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

Murray, to cure you a bit of your fanboyish delusions, wasn't Monza a great race by Hamilton in the wet? Vettel only had to bring it home, Hamilton provided the action in the back (wow, sounds weird to be typing it in this order, but that's how it was xD). I'm not saying it played a part in Brazil, I'm just saying to drop the excuse of the Toro Rosso better suited to the conditions. Please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, Murray. Vettel's (and Kubica's, btw) humilliation of Hamilton is irrelevant to me as far as Hamilton goes. Why? Because the season was a random mess that could've gone either way to equally (un)deserving drivers. Hamilton won, so congrats to him. Done. I'm indifferent. I don't find Bingo or Lottery interesting nor care much about anything that resembles those kind of chance games.

Now, Vettel's (and Kubica's, btw) skill under those circumstances is an eye opener and, hopefully, might mean that some day top teams will again hire on skill rather than who-you-know and the level of competition will raise again. Those of us that follow F1 because of racing and not because of heroworshipping have much to celebrate when we see a driver having to prove himself with an inferior car and succeeding brilliantly. Get it? Not at all about Hamilton.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In that case, you surprise me... and that is no little thing.

You say that Hamiton knew "at the start of the last lap that he would catch Glock" while Hamilton says that "They did, just before I got to him, they said you have to get past Glock"

Even if you were right, that would've been said two laps after Vettel and Hamilton had the face off that Hamilton lost.

Considering this, your whole narration of the events falls apart.

Sorry to disappoint. I'd love to have a good chat about it all, it's been some time since we argued, but I don't have the time or patience at present. I'm sure you'll have a reasonable, sensible and thought provoking discussion with Murray though :D:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
According to Hamilton, yes, he _did_ try his "hardest" and failed.

Lewis didn't race Vettel all the way to the chequered flag, so clearly he wasn't giving 'every iota of skill' he had to beat Vettel.

For example, in those "certain conditions" where you don't have a place to hide and anything you come up with, no matter how absurd, is better than to admit you are wrong.

The STR was better set up for those conditions. It's clear for anyone to see, if they care to investigate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now, Vettel's (and Kubica's, btw) skill under those circumstances is an eye opener and, hopefully, might mean that some day top teams will again hire on skill rather than who-you-know and the level of competition will raise again. Those of us that follow F1 because of racing and not because of heroworshipping have much to celebrate when we see a driver having to prove himself with an inferior car and succeeding brilliantly. Get it? Not at all about Hamilton.

I actually agree with you on this. Lewis, however is the 2008 WDC so what is your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

blah blah blah

Hamilton is the WORLD CHAMP. believe it. what do you want to prove? that because Vettel WAS faster than Hamie means the title isnt deserved? you think mclaren were running at full potential? they did whatever they could to have as much a reliable car as possible, and YES if you watch carefully Lewis never pushed really the car, until those 2 laps where he couldnt do anything as Vettel had a better set up for those conditions...Vettel -as said and i agree with the others- had nothing to lose...so you cannot compare apples to lemons...

we will have time in the future to see an immediate comparison between Lewis and Vettel in the wet, no doubt, but despite that the last one was faster in ONE race (dont tell me about Monza, because Hamilton was so back) and not by chance (setup+nothing to lose) , proves N-O-T-H-I-N-G -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahaha.

I did think that Vettel made him look a little silly. Delighted that he went for Hamilton as he also had a fair bit to lose.

Lewis and Kovalainen both had poor cars in the wet and really all race so it's hard to really say, I think that Vettel was the better driver on the day, definately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It remains a mystery what Kubica was playing at there as he had nothing to gain by unlapping himself with 3 laps to go.

Oh please. Kubeetza has his own race to worry about. And please understand that quoting dubious websites or random forum posts does nto in any way support your view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why? Because the season was a random mess that could've gone either way to equally (un)deserving drivers. Hamilton won, so congrats to him. Done. I'm indifferent. I don't find Bingo or Lottery interesting nor care much about anything that resembles those kind of chance games.

Are you watching F1 for the first time? Almost every single F1 season could have gone either way depending on FIA decisions and random non driver related events. 2007 was equally random, except since Kimi won, I didn't see you complaining. Schumacher would have won 2006 if his car hadn't broken down. 2003 was random. So was 1999, where Irvine almost won. 1998 might have been different had the Ferrari not stalled on the grid. In fact, more often than not, this is how F1 seasons are decided, and you can have a field day with what ifs if you want. This year has been as random as ever, most seasons there are two or three good drivers, and who wins comes down to car differences, reliability and the FIA. This season is hardly the first time that has happened, and if you don't like it, you might as well stop watching F1 already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry to disappoint. I'd love to have a good chat about it all, it's been some time since we argued, but I don't have the time or patience at present. I'm sure you'll have a reasonable, sensible and thought provoking discussion with Murray though :D:lol:

I've heard worse excuses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I actually agree with you on this. Lewis, however is the 2008 WDC so what is your point?

Guess who beat the current WDC on skill and with an inferior car...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lewis didn't race Vettel all the way to the chequered flag, so clearly he wasn't giving 'every iota of skill' he had to beat Vettel.

For two laps, Hamilton knew he had lost the WDC and couldn't do anything to win it back on skill even if he tried his "hardest".

Hamilton's disposition at the time:

A. Cool indifference and moderate attention to the situation.

B. Considering the merits of _not_ trying to win in order to satisfy Murray's denials.

C. Impotence and desperation as there was nothing he could do to win the WDC on merit, no matter how hard he tried.

The STR was better set up for those conditions. It's clear for anyone to see, if they care to investigate.

And to think that a Force India could have won every single race this season if only they would have found Murray's "magical set up" that made a Toro Rosso faster than a McLaren...

They just didn't care to "investigate". Fools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
blah blah blah

Hamilton is the WORLD CHAMP. believe it. what do you want to prove? that because Vettel WAS faster than Hamie means the title isnt deserved? you think mclaren were running at full potential? they did whatever they could to have as much a reliable car as possible, and YES if you watch carefully Lewis never pushed really the car, until those 2 laps where he couldnt do anything as Vettel had a better set up for those conditions...Vettel -as said and i agree with the others- had nothing to lose...so you cannot compare apples to lemons...

we will have time in the future to see an immediate comparison between Lewis and Vettel in the wet, no doubt, but despite that the last one was faster in ONE race (dont tell me about Monza, because Hamilton was so back) and not by chance (setup+nothing to lose) , proves N-O-T-H-I-N-G -_-

You are correct. McLaren was not running at "full potential" even though when Vettel passed Hamilton, they had lost the WDC... And Hamilton didn't push, oh no, he just decided to lose the WDC because he is such a cool guy.

Hilarious.

Read what Hamilton has to say about the last laps:

We could see pictures of Glock slowing down – did the team tell you that?

"They did, just before I got to him, they said you have to get past Glock. I was trying my hardest to get to Vettel but he was just as quick as me – if not quicker. It was the toughest races of my life – if not the toughest."

http://www.f1technical.net/news/11003

Oops. Hamilton says you are deep in denial...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you watching F1 for the first time? Almost every single F1 season could have gone either way depending on FIA decisions and random non driver related events. 2007 was equally random, except since Kimi won, I didn't see you complaining. Schumacher would have won 2006 if his car hadn't broken down. 2003 was random. So was 1999, where Irvine almost won. 1998 might have been different had the Ferrari not stalled on the grid. In fact, more often than not, this is how F1 seasons are decided, and you can have a field day with what ifs if you want. This year has been as random as ever, most seasons there are two or three good drivers, and who wins comes down to car differences, reliability and the FIA. This season is hardly the first time that has happened, and if you don't like it, you might as well stop watching F1 already.

This year was far more random than last, which in turn, was far more random than previous ones. There is a difference between total chance and the acknolwedgement that unpredictable odds are at play in any sport. To claim that the last 10 seasons have not been won on skill is a desperate, absurd, and ineffective way to cover up for Hamilton's poor performance in Brazil.

Last season, Kimi finished very strong and had more wins than anybody. This year Hamilton finished having earned less points in the last EIGHT races than a Renault. Do take a moment to consider that.

In 2006, MS broke down in Japan. Yet, Alonso was there with a capable drive and not lost in the pack uinable to fend off a Honda to then win the WDC in the last curve by absolute luck.

In 2005, Alonso was lucky that Kimi had reliability problems (even if he had some of his own). Yet, Alonso strung how many podiums?

In short, you can argue that luck plays a role but not that those champions of the past where anywhere near as lucky as Hamilton nor won the WDC as unskillfully.

The quality of the competitions is slowly but systematically going down the drain because of "political" mismanagement. You are happy because you care about heroworshiping and not racing. The only good news those of us that are F1 fans got this season is that there are drivers like Vettel that are able to stick it up to the well-connected drivers in top teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just watched the video again. Amusing your denials in light of what happened:

-------------------------------------

(Vettel has just passed Hamilton taking advantage of his mistake. Apparently Kubica too has Murry's magical setup)

ITV comentator 1: "Let's look at Glock's sector times.. they're fine! Hamilton is not going to get the championship right now."

...

ITV comentator 2: "Vettel is driving away from him... the frustation must be colossal... Hamilton just doesn't seem to have the pace when it matters..."

-------------------------------------

It is true that Hamilton was overwhelmed by pressure (like last year) and couldn't even fight with a Toro Rosso (forget the BMW that screamed by). But, at least, this time Hamilton was able to keep the car in the track. That counts as an improvement that should not be overlooked. Good on him, it gave him the championship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm just watched the video again. Amusing your denials in light of what happened:

-------------------------------------

(Vettel has just passed Hamilton taking advantage of his mistake. Apparently Kubica too has Murry's magical setup)

ITV comentator 1: "Let's look at Glock's sector times.. they're fine! Hamilton is not going to get the championship right now."

...

ITV comentator 2: "Vettel is driving away from him... the frustation must be colossal... Hamilton just doesn't seem to have the pace when it matters..."

-------------------------------------

It is true that Hamilton was overwhelmed by pressure (like last year) and couldn't even fight with a Toro Rosso (forget the BMW that screamed by). But, at least, this time Hamilton was able to keep the car in the track. That counts as an improvement that should not be overlooked. Good on him, it gave him the championship.

There is no denial that Vettel was the faster driver at that point of the race. I maintain that he would not have been able to pass but for the distraction of Kubica. Lewis took forever trying to overtake a force india so I'm not sure vettel would have got by under normal circumstances.

Regardless, this is irrelevant in the overall scheme of things as Lewis won the WDC (with the help of our friend Glock) and is now the YOUNGEST WDC EVER!!!

:yahoo:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: It's fun to watch Maure argue things even he can see are ridiculous. The speed trap data are enough to see the McLaren wasn't working well in those conditions, hence Kubica and Vettel doing better. Anyway, if Maure wants to argue that Vettel is 'much much' better than Hamilton that's fine: the problem with F1 is that it's so subjective you could argue Fisichella was the DOD. We'll all see soon enough whether Maure's pretend belief is true or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no denial that Vettel was the faster driver at that point of the race. I maintain that he would not have been able to pass but for the distraction of Kubica. Lewis took forever trying to overtake a force india so I'm not sure vettel would have got by under normal circumstances.

Kubica hurt Vettel more than Hamilton. Watch the video. Hamilton had run wide the cruve previous and so did again. Hamilton was not able to handle the pressure.

Regardless, this is irrelevant in the overall scheme of things as Lewis won the WDC (with the help of our friend Glock) and is now the YOUNGEST WDC EVER!!!

It is amusing to hear that being a WDC is once again something good and that being the youngest at it is no longer cause for insults.

I suppose, though, that being the youngest double world champion remains a trivilaity without any merit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is amusing to hear that being a WDC is once again something good and that being the youngest at it is no longer cause for insults.

I suppose, though, that being the youngest double world champion remains a trivilaity without any merit...

He will be WDC for a whole year so you better start getting used to it my friend

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: It's fun to watch Maure argue things even he can see are ridiculous. The speed trap data are enough to see the McLaren wasn't working well in those conditions, hence Kubica and Vettel doing better. Anyway, if Maure wants to argue that Vettel is 'much much' better than Hamilton that's fine: the problem with F1 is that it's so subjective you could argue Fisichella was the DOD. We'll all see soon enough whether Maure's pretend belief is true or not.

Wow. Hamilton sinks under pressure and _this_ is the best you've got? Hilarious.

Kubica's skill and car? No problem. Vettle's skill and car? Best than ever. Hamilton's poor performance at the most important momemt? Excuses, excuses, excuses, and more excuses...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He will be WDC for a whole year so you better start getting used to it my friend

:P

I became indiffernt to the outcome of the season long ago. Anyone interested in F1 racing did the same.

The tricky thing for you is that you know well what a phenomenal luck Hamilton had to have to get the WDC. Morevover, you know too that Hamilton again sunk when it mattered most. You have a lot to worry about for "a whole year". Thus, the denials.

Last year, you two went on and on about how Kimi would want to win again because that time he was just lucky. Now that Hamilton won by so much luck that is almost inexplicable, you try to pretend it away with "magical setups" and similar absurdities.

There is the video. There are the ITV commentators' observations as it happened. There are Hamilton's own words. Do not fight it. Hamilton is WDC, why continue to lie to yourself? What need is there? Hooliganism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I became indiffernt to the outcome of the season long ago. Anyone interested in F1 racing did the same.

The tricky thing for you is that you know well what a phenomenal luck Hamilton had to have to get the WDC. Morevover, you know too that Hamilton again sunk when it mattered most. You have a lot to worry about for "a whole year". Thus, the denials.

Last year, you two went on and on about how Kimi would want to win again because that time he was just lucky. Now that Hamilton won by so much luck that is almost inexplicable, you try to pretend it away with "magical setups" and similar absurdities.

There is the video. There are the ITV commentators' observations as it happened. There are Hamilton's own words. Do not fight it. Hamilton is WDC, why continue to lie to yourself? What need is there? Hooliganism.

I really don't know what your point is. I think this thread is proof that you are just a wind up and people shouldn't take you seriously.

Every driver needs luck to win a WDC. Kim had it, Alonso, Schumacher, Mansell and many many others. When the dust has settled the WDC will be safely tucked away in the trophy cabinet and history has been made.

You just need to embrace your new WDC and move on

;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to play devil's advocate here.

IN MAURE'S DEFENSE...

Having watched the end of the race 3 times now - this was my take.

When they came out on inters, McLaren realised Ham was 5th and that Glock was ahead still on slicks. At that point it wasn't raining hard enough for Ham to catch Glock at all - that is beyond dispute - even Brundle made that comment - Glock's lap times were virtually identical to Ham and Vettel's and he was way ahead.

At that point they must have told Ham "keep Vettel behind!!!!!!" because they needed to - they didn't know if the rain would start down properly or not (it was only drizzling then) - Glock's gamble might have paid off.

He did indeed keep Vettel behind for a while, but then came Kubica (which I don't blame him for - he's a racer, if he can unlap himself, why the **** shouldn't he?) and with that and the onset of real rain Hamilton lost the place to Vettel - that was definately NOT deliberate - no matter who claimed differently later. They would have been telling Hamilton then "get that place back, you're 6th!" there's absolutely no doubt.

Soon after that McLaren will have noticed Glock was dropping back (it started at around the time of Vettel's pass and would have shown up in Glock's sector times) and that Ham may be able to pass him. I'm sure that at no point until the pass on Glock was certain, did anyone at McLaren tell Hami "you don't need to repass Vettel, cos we'll overtake Glock". There simply wasn't the certainty that that would happen for them to risk saying it to Hami.

Hamilton also said afterwards that he DID NOT KNOW he was fifth until after the first corner after finishing the race (having overtaken Glock 2 corners previously). So if he didn't know, then it follows that the McLaren team weren't sure either - not until the final positions came through and they could confirm it. This all points to what Maure is saying being very true. They tried to claim afterwards - "oh we knew that we could catch Glock, so Vettel wasn't a problem" - that I don't believe - they were bricking it and weren't sure until he crossed the line - whatever they said later.

BUT

AGAINST MAURE...

Who really gives a crap?

Come on buddy, bringing this up (while it does prove that McLaren don't wish to look like fools and would rather be seen as cool calm and collected / in control of everything) is pointless.

McLaren, like any team, will do their crowing. From the other side of the fence, listening to that crowing is all part of not being in the McLaren club. Ferrari and Massa have set a fantastic example in being as gracious as they and he were. I suggest we all follow that lead. By picking up on silly things like this, it reflects far less kindly on your own attitude than it does on McLaren's.

What ever you may think, now's not the time to air it because it inevitably sounds like sour grapes. Whether it is or not is for you to decide. Though I may agree with the facts in question, I disagree with the motivation for bothering to make a topic about it. I also disagree with any assumption that it is in the slightest bit important. It's a non-starter, it doesn't matter, who cares?

He won - well done to him. They won, well done to them. That's life, that's sport.

AND LASTLY...

Would you believe it - having missed 3 races this season, but calculating on average, I would have been in 33rd place with 5586 points in the PPP competition - as it is, I finished 160th with 4655 points - boo hoo.

I doubt the forums will be that busy in the off season (though I'll occasionally look in) so bye to everyone until 2009 - **** me - a whole winter without F1.

It's been fun. - Take care all. :congrats::eekout:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This year was far more random than last, which in turn, was far more random than previous ones.

No it wasn't. Some randomness happened to occur right at the end that's all. There was plenty of other randomness throughout the season.

There is a difference between total chance and the acknolwedgement that unpredictable odds are at play in any sport. To claim that the last 10 seasons have not been won on skill is a desperate, absurd, and ineffective way to cover up for Hamilton's poor performance in Brazil.

They have been won on skill and a bit of luck and having the right car under you. It's not a pure drivers' championship.

Last season, Kimi finished very strong and had more wins than anybody.

And he started poorly, while Hamilton started well. The beginning and the end of the season count for exactly the same, so that's a very lame argument.

This year Hamilton finished having earned less points in the last EIGHT races than a Renault. Do take a moment to consider that.

About the same as Massa got in the last 9-10 races (can't be bothered counting), so what's your point? Renault improved in the second half. We know that. Alonso drove well i nthe second half and drove crap in the first. We know that too. So what's your point?

In 2006, MS broke down in Japan. Yet, Alonso was there with a capable drive and not lost in the pack uinable to fend off a Honda to then win the WDC in the last curve by absolute luck.

Alonso had a ocuple of horrid drives that let Michael back into the championship. Again, just because something occurs in the last race doesn't make it more important. The season has 18/19 races, they all count equally.

In short, you can argue that luck plays a role but not that those champions of the past where anywhere near as lucky as Hamilton nor won the WDC as unskillfully.

There have been 4 world championships in the last 10 years that came down to a single point. So again, hardly unique.

The quality of the competitions is slowly but systematically going down the drain because of "political" mismanagement.

The so called top guns of a few years ago aren't driving too well either, so it's more likely that the new regulations are making them struggle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...