No I haven't. I never said anything like that.
Head To Head Sebastian Vettel vs Daniel Ricciardo
- Thread starter Greenlantern101
- Start date
What are you talking about? You are making those implications about my statements not me. I meant or inferred nothing of the sort.
That time in the car may well have been a benefit to him or it may not. He may have gained on Ricciardo, or like Hamilton he may have lost time to his teammate. Are you now having a go at me for not making my jusdgements on events that didn't happen. Should I give Seb two tenths for his missed time in the car? That would be making things up.
Please stop twisting my words and take my statements at face value. It is rude and insulting to suggest that I am saying anything other than what I am saying. I don't do the same to you or to anybody else on here. Fine if you disagree with my opinions but don't twist my words and make out I am saying something I am not when I am being nothing less than perfectly clear.
That time in the car may well have been a benefit to him or it may not. He may have gained on Ricciardo, or like Hamilton he may have lost time to his teammate. Are you now having a go at me for not making my jusdgements on events that didn't happen. Should I give Seb two tenths for his missed time in the car? That would be making things up.
Please stop twisting my words and take my statements at face value. It is rude and insulting to suggest that I am saying anything other than what I am saying. I don't do the same to you or to anybody else on here. Fine if you disagree with my opinions but don't twist my words and make out I am saying something I am not when I am being nothing less than perfectly clear.
Last edited:
I am not "having a go at you" at all, I am simply pointing out some holes in your argument, which you seem to dismiss as they do not help support your point.
Most if not all of what you say is true, however, there are those pieces of information which are omitted which I have simply called out.
I cannot disagree that Daniel has had the upper hand this season, that is plain for all to see, however, with the woes that Red Bull have had this season, all track time is valuable. That Seb was able to come through the field from a poor qualifying (car related, so no comparison can be drawn on quali times) on a different strategy and with different levels of traffic, I find it hard to say that "Daniel still had the legs on him"
You did say that, so I called you on it. You yourself have said that you need to compare like with like, and this weekend at least, that is not really the case. To ignore this as "not making my jusdgements on events that didn't happen" whilst true at face value, leads to the logical conclusion that if Seb had taken no part in activity this weekend, Daniel is better than Seb. This may indeed be the case, and could be argued based on other races, but not this one, as there is not sufficient evidence to draw a conclusion.
That was where your assumption about Seb making improvements comes in. You have assumed that he would not, therefore this all fits. But, he is a four time WDC, who has before made significant steps to address shortcomings whether it be in car set up or his personal performance, so I think that your assumption could be wide of the mark.
Let me be honest, I am not saying that he has miraculously sorted everything out, and that this race is evidence to prove that, as it is not, and the rest of the season may play out the same way as the first few races, and Ricciardo may prove to be his equal or better, fair play, that would make things a bit spicy, as I really like Ricciardo, and was not really expecting him to provide such a strong challenge.
I am not twisting your words, I am simply questioning your logic and rationale in choosing to trivialise some key factors. To accuse me of being rude and insulting as a result of questioning you is, how should I say, rude and insulting.
Most if not all of what you say is true, however, there are those pieces of information which are omitted which I have simply called out.
I cannot disagree that Daniel has had the upper hand this season, that is plain for all to see, however, with the woes that Red Bull have had this season, all track time is valuable. That Seb was able to come through the field from a poor qualifying (car related, so no comparison can be drawn on quali times) on a different strategy and with different levels of traffic, I find it hard to say that "Daniel still had the legs on him"
You did say that, so I called you on it. You yourself have said that you need to compare like with like, and this weekend at least, that is not really the case. To ignore this as "not making my jusdgements on events that didn't happen" whilst true at face value, leads to the logical conclusion that if Seb had taken no part in activity this weekend, Daniel is better than Seb. This may indeed be the case, and could be argued based on other races, but not this one, as there is not sufficient evidence to draw a conclusion.
That was where your assumption about Seb making improvements comes in. You have assumed that he would not, therefore this all fits. But, he is a four time WDC, who has before made significant steps to address shortcomings whether it be in car set up or his personal performance, so I think that your assumption could be wide of the mark.
Let me be honest, I am not saying that he has miraculously sorted everything out, and that this race is evidence to prove that, as it is not, and the rest of the season may play out the same way as the first few races, and Ricciardo may prove to be his equal or better, fair play, that would make things a bit spicy, as I really like Ricciardo, and was not really expecting him to provide such a strong challenge.
I am not twisting your words, I am simply questioning your logic and rationale in choosing to trivialise some key factors. To accuse me of being rude and insulting as a result of questioning you is, how should I say, rude and insulting.
Daniel was faster in the parts of qualifying and practice that Seb also took part in. None of that statement has anything to do with the race or what strategy either driver was on. I agree that the race was incomparable, so I didn't make a comparison. I also think that the parts of the practice and quali where Seb was not in the car were also incomparable, so I did not make a comparison.
You are arguing against points that I have not made and are in fact making them for me so that you can argue against them. Your points are perfectly valid but please don't put my name against something I have not said so that you have someone to counter your own arguments against.
You are arguing against points that I have not made and are in fact making them for me so that you can argue against them. Your points are perfectly valid but please don't put my name against something I have not said so that you have someone to counter your own arguments against.
Please, take the point.
You are correct, that Daniel was quicker than Seb in the bits they both took part in, but that totally ignores the fact that on Friday, Seb only had 4 laps of running against 59 of Daniel, nearly a whole race distance. Then, P3 Seb got some running at last, but would possibly have altered his program to make up for a whole days lost running.
In Q1, Seb was actually quicker than Daniel, then in Q2 his car went kaput.
The race was compromised as a result, with differing strategies.
Daniel had a 59 lap head start on Seb. The only sessions that they both ran in excluding the race, the results were one all.
Please do not patronise me, nor try and twist what I am saying. You are making a comparison where none can be made. you are saying that Daniel was provably faster which he was not. Your glaring ommission is in not accepting the value of 59 extra laps of running. I am not asking you to put a value on it, my point is that due to the difference in the data, no comparison can be made, you still seem to be making it.
You are correct, that Daniel was quicker than Seb in the bits they both took part in, but that totally ignores the fact that on Friday, Seb only had 4 laps of running against 59 of Daniel, nearly a whole race distance. Then, P3 Seb got some running at last, but would possibly have altered his program to make up for a whole days lost running.
In Q1, Seb was actually quicker than Daniel, then in Q2 his car went kaput.
The race was compromised as a result, with differing strategies.
Daniel had a 59 lap head start on Seb. The only sessions that they both ran in excluding the race, the results were one all.
Please do not patronise me, nor try and twist what I am saying. You are making a comparison where none can be made. you are saying that Daniel was provably faster which he was not. Your glaring ommission is in not accepting the value of 59 extra laps of running. I am not asking you to put a value on it, my point is that due to the difference in the data, no comparison can be made, you still seem to be making it.
I am ignoring nothing. I accept 59 laps of running may have effected the deficit or gain that Vettel might have had to Ricciardo. As I said previously, Seb may have gained on Daniel or, like Lewis on Nico, he may have lost out by going the wrong way. I said this before. I have not ommited this, but I also will not make any assumptions about whether this time on the circuit would have made him comparably faster or slower. That would be invention.
Int he race, Vettel was visibly and noticably faster. This can be largely attributed to an extra set of medium tyres and a three stop strategy where he could thrash his tyres and drive an aggresive overtaking strategy rather than a conservative and consolidatory strategy. This is not invention and i have also made reference to this.
Int he race, Vettel was visibly and noticably faster. This can be largely attributed to an extra set of medium tyres and a three stop strategy where he could thrash his tyres and drive an aggresive overtaking strategy rather than a conservative and consolidatory strategy. This is not invention and i have also made reference to this.
Well, you said:
Then you said he may have gained or not gained. Then you said Seb was noticeably faster in the race, due to strategy etc.
All this, you base on Danny being faster in P3 and Q1, the only 2 sessions they both fully participated in, which is not actually correct, as Seb was quicker in Q1, but you also make no allowance for differing run plans in P3.
I am making no judgement on what may have happened, as, you are indeed correct, he may have used 59 laps to make his car slower, it does happen (rarely, but it does) and you refer to previous races, again fine, and Danny has had the legs so far, agreed, however, an assumption that no progress was made I do not agree with, as there is insufficient data to say so.
I know it is a small point, but I feel an important one.
Then you said he may have gained or not gained. Then you said Seb was noticeably faster in the race, due to strategy etc.
All this, you base on Danny being faster in P3 and Q1, the only 2 sessions they both fully participated in, which is not actually correct, as Seb was quicker in Q1, but you also make no allowance for differing run plans in P3.
I am making no judgement on what may have happened, as, you are indeed correct, he may have used 59 laps to make his car slower, it does happen (rarely, but it does) and you refer to previous races, again fine, and Danny has had the legs so far, agreed, however, an assumption that no progress was made I do not agree with, as there is insufficient data to say so.
I know it is a small point, but I feel an important one.
OK. We can end it here if you like
I think we have both made valid points. Sorry we got tangled up in semantic dissection
.
.According to F1.com:
Q1: Vettel 1:27.958 Ricciardo 1:28.053
Q2: Vettel 1:27.052 Ricciardo 1:26.613
Q3: Vettel no time Ricciardo 1:26.285
Which changes none of the above.
Which enforces the above
So doesn't change the point.
Dan faster again. Now Dan 5 Seb 1
It seems very clear who the best driver in this team is now. It is not the current 4 times WDC and i am not surprised.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
