Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
raymondu999 wrote:That's a very interesting way to look at it. Perhaps if we were to ascertain how much "better" or "worse" Hamilton would've been in Alonso's machinery, we could look at their 2007 qualifying head to head, looking at the relative laptimes.
that's a point ....I know that in 2007 hamilton was a rookie and alonso was double WDC but even so I bet he wasn't far behind
to the optimist a glass is half full ; to the pessimist a glass is half empty ; to the F1 engineer the glass is twice as big as it needs to be
I don´t agree with the Hamilton would have won the WDC had he ran the Ferrari.
I think he would have done equally good or slightly less good because Alonso was simply godlike this year, i don´t think anyone could have touched Alonso in the same machinery this year. Not Hamilton and definitely not Vettel.
Q2 times Alonso had the upper hand as far as the 2007 season goes.
"Il Phenomeno" - The one they fear the most!
"2% of the world's population own 50% of the world's wealth."
The Q2 score is 8 -9 in Alonso's favor
that isnt too much, considering they were close to 100th of a second in few races
Lewis really did great work for a rookie against a 2 times WDC
If we were to combine every single lap on the calendar head to tail, to create one massive "superlap" - then we have the following "lap times"
Hamilton - 1427.144s - or 23:47.144
Alonso - 1427.08 - or 23:47.080
So interestingly - Alonso comes out 0.064 quicker. VERY close - certainly a lot closer than I was expecting. Hamilton's superlap was 100.0044847% of Alonso's superlap - ie very smidgen-slightly slower
What is the point in looking at Q2 when both cars are Q3 contenders.
It's like comparing beating lower league football opposition in the English FA cup, it's not the score, it's the result. One may score ten-nil, the other would win 1-0...what's the end result? Progression to the next round.
It's the final round that counts.
FoxHound wrote:What is the point in looking at Q2 when both cars are Q3 contenders.
In 2007 they did Q3 on race fuel - and on different levels of fuel, as opposed to equal levels. That would skew the result. Also, qualifying on race fuel vs fumes is very different. Mark Webber in 2010 attributed a part of his upturn in qualifying form (relative to Vettel) due to the return to low fuel qualifying. As such, the "conditions" for Q2 in 2007 - qualifying on fumes, etc - would be a closer reflection of the current qualifying format, than of Q3.
FoxHound wrote:What is the point in looking at Q2 when both cars are Q3 contenders.
It's like comparing beating lower league football opposition in the English FA cup, it's not the score, it's the result. One may score ten-nil, the other would win 1-0...what's the end result? Progression to the next round.
It's the final round that counts.
in 2007 at Mclaren they determined who will get lowest fuel in q3 by their q2 times
so it was not just progression to next round, it was the real qualifying session in that format as in Q3 it was just fuel burning
I remember it differently - to my memory, whoever was the better Q2 qualifier meant that they were given 1 extra lap of fuel in Q3 - that way they could have a better race strategy as they could run longer.
FoxHound wrote:Ahh right, was this published as fact?
Will try to dig up what I can find, but no promises
Nando wrote:Isn´t the extra lap of fuel simply down to not wanting to pit both guys on the same lap at the same time?
Yes - and as said in the posts above, McLaren used the Q2 performance to CHOOSE who got the extra fuel - not to decide whether or not one car would get extra fuel.
I don't have a documented source but I'm very confident-- McLaren tried to manage from the top down by alternating race weekends. One weekend Alonso would get the fuel advantage (less fuel) and the next weekend Hamilton would. This understandably pissed off the drivers because no matter how well they did in qualy the strategy was already locked in.
Hamilton was particularly pissed at Monaco because Alonso was decreed to get lighter fuel for qualy. Hamilton's "fuel weight adjusted" qualy time was better than Alonso's, but Alonso had pole on a track where passing was impossible. Done deal, Hamilton was ordered not to challenge Alonso, and Alonso won.
At the first race of the season (Australia) Alonso outqualified Hamilton and also took the lead at the start. However, Hamilton pitted one lap later and also took an extra couple kilos of fuel. At the end of that second stint Hamilton was close to Alonso, a perfect situation to go one lap further on light fuel and take the lead. However, McLaren ordered him to pit one lap before Alonso because they said they didn't permit the second driver to unfairly pass the leader on pit strategy.
To be fair, I also remember a couple similar occasions where Alonso got the short end of the deal.
Even as I write this I get more and more sympathy for both drivers. I think McLaren sincerely thought they were treating the drivers equally, but note this is not the same thing as letting the drivers actually race each other.
Sorry to go on in so much detail, but that was an epic season and it does no harm to get the details right.
