Head To Head Nico Rosberg vs Lewis Hamilton

[The Artist.....]

Hamilton gave the place back but was still penalised.
So that's not quite correct, is it?

I'm not getting in to the drawn out debate about Spa 2008. If one wanted to defend the stewards, you could argue that Hamilton was only in a position to overtake because he had jumped the chicane. However, I wouldn't want to comment

Rosberg had lost so much momentum by massively locking his brakes that Hamilton would have passed him easily after the chicane.
So therefore Rosberg managed to prevent an overtake by cutting the corner.

Hamilton might have passed him easily after the chicane. Or he might not have. Anything else is just subjection.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

Rosberg wasn't anywhere behind Hamilton at one point and was clearly ahead, why is no one talking about Vergne against Raikkonen when it was more clear cut?

Because this is the Rosberg v Hamilton thread?

Here's the regulation governing track limits:
20.2 Drivers must use the track at all times. For the avoidance of doubt the white lines defining the track edges are considered to be part of the track but the kerbs are not.

A driver will be judged to have left the track if no part of the car remains in contact with the track.

Should a car leave the track the driver may re-join, however, this may only be done when it is safe to do so and without gaining any lasting advantage. At the absolute discretion of the race director a driver may be given the opportunity to give back the whole of any advantage he gained by leaving the track.

A driver may not deliberately leave the track without justifiable reason.

Rosberg left the track (not deliberately), then accelerated (deliberately) and gained a lasting advantage, i.e. if he had not taken the above course of action, having made the initial mistake, Hamilton would have passed him (one could also argue the point about whether strictly speaking he re-joined when it was safe to do so, although on that I'd give him the benefit of the doubt). All-in all, a penalty would have been more appropriate than a warning.

 

[Brogan]

F1 drivers are used to making split second decisions - they do it hundreds, if not thousands of times every GP.

Rosberg did it in Monaco when he chose to take the escape road after "making a mistake" on the approach to the turn.
I've watched that footage several times and he could easily have made the turn if he wanted to.

This time he knew that he had lost first place as soon as he locked up so he weighed up taking the turn very slowly and being passed by Hamilton versus taking to the run off area, cutting the chicane and putting his foot down to build up a gap and avoid being passed.
Naturally he chose the latter.

 

[Chad Stewarthill]

The Artist..... but you rather cleverly did comment, by making that suggestion (I have to say, one of the more ridiculous arguments to have been put forward about that situation. By giving the place back, Hamilton was by definition decelerating, while if he'd stayed behind Raikkonen through the chicane he would have been as close behind but able to accelerate earlier; so he couldn't possibly have been in a better position to attack by doing what he did.)

Granted, any statement that Hamilton would have passed Rosberg had Nico not accelerated is not scientific fact, but it's impossible (to me, anyway) to imagine that he wouldn't have, seeing how close behind he was after Nico re-joined and having seen enough examples of that kind of incident over the years. The loss of momentum would surely have been too much.

 

[downforce]

It was frustrating hearing the comentators say that Hamilton wasn't trying to overtake Rosberg.

 

[Mezzer]

The commentators in the US certainly weren't saying that.

 

[Hamberg]

How unfair was it eh, that Nico lost out at the pit stops with his 4.5 second stop due to a problem, allowing Hamilton to jump him? Can you imagine if Hamilton had gone on to win in such an unfair situation? Mental.

 

[KekeTheKing]

In general the Mercedes stops have been quite slow this year due to the fact that they have been out front and so it's "slow and steady wins the race". I think that was the first time that Lewis really gained in a stop this year and it was long enough to completely cook his brakes as Wolff said that was the final straw.

And slow stops have nothing to do with fairness anyway, just ask Felipe

 

[Titch]

I will say it again, with my Tin or Tin foil hat on. Rosberg is not the cleanest of drivers IMO. He's clever, fast and very shrewd.

 

[RasputinLives]

Personally I think Massa will win the title this year........oh hang I thought I was back in 2008 there for a min.

 

[Mezzer]

How unfair was it eh, that Nico lost out at the pit stops with his 4.5 second stop due to a problem, allowing Hamilton to jump him? Can you imagine if Hamilton had gone on to win in such an unfair situation? Mental.

Of course somewhat mitigated by his half-second quicker first stop ...

 

[KekeTheKing]

Let's look at the crucial part of the race again shall we.

After their first stops and Nico's time gain in that sequence, the gap stood at 2.720 seconds after Lap 20.

Lap 21 ROS - 20.949 HAM - 20.081 : Gap at 1.852
Lap 22 ROS - 20.088 HAM - 19.561 : Gap at 1.325
Lap 23 ROS - 19.619 HAM - 19.076 : Gap at 0.782
Lap 24 ROS - 19.160 HAM - 18.942 : Gap at 0.564
Lap 25 ROS - 18.616 HAM - 19.236 : Gap at 1.184
Lap 26 ROS - 19.648 HAM - 19.529 : Gap at 1.065

There really was an extraordinary advantage gained there and the lap in question nearly matched Alonso's 18.614 on Lap 64 that was the third fastest lap of the entire race.

Rosberg is on a fortunate run right now where everything is coming up roses, we'll just have to wait and see how long it continues. It's anybody's guess what happens in Austria.

 

[Hamberg]

Hamilton all by himself was over half a second slower between laps 24 and 26 though. It seems inconclusive to me? I think it's down to interpretation of a 'lasting advantage' but there is a lot of speculation. I didn't see many cars of similar speed overtaking with or without DRS.

 

[KekeTheKing]

Inconclusive how? Hamiltons 18.9 was easily the fastest lap of the race at that point and with DRS. His lap 26 time was without DRS and with the pit wall telling him not to do anything silly because his teammate was under investigation. The fact it was a half second slower is completely irrelevant.

 

[Hamberg]

I forgot about his radio message! It's his engineers fault then, that gap may not have been as big on lap 26 had he kept pushing. His lap 25 was slower than lap 24 so he wasn't as quick on the offending lap.

Did he miss the DRS detection zone in those three corners? The one where Rosberg gained the time and the two straight after where he gave it back?

 

[Jen]

Oh, what fun and who ever said competition was dull and unnecessary - even amongst team-mates?

 

[KekeTheKing]

It's a shame we haven't really had good straight-up competition over the last two rounds though. Even allowing for the possibility that every questionable maneuver was an honest to goodness mistake, Rosberg's action have well and truly put his teammate at a direct disadvantage. And as I've stated a couple times since Sunday, Nico has the look of a World Champion right now and he's driving as if that's the only option this year.

 

[teabagyokel]

It's a shame we haven't really had good straight-up competition over the last two rounds though.

Are you kidding me? This is much more fun!

 

[RasputinLives]

I think we had a good straight up fight on Monaco Sunday.

 

[KekeTheKing]

Overtaking your teammate for the lead on track in Monte Carlo is simply not a realistic possibility. And seeing as Rosberg never made a mistake even partially resembling his Qualifying gaffe, the race had been decided.

Interesting note for the Mercedes boys this season is that the first driver out in Q3 has secured Pole on 5 of 7 occasions. It's Nico's choice in Austria so we'll wait and see if he tries to continue this trend.