Clicky

Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

maure

Hamilton Vs Vettel, See The Video

Recommended Posts

Your posts are not about racing, you are labouring the point that Lewis choked, that Vettel owned him, that Lewis is underserving, but it is of no consequence because he has won the WDC.

You lie, of course.

First, I've said for weeks that Hamilton is as (un)deserving as Massa would have been.

Second, the thread is about _what_ happened in those last laps that decided the championship.

Third, the only thing that this last post of yours reveals is _precisely_ what YOU insist on talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, he thinks his son is an idiot too? :P
Hey! I have enough to worry about! My PS3 got taken off me so no porn & crappy tests next week & Man. U are losing atm to Celtic :lol::lol: !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think what's meant to be said here is nobody is getting anywhere and none of you are going to give in/back down, and its just going to keep on going in circles....

Actually, no.

If you follow the thread you will find how the excuses have evolved as, time and again, they were shown to be nonsense. Quite amusing if you are into that sort of thing.

That said, when I started this thread, I was just concentrating on Vettel's demonstration of ability. Thanks to lewisterics et al., it's become clear that, indeed, Hamilton choked. With that in mind, therefore, it easier to see why Vettel in a much inferior car passed him and pulled away and why Kubica flew by both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't get why you keep saying the same thing over & over again maure! Yes, Hamilton screwed up & Vettel passed him, at the end of the day Lewis is champ! Can't you just take the fact that the driver you hate the most is the current champ & move of with your life cos I'm curently getting sick of seeing 5 more pages worth of junk created in 24 hours!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why wasn't he able to pass Hamilton then but he could later? Choke.

Nope. Because of the safety car. He only had time to pass Alonso and Kova in the half lap before it came out. When racing resumed, Vettel was again initially catching Hamilton up, but by that stage the track was drying out and he fell back.

If you follow the thread you will find how the excuses have evolved as, time and again, they were shown to be nonsense. Quite amusing if you are into that sort of thing.

:lol: In fact the explanation has simply been repeated over and over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What? This thread is dying already? No way! Come on guys! My humble contribution to the fire.

I don't know where everybody stands right now because your argumentations got so convoluted I guess opposite views switched back and forth more than once. But...

I just want to point this single thing out: LH only had to finish 5th to secure the championship. The Maccas had their ups and downs but never seemed to be struggling for a 5th position. I agree with Maure in the sense that, after the race (and during it), it was pretty obvious that they had no idea whether he would catch up Glock, or Vettel, or none until the last miliseconds.

So...question: Why in heavens did they aim at a 5th place in first place? Why not a pole and managing things from there? Why not try to focus on a 3rd place at least, if the Maccas weren't in perfect shape for the weekend? They could have easily devised a strategy to make him finish 3rd right? I mean, it's LH!!!! In a friggin' McLaren!!!! Why play on the edge and almost lose it all? It was a serious, suicidal example fo team strategy.

Ahh...let the fireworks begin continue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope. Because of the safety car. He only had time to pass Alonso and Kova in the half lap before it came out. When racing resumed, Vettel was again initially catching Hamilton up, but by that stage the track was drying out and he fell back.

:lol: In fact the explanation has simply been repeated over and over again.

Nah, it did evolve, because at first even I found it dubious XD

But I do that too, post, and then think: maybe I should take another look just in case I'm wrong... Nah, but I'm forgetting that you're never wrong :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What? This thread is dying already? No way! Come on guys! My humble contribution to the fire.

I don't know where everybody stands right now because your argumentations got so convoluted I guess opposite views switched back and forth more than once. But...

I just want to point this single thing out: LH only had to finish 5th to secure the championship. The Maccas had their ups and downs but never seemed to be struggling for a 5th position. I agree with Maure in the sense that, after the race (and during it), it was pretty obvious that they had no idea whether he would catch up Glock, or Vettel, or none until the last miliseconds.

So...question: Why in heavens did they aim at a 5th place in first place? Why not a pole and managing things from there? Why not try to focus on a 3rd place at least, if the Maccas weren't in perfect shape for the weekend? They could have easily devised a strategy to make him finish 3rd right? I mean, it's LH!!!! In a friggin' McLaren!!!! Why play on the edge and almost lose it all? It was a serious, suicidal example fo team strategy.

Ahh...let the fireworks begin continue

Will add you to the forum fight list then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So...question: Why in heavens did they aim at a 5th place in first place? Why not a pole and managing things from there? Why not try to focus on a 3rd place at least, if the Maccas weren't in perfect shape for the weekend? They could have easily devised a strategy to make him finish 3rd right? I mean, it's LH!!!! In a friggin' McLaren!!!! Why play on the edge and almost lose it all? It was a serious, suicidal example fo team strategy.

Yes it was dumb in retrospect. I imagine they trusted their weather forecasts too much during the race. Surely if they'd known it was likely to rain again they would never have taken it so easy for most of the race. Even in the closing stages they could have used Kova to back up the field before the final pit stops.

I'm forgetting that you're never wrong :P

I do that too sometimes. There was this one time ages ago when I thought I might have been. But then I remembered. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So...question: Why in heavens did they aim at a 5th place in first place? Why not a pole and managing things from there? Why not try to focus on a 3rd place at least, if the Maccas weren't in perfect shape for the weekend? They could have easily devised a strategy to make him finish 3rd right? I mean, it's LH!!!! In a friggin' McLaren!!!! Why play on the edge and almost lose it all? It was a serious, suicidal example fo team strategy.

Ahh...let the fireworks begin continue

Ah but you are assuming McLaren accidently ended up in this position.

How about the "Ecclestone conspiracy" - Bernie agrees with Toyota, STR and McLaren to have a nice close finish - predetermined outcome, trading positions - good for TV ratings, good for the sport.

Mwah ha ha! Its all a pantomime, I tell you!!!! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I'm thinking, Ferrari ****ed a lot of Massa's races, so it's only fair that McLaren screwed up sometime too, right? Bad thing they chose to almost lose his boy the championship in the last race. Guess it happened because he didn't screw up by himself and they must have thought that that's just plain boring, just remember last year's race at Interlagos... :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So...question: Why in heavens did they aim at a 5th place in first place? Why not a pole and managing things from there? Why not try to focus on a 3rd place at least, if the Maccas weren't in perfect shape for the weekend? They could have easily devised a strategy to make him finish 3rd right? I mean, it's LH!!!! In a friggin' McLaren!!!! Why play on the edge and almost lose it all? It was a serious, suicidal example fo team strategy.

They would have got 3rd, but for their poor timing switching to slicks. At the start Lewis was comfortable in 4th behind Massa, Kimi and Trulli. They made the mistake by covering Massa at the 1st stops and lost out to Nando and Vettel, Vettel was unfortunate that his team didn't add fuel during his first stop otherwise he would have been 2nd/3rd close to Nando.

Lewis was then comfortably running in 4th place with no further stops planned when it started to rain. This time they had vettel, nando, kimi and massa covered, but I think they dropped the curve ball not shadowing Glock. Lewis then CHOKED losing 5th place to Vettel and, but for Glock coming unstuck they would have lost the WDC.

The team were over cautious and the rain nearly ruined their day

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nope. Because of the safety car. He only had time to pass Alonso and Kova in the half lap before it came out. When racing resumed, Vettel was again initially catching Hamilton up, but by that stage the track was drying out and he fell back.

:lol: In fact the explanation has simply been repeated over and over again.

So, summing up, you abandon all previous exculpatory excuses and put it all on a slow McLaren "under certain" conditions.

Cool.

McLaren spends millions fitting Hamilton's car for this race (no word on Kova's, btw) in order to get a "few tenths" ("the most expensive workup for a race in the history of McLaren", if I remember correctly RD's words). However, you claim, all this money accomplishes the precise opposite because McLaren fails to take into consideration the prediction of rain that we had all heard. Consequently, the McLaren becomes "so slow" that even a Toro Rosso can pass Hamilton.

Brilliant thinking on your part... as well as delightfully amusing.

Now take another look at the race and you will easily realize that it had nothing to do with speed. Hamilton made a mistake and run wide. Vettel took advantage of Hamilton's error and passed him. Vettel himself didn't make any mistakes and Hamilton couldn't pass him back even though, as he said himself, he tried his "hardest".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Compared to Hamilton, Vettel has gotten screwed. The entire field has. Hamilton's jump from nothing to a top team in a whine and that team being at his feet almost from the get-go is something never seen before in F1.

The normal route, if you are able to ever see beyond Hamilton, is to be a test driver and work you way up, perhaps by driving for small teams before moving on. Vettel is doing that. Hamilton never did. You know this, everyone does.

But McLaren saw a talent that was so immense that they put him straight in one of their race cars. And it paid off because he came within a point of the title in his rookie season and upstaged his illustrious champion team-mate.

And by the way Lewis's journey was normal. GP2 to F1 is a route we've seen with Rosberg, Heidfeld, Liuzzi, Glock, and so on.

And no matter how you cling to the age issue, Hamilton's got treatment than no one else has.

What about J Villeneuve & Damon Hill, they jumped straight into race-winning cars for their debuts (Hill at brabham in '92 doesnt count)! F1 has seen it before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But McLaren saw a talent that was so immense that they put him straight in one of their race cars. And it paid off because he came within a point of the title in his rookie season and upstaged his illustrious champion team-mate.

And by the way Lewis's journey was normal. GP2 to F1 is a route we've seen with Rosberg, Heidfeld, Liuzzi, Glock, and so on.

What about J Villeneuve & Damon Hill, they jumped straight into race-winning cars for their debuts (Hill at brabham in '92 doesnt count)! F1 has seen it before.

Aside from the fact, that "Rosberg, Heidfeld, Liuzzi, Glock, and so on" did not walk into a top team and are or had to work to get ahead...

... did any of them also have a team that stopped at nothing (including screwing over a 2xWDC) to serve them?

... did, for example, any of these guys' teambosses say they were racing against their respective teammates when they both still had a shot at the championship?

We both know that the favoritism enjoyed by Hamilton is unprecedented in many respects. I still chuckle at the "equality" mantra and how it has been completely "forgotten" this season. The joke of it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, summing up, you abandon all previous exculpatory excuses and put it all on a slow McLaren "under certain" conditions.

Cool.

McLaren spends millions fitting Hamilton's car for this race (no word on Kova's, btw) in order to get a "few tenths" ("the most expensive workup for a race in the history of McLaren", if I remember correctly RD's words). However, you claim, all this money accomplishes the precise opposite because McLaren fails to take into consideration the prediction of rain that we had all heard. Consequently, the McLaren becomes "so slow" that even a Toro Rosso can pass Hamilton.

Brilliant thinking on your part... as well as delightfully amusing.

Now take another look at the race and you will easily realize that it had nothing to do with speed. Hamilton made a mistake and run wide. Vettel took advantage of Hamilton's error and passed him. Vettel himself didn't make any mistakes and Hamilton couldn't pass him back even though, as he said himself, he tried his "hardest".

In fact I've been saying all along that anyone who looks at the race sensibly will see that the McLarens simply weren't fit for the wet conditions. Hamilton ran wide just as it started to rain hard again because his car was awful in those conditions, coupled with the difficulty of negotiating Kubica and pushing to stay ahead of Vettel. Hamilton couldn't pass him back because his car was much slower at that time. It has everything to do with the McLaren and nothing to do with 'choking'.

Regarding Kova's car, I've said he was struggling even more. The cars were set up presumably in accordance with McLaren's weather predictions. And they were very nearly correct since the race appeared to be under control until the end. Their biggest mistake was trusting their weather forecasts too much and thus not pushing enough in the race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is hilarious in and off itself...

let's look back (at a glance) -

MAURE - "Hamilton did better than last year and didn't crash. This was enough for providence to gift him the championship."

ME - "So was it 'providence' or Hamilton that won the WDC? Is there a higher being that manipulated the WDC for it's own entertainment? Does that higher entity support Hamiton this year but not last?"

MAURE - "It wasn't providence that Hamilton didn't crash. That he didn't crash is his merit, as I said. However, it was providence that it restarted to rain in the last lap just enough so that Glock could lose sufficient time for Hamilton (on intermediates) to catch up."

ME - "What we're talking about here is luck/fortune/providence - call it what you will. 1) Luck even's itself out 2) Ham and Massa had their shares of good and bad luck throughout the whole season 3) it's the same every season 4) and wasn't it bad luck that the rain started at all 6 laps from the end when Hamilton was in 4th place? 5) If it was all luck, we could stick my granny in a force india and have fair chance of winning 6) if it was no luck, it wouldn't be a sport, it would be a predictable science."

MAURE - "I just felt sorry for Hamilton when Vettel passed him. You can see how much emotion some people put on this race."

I love the way that NOT ONCE do you actually address the point I'm making. Do you know why people hate politicians Maure? Do you know why no one trusts them? Do you know why no one takes them seriously? Do you know why people think they have their own misguided agenda and that they lie to everyone (including themselves) in order to fullfill it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In fact I've been saying all along that anyone who looks at the race sensibly will see that the McLarens simply weren't fit for the wet conditions. Hamilton ran wide just as it started to rain hard again because his car was awful in those conditions, coupled with the difficulty of negotiating Kubica and pushing to stay ahead of Vettel. Hamilton couldn't pass him back because his car was much slower at that time. It has everything to do with the McLaren and nothing to do with 'choking'.

Regarding Kova's car, I've said he was struggling even more. The cars were set up presumably in accordance with McLaren's weather predictions. And they were very nearly correct since the race appeared to be under control until the end. Their biggest mistake was trusting their weather forecasts too much and thus not pushing enough in the race.

Millions invested setting up one of the best (if not the best) car in the field and the result, you claim, is a lemon that even a Toro Rosso could easily pass.

That's the substance of your latest excuse.

My friend, your ego has outdone itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this is hilarious in and off itself...

let's look back (at a glance) -

MAURE - "Hamilton did better than last year and didn't crash. This was enough for providence to gift him the championship."

ME - "So was it 'providence' or Hamilton that won the WDC? Is there a higher being that manipulated the WDC for it's own entertainment? Does that higher entity support Hamiton this year but not last?"

MAURE - "It wasn't providence that Hamilton didn't crash. That he didn't crash is his merit, as I said. However, it was providence that it restarted to rain in the last lap just enough so that Glock could lose sufficient time for Hamilton (on intermediates) to catch up."

ME - "What we're talking about here is luck/fortune/providence - call it what you will. 1) Luck even's itself out 2) Ham and Massa had their shares of good and bad luck throughout the whole season 3) it's the same every season 4) and wasn't it bad luck that the rain started at all 6 laps from the end when Hamilton was in 4th place? 5) If it was all luck, we could stick my granny in a force india and have fair chance of winning 6) if it was no luck, it wouldn't be a sport, it would be a predictable science."

MAURE - "I just felt sorry for Hamilton when Vettel passed him. You can see how much emotion some people put on this race."

I love the way that NOT ONCE do you actually address the point I'm making. Do you know why people hate politicians Maure? Do you know why no one trusts them? Do you know why no one takes them seriously? Do you know why people think they have their own misguided agenda and that they lie to everyone (including themselves) in order to fullfill it?

Wow. You really are dancing on the head of a pin here. What issue are you getting at with your truth seeking exploration into the inner workings of "luck"? Are you asking me to, perhaps, validate your idea that "luck" somehow follows a peculiar arithmetic of balance?

Hamilton lost the championship when he run wide and Vettel passed him. Hamilton won the championship back when it started to rain in the last lap. Perhaps if you explain the acrobatics you are trying to conjure up to somehow rewrite these events I could help you out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hamilton lost the championship when he run wide and Vettel passed him. Hamilton won the championship back when it started to rain in the last lap. .

That about sums it up doesn't it Maure? Now bring on 2009!!! I hope Hamilton wins again :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow. You really are dancing on the head of a pin here. What issue are you getting at with your truth seeking exploration into the inner workings of "luck"? Are you asking me to, perhaps, validate your idea that "luck" somehow follows a peculiar arithmetic of balance?

Hamilton lost the championship when he run wide and Vettel passed him. Hamilton won the championship back when it started to rain in the last lap. Perhaps if you explain the acrobatics you are trying to conjure up to somehow rewrite these events I could help you out.

huh? in what way?

hang on - it was you that started waffling about providence/chance - you seem to have forgotton that - how surprising.

oh dear - misrepresentation is now part of your armoury eh.

Hamilton lost the championship when he ran into the back of Kimi in Canda

Hamilton won the championship when he cruised home from pole in China

Hamilton lost the championship when he hit the wall in Monaco

Hamilton won the championship when it started raining in Monaco

Hamilton lost the championship when he ran kimi off the track and got penalised in Fuji

Hamilton won the championship when Massa got penalised in Fuji

Hamilton lost the championship when he qualified 13th in Belgium

Hamilton won the championship when Vettel not Massa won Belgium

Hamilton lost the championship when it started raining in Brazil and Vettel got past him

Hamilton won the championship when he was able to pick up Glock in Brazil because of that rain

Hamilton lost the championship because he was unlucky

Hamilton won the championship because he was lucky

Hamilton lost the championship when he didn't drive well

Hamilton won the championship when he did drive well

Can you see what bollocks you're speaking?

Hamilton won the championship.

Just end the sentence there - that is what you can't bring yourself to do - you always have to add ifs, buts, conditions and detractions and when someone points out that those ifs, buts, conditions and detractions are false, superficial, condradictory or subjective, you just pile on more.

Hamilton won the championship - let it go.

Pot - kettle - black? No acrobatics - I agreed with the facts your original post - I agree with the facts of the race - the ACTUAL facts, not the ones you subjectively superimpose upon the race - that Hamilton was lucky, that Hamilton choked etc etc - these are not facts but suppositions - you are the one making them - not I.

I'm saying no more than what happened happened. Your subsequent defense of these suppositions has become absolutely bizzare because it's evident to one and all that your speaking absolute tosh.

Citing luck, weather, providence, poor form, good form, choking whatever you like only compounds the generally held opinion that you can't accept graciously facts that you don't like. Even Sarah Palin did better than this.

Hamilton won the championship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: You know his technique by now surely? Maure will avoid what you just said by responding with something along the lines of "Wow, the way you try to wish away your hero's prodigious choke by hiding behind such violent lewisteric ramblings is hilarious, as always, _carry_on"

Or some such gibberish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...