Head To Head Jenson Button vs Lewis Hamilton

[Cookinflatsix]

Mjo the response wasnt aimed at you, i just quoted your post as an example of how valid speculation can get mistaken for illogical suggestions

I think we all agree that in F1 history teams have hindered one driver, but never just out of spite or to 'harm their own chances of success' they have done it for the greater good of the team ( in their opinion)

Which is why it's strange that there is so much hysteria surrounding any mention of LH being hindered inadvertently by flawed management initiatives, like it's completely unthinkable that F1 has shrugged off it's history and is suddenly about fairness to the drivers and not the team

in my view LH does t get the lesser option each time, what I am saying is that when there is a borderline decision the vig seems to slightly favour JB

It's not black or white, there are lots of subtle shades and there ain't no smoke without fire

 

[Brogan]

snip

Please heed rule 5: http://cliptheapex.com/help/rules-and-guidelines

I've had to post this three times today as more and more people are block quoting huge posts.

 

[mjo]

Completely unrelated: Lewis has shown remarkable consistency this year, like in2007, racking up consecutive podiums; the way this season's going, if he finishes third in every race, he'll be champion. As for Button, whilst he has finished first and second this season, he often has this very disappointing races (like in Malaysia) and it's because of these I think Lewis has a great chance of finishing ahead of Button in the championship. But I have no idea who will win it, though.

 

[mjo]

Please heed rule 5: http://cliptheapex.com/help/rules-and-guidelines

I've had to post this three times today as more and more people are block quoting huge posts.

Sorry.... Although if I quoted individual parts then I would have quoted nearly all of it also.

 

[Viscount]

Ah, I thought you meant based on the information at hand when the decision was made rather than with the benefit of hindsight.

My mistake!

Obivously it was done for the greater good of potential race win but they also knew there was the possiblity that they may get caught which was the evntual negative outcome.
mjo said, "No team goes and makes decisions which deliberately hinder a driver's race."
I think telling your driver to crash out of a race is kind of hindering his race...

But the point I was making was that their decisions were only to benefit the team, never simply to spite a driver.

OK number 2 drivers may have second choice on kit, but the team always compete for championship points first, never for the moral high ground over their drivers.

I'd generally agree with that, except in the Perry McCarthy example I used, as the team couldn't legally replace him after already using it's allowance for driver changes in a season so they just made his life a misery for the rest of his time there.

 

[mjo]

mjo said, "No team goes and makes decisions which deliberately hinder a driver's race."
I think telling your driver to crash out of a race is kind of hindering his race....

True, although I should have mentioned a responsible team. Anyway, that was one team out of....60? (in total)

 

[Viscount]

True, although I should have mentioned a responsible team. Anyway, that was one team out of....60? (in total)

Yeah a pretty rare occurence, but it does make me wonder if one team is willing to cheat or hamper their driver perhaps others are, they just haven't been caught.

 

[Viscount]

Back on topic, I think today's race was another example that Button and Hamilton are arguably the current best pairing on the grid.

 

[riskitall]

it is true that lewis has lost some race pace,but its only because he can't drive the way he used to on these tyres.
so basically he has to drive slower to look after his tyres.so lewis has got slower,jenson hasnt really got faster.
im sure lewis would be faster on the other tyres,but nevermind.
he is currently top of the championship,despite the grid pen,so he must be doing something right.
im sure the wins will come,maybe next week,we'll see.

 

[riskitall]

it was suggested that if button had of been pitted before lewis he would have ended up in the traffic lewis ended up in.
we'll never really know tho.

 

[Brogan]

There was very little in it.

Button was faster for 29 of the laps, Hamilton for 26.

 

[Brogan]

it was suggested...

I just deleted the quote from your post.

You obviously missed my post here: http://cliptheapex.com/threads/jenson-button-vs-lewis-hamilton.4734/page-45#post-122804

 

[racecub]

I dont subscribe to this conspiracy talk, its not a conspiracy. Im concerned about McLaren's pitstop strategies and their inefficiency. And I think it needs to be asked why this happens so much. Does lead driver have option on pitstop call? It appears not. Does lead driver get first pitstop? It appears not.So I really dont know what their stategy is. What I do know is that in the first three races, whatever theit strategy is, its favoured Button every time. This I think needs questining and addressing.

 

[Bill Boddy]

Have McLaren published the pit to/from car messages this time? I've looked at their web site but can't see them, they could give some more clues as to how the team works.

From what I have seen, heard about and guessed it looks to me as though the leader gets first choice about when to pit. There does seem to be the possibilty of a driver calling in with a request to pit, presumably the crew would then ask the lead driver if he wants to pit on that particular lap (or the next on), if he says yes he gets it, if he says no the other driver is brought in. If neither driver is requesting a pit stop then the team decide, bringing the lead driver in first.

The above method would tally with what we know has happened so far this year, but we haven't got all the messages so are not sure.

 

[tranquility2k9]

I have got a little angry at Mr. Ted Kravitz for something he said during his notebook video ( http://www1.skysports.com/formula1/video/12870/7675106 at 4min 30sec). I do not see what evidence he has to suggest Lewis "had thermal degradation ... and could not get the lap time out of it whereas Jenson Button could". It really annoys me when supposed analysts who have the privilege of presenting on TV just make up rubbish like that. It's almost as though because Lewis has had problems with tyres in the past, if people want something to talk about they just randomly make up that he had issue with tyres and wasn't lapping as fast as Jenson even though if you look at the stats, it clearly shows he was just as fast in clear air throughout the whole race! Please see my analysis below:-

The McLaren drivers were really close on pace today. The only 2 stints worth comparing as a whole were their first 2 as they were both running in relatively clear air. I've therefore totaled their first 2 stints respectively, taking out 1 lap each time as Hamilton pitted 1 lap sooner, but adjusting the comparison by 1 lap so it is completely fair and like-for-like.

The results:-

1st stint: Hamilton

01:44.6
01:44.2
01:44.0
01:44.1
01:44.0
01:43.7
01:44.2
01:44.3
13:53.1

1st stint Button

01:44.6
01:44.1
01:43.9
01:44.0
01:44.1
01:44.1
01:44.4
01:44.3
13:53.5

So Button was 0.4 slower over the whole stint. If anything Hamilton looked slightly faster in the 1st stint as Button seemed to be slightly holding up both Kimi and him. Onto the 2nd stint:-

2nd stint: Hamilton

01:42.8
01:43.0
01:42.8
01:42.7
01:42.9
01:42.9
01:42.6
01:43.0
01:43.2
01:43.1
17:08.9

2nd stint: Button

01:42.7
01:43.0
01:42.7
01:43.0
01:42.9
01:42.8
01:42.9
01:42.9
01:42.7
01:42.8
17:08.3

Button was slightly quicker over the 2nd stint, by 0.6 of a second. I'm not on about 0.6 average per lap, I mean over the WHOLE stint, which is still incredibly close. If anything Hamilton's tyres dropped off very slightly over the last 3 laps.

In total over the first 2 stints Button was 0.2 seconds quicker than Hamilton - that is over the WHOLE of those 2 stints. The tiny difference and almost identical comparison over 2 whole stints is quite incredible.

The 3rd and 4th stints are not really comparable, but Lewis was lapping quicker at the end of the 3rd stint even though he'd been in traffic and Jenson was currently leading, so he made those primes work better. Jenson however was very slightly quicker at the end of the race on the 4th stint, although again Hamilton arguably had more traffic but Jenson had his fair share.

All in all they were almost identicle averaged out through the race based on their clear air laps. This just goes to show how competitive it will be this year. You would think if Hamilton had of kept grid position then he'd of been ahead of Jenson today, so grid position will be key and this will favour Lewis. Saying this, Jenson still seems to have a slight tyre advantage in some races, although in this race I do not think it was evident at all.

So TED please next time before coming out with unfounded waffle like this, take a look at the stats, maybe those lap charts you're holding in your hand might be worth looking at a bit more closely?

 

[The Artist.....]

I dont subscribe to this conspiracy talk, its not a conspiracy.

What I do know is that in the first three races, whatever theit strategy is, its favoured Button every time. This I think needs questining and addressing.

So, it's not a conspiracy, but you're concerned that the pit calls always favour Button? Ok, although your logic is rather contradictory.

So, let's look at the evidence.

Melbourne. Button was the leading driver - he got to pit first - does anyone have any evidence that Hamilton actually wanted to pit earlier there? The only reason he finished third rather than second there was because of the safety car! In fact, they made a slightly odd strategy by pitting Hamilton on the same lap as Button - so actually tried to give Hamilton the best possible strategy!

Malaysia. Button changed to inters the lap before Hamilton - and this was probably 1 lap too early. The only reason Hamilton ended up after that stop behind Button was because of a pit malady! The later stop was nothing to do with Button vs Hamilton - as Button was no threat! The only reason that Hamilton stopped so late to change to dries was because they were trying to roll the dice, and hopefully have another shower, allowing 1 stop to new inters. The rain didn't come, and they stopped LH on the lap which would lead to him not losing any places! i.e. They were concerned with trying to manage the upside risk (i.e. gaining places) with the lack of any downside risk (losing places).

China. LH was allowed onto the fresh tyres first each time. Surely this was a better strategy? Certainly, had he been left out any longer, he would likely have been behind even MORE traffic! The only reason that there ended up being a large gap at one point between Button and Hamilton was because LH wasn't able to overtake cars - which on this occasion Button had had less problem with! The only time Button was really held up by slower cars all race was behind the Raikkonen/Vettel fight.

There we go. Question answered.

 

[racecub]

So, it's not a conspiracy, but you're concerned that the pit calls always favour Button? Ok, although your logic is rather contradictory.

.

How so?

Melbourne. Button was the leading driver - he got to pit first - does anyone have any evidence that Hamilton actually wanted to pit earlier there? .

Yes. Hamilton radioed in the lap befor Button pitted to say his tyres were shot.

Malaysia. Button changed to inters the lap before Hamilton - and this was probably 1 lap too early.
.

It was also after Hamilton had told the pits the time was right for inters, and it wasnt too early, it was faster.

China. LH was allowed onto the fresh tyres first each time. Surely this was a better strategy?

No he came out with much more traffic to deal with than Button thus wasting his fresh tyres..

There we go. Question answered.

I dont think so.

 

[Cookinflatsix]

Melbourne. Button was the leading driver - he got to pit first
snip/
The later stop was nothing to do with Button vs Hamilton - as Button was no threat! The only reason that Hamilton stopped so late to change to dries was because they were trying to roll the dice, and hopefully have another shower, allowing 1 stop to new inters.
snip/
China. LH was allowed onto the fresh tyres first each time. Surely this was a better strategy? Certainly, had he been left out any longer, he would likely have been behind even MORE traffic! The only reason that there ended up being a large gap at one point between Button and Hamilton was because LH wasn't able to overtake cars - which on this occasion Button had had less problem with! The only time Button was really held up by slower cars all race was behind the Raikkonen/Vettel fight.

If I might just add my twopence worths,
Melbourne, JB pitted first, it worked out better for him, no ifs and buts, its a fact

Malaysia, Again JBs first pit stop worked better for him than LHs, no ifs and buts or maybes. Second stop? doesnt matter they werent racing each other but JB got still got better info and service, and his stop worked better for his race than LHs, see the radio transcript

China, LH was allowed onto fresh tyres earlier, but he had fresher tyres than JB and wasnt using them up quicker, where is the proof that that LH would have ended in more traffic if pitted later? It could be argued that if he had been left out longer he woyuld have ended in less traffic as more drivers peeled off the track to pit. Anyway we will never really know what drove the decision. However the fact remains that pitting LH before JB worked out worse for LH and better for JB no ifs and buts and maybes again,

So where is Racecubs question contradictory, for what ever reason its worked better for JB more than LH this season no matter what the McLaren stated pitstop plan has been. She says questions should be asked, and she has, you have tried to answered some, like pointing out that it was the SC or traffice that caused this imbalance

Wheres the contradiction between saying there is no conspiracy but the pattern suggests questions need to be asked?

 

[Road of Bones]

Might it be possible that JB is happier to make his own tyre calls based on information he gets from his race engineer, whereas Lewis is content to accept advice on tyre strategy? I'm not suggesting that this is the case at all times and situations, but it does reduce the frankly risible and increasingly tiresome "conspiracy" speculation that is being beaten around on this thread...

 

[The Artist.....]

If I might just add my twopence worths,
Melbourne, JB pitted first, it worked out better for him, no ifs and buts, its a fact

I'm not going to argue that it worked out better for JB to stop first in Melbourne - but he was the leading driver, so that's only right!

Malaysia, Again JBs first pit stop worked better for him than LHs, no ifs and buts or maybes. Second stop? doesnt matter they werent racing each other but JB got still got better info and service, and his stop worked better for his race than LHs, see the radio transcript

To be honest, I don't know which stops you're talking about here! Certainly the stop from wet to intermediate, Button would have ended up further behind Hamilton, had Hamilton's stop not been botched. The fact that Button went from being ahead of Alonso to being behind Alonso (who stopped on the same lap as Hamilton) is evidence of this. Therefore, the strategy was BETTER for Hamilton (just the execution went wrong). We can keep arguing till we're blue in the face about the final stop, but the fact is that Button and Hamilton were not racing each other in Malaysia, so to talk about one driver being disadvantaged compared with the other is just garbage!

China, LH was allowed onto fresh tyres earlier, but he had fresher tyres than JB and wasnt using them up quicker, where is the proof that that LH would have ended in more traffic if pitted later? It could be argued that if he had been left out longer he woyuld have ended in less traffic as more drivers peeled off the track to pit. Anyway we will never really know what drove the decision. However the fact remains that pitting LH before JB worked out worse for LH and better for JB no ifs and buts and maybes again,

The fact is that if he had stopped later, he would have ended up behind Webber on all of his stops! I'd say that that is a pretty good reason for stopping earlier! In fact the only stop he ended up behind Webber was after the final stop.

So where is Racecubs question contradictory, for what ever reason its worked better for JB more than LH this season no matter what the McLaren stated pitstop plan has been. Wheres the contradiction between saying there is no conspiracy but the pattern suggests questions need to be asked?

So, the null hypothesis is that there is equality at McLaren. If you are looking for an alternative, what is that alternative? People will always accuse you of spreading conspiracy theories if you bandy about ideas like this, but without providing any other alternatives! The implication of the statements is always that there is something that is (deliberately or otherwise) compromising Hamilton's races.