>> that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one of the very best >>>>>> drivers out there currently.

    Funny how so many posters here see you with an intense bias against
    Hamilton yet you insist they are wrong Maybe Willie really is the only >>>>> one in step or maybe you might want to rethink the stuff you post
    about him.

    Funnier still that none of them can produce a single quote that supports >>>> their belief.

    OK, everyone is out of step except Willie.

    Sometimes, yes.

    But it doesn't actually apply to not being able to provide the quotes.



    But please: post the absolute worst thing you can find me saying about >>>> Hamilton.


    "Damning with faint praise" is clearly another concept that is beyond
    your comprehension.

    I don't damn him with faint praise, so that won't wash either.

    The fact of the matter is that all I take issue with is declaring him
    the GOAT simply based on his race record when he was clearly in what was
    an utterly dominant car.

    How many posters declared him GOAT?

    Tacit admission that you have no other example of any issue that I have specifically with Hamilton.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 09:20:14 2022
    On 2022-07-20 02:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 19:28:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-10 15:50, Andrew Karlsson wrote:
    sunnuntai 10. hein|nkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com
    kirjoitti:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
    <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
    wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in
    Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
    answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car
    and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the
    skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes
    called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the
    team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
    Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly
    validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been
    greatly overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
    accounts for roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
    interaction between the driver and the team, which
    accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-


    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance
    of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least
    a very decent shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study
    reported above; where you differ from others is your
    insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor
    and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver,
    he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have
    had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
    repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one
    of the very best drivers out there currently.

    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being
    able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try
    were it not for a mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he
    might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might
    not even have been able to do that.

    And you know it.

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the
    driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
    standings.

    How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second,
    other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.

    How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other
    than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.

    How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other
    than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.

    Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side
    by side.
    Points scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
    the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:

    2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226

    2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125

    2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187

    So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
    winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite
    which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
    not-so-very-best teammates.
    People say that the best car is more important than the driver, but
    the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon
    would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car.
    Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be
    in the top teams.


    I don't know about Latifi...

    ..but how are you so sure that Albon couldn't win a title in a top car?

    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?

    Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 18:49:34 2022
    On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 09:20:14 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-20 02:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 19:28:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-10 15:50, Andrew Karlsson wrote:
    sunnuntai 10. heinEkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com
    kirjoitti:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
    <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
    wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in
    Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
    answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car
    and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the
    skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes
    called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the
    team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
    Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly
    validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been
    greatly overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input
    accounts for roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
    interaction between the driver and the team, which
    accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-


    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance
    of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least
    a very decent shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study
    reported above; where you differ from others is your
    insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor
    and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver,
    he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have
    had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
    repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one
    of the very best drivers out there currently.

    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being
    able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try
    were it not for a mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he
    might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might
    not even have been able to do that.

    And you know it.

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the
    driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
    standings.

    How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second,
    other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.

    How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other
    than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.

    How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other
    than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.

    Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side
    by side.
    Points scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
    the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:

    2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226

    2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125

    2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187

    So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
    winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite
    which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
    not-so-very-best teammates.
    People say that the best car is more important than the driver, but
    the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon
    would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car.
    Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be
    in the top teams.


    I don't know about Latifi...

    ..but how are you so sure that Albon couldn't win a title in a top car?

    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?

    Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.

    My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of
    Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in
    the running for WDC.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 14:01:18 2022
    On Wednesday, July 20, 2022 at 1:39:36 AM UTC-6, martin...@gmail.com wrote:

    Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown
    by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.

    His boasting about that is over.
    Fuckhead is not racing this year.
    Probably banned from the track
    for being at total weird ass cunt.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 14:03:08 2022
    On Wednesday, July 20, 2022 at 9:53:24 AM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Tacit admission that you have no other example of any issue that I have specifically with Hamilton.

    fuck you and your tacit.
    you simple trolling piece of shit.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 14:05:17 2022
    On Wednesday, July 20, 2022 at 10:20:27 AM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    That is some amazing ignorance.

    small things
    amaze small minds
    you simple trolling fucking idiot
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 14:35:12 2022
    On 2022-07-20 10:49, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 09:20:14 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-20 02:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 19:28:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-10 15:50, Andrew Karlsson wrote:
    sunnuntai 10. hein|nkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com >>>>> kirjoitti:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
    <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
    wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in >>>>>>>>>>> Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
    answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car
    and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the
    skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes
    called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the >>>>>>>>>>> team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
    Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly >>>>>>>>>>> validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been
    greatly overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>> accounts for roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
    interaction between the driver and the team, which
    accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-


    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance >>>>>>>>>> of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least >>>>>>>>>> a very decent shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study
    reported above; where you differ from others is your
    insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor >>>>>>>>> and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver,
    he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have >>>>>>>>> had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
    repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one >>>>>>>> of the very best drivers out there currently.

    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being
    able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try >>>>>>>> were it not for a mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he >>>>>>>> might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might >>>>>>>> not even have been able to do that.

    And you know it.

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the >>>>>>> driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
    standings.

    How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second,
    other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.

    How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other >>>>>>> than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.

    How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other >>>>>>> than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.

    Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side
    by side.
    Points scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
    the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:

    2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226

    2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125

    2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187

    So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
    winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite
    which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
    not-so-very-best teammates.
    People say that the best car is more important than the driver, but
    the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon >>>>> would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car.
    Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be >>>>> in the top teams.


    I don't know about Latifi...

    ..but how are you so sure that Albon couldn't win a title in a top car? >>>
    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?

    Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.

    My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of
    Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in
    the running for WDC.

    Sure.

    Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...

    ...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.

    Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in
    the season?

    Same question for Perez.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 14:39:20 2022
    On Wednesday, July 20, 2022 at 3:35:15 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Sure.

    fuck you and your pussy sure
    you fucking pussy cock sucker
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 14:40:51 2022
    On Wednesday, July 20, 2022 at 3:35:15 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Seriously

    this from a fucking trolling clown
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 14:58:54 2022
    On 2022-07-20 00:39, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 11:28:50 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-19 10:34, Martin Harran wrote:

    On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 10:43:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-18 02:26, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula
    1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
    they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
    Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
    between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
    winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
    decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
    the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic.

    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. >>>>>>>>>>>

    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.

    And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton. >>>>>>>>
    I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his >>>>>>>> own horn.

    That was an F1 driver-as a class, not known for having small
    egos-talking about himself.

    Happy now?


    I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I >>>>>>> don't have a 'thing' about him.

    '"But in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work >>>>>> with the characteristics of the driver, that's my job and I'd say I'm >>>>>> definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people don't get to >>>>>> see all that in the background."'

    And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good >>>>>> development driver.

    Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in >>>>> development of the best car. I specifically said:

    "Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not >>>>> sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"

    You said that earlier in the thread perhaps...

    ...but the new text in the post you chose to reply to said:

    'Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. '

    Your reply was to that, so it is reasonable to infer that you posted to >>>> rebut that.


    So you want to both say it supports that claim...

    ...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his >>>>>> ability in this area.

    He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers >>>>> must play in car development before he joined his current team as
    Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping >>>>> develop the car, that's something that I think that drivers - and as >>>>> I'm approaching where Michael was - I never fully understood."

    I don't see anything boastful in that.

    "and as I'm approaching where Michael was".



    Did I miss anything?

    Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in
    regard to Hamilton.

    You ignore what is clearly there.

    The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development
    driver.

    You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only
    Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
    "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by >>>> many as among the very best for helping develop the car...

    ...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.

    A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
    important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits
    that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a
    clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.

    He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that
    isn't "tooting his own horn".

    Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability!

    Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown
    by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.



    I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
    contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So,
    do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution
    and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a
    contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?

    I completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.

    Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstated
    due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his achievements, not takes away from them.

    Nope. The car is still the car and all you have is "if".



    And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a
    contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.

    Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?

    As I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in
    the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.

    Really? "Widely recognized"... ...by whom?

    Up to this moment the only supporting cite you made was Hamilton blowing
    his own horn.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development

    "Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him, working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
    similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
    emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his
    team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the
    visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do
    not deliver."

    "He has grown into his role and Mercedes emphasise the time and effort
    he puts into developing the car and his team."

    "Time and effort" is less than a ringing endorsement.

    You or I (ok, I could) put in time and effort...

    ...but that says nothing about the quality of his contribution.

    And seriously, do you think the team would ever say anything else?

    And Hamilton hasn't exactly been "scrupulously fair" on track...

    'This is not to belittle SchumacherrCOs achievements but HamiltonrCOs career has been marked by his hard but scrupulously fair performances. He has
    made mistakes and held his hands up. He has been tested but not resorted
    to what Villeneuve pointedly referred to as rCLdirty tricksrCY.'

    (I think there are more than a few drivers who would disagree with that assessment.)

    ...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 15:02:50 2022
    On Wednesday, July 20, 2022 at 3:58:58 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    ...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.

    you are fucking puff
    you weird, queer ass, fucking faggot
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From ~misfit~@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 21 11:58:16 2022
    On 20/07/2022 9:12 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 07:53:08 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    blah blah blah blah blah....

    Martin you're fast becoming background noise. I think a troll may have caught you. You know you can
    never change it's mind yeah?
    --
    Shaun.

    "Humans will have advanced a long, long way when religious belief has a cozy little classification
    in the DSM"
    David Melville

    This is not an email and hasn't been checked for viruses by any half-arsed self-promoting software.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 17:01:17 2022
    On 2022-07-20 16:58, ~misfit~ wrote:
    On 20/07/2022 9:12 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 07:53:08 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    blah blah blah blah blah....

    Martin you're fast becoming background noise. I think a troll may have caught you. You know you can never change it's mind yeah?

    He could change my mind...

    ...if he presented a cogent argument based on facts.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 18:20:07 2022
    On Wednesday, July 20, 2022 at 6:01:19 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    He could change my mind...

    ...if he presented a cogent argument based on facts.

    fuck you
    you trolling piece of shit
    mother fucking loser
    cock sucking cunt hole
    moron idiot loser
    fuck off back to rec.sport.golf
    you simpleton asshole
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Wed Jul 20 18:23:20 2022
    On Wednesday, July 20, 2022 at 5:58:18 PM UTC-6, ~misfit~ wrote:
    On 20/07/2022 9:12 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 14 Jul 2022 07:53:08 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com> wrote:
    blah blah blah blah blah....

    Martin you're fast becoming background noise. I think a troll may have caught you. You know you can
    never change it's mind yeah?

    Harry martin threw the bait.
    Alice baker bit with eager.
    Pair of no life losers.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 21 09:08:21 2022
    On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 14:58:54 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-20 00:39, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Tue, 19 Jul 2022 11:28:50 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-19 10:34, Martin Harran wrote:

    On Mon, 18 Jul 2022 10:43:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-18 02:26, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 18:19:29 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-17 04:54, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:23:43 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-16 01:40, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 19:10:25 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-15 14:07, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:57:48 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>
    On 2022-07-15 11:39, News wrote:
    On 7/14/2022 5:24 PM, geoff wrote:
    On 14/07/2022 7:44 pm, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 13:47:58 -0400, News <News@Group.Name> wrote:

    On 7/13/2022 1:16 PM, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in Formula
    1? An
    eight-season study has offered up an answer. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car and the team
    contribute to 80% of race success with the skill of the driver
    making up
    the other 20% - sometimes called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the team,
    they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of Lethbridge in
    Canada,
    said the findings are "particularly validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been greatly
    overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for
    roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the interaction
    between the
    driver and the team, which accounts for 30-40%. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-

    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance of
    winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least a very
    decent
    shot at winning.


    What you seem to miss entirely is the driver's contribution to
    achieving the best car. Schumacher was particularly superb at that
    with Ferrari where he spent countless hours working hands-on with
    engineers and designers. I'm not sure that Hamilton is quite in that
    league but he is widely recognised as playing a key role in the
    development of the car since he joined Mercedes. All that ties in with
    what the study above showed.


    Hamliton is a frequent second-guesser over the radio. Does that count?

    Whilst Hamilton, like any human being, will get annoyed at an >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid decision, it seems to me that most times he is
    "second guessing" decisions, he is trying to understand what went
    wrong so they can avoid it in future. But maybe it just seems that way
    to me because I'm not a Hamilton-hater.


    Seems he pretty much echoes the thoughts of we spectators .... "Why
    the fuck did they decide to do/not-do that ?".

    geoff


    Exactly.

    Not a development driver, a pitwall/pitlane critic. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance)

    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. >>>>>>>>>>>>

    https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/hamilton-now-understands-schumacher-influence/4913142/


    And?

    That was Hamilton talking about Hamilton.

    And you wonder why people think you have a 'thing' about Hamilton. >>>>>>>>>
    I'd say the same about any uncorroborated report from some tooting his
    own horn.

    That was an F1 driver-as a class, not known for having small >>>>>>>>> egos-talking about himself.

    Happy now?


    I didn't see him tooting his horn but that just might be because I >>>>>>>> don't have a 'thing' about him.

    '"But in terms of development, how to get the car to go further and work
    with the characteristics of the driver, that's my job and I'd say I'm >>>>>>> definitely very, very proud of that. Unfortunately people don't get to >>>>>>> see all that in the background."'

    And you literally presented it as evidence that Hamilton is a good >>>>>>> development driver.

    Nope, I presented it as evidence about the importance of the driver in >>>>>> development of the best car. I specifically said:

    "Schumacher was particularly superb at that with Ferrari ... I'm not >>>>>> sure that Hamilton is quite in that league"

    You said that earlier in the thread perhaps...

    ...but the new text in the post you chose to reply to said:

    'Please.

    You don't have the slightest clue...

    (Well, actually about anything that I've seen, but in this instance) >>>>>
    ...whether Hamilton is a good development driver or not. '

    Your reply was to that, so it is reasonable to infer that you posted to >>>>> rebut that.


    So you want to both say it supports that claim...

    ...AND that an article that only quotes Hamilton isn't touting his >>>>>>> ability in this area.

    He said that "he did not fully comprehend just how big a role drivers >>>>>> must play in car development before he joined his current team as
    Schumacher's replacement ..." and goes on to say "In terms of helping >>>>>> develop the car, that's something that I think that drivers - and as >>>>>> I'm approaching where Michael was - I never fully understood."

    I don't see anything boastful in that.

    "and as I'm approaching where Michael was".



    Did I miss anything?

    Not from your point of view, you always see what you want to see in >>>>>> regard to Hamilton.

    You ignore what is clearly there.

    The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >>>>> driver.

    You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only
    Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
    "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by >>>>> many as among the very best for helping develop the car...

    ...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.

    A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
    important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits
    that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a
    clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.

    He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that
    isn't "tooting his own horn".

    Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability!

    Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown
    by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.



    I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
    contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So, >>>> do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution
    and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a
    contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?

    I completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.

    Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstated
    due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his
    achievements, not takes away from them.

    Nope. The car is still the car and all you have is "if".



    And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a
    contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.

    Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?

    As I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in
    the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.

    Really? "Widely recognized"... ...by whom?

    Up to this moment the only supporting cite you made was Hamilton blowing
    his own horn.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development

    "Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him,
    working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them
    afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
    similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
    emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his
    team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the
    visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do
    not deliver."

    "He has grown into his role and Mercedes emphasise the time and effort
    he puts into developing the car and his team."

    "Time and effort" is less than a ringing endorsement.

    Obviously not to you.


    You or I (ok, I could) put in time and effort...

    ...but that says nothing about the quality of his contribution.

    And seriously, do you think the team would ever say anything else?

    I haven't seen many teams saying that about their - or Mercedes about
    drivers other than Schumacher and Hamilton - feel free to give
    examples.


    And Hamilton hasn't exactly been "scrupulously fair" on track...

    Once again, you are out of line with the majority of opinion; no
    surprises there when it involves Hamilton.


    'This is not to belittle Schumacher's achievements but Hamilton's career
    has been marked by his hard but scrupulously fair performances. He has
    made mistakes and held his hands up. He has been tested but not resorted
    to what Villeneuve pointedly referred to as "dirty tricks".'

    (I think there are more than a few drivers who would disagree with that >assessment.)

    ...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.

    So you dismiss a piece by one of the UK's top sports reporters with a specialist interest in F1, writing in one of the UK's top newspapers
    is just a puff piece - but you don't have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
    ROFLMAO.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 21 09:11:06 2022
    On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 14:35:12 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-20 10:49, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 20 Jul 2022 09:20:14 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-20 02:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 19:28:05 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-10 15:50, Andrew Karlsson wrote:
    sunnuntai 10. heinEkuuta 2022 klo 11.50.21 UTC+3 martin...@gmail.com >>>>>> kirjoitti:
    On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 20:06:35 -0700, a425couple
    <a425c...@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On 7/8/2022 9:09 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-07-08 00:10, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:38:33 -0700, Alan <nuh...@nope.com>
    wrote:

    On 2022-07-06 06:26, Philip wrote:
    What is the most important factor to securing success in >>>>>>>>>>>> Formula 1? An eight-season study has offered up an
    answer.

    According to experts, a "long-held belief" that the car >>>>>>>>>>>> and the team contribute to 80% of race success with the >>>>>>>>>>>> skill of the driver making up the other 20% - sometimes >>>>>>>>>>>> called the 80-20 rule - is not accurate.

    It's actually the interaction between the driver and the >>>>>>>>>>>> team, they said.

    Lead author Duane Rockerbie, from the University of
    Lethbridge in Canada, said the findings are "particularly >>>>>>>>>>>> validating for drivers".

    The professor added: "The car and team's input has been >>>>>>>>>>>> greatly overestimated.

    "Rather than 80%, it is closer to 20%. The driver's input >>>>>>>>>>>> accounts for roughly 15%.

    "The biggest factor is more nuanced and it's the
    interaction between the driver and the team, which
    accounts for 30-40%.



    https://news.sky.com/story/whats-most-important-for-f1-success-car-and-


    team-or-driver-eight-season-study-gives-an-answer-12646848

    I know what they're saying and why.

    But the simple facts remain:

    The best driver in the field in the worst car has 0% chance >>>>>>>>>>> of winning.

    The worst driver in the field in the best car has at least >>>>>>>>>>> a very decent shot at winning.

    Nobody disputes that the car is a factor nor does the study >>>>>>>>>> reported above; where you differ from others is your
    insistence that the car is far and away the *biggest* factor >>>>>>>>>> and your obsession that whilst Hamilton is a 'good' driver, >>>>>>>>>> he really isn't all that exceptional, just fortunate to have >>>>>>>>>> had a great car.

    I have never made any such insistence about Hamilton. Stop
    repeating that falsehood. I have said repeatedly that he is one >>>>>>>>> of the very best drivers out there currently.

    But the car is a far, far bigger factor than the driver.

    Russell got into Hamilton's car and despite not really being >>>>>>>>> able to fit properly, he would have won in it on his first try >>>>>>>>> were it not for a mechanical problem.

    If Hamilton for some reason got into the Williams that year, he >>>>>>>>> might have been able to push it up a place or two, but he might >>>>>>>>> not even have been able to do that.

    And you know it.

    Alan's statement that the car is a far,far bigger factor than the >>>>>>>> driver, would seem to be supported by this years current
    standings.

    How could Max Verstappen and Sergio Perez be first and second, >>>>>>>> other than them being in the best car, Red Bull.

    How could Charles Leclerc and Carlos Sainz be 3rd and 4th, other >>>>>>>> than them being in the second best car, Ferrari.

    How could George Russell and Lewis Hamilton be 5th and 6th, other >>>>>>>> than them being in the third best car, Mercedes.

    Year after year, the grids quite often have the team mates side >>>>>>>> by side.
    Points scored over a full season are a pretty good indicator of
    the difference between teammates. The last 3 years:

    2021 Verstappen: 395 Perez: 190 Hamilton: 387.5 Bottas: 226

    2020 Hamilton: 357 Bottas: 223 Verstappen: 214 Perez: 125

    2019 Hamilton: 413 Bottas: 326 Verstappen: 278 Gasley+Albon: 187 >>>>>>>
    So yes, having the best car is more or less a prerequisite for
    winning but having the best driver is even more so a prerequisite >>>>>>> which is why the very best drivers always outstrip their
    not-so-very-best teammates.
    People say that the best car is more important than the driver, but >>>>>> the driver is also very important. I mean driver like Latifi or Albon >>>>>> would not win title in the best car if they were given the top car. >>>>>> Hamilton and Verstappen are worthy champions who have deserved to be >>>>>> in the top teams.


    I don't know about Latifi...

    ..but how are you so sure that Albon couldn't win a title in a top car? >>>>
    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?

    Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.

    My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of
    Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in
    the running for WDC.

    Sure.

    Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...

    ...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.

    Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in
    the season?

    First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being
    given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you
    can't produce any examples either.


    Same question for Perez.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 21 10:47:32 2022
    On 2022-07-21 01:08, Martin Harran wrote:
    You ignore what is clearly there.

    The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >>>>>> driver.

    You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only >>>>>> Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
    "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by >>>>>> many as among the very best for helping develop the car...

    ...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
    A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
    important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits >>>>> that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a >>>>> clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
    He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that >>>> isn't "tooting his own horn".

    Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability! >>> Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown
    by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.

    What boasts have I made?

    Be specific, liar.


    I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
    contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So, >>>>> do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution >>>>> and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a >>>>> contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
    I completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.
    Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstated
    due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his
    achievements, not takes away from them.
    Nope. The car is still the car and all you have is "if".

    Unaddressed.


    And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a
    contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.

    Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
    As I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in
    the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.
    Really? "Widely recognized"... ...by whom?

    Up to this moment the only supporting cite you made was Hamilton blowing
    his own horn.

    Unaddressed.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development

    "Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him,
    working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them
    afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
    similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
    emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his
    team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the
    visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do
    not deliver."
    "He has grown into his role and Mercedes emphasise the time and effort
    he puts into developing the car and his team."

    "Time and effort" is less than a ringing endorsement.
    Obviously not to you.

    To anyone?

    Do you think there is a single driver in the field who DOESN'T put time
    and effort into developing the car?


    You or I (ok, I could) put in time and effort...

    ...but that says nothing about the quality of his contribution.

    Unaddressed.


    And seriously, do you think the team would ever say anything else?
    I haven't seen many teams saying that about their - or Mercedes about
    drivers other than Schumacher and Hamilton - feel free to give
    examples.

    You haven't looked.

    But what you've shown only says he puts in "time and effort".

    There is literally not a single word about whether he is particularly
    good OR bad at it.


    And Hamilton hasn't exactly been "scrupulously fair" on track...
    Once again, you are out of line with the majority of opinion; no
    surprises there when it involves Hamilton.

    I'll bet Albon agrees with me...


    'This is not to belittle Schumacher's achievements but Hamilton's career
    has been marked by his hard but scrupulously fair performances. He has
    made mistakes and held his hands up. He has been tested but not resorted
    to what Villeneuve pointedly referred to as "dirty tricks".'

    (I think there are more than a few drivers who would disagree with that
    assessment.)

    ...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.
    So you dismiss a piece by one of the UK's top sports reporters with a specialist interest in F1, writing in one of the UK's top newspapers
    is just a puff piece - but you don't have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
    ROFLMAO.

    So top sports reporters can't have biases?

    And let's remember, he doesn't actually quote anyone saying that
    Hamilton is a great or even good development driver.

    I don't have a thing with Hamilton. I have a thing with Hamilton
    fanbois; a class of which you clearly are a member.

    Hamilton is clearly one of the very best current drivers. He may even be
    the best. I don't pretend to know.

    But there are fanbois here who have stated that simply because he has
    won a lot of championships me must therefore be the GOAT...

    ...and that's simply not true.

    Go ahead, give any example of me denigrating Hamilton.

    Just one, liar.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Thu Jul 21 10:51:01 2022
    On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?
    Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.
    My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of
    Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in
    the running for WDC.
    Sure.

    Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...

    ...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.

    Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in
    the season?
    First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being
    given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you
    can't produce any examples either.


    Seriously?

    At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the running"?

    I'll even help.

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship>
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 22 10:30:33 2022
    On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:47:32 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-21 01:08, Martin Harran wrote:
    You ignore what is clearly there.

    The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >>>>>>> driver.

    You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only >>>>>>> Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is
    "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by >>>>>>> many as among the very best for helping develop the car...

    ...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
    A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an
    important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits >>>>>> that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a >>>>>> clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
    He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that >>>>> isn't "tooting his own horn".

    Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability! >>>> Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown
    by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.

    What boasts have I made?

    ========================
    On Fri, 20 May 2022 08:51:56 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
    "Running in the Camaro all day, I gave 22 people huge thrills and some
    insight into what it's like to drive a car at speed." =============================

    Do I really have to go back further and dig out some more?


    Be specific, liar.

    I won't hold my breath waiting for your apology.



    I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
    contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So, >>>>>> do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution >>>>>> and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a >>>>>> contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
    I completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.
    Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstated
    due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his
    achievements, not takes away from them.
    Nope. The car is still the car and all you have is "if".

    Unaddressed.

    Unaddressed nonsense.


    And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a
    contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.

    Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
    As I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in
    the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.
    Really? "Widely recognized"... ...by whom?

    Up to this moment the only supporting cite you made was Hamilton blowing >>> his own horn.

    Unaddressed.

    So what, I gave you another cite from a journalist when you whined.



    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development

    "Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him, >>>> working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them
    afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
    similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
    emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his
    team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the
    visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do
    not deliver."
    "He has grown into his role and Mercedes emphasise the time and effort
    he puts into developing the car and his team."

    "Time and effort" is less than a ringing endorsement.
    Obviously not to you.

    To anyone?

    Whether "ringing" or not, I'd say it's an endorsement to those who
    aren't biased against Hamilton.


    Do you think there is a single driver in the field who DOESN'T put time
    and effort into developing the car?


    You or I (ok, I could) put in time and effort...

    ...but that says nothing about the quality of his contribution.

    Unaddressed.

    Much more than the zero you seem to think it is


    And seriously, do you think the team would ever say anything else?
    I haven't seen many teams saying that about their - or Mercedes about
    drivers other than Schumacher and Hamilton - feel free to give
    examples.

    You haven't looked.

    Rather weak way of trying to avoid that you can't produce any
    examples.


    But what you've shown only says he puts in "time and effort".

    There is literally not a single word about whether he is particularly
    good OR bad at it.


    And Hamilton hasn't exactly been "scrupulously fair" on track...
    Once again, you are out of line with the majority of opinion; no
    surprises there when it involves Hamilton.

    I'll bet Albon agrees with me...

    People beaten on track aren't generally the best judges of whether
    they were beaten fairly.



    'This is not to belittle Schumacher's achievements but Hamilton's career >>> has been marked by his hard but scrupulously fair performances. He has
    made mistakes and held his hands up. He has been tested but not resorted >>> to what Villeneuve pointedly referred to as "dirty tricks".'

    (I think there are more than a few drivers who would disagree with that
    assessment.)

    ...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.
    So you dismiss a piece by one of the UK's top sports reporters with a
    specialist interest in F1, writing in one of the UK's top newspapers
    is just a puff piece - but you don't have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
    ROFLMAO.

    So top sports reporters can't have biases?

    They won't last long as top reporters if they let those biases
    influence their writing.

    And let's remember, he doesn't actually quote anyone saying that
    Hamilton is a great or even good development driver.

    You accusing him of making stuff up?


    I don't have a thing with Hamilton. I have a thing with Hamilton
    fanbois; a class of which you clearly are a member.

    Absolutely not. Let's see you produce a single example of anything I
    ever posted that could be considered "fanbois".


    Hamilton is clearly one of the very best current drivers. He may even be
    the best. I don't pretend to know.

    But there are fanbois here who have stated that simply because he has
    won a lot of championships me must therefore be the GOAT...

    You still haven't identified any of them.


    ...and that's simply not true.

    It might or might not be true, we have no real way of comparing
    drivers of different generations. Hamilton's 7 WDcs with two different
    teams would certainly put him into any list of all-time greats.


    Go ahead, give any example of me denigrating Hamilton.

    Just one, liar.

    This thread is a pretty good example of you trying to belittle his
    achievements by trying to play down any significance of his
    contribution to car development.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 22 10:44:06 2022
    On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates? >>>>> Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.
    My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of
    Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in
    the running for WDC.
    Sure.

    Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...

    ...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.

    Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in
    the season?
    First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being
    given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you
    can't produce any examples either.


    Seriously?

    At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the >running"?

    I'll even help.

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship>


    All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway
    point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4
    years plus last year:


    2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
    Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
    Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
    Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
    Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260

    2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
    Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
    Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208

    2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
    Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
    Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286

    Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to
    the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again,
    I won't hold my breath.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 22 07:51:16 2022
    On 2022-07-22 02:44, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates? >>>>>> Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.
    My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of
    Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>> the running for WDC.
    Sure.

    Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...

    ...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.

    Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in
    the season?
    First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being
    given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you
    can't produce any examples either.


    Seriously?

    At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the
    running"?

    I'll even help.

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship>


    All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway
    point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4
    years plus last year:


    2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
    Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
    Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    Except in race three of that year, Bottas was told to give way to Hamilton.


    2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
    Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
    Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260

    2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
    Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
    Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208

    2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
    Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
    Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286

    Sorry, but "Points still available" isn't the metric.

    If your teammate has that many more points than you have, you're not "in
    the running" against your teammate.


    Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to
    the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again,
    I won't hold my breath.

    You were set up, lad.

    Bahrain:

    'Vettel won from Hamilton who was let through into 2nd by Bottas with 10
    laps to go.[7]'

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Bahrain_Grand_Prix#Race>
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 22 20:01:53 2022
    On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:51:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-22 02:44, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates? >>>>>>> Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.
    My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of
    Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>>> the running for WDC.
    Sure.

    Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...

    ...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.

    Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in >>>>> the season?
    First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being
    given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you >>>> can't produce any examples either.


    Seriously?

    At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the >>> running"?

    I'll even help.

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship>


    All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway
    point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4
    years plus last year:


    2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
    Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
    Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    Except in race three of that year, Bottas was told to give way to Hamilton.

    LOL, a race where Bottas tyres were fucked and Hamilton was clearly
    faster. I suggest you go back to the drawing board.



    2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
    Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
    Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260

    2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
    Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
    Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208

    2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
    Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
    Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286

    Sorry, but "Points still available" isn't the metric.

    It's the metric everybody except you uses, including Toto Wolff who
    said he would allow his drivers to race as long as they could both mathematically win the championship.


    If your teammate has that many more points than you have, you're not "in
    the running" against your teammate.


    Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to
    the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again,
    I won't hold my breath.

    You were set up, lad.

    Trying to use a race where Bottas's tyres were fucked - you've just
    set yourself up.


    Bahrain:

    'Vettel won from Hamilton who was let through into 2nd by Bottas with 10 >laps to go.[7]'

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Bahrain_Grand_Prix#Race
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 22 12:07:54 2022
    On 2022-07-22 02:30, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:47:32 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-21 01:08, Martin Harran wrote:
    You ignore what is clearly there.

    The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >>>>>>>> driver.

    You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only >>>>>>>> Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is >>>>>>>> "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by >>>>>>>> many as among the very best for helping develop the car...

    ...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
    A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an >>>>>>> important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits >>>>>>> that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a >>>>>>> clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
    He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that >>>>>> isn't "tooting his own horn".

    Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability! >>>>> Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown >>>>> by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.

    What boasts have I made?

    ========================
    On Fri, 20 May 2022 08:51:56 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
    "Running in the Camaro all day, I gave 22 people huge thrills and some insight into what it's like to drive a car at speed." =============================

    Do I really have to go back further and dig out some more?

    That's it? That's the best you could come up with?

    I've got one more question:

    How is that boasting about my "racing achievements"?

    First, I wasn't boasting. There is literally no "boast" in there. Do you
    know what "boast" even means?

    I just thought I got to do something pretty cool, and while expensive, I thought I might mention that such things exist to an audience that might
    enjoy doing something similar.

    Second, there is no "racing achievement" in it.



    Be specific, liar.

    I won't hold my breath waiting for your apology.

    Because you didn't find anything I need to apologize FOR.




    I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
    contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So, >>>>>>> do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution >>>>>>> and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a >>>>>>> contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
    I completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.
    Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstated >>>>> due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his
    achievements, not takes away from them.
    Nope. The car is still the car and all you have is "if".

    Unaddressed.

    Unaddressed nonsense.

    LOL!



    And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a >>>>>> contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.

    Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
    As I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in
    the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.
    Really? "Widely recognized"... ...by whom?

    Up to this moment the only supporting cite you made was Hamilton blowing >>>> his own horn.

    Unaddressed.

    So what, I gave you another cite from a journalist when you whined.

    A journalist who only got that Hamilton puts in "time and effort"...

    ...just like every other F1 driver.




    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development

    "Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him, >>>>> working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them >>>>> afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
    similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
    emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his >>>>> team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the
    visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do >>>>> not deliver."
    "He has grown into his role and Mercedes emphasise the time and effort >>>> he puts into developing the car and his team."

    "Time and effort" is less than a ringing endorsement.
    Obviously not to you.

    To anyone?

    Whether "ringing" or not, I'd say it's an endorsement to those who
    aren't biased against Hamilton.

    "No true Scotsman": look it up.

    Also look up, "damning with faint praise".

    They ALL put in "time and effort".



    Do you think there is a single driver in the field who DOESN'T put time
    and effort into developing the car?


    You or I (ok, I could) put in time and effort...

    ...but that says nothing about the quality of his contribution.

    Unaddressed.

    Much more than the zero you seem to think it is

    I don't think it's zero.

    So you're either ignorant or a liar.



    And seriously, do you think the team would ever say anything else?
    I haven't seen many teams saying that about their - or Mercedes about
    drivers other than Schumacher and Hamilton - feel free to give
    examples.

    You haven't looked.

    Rather weak way of trying to avoid that you can't produce any
    examples.

    Sorry, but I don't need to look.

    The fact is that the strongest "endorsement" YOU have been able to
    produce is:

    "time and effort".



    But what you've shown only says he puts in "time and effort".

    There is literally not a single word about whether he is particularly
    good OR bad at it.

    Unaddressed.



    And Hamilton hasn't exactly been "scrupulously fair" on track...
    Once again, you are out of line with the majority of opinion; no
    surprises there when it involves Hamilton.

    I'll bet Albon agrees with me...

    People beaten on track aren't generally the best judges of whether
    they were beaten fairly.

    The FIA that penalized Hamilton (twice!):

    Are they good judges do you think?




    'This is not to belittle Schumacher's achievements but Hamilton's career >>>> has been marked by his hard but scrupulously fair performances. He has >>>> made mistakes and held his hands up. He has been tested but not resorted >>>> to what Villeneuve pointedly referred to as "dirty tricks".'

    (I think there are more than a few drivers who would disagree with that >>>> assessment.)

    ...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.
    So you dismiss a piece by one of the UK's top sports reporters with a
    specialist interest in F1, writing in one of the UK's top newspapers
    is just a puff piece - but you don't have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
    ROFLMAO.

    So top sports reporters can't have biases?

    They won't last long as top reporters if they let those biases
    influence their writing.

    Bullshit.


    And let's remember, he doesn't actually quote anyone saying that
    Hamilton is a great or even good development driver.

    You accusing him of making stuff up?

    I'm accusing him of being a Brit who is going doe-eyed over a Brit.



    I don't have a thing with Hamilton. I have a thing with Hamilton
    fanbois; a class of which you clearly are a member.

    Absolutely not. Let's see you produce a single example of anything I
    ever posted that could be considered "fanbois".

    How about pretending "time and effort" is an endorsement of Hamilton's excellence as a development driver?



    Hamilton is clearly one of the very best current drivers. He may even be
    the best. I don't pretend to know.

    But there are fanbois here who have stated that simply because he has
    won a lot of championships me must therefore be the GOAT...

    You still haven't identified any of them.

    How about someone who declared him:

    'A class of his own' and went on to say:

    'He makes it look easy which is the hallmark of a true craftsman.'

    Do you recall who said that?



    ...and that's simply not true.

    It might or might not be true, we have no real way of comparing
    drivers of different generations. Hamilton's 7 WDcs with two different
    teams would certainly put him into any list of all-time greats.


    Go ahead, give any example of me denigrating Hamilton.

    Just one, liar.

    This thread is a pretty good example of you trying to belittle his achievements by trying to play down any significance of his
    contribution to car development.

    I didn't try and belittle a single thing, Liar.

    I pointed outrCocorrectlyrCothat you have only produced Hamilton boasting about himself and Mercedes saying he puts in "time and effort".
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 22 12:08:41 2022
    On 2022-07-22 12:01, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:51:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-22 02:44, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates? >>>>>>>> Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.
    My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of >>>>>>> Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>>>> the running for WDC.
    Sure.

    Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...

    ...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.

    Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in >>>>>> the season?
    First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being
    given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you >>>>> can't produce any examples either.


    Seriously?

    At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the >>>> running"?

    I'll even help.

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship>


    All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway
    point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4
    years plus last year:


    2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
    Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
    Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    Except in race three of that year, Bottas was told to give way to Hamilton.

    LOL, a race where Bottas tyres were fucked and Hamilton was clearly
    faster. I suggest you go back to the drawing board.



    2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
    Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
    Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260

    2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
    Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
    Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208

    2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
    Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
    Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286

    Sorry, but "Points still available" isn't the metric.

    It's the metric everybody except you uses, including Toto Wolff who
    said he would allow his drivers to race as long as they could both mathematically win the championship.

    And if he said that, he lied.



    If your teammate has that many more points than you have, you're not "in
    the running" against your teammate.


    Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to
    the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again,
    I won't hold my breath.

    You were set up, lad.

    Trying to use a race where Bottas's tyres were fucked - you've just
    set yourself up.

    Got any proof of that, Liar?



    Bahrain:

    'Vettel won from Hamilton who was let through into 2nd by Bottas with 10
    laps to go.[7]'

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Bahrain_Grand_Prix#Race

    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 22 20:37:58 2022
    On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 12:08:41 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-22 12:01, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:51:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-22 02:44, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates? >>>>>>>>> Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.
    My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of >>>>>>>> Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>>>>> the running for WDC.
    Sure.

    Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...

    ...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.

    Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in >>>>>>> the season?
    First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being >>>>>> given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you >>>>>> can't produce any examples either.


    Seriously?

    At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the >>>>> running"?

    I'll even help.

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship>


    All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway
    point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4
    years plus last year:


    2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
    Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
    Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    Except in race three of that year, Bottas was told to give way to Hamilton. >>
    LOL, a race where Bottas tyres were fucked and Hamilton was clearly
    faster. I suggest you go back to the drawing board.



    2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
    Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
    Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260

    2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
    Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
    Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208

    2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
    Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
    Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286

    Sorry, but "Points still available" isn't the metric.

    It's the metric everybody except you uses, including Toto Wolff who
    said he would allow his drivers to race as long as they could both
    mathematically win the championship.

    And if he said that,

    He did, several times..

    he lied.

    LOL, you claearly don't see how pathetic your arguments have become.




    If your teammate has that many more points than you have, you're not "in >>> the running" against your teammate.


    Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to >>>> the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again,
    I won't hold my breath.

    You were set up, lad.

    Trying to use a race where Bottas's tyres were fucked - you've just
    set yourself up.

    Got any proof of that, Liar?

    Bottas's own words:

    "In the first stint it was quite a big issue for sure," he said.
    "Sebastian and Lewis were putting quite a lot of pressure and I
    couldn't control the race. I had to try and build a gap but there was
    no grip to build it. Then I had to really take everything out of the
    tyres and the tyre life was shorter.

    "We were also a bit unlucky with the safety car pit stop - it was a
    bit slow, so I lost a place to Sebastian. And then in the second and
    third stint still the pace wasn't there and the car didn't feel as it
    did yesterday, so we'll have to find out what the problem was."

    https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.bottas-accepting-team-orders-tough.2TAwqblZsIq6AgSmqgys08.html

    But then again, according to your reckoning Toto Wolff is a liar, I'm
    a liar so maybe Bottas is a liar too!




    Bahrain:

    'Vettel won from Hamilton who was let through into 2nd by Bottas with 10 >>> laps to go.[7]'

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Bahrain_Grand_Prix#Race

    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Alan@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 22 12:43:55 2022
    On 2022-07-22 12:37, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 12:08:41 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-22 12:01, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:51:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-22 02:44, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?
    Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.
    My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of >>>>>>>>> Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>>>>>> the running for WDC.
    Sure.

    Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...

    ...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.

    Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in >>>>>>>> the season?
    First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being >>>>>>> given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you >>>>>>> can't produce any examples either.


    Seriously?

    At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the >>>>>> running"?

    I'll even help.

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship> >>>>>>
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship> >>>>>

    All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway >>>>> point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4
    years plus last year:


    2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
    Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
    Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    Except in race three of that year, Bottas was told to give way to Hamilton.

    LOL, a race where Bottas tyres were fucked and Hamilton was clearly
    faster. I suggest you go back to the drawing board.



    2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
    Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
    Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260

    2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
    Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
    Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208

    2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
    Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
    Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286

    Sorry, but "Points still available" isn't the metric.

    It's the metric everybody except you uses, including Toto Wolff who
    said he would allow his drivers to race as long as they could both
    mathematically win the championship.

    And if he said that,

    He did, several times..

    Funny you don't provide any quotes, then...


    he lied.

    LOL, you claearly don't see how pathetic your arguments have become.




    If your teammate has that many more points than you have, you're not "in >>>> the running" against your teammate.


    Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to >>>>> the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again, >>>>> I won't hold my breath.

    You were set up, lad.

    Trying to use a race where Bottas's tyres were fucked - you've just
    set yourself up.

    Got any proof of that, Liar?

    Bottas's own words:

    "In the first stint it was quite a big issue for sure," he said.
    "Sebastian and Lewis were putting quite a lot of pressure and I
    couldn't control the race. I had to try and build a gap but there was
    no grip to build it. Then I had to really take everything out of the
    tyres and the tyre life was shorter.

    "We were also a bit unlucky with the safety car pit stop - it was a
    bit slow, so I lost a place to Sebastian. And then in the second and
    third stint still the pace wasn't there and the car didn't feel as it
    did yesterday, so we'll have to find out what the problem was."

    https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.bottas-accepting-team-orders-tough.2TAwqblZsIq6AgSmqgys08.html

    But then again, according to your reckoning Toto Wolff is a liar, I'm
    a liar so maybe Bottas is a liar too!

    But he let Hamilton through... ...twice:

    'Valtteri Bottas has admitted it was hard to accept being asked to move
    aside for Mercedes team mate Lewis Hamilton not once, but twice '

    He didn't defend his position:

    'rCLI think there would have been a possibility,rCY he said. rCLI would have had to defend hard and that could have meant some risky situations, but
    like I said the team thought he had the chance to catch Sebastian
    possibly, and we tried it.rCY'

    Further:

    'And Mercedes, in a very difficult position in only the third race of
    the year, waited until just short of half-distance to order the slower
    Bottas to let Hamilton by for the first time.'

    <https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/39615516>
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Fri Jul 22 18:19:19 2022
    On Friday, July 22, 2022 at 1:43:58 PM UTC-6, Alan wrote:

    Funny you don't provide any quotes

    small things amuse small minds
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 23 10:46:01 2022
    On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 12:43:55 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-22 12:37, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 12:08:41 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-22 12:01, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 07:51:16 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-22 02:44, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:51:01 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-21 01:11, Martin Harran wrote:
    No comment on those stats and the size of the gap between teammates?
    Apparently you have gotten this far following F1...

    ...and never heard of:

    team number 1 drivers,

    or

    team orders.

    That is some amazing ignorance.
    My ignorance would be dispelled if you could give any examples of >>>>>>>>>> Bottas or Perez being disadvantaged by the team when he was still in >>>>>>>>>> the running for WDC.
    Sure.

    Point out a time when either was "still in the running"...

    ...and see "team number 1 drivers" again.

    Seriously, what year was Bottas ever "in the running" at any point in >>>>>>>>> the season?
    First half of the season most times. I can't recall him ever being >>>>>>>> given team orders to favour Hamilton in that situation. Apparently you >>>>>>>> can't produce any examples either.


    Seriously?

    At the half point of which season with Mercedes was Bottas still "in the
    running"?

    I'll even help.

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Formula_One_World_Championship#World_Drivers'_Championship_standings>

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Formula_One_World_Championship> >>>>>>>
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Formula_One_World_Championship> >>>>>>

    All of them! Apparently, you don't quite grasp the concept of halfway >>>>>> point. To save you working it out, I have done it for you for the 4 >>>>>> years plus last year:


    2017 Halfway point - 10/20 races:
    Hamilton: 176 pts Bottas 154pts
    Difference: 22 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    Except in race three of that year, Bottas was told to give way to Hamilton.

    LOL, a race where Bottas tyres were fucked and Hamilton was clearly
    faster. I suggest you go back to the drawing board.



    2018 Halfway point - 11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 188 pts Bottas 122 pts
    Difference: 66 pts Points still available: 25x10 = 250

    2019 Halfway point -11/21 races:
    Hamilton: 225 pts Bottas 184 pts
    Difference: 41 pts Points still available: 26x10 = 260

    2020 Halfway point - 9/17 races:
    Hamilton: 190 pts Bottas 135 pts
    Difference: 55 pts Points still available: 26x8 = 208

    2021 Halfway point -11/22 races:
    Hamilton: 193 pts Bottas 107 pts
    Difference: 86 pts Points still available: 26x11 = 286

    Sorry, but "Points still available" isn't the metric.

    It's the metric everybody except you uses, including Toto Wolff who
    said he would allow his drivers to race as long as they could both
    mathematically win the championship.

    And if he said that,

    He did, several times..

    Funny you don't provide any quotes, then...

    I didn't think there was any need when he has said it so often in
    interviews. Not much point now when you've decided that even if he did
    say it, he just lied. Anyway, for the record, talking about the exact
    same principle with Hamilton and Russell:

    "One hundred per cent we will allow them to race until a driver is mathematically out of contention, we're not making such a call."

    https://www.planetf1.com/news/toto-wolff-100-percent-no-team-orders/






    he lied.

    LOL, you claearly don't see how pathetic your arguments have become.




    If your teammate has that many more points than you have, you're not "in >>>>> the running" against your teammate.


    Now, let's see you give an example of Mercedes imposing team orders to >>>>>> the disadvantage of Bottas before any of those halfway points. Again, >>>>>> I won't hold my breath.

    You were set up, lad.

    Trying to use a race where Bottas's tyres were fucked - you've just
    set yourself up.

    Got any proof of that, Liar?

    Bottas's own words:

    "In the first stint it was quite a big issue for sure," he said.
    "Sebastian and Lewis were putting quite a lot of pressure and I
    couldn't control the race. I had to try and build a gap but there was
    no grip to build it. Then I had to really take everything out of the
    tyres and the tyre life was shorter.

    "We were also a bit unlucky with the safety car pit stop - it was a
    bit slow, so I lost a place to Sebastian. And then in the second and
    third stint still the pace wasn't there and the car didn't feel as it
    did yesterday, so we'll have to find out what the problem was."

    https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.bottas-accepting-team-orders-tough.2TAwqblZsIq6AgSmqgys08.html

    But then again, according to your reckoning Toto Wolff is a liar, I'm
    a liar so maybe Bottas is a liar too!

    But he let Hamilton through... ...twice:

    'Valtteri Bottas has admitted it was hard to accept being asked to move >aside for Mercedes team mate Lewis Hamilton not once, but twice '

    He didn't defend his position:

    And he goes on to explain why; do you have trouble understanding the
    word "risky" in the context of teammates?


    '"I think there would have been a possibility," he said. "I would have
    had to defend hard and that could have meant some risky situations, but
    like I said the team thought he had the chance to catch Sebastian
    possibly, and we tried it."'

    Further:

    'And Mercedes, in a very difficult position in only the third race of
    the year, waited until just short of half-distance

    Reflecting to their desire to give Bottas every chance to improve.

    to order the slower
    Bottas to let Hamilton by for the first time.'

    https://www.bbc.com/sport/formula1/39615516

    What part of *the slower Bottas* do you struggle to understand?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From Martin Harran@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 23 11:04:40 2022
    On Fri, 22 Jul 2022 12:07:54 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-22 02:30, Martin Harran wrote:
    On Thu, 21 Jul 2022 10:47:32 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

    On 2022-07-21 01:08, Martin Harran wrote:
    You ignore what is clearly there.

    The point at issue was whether or not Hamilton was a good development >>>>>>>>> driver.

    You chose to post on that subject something that is literally only >>>>>>>>> Hamilton talking about Hamilton and clearly stating that he is >>>>>>>>> "approaching where Michael [Schumacher] was"; a driver acknowledged by
    many as among the very best for helping develop the car...

    ...and then you claim that wasn't boastful.
    A driver with an outstanding career says that he missed out on an >>>>>>>> important part of being a great driver, he's working on it but admits >>>>>>>> that he's not fully there yet. Seeing that as "tooting his horn" is a >>>>>>>> clear demonstration of your 'thing' about Hamilton.
    He "admits" he's approaching one of the acknowledged very best and that >>>>>>> isn't "tooting his own horn".

    Well then I guess I can say I'm approaching Hamilton's driving ability! >>>>>> Nah, you're streets ahead of Hamilton in tooting one's horn as shown >>>>>> by your numerous boasts here about your own achievements in racing.

    What boasts have I made?

    ========================
    On Fri, 20 May 2022 08:51:56 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
    "Running in the Camaro all day, I gave 22 people huge thrills and some
    insight into what it's like to drive a car at speed."
    =============================

    Do I really have to go back further and dig out some more?

    That's it? That's the best you could come up with?

    I've got one more question:

    How is that boasting about my "racing achievements"?

    First, I wasn't boasting. There is literally no "boast" in there. Do you >know what "boast" even means?

    So when Hamilton in an interview describes how he came to understand
    the importance of driver input and worked hard to improve his own
    contribution, he is tooting his horn. When you start a thread on
    Usenet to talk about how you gave 22 people huge thrills (in your own
    opinion, of course), there is nothing boastful about it.

    That demonstrates how you live in an alternate reality all of your
    own. Or maybe you just make up shit.


    I just thought I got to do something pretty cool, and while expensive, I >thought I might mention that such things exist to an audience that might >enjoy doing something similar.

    Second, there is no "racing achievement" in it.



    Be specific, liar.

    I won't hold my breath waiting for your apology.

    Because you didn't find anything I need to apologize FOR.




    I also note that you have made no comment about the driver's
    contribution to getting the best out of the car, development-wise. So, >>>>>>>> do you agree or disagree that the driver can have such a contribution >>>>>>>> and, if you agree, do you agree or disagree that Hamilton has made a >>>>>>>> contribution in that aspect to the Mercedes success?
    I completely agree a driver can have such a contribution.
    Which undermines your claim about Hamilton's ability being overstated >>>>>> due to the car. If he helped develop the car then that adds to his >>>>>> achievements, not takes away from them.
    Nope. The car is still the car and all you have is "if".

    Unaddressed.

    Unaddressed nonsense.

    LOL!



    And unlike you, I'll clearly state that I don't know how much of a >>>>>>> contribution Hamilton has made to that aspect of the program.

    Will you acknowledge that you also haven't any clue about it?
    As I said earlier "he is widely recognised as playing a key role in >>>>>> the development of the car since he joined Mercedes" e.g.
    Really? "Widely recognized"... ...by whom?

    Up to this moment the only supporting cite you made was Hamilton blowing >>>>> his own horn.

    Unaddressed.

    So what, I gave you another cite from a journalist when you whined.

    A journalist who only got that Hamilton puts in "time and effort"...

    ...just like every other F1 driver.




    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/oct/09/what-sets-lewis-hamilton-apart-from-schumacher-is-personal-development

    "Schumacher has been lauded for building that Ferrari team around him, >>>>>> working with engineers and mechanics then going for a beer with them >>>>>> afterwards. Hamilton is not often given enough credit for doing
    similarly at Mercedes. He has grown into his role and Mercedes
    emphasise the time and effort he puts into developing the car and his >>>>>> team. Just what a strong relationship he now enjoys is clear by the >>>>>> visceral disappointment across the Mercedes garage when he or they do >>>>>> not deliver."
    "He has grown into his role and Mercedes emphasise the time and effort >>>>> he puts into developing the car and his team."

    "Time and effort" is less than a ringing endorsement.
    Obviously not to you.

    To anyone?

    Whether "ringing" or not, I'd say it's an endorsement to those who
    aren't biased against Hamilton.

    "No true Scotsman": look it up.

    Also look up, "damning with faint praise".

    They ALL put in "time and effort".



    Do you think there is a single driver in the field who DOESN'T put time
    and effort into developing the car?


    You or I (ok, I could) put in time and effort...

    ...but that says nothing about the quality of his contribution.

    Unaddressed.

    Much more than the zero you seem to think it is

    I don't think it's zero.

    So you're either ignorant or a liar.



    And seriously, do you think the team would ever say anything else?
    I haven't seen many teams saying that about their - or Mercedes about
    drivers other than Schumacher and Hamilton - feel free to give
    examples.

    You haven't looked.

    Rather weak way of trying to avoid that you can't produce any
    examples.

    Sorry, but I don't need to look.

    The fact is that the strongest "endorsement" YOU have been able to
    produce is:

    "time and effort".



    But what you've shown only says he puts in "time and effort".

    There is literally not a single word about whether he is particularly
    good OR bad at it.

    Unaddressed.



    And Hamilton hasn't exactly been "scrupulously fair" on track...
    Once again, you are out of line with the majority of opinion; no
    surprises there when it involves Hamilton.

    I'll bet Albon agrees with me...

    People beaten on track aren't generally the best judges of whether
    they were beaten fairly.

    The FIA that penalized Hamilton (twice!):

    Are they good judges do you think?




    'This is not to belittle Schumacher's achievements but Hamilton's career >>>>> has been marked by his hard but scrupulously fair performances. He has >>>>> made mistakes and held his hands up. He has been tested but not resorted >>>>> to what Villeneuve pointedly referred to as "dirty tricks".'

    (I think there are more than a few drivers who would disagree with that >>>>> assessment.)

    ...and that casts the whole article as something of a puff piece.
    So you dismiss a piece by one of the UK's top sports reporters with a
    specialist interest in F1, writing in one of the UK's top newspapers
    is just a puff piece - but you don't have a 'thing' about Hamilton.
    ROFLMAO.

    So top sports reporters can't have biases?

    They won't last long as top reporters if they let those biases
    influence their writing.

    Bullshit.


    And let's remember, he doesn't actually quote anyone saying that
    Hamilton is a great or even good development driver.

    You accusing him of making stuff up?

    I'm accusing him of being a Brit who is going doe-eyed over a Brit.



    I don't have a thing with Hamilton. I have a thing with Hamilton
    fanbois; a class of which you clearly are a member.

    Absolutely not. Let's see you produce a single example of anything I
    ever posted that could be considered "fanbois".

    How about pretending "time and effort" is an endorsement of Hamilton's >excellence as a development driver?



    Hamilton is clearly one of the very best current drivers. He may even be >>> the best. I don't pretend to know.

    But there are fanbois here who have stated that simply because he has
    won a lot of championships me must therefore be the GOAT...

    You still haven't identified any of them.

    How about someone who declared him:

    'A class of his own' and went on to say:

    'He makes it look easy which is the hallmark of a true craftsman.'

    Do you recall who said that?

    Ignoring the fact that that has nothibg to do with declaring him GOAT,
    I said it about a *specific race* and you didn't dispute his
    outstanding performance in it at the time except, as usual, you tried
    to make out there was really nothing special about it, it was just him
    having the best car.

    Also, it was two years ago. The fact that you try to wrangle a two
    year old comment about a specific race as some sort of evidence of me
    being a fanbois shows the utter futility of trying to have a rational discussion with you. I'm outa here.




    ...and that's simply not true.

    It might or might not be true, we have no real way of comparing
    drivers of different generations. Hamilton's 7 WDcs with two different
    teams would certainly put him into any list of all-time greats.


    Go ahead, give any example of me denigrating Hamilton.

    Just one, liar.

    This thread is a pretty good example of you trying to belittle his
    achievements by trying to play down any significance of his
    contribution to car development.

    I didn't try and belittle a single thing, Liar.

    I pointed outucorrectlyuthat you have only produced Hamilton boasting
    about himself and Mercedes saying he puts in "time and effort".
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From texas gate@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 23 09:18:44 2022
    On Saturday, July 23, 2022 at 4:04:43 AM UTC-6, martin...@gmail.com wrote:

    I'm outa here.

    Thanks harry martin.
    Hopefully numbnuts fucks off too.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)
  • From bra@24:150/2 to rec.autos.sport.f1 on Sat Jul 23 11:03:49 2022
    Acceptance by sponsors and a team invite, and those have sometimes been granted to drivers of rather modest talents who did not really deserve an F1 seat.
    Next question?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: SportNet Gateway Site (24:150/2)