Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 46,245
Rosberg could easily battle to second again, so not sure if much is gained. Hamilton might decide to take some new parts on his car though while Rosberg is further back.
Austrian Grand Prix 2016, Spielberg - Race 9/21
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
Ok. Under normal scenario.
Rosberg could beat Hamilton next race. I doubt he contemplates anything else.
+7 Rosberg
Now he won't win and Hamilton will win.
Immediately a 14 point swing.
Then Rosberg is likely to lose even more points from starting so far back.
Soldato
Have you been watching f1 the last couple of years?
Ask Rosberg which he's prefer and I can guarantee he'd rather take the penalty this week and get it over with.
Ask Hamilton which he'd prefer and I can equally guarantee he'd rather Rosberg take the penalty next race. A guaranteed race win for Hamilton with no competition from Rosberg with Rosberg potentially losing even more points back in the field.
Are you assuming that Hamilton wins the next race, and Rosberg in the second fastest car isn't going to cut through the intervening cars?
Conversely, punishment today would reduce Rosberg's points and let Hamilton close the championship gap. A grid penalty next race is jam tomorrow. A Mercedes could easily get to second place, maybe first if they screw up Hamilton's pit stops again. So a grid penalty that's easily overcome isn't really a penalty at all.
Last edited:
Soldato
No he wouldn't. You are banking on Hamilton winning and Rosberg not moving up the field. Time and time again Mercedes have shown the pace to move up the field and finish 2nd. So no, a penalty now is better for Hamilton.
I'm completely failing to understand your logic here - you're saying that scoring no points this week is better than maybe winning next week? He could win next week, he could equally DNF, Hamilton could DNF etc. etc.
He'll want to take the maximum points from every race, so I'd wager that he'd rather keep todays points as he'll in all likelihood be able to move forward next week to a high points scoring position due to superior car.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Almost exclusively when Hamilton has had mechanical problems or the team has boned him with strategy/pit calls or when someone else has hit Hamilton's car.
It's no where near as close as it appears currently between the two drivers. The only reason Rosberg has led the championship at any point since start or 2014 is because of mechanical failures for Hamilton. A couple of race wins have come at tracks where he beat Hamilton in qualifying and they were tracks which make passing incredibly hard, even of those one should have gotten him a DQ.
Like here where basically everyone up and down the grid says Rosberg did it deliberately, at Monaco almost everyone also believed Rosberg screwed up in qualifying on purpose, but he got away with that one.
I said previously, the first big cheating incident is one thing, without really any previous nothing counts against him and the stewards gave him the benefit of the doubt. After Monaco, Spa, a couple of other incidents and now this, they aren't giving him the benefit of the doubt. the next incident where he hits Hamilton, pushes him off the track or magically breaks down on track in qualifying ruining a lap it will be painfully obvious.
If Rosberg had been part of another team and Merc weren't downplaying incidents he would have been banned from that Monaco race or start from the pitlane, he would get a big penalty for Spa, he would have a huge penalty for the Spain incident and another penalty here but larger than 10 place grid penalty.
Soldato
I've just watched a few more replays. Problematic brakes or not, what Rosberg intended to do was entirely the right thing - force Hamilton wide and make him lose momentum, getting superior drive off the corner himself.
Rosberg's execution of the plan was, however, poor. Really poor. And then he followed it up with the worst media interview imaginable. I know his team will defend him in front of the stewards in order to protect the team, but outside of that room they should be ripping him a new one
I hope the stewards throw the book at him.
Rosberg's execution of the plan was, however, poor. Really poor. And then he followed it up with the worst media interview imaginable. I know his team will defend him in front of the stewards in order to protect the team, but outside of that room they should be ripping him a new one
I hope the stewards throw the book at him.
It's not about scoring points.
It's about where you finish versus your competitor.
You want to look at how the gap is moving, race to race.
Taking the penalty now obviously makes you 12 points worse off versus Hamilton. It also draws a line and you forget about it.
In terms of scenarios next weekend
Rosberg could beat Hamilton +7 (or more if Hamilton finishes lower)
Rosberg could finish second to Hamilton -7 (14 point swing)
Rosberg could finish lower than second and Hamitlon wins -x (>14 point swing).
Then you attach probabilities to these outcomes. The very unlikely scenarios of DNFs don't really come into it. The odds of someone other than Mercedes winning is also very low (check the last 3 years, where no penalties have been taken).
A penalty only makes the second (-7) and 3rd (< -7) outcomes most likely. The second outcome is actually unlikely to happen no matter how dominant we think Mercedes are.
Then there is the psychological factor of winning the race, something Hamilton will pretty much be guaranteed.
Last edited:
Over 3 years you are saying Hamilton has been the better driver where Rosberg has won?
Not even remotely close to the truth.
Rosberg has had his share of mechanical problems and bad luck as well, even if it might be fewer in number.
I can understand what you're getting at muon, but personally I disagree with you. Whilst obviously where you finish in relation to a competitor is important, any sport is absolutely all about points. Todays points could make the difference come the end of the season.
You've also got to remember that Hamilton is virtually guaranteed to to take some heavy engine penalties at some point this year as well.
But like I said, I don't think this is something we are going to agree with each other on so I'll take myself out the running here to avoid a circular argument
You've also got to remember that Hamilton is virtually guaranteed to to take some heavy engine penalties at some point this year as well.
But like I said, I don't think this is something we are going to agree with each other on so I'll take myself out the running here to avoid a circular argument
I just view it as a maths problem and it doesn't make much of a difference in expected points over the 2 weeks (I'd personally skew it in favour of grid penalty next week).
The big intangible difference is that Hamilton gets an easy run at the British GP and Rosberg has another bad weekend.
The big intangible difference is that Hamilton gets an easy run at the British GP and Rosberg has another bad weekend.
Soldato
Anyone can see that Rosberg deliberately didn't turn it when he should have. He was pushing Ham off of the track but it backfired for him even though he was certainly going to lose the position due to his brake issue.
It boils down to not knowing what will happen in the next race. A 10 place grid penalty for the next race could have minimal or no impact on Rosberg's title points. A 30 second penalty at this race would close the gap between Hamilton and Rosberg because we already know Hamilton won the race and Rosberg would be demoted to a couple of points at best, levelling the championship.
A penalty now is a definite loss of points, a grid penalty next race is possibly a punishment that doesn't actually disadvantage Rosberg point's haul much.
Soldato
I remember the phrase 'never take points off the board'. Granted it's from American Football, but personally I would prefer to keep what I have this week and see what happens next week.
But, being a logical person, I totally understand the argument for doing the reverse.
But, being a logical person, I totally understand the argument for doing the reverse.