2019 Aston Martin Red Bull Racing - Honda F1 Team

[Bence]

Maybe consider this scenario; RB15 was initially designed anticipated kW from 619 of 618 kW + X kW increase. Actual kW of Spec 1 619 ended up with 618 kW + Y kW. Let's say Y is 130% of X. Maybe that might require some changes to optimize chassis for the actual new kW figures?

Wow, I love this. This is a perfect play with occult info.

[Singabule]

Verstappen says here that he overtake vettel by using party mode. He says he just followed Hamilton (and followed easily ) until the end part of the race as team told him to do so and attack at the end.

https://tr.motorsport.com/f1/news/verst ... i/4355437/

I see that too yesterday on other website. Unfortunately he cant do that as he slip out to gravel. And one more problem, it takes 5 second for PU to react (see gasly case)

[etusch]

Verstappen says here that he overtake vettel by using party mode. He says he just followed Hamilton (and followed easily ) until the end part of the race as team told him to do so and attack at the end.

https://tr.motorsport.com/f1/news/verst ... i/4355437/

I see that too yesterday on other website. Unfortunately he cant do that as he slip out to gravel. And one more problem, it takes 5 second for PU to react (see gasly case)

5 second is too long for F1 . I think there was a problem.

[Maplesoup]

Verstappen says here that he overtake vettel by using party mode. He says he just followed Hamilton (and followed easily ) until the end part of the race as team told him to do so and attack at the end.

https://tr.motorsport.com/f1/news/verst ... i/4355437/

I see that too yesterday on other website. Unfortunately he cant do that as he slip out to gravel. And one more problem, it takes 5 second for PU to react (see gasly case)

5 second is too long for F1 . I think there was a problem.

He was told to hold the button for 5 seconds, this doesn't mean it takes 5 seconds for the PU to respond. It could be set like that to prevent accidental presses, although 5 seconds feels like a long time. Or the pu could be responding straight away and they were telling him to use it for only 5 seconds so he didn't use all the battery.

[Sieper]

I think they have a push to overtake button that enables optimal power mode for 5 seconds when pushed once?

[godlameroso]

I dont think that's representative at all.

Bottas was 16 seconds clear of Verstappen after 24 laps!

Who was also behind the wounded horse.

If we look objectively at the laps where Bottas and Verstappen were both in clean air the gaps were very close, right around .3 seconds.

Furthermore, previous to Bottas's fastest lap, he slowed down 2 seconds off the pace, it was a glory run. Verstappen did no such antics, and just kept his head down trying to hunt down Hamilton. Feel free to look at the data yourself.

Melbourne is also incredibly hard to overtake, Kvyat couldn't pass Stroll despite being able to catch him at will. Gasly couldn't pass Kvyat, and Norris couldn't pass a wounded Giovinnazzi. Last year Verstappen couldn't overtake Alonso, so inability to pass is a poor argument when it's so difficult to do so around here in the first place.

In any case, it was a good race, I'm eager to see the next one, and to watch Red Bull and Honda close the gap, they can do it. It's not a 1.6-2.7 second gap like it was with McLaren it's a .3-.6 second gap.

You are hypothesising.
The best time set by Red Bull was 0.7 off best in the race. That's a fact.
The best time set by Red bull in Q3 was 0.8 off Pole. Again a fact.


You make the point that Oz is difficult to overtake. Hypothesising about various drivers in 2018.
Verstappen overtook Vettel on Sunday. Another fact you fail to mention.

You say its objective to compare 2 cars, one 20 seconds in the lead, and another in 3rd chasing 2nd.
That's not objective at all.
Lead cars dont tend to be the ones pushing the hardest. Witness Bottas requesting the pitwall for a faster engine mode to get the fastest lap.



Also, Comparing Gasly, why?
He qualified 17th or some such and was all at sea.

I'm sorry I just dont see how you got this 0.3 figure because a guy chasing down 2nd in clear air was 0.3 off a lead car 20 seconds up the road of 2nd.

It makes no sense at all.

So you try to hypothesise harder by using 2 facts with no context? Okie dokie.

Look at the lap before Bottas set his best, it was 2 seconds off the pace. No hypothesis, its obvious he was building ERS power to attack on the next lap. No way he could do those laps consecutively.

No hypothesis over passing in Albert Park, all factual. I used examples real factual examples of faster cars being unable to pass a slower one. You need a big speed differential to pass, did you watch the same race?

It's relevant to compare two cars in similar circumstances in free air, which I did. Obviously you will try to downplay this because you need to reinforce the notion that I'm hypothesising and you are using facts.

"You reckon he'd risk stacking the his car to get the quickest possible lap for bragging rights on F1technical?
That's interesting to say the least."

Now you're hypothesising, and arguing non-sense. Bottas said he "wants 26 points" there is no hypothesis on my part, claiming he did it for f1 technical is absurd.

I got .3 because that was the average gap, something I explained already. Did they teach you how to obtain averages in school?

https://www.mathsisfun.com/mean.html

Give it a shot its not that hard.

[Big Tea]

Is it possible that the button was not 'latching'?

IE press and it should stay activated for 5 seconds, but was not? He would than have to hold the button for the full time he needed the effect.

[Quantum]

@godlameroso

Poor form with the insults.

Anyway, when I say Mercedes is 0.7 to 0.8 seconds FASTER than RB, that's a statement etched as fact.
There is no hypothesis, just plain fact.

No whattaboutery.

You can speculate, but to insult me and then put forward speculation as a replacement of the facts is erroneous.

It stands therefore that in Qualifying, the gap was 0.8, and in the race 0.7.

Yet you twist the story, and compare a car plain sailing out front with a car jockeying for position 2 places behind and 20 seconds down the road.
You suggest gaps in qualifying, and in the race can be thrown away and ONLY the gaps when both cars were in clean air(aside from the fact Bottas was home and dry already).
You say 0.3 by twisting torturing the methodology to fit a very narrow and bizarre narrative.

Sorry to say, but I invoke Ockhams razor... as you are so familiar with math,... perhaps you skipped class on the day they said it was the
"problem solving principle that ssentially states that simpler solutions are more likely to be correct than complex ones".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

[dren]

Remember STR erred on the conservative side for cooling the Honda PU last year. Some of the initial gains from their first PU update were realized from optimizing the cooling. RBR could have easily done the same with power expectations at the start. Honda might have over delivered, or actually hit targets, which should have RBR pleased. Everything seems to be pointing that way. Remember RBR had an even lower DF rear wing at the first test.

[HPD]

[dxpetrov]

Quite obviously shows how VER was stuck behind whole race, either by VET or HAM.
Good graphics. Thanks.

[godlameroso]

@godlameroso

Poor form with the insults.

Anyway, when I say Mercedes is 0.7 to 0.8 seconds FASTER than RB, that's a statement etched as fact.
There is no hypothesis, just plain fact.

No whattaboutery.

You can speculate, but to insult me and then put forward speculation as a replacement of the facts is erroneous.

It stands therefore that in Qualifying, the gap was 0.8, and in the race 0.7.

Yet you twist the story, and compare a car plain sailing out front with a car jockeying for position 2 places behind and 20 seconds down the road.
You suggest gaps in qualifying, and in the race can be thrown away and ONLY the gaps when both cars were in clean air(aside from the fact Bottas was home and dry already).
You say 0.3 by twisting torturing the methodology to fit a very narrow and bizarre narrative.

Sorry to say, but I invoke Ockhams razor... as you are so familiar with math,... perhaps you skipped class on the day they said it was the
"problem solving principle that ssentially states that simpler solutions are more likely to be correct than complex ones".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

Again you seem to insist it is you using facts, you only outlined two without context. And have hypothesised and speculated as much if not more than I have. If you feel insulted I suggest taking a breath of fresh air to calm down, I am critiquing your argument, not you, I don't even know you. It just seems odd that disagree with facts, call them hypothesis and only refer to your own hypothesis as facts. That's arguing in bad faith, and am simply calling out your logical fallacies.

Yes two cars in clean air racing in the same conditions can be comparable. Its also factual that gaps in qualifying and in the race can differ. In qualifying you don't get 58 chances to do a perfect lap, you get two chances per session, human error can and does affect the gap. Or are we to believe, according to your logic, that Mercedes is 2.4 seconds ahead of Red Bull? That was after all the factual gap to Gasly's car in qualifying, or does context matter when considering raw numbers?

[Quantum]

https://soymotor.com/sites/default/file ... itmo_r.png

https://soymotor.com/sites/default/file ... ijo/t1.png

https://soymotor.com/sites/default/file ... /t2_t3.png

https://soymotor.com/sites/default/file ... jo/top.png

Thank you,

The trend for Bottas after lap 31 shows without any doubt that he was cruising.
His gap relative to Hamilton stabilised and actually got smaller later on.

How anyone can suggest RB were "within 0.3" utilising these statistics is doing so by mere assumption.

[Capharol]

https://soymotor.com/sites/default/file ... itmo_r.png

https://soymotor.com/sites/default/file ... ijo/t1.png

https://soymotor.com/sites/default/file ... /t2_t3.png

https://soymotor.com/sites/default/file ... jo/top.png

Thank you,

The trend for Bottas after lap 31 shows without any doubt that he was cruising.
His gap relative to Hamilton stabilised and actually got smaller later on.

How anyone can suggest RB were "within 0.3" utilising these statistics is doing so by mere assumption.

you just cant stop hitting on RB don't you?
as you see on the graphic aswell, Verstappen got hold up most of the time by either VET or HAM

[Quantum]

Again you seem to insist it is you using facts, you only outlined two without context. And have hypothesised and speculated as much if not more than I have. If you feel insulted I suggest taking a breath of fresh air to calm down, I am critiquing your argument, not you, I don't even know you. It just seems odd that disagree with facts, call them hypothesis and only refer to your own hypothesis as facts. That's arguing in bad faith, and am simply calling out your logical fallacies.

Yes two cars in clean air racing in the same conditions can be comparable. Its also factual that gaps in qualifying and in the race can differ. In qualifying you don't get 58 chances to do a perfect lap, you get two chances per session, human error can and does affect the gap. Or are we to believe, according to your logic, that Mercedes is 2.4 seconds ahead of Red Bull? That was after all the factual gap to Gasly's car in qualifying, or does context matter when considering raw numbers?

Why are you contorting this?

You are basing this on assumptions.
Your definition of a "fact" is the underlying problem.

You have still not accepted that in the race RB were 0.7 down. Fact.
Nor that they were 0.8 down in qualifying. Fact.
You assert that in clean air a 3rd placed car racing 2nd placed car, was 0.3 a lap off a cruising lead car, 20 seconds clear of 2nd.

You present this as a factual gap, foregoing any controls such as engine mode being tuned down(we know Bottas was cruising), tyre life extension by not reaching maximum every lap, and general by the numbers approach drivers have when they're miles out in front racing.... NOBODY.
That's assumptive. You are assuming both drivers had exactly the same parameters, despite being in different positions with differing requirements and objectives. For the hard of thought... Verstappen to achieve 2nd, and Bottas to guarantee his win...20 seconds up the road.
Therefore hypothesis.

You mentioned Albert park to be very hard to overtake, citing 2018.
Verstappen had no trouble with Vettel in 2019 now, did he?
I've mentioned this before but obviously doesn't fit your narrative.

Finally, If you cannot accept what the difference between the facts I have presented and the hypothesis you are presenting as "fact" when surrounded by variables I have described in this post, constructive dialogue is done. Some might say some time ago.