Head To Head Jenson Button vs Lewis Hamilton

Status
Not open for further replies.
What I don't understand is why folk's are arguing about a coin toss decision in the latter quarter of the race when actually Hamilton's race for the top step of the podium was screwed on lap 14?:thinking:

Because the warbling fat lady didn't emerge until after the chequered flag.
 
Okay

The two reasons I can see for the decision are:
1. They could afford a gamble with Button as his race was pretty much buggered rain or no rain
2. They were racing the Red Bulls

Put simply they fucked up on both counts because:
1. The inters had no tread and would have been useless anyway therefore more rain = another pit stop regardless
2. Vettel came in a lap earlier than Hamilton and they didn't respond despite...
3. The team had information to show that Button two laps earlier (and ric three laps earlier) were putting in storming times on slicks

Let's be clear, at that stop Button didn't ask to pit. Hamilton didn't ask to pit. At that stop neither driver indicated they were suffering. They both pitted on the teams advice at the points they were told to box.

I don't give a shit about conspiracies, but there is absolutely no justification for bringing Hamilton in two laps after Button, one maybe but not two. As with Brogan, I'd love to hear the reason, from the team, for this decision.

I think I'll be sending a few tweats in a couple of weeks.
 
What I don't understand is why folk's are arguing about a coin toss decision in the latter quarter of the race when actually Hamilton's race for the top step of the podium was screwed on lap 14?:thinking:

Also, why is it important when the other teams pitted their drivers after Ric, as far as ii can see Mac were the only team who started off on the front row and lost the initiative and fell apart as they couldn't handle rain enough to remain ahead

And even if Sauber kept Perez out also his game was more about staying out longer than everyone else on the same tyres, the pole sitter in the fastest car did not need to be kept out longer than Perez

Still no good explanation for why a guy who started on pole and was in control ended up losing 3 seconds a lap for 3 laps and was last to be brought in laps after his teammate who immediately went faster enough to make any further gamble on rain foolhardy
 
1. The inters had no tread and would have been useless anyway therefore more rain = another pit stop regardless.
I believe those arguing in favour of McLaren's strategy are doing so on the assumption that if it started raining then a new set of inters would be used for the rest of the race.

So if Hamilton had pitted for new slicks and then it started raining, he would have had to pit again for inters; which would have meant two pit stops.
Anyone else who didn't pit may have been able to get away with a single stop for new inters.

Of course those same people have also argued that those around Hamilton would have pitted to cover him off, so unless it rained on that very lap, and rained bad enough to require inters, it would still have benefited Hamilton from pitting one lap before them.

So a lot of ifs, buts and maybes.
 
I didn't expect to be taken seriously with that last post but since the button has been pressed ...

The pattern of Hamilton's race had been set. Three late and fluffed pit stops meant a last chance coin toss decision that might have got him the second or top step. That's academic even to the fat lady.

So, having done that debate to it's death, how is it relevant to Hamilton vs Button? Oh, I guess the 7 day debate about Jens is in the Drivers section. I'll just be off to that one now then.:)
 
So if Hamilton had pitted for new slicks and then it started raining, he would have had to pit again for inters; which would have meant two pit stops.
Anyone else who didn't pit may have been able to get away with a single stop for new inters.
.

Ahh okay good point.

I genuinely believe this was a simple case of McLaren trying to be clever with Hamilton and getting it very, very wrong.
 
Maybe the 'McLaren team strategy watch, dodgy tyre call analysis and questionable radio transcripts' need their own thread, mind you if added to the McLaren thread will just look like deja vu from the posts from last two seasons

LOL
 
This thread has surpassed the number of responses of the threads of each of the current world champions on the grid with the exception of one - and it has done it in about three weeks!
 
Another thing to consider is that if Button was being used as a guinea pig, he was half a lap down on Hamilton, which correlates to Ferrari's behaviour in a similar position.

There is either no conspiracy or 7 different teams acting against their #1 drivers.

Or neither of these things. Just a crap call. Why use Button as a guinea pig when Torro Rosso sent one out for you free of charge?

Conspiracy theories are mainly being mentioned by people saying that there isn't one, which is effectively a counter-argument against nothing.
 
I'm not sure why you (and others who agree with your position) keep mentioning the word conspiracy?

As far as I can tell, most of us are just debating the issue rationally without resorting to cheap shots.

this is only because *some* of the users who have been suggesting that it was incompetence (or other descriptions) have also used terms like *disturbingly good looking* and other such misnomers.
 
this is only because *some* of the users who have been suggesting that it was incompetence (or other descriptions) have also used terms like *disturbingly good looking* and other such misnomers.

Maybe 2 or 3 days ago. Sure, there are a couple of wallies around but there is need to form teams on either side of the argument and then tar everyone that doesn't agree with you using the same brush. It doesn't help in the slightest and is not conducive to civilised adult debate.
 
Or neither of these things. Just a crap call. Why use Button as a guinea pig when Torro Rosso sent one out for you free of charge?

Conspiracy theories are mainly being mentioned by people saying that there isn't one, which is effectively a counter-argument against nothing.

Conspiracy theories may be explicitly denied by some, whilst they're implicitly suggested by others! It is far more likely that individuals will say "there is NO conspiracy" than to say "there IS a conspiracy"... Extremeninja- I'm not referring to you btw... Nor brogan....
 
Why mention it at all unless it is brought up, then?

I know that was TBY, but like I said with teamplay, you saw it as an opportunity to pledge your allegiance to your side and instantly formed rank.
 
But that's not a comparable situation.... If, for instance, you saw that it was forecast to rain, and took an umbrella out with you- but then the rain never came, then you could easily argue that you would have been much better off not taking an umbrella out with you!!! This is the same as the Hamilton incident! Rain was forecast.... As such, they rolled the dice and took their metaphorical umbrella out with them whilst everyone else (except Perez) left their umbrella at home! This time, no umbrella was needed, but it could have been so much different!

Thing is..had the rain come, Hamilton's umbrella had a hole in it, and he'd have to have gone back home anyway to get a new umbrella.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom