Brazilian Grand Prix 2010, Interlagos Circuit - Race 18/19

[Glaucus]

yes as I said it's fine to define it as bad luck. But luck is not a driving force.

So when we analyse the championship you can not go if he had more luck. We've been over this already.

 

[Glaucus]

So if Felipe Massa had been 9 points clear of the Championship, on the last race of the season, and three laps ahead of everyone when that spring knocked him out and made him drive into a wall, and whoever was second ended up winning the title, you're telling me luck wouldn't have been a major factor?

EDIT: Using 9 to refer to the old style points system here. Substitute 24 if you want.

Again you are using luck as a driving force, there is no such thing.

Why are you arguing the semantics of language in motors for gods sake?

Why not, and it was all down to if vettle didn't have such bad luck. which I called BS on.

+ I'm bored been of work just over two weeks and going insane with bordem.

 

[Glaucus]

Are you saying luck wasn't that decider of the championship in that scenario? Even though I intentionally made it so?

Of course it's not. Luck is not like gravity, electricity or any other existing force.
At no point is luck taken into a calculation or prediction model. it simply doesn't exist.

 

[Glaucus]

I seriously have no idea what you're saying any more.

it's quite simple.

It is ok to describing something as luck as it is easier that defining the actual parameters, which often you wont know what they are.

However when analysing the season, or saying if only such and such had more luck. then that's not ok. As there is no such thing as luck. It's not measurable. It is not evolved in any equation to predict the outcome. For example vettle could have been using more revs, or pushing the engine harder, which is why it blew, or that the engine had been used for x-races already and was at the end of it's life. It didn't blow because of luck.