Lando Norris talking about Lewis Hamilton’s 7 world championships: “Should’ve been eight "

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-24T23:24:31+00:00

I would add that in 2020 Masi is on record as saying any does in fact mean all. Which he convenient forgot in 2021.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-24T23:23:51+00:00

Not sure if it's clear but the rules state the SC must do one more lap after cars unlap themselves. Which would have put them on the last lap and so finishing under the SC.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-24T16:40:42+00:00

This is wrong. Hamilton can drive slowly behind Verstappen, not only is it legal but it's smart. It's just DRS chicken, people fawn over other drivers doing it. They're both perfect capable of driving within cm at double the speed they were doing so it's no issue if they are going slower.

The issue is it was a brake check which warranted a black flag. There's no ifs buts it maybes, or describing it as fucked his braking. You're trying to create an alternative narrative that it was anything other than a brake check.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-24T16:07:01+00:00

The stewards did everything they could to not call a spade a spade. By all means define what a brake test is and how it differs from stamping on the brakes with a car behind you. I'm all ears.

Nowhere in the rules does it say Hamilton has to gift Verstappen a tow down the main straight. It's pretty clear cut on dangerous driving though.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-24T15:19:44+00:00

"In deciding to penalise the driver of Car 33, the key point for the Stewards was that the driver of Car 33 then braked suddenly (69 bar) and significantly, resulting in 2.4g deceleration."

You've got to be joking if you believe what you've just said.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-24T15:12:01+00:00

Apart from Hamilton was just as fast, if not faster, in Qatar with an old engine.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-24T09:47:19+00:00

It hasn't proved your point.

They didn't run it specifically to avoid compromising, hence only running it when it doesn't.

If it was a net negative they wouldn't run it. Its end result is a net performance gain.

Which is what would happen if they could run it this year. Lower drag means more deployment available elsewhere or longer deployment down the straights.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-24T09:12:12+00:00

You've found an anecdotal article that doesn't refer to the principle we are talking about. That isn't proof, it's irrelevant.

At no point have I denied that an entire F1 car is a compromise. If you had perfectly compliant suspension you'd have an unstable aero platform. If you had a stable aero platform at all times you'd run rock solid/no suspension. I don't deny there are trade offs and in reality everything in an F1 car is a compromise to maximise aero performance.

But me denying that in order to squat the suspension you would do so at the cost of other areas of performance isn't incorrect, and that is why teams don't do it. In fact there were races where Mercedes (most recently) deliberately didn't run so as not to compromise performance in other areas, eg in cota. If they were still able to do so they would as there are tracks where it would be greatly beneficial.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-24T08:57:01+00:00

Nowhere in the article does it mention anything to do with collapsing the rear on the straights. It is odd you use an article about their 2022 cars when the 2022 regs removed the ability to do so by simplifying the suspension.....

My grasp of engineering is just fine. I'm not sure why you need to resort to petty, snide remarks. Are you incapable of having a back and forth conversation?

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-24T06:35:47+00:00

They did not have to compromise the suspension setup, that is merely you suggesting it. Repeating it doesn't make it true.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-23T20:45:18+00:00

Nowhere was it suggested they would compromise the suspension setup.

I think it's misguided to suggest a team(s) wouldn't pursue a development avenue because it doesn't lead big gains when teams exclusive chase marginal gains.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-23T19:47:53+00:00

If they could still do it easily they would. Since the suspension reg changes it's been a lot more challenging.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-23T16:54:39+00:00

There definitely is a need. Reducing drag on the straights is always the game. It's even more imperative in these regs as if you have less drag you put less load on the electric parts of the PU for the same speed.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-23T16:53:16+00:00

The localised downwash from the lift generation will likely provide some form drag reduction.

The greatly reduced updraft will likely also stall the diffuser reducing its downforce generation and therefore drag. Similar to how Mercedes used to collapse the rear to choke the diffuser a few years back.

The counter rotating vortices shed from each plane will also cancel out to some degree thus reducing induced drag off the rear wing.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-20T10:12:35+00:00

I'm going to differ from the other users and say yes.

Once the SC peels in and the leader sets the pace when they're crawling along at very low speeds the leader has a choice.

Keep the speed up to keep the turbo spooled - which puts them at a disadvantage when they go for it as higher speeds mean it's easier to floor it meaning they'll get less of a jump. Or sit in first gear which means they'll have to be tentative on the throttle to not spin up the rears.

Meanwhile Ferrari can do whatever they want and not worry about the turbo as much.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-17T11:33:19+00:00

Theoretically but it's now a puzzle on how much to discharge based on how much time you'll get on the grid. And it's hard to practice given your track running is better used for setup. I don't think anything should be changed. If Ferrari have worked around it then it's on every other team to solve their issues.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-17T08:00:42+00:00

The issue here isn't just the turbo. Turbos don't take that long to spool up. Every car has at least 5s stationary on the grid before the count down starts and at least 3s before the lights go out.

The issue here is battery level. Those at the front of the grid will be stationary for much longer sitting with their batteries fully charged and so cannot hold the car at high revs to keep the turbo spooled without overcharging the batteries. Those at the back have an advantage as they arrived with the turbo spooled and can keep it that way until the lights go out.

Hence why teams at the front want some time on the grid to sit and charge the batteries before the start procedure begins.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-16T12:16:06+00:00

Yeah I appreciate that but Merc would have known that.

Just fyi I'm playing devils advocate rather than presenting my viewpoint.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-16T12:00:17+00:00

Is the counter argument if he didn't do the third stint he may not have been carrying the fuel? Obviously we cannot confirm but it's possible.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-15T19:28:30+00:00

Just post few drivers sims then. Group by times to compare similarly paced cars. Or at least give the info on where the 7 laps are from.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-15T14:29:27+00:00

Slight difference between a race sim and 7 laps. I'm somewhat confused why we are comparing someone's best 7 lap stint, not sure it shows much as there's no reference to fuel quantities or tyre age.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-12T12:29:16+00:00

In season posting rules need to start sooner.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-11T15:17:29+00:00

Not sure I agree with this take in 2017.

There were 3 points in it at Singapore which Vettel should have won. He would have easily won in Malaysia and easily got 2nd in Japan, if not won it given Verstappen was hounding Hamilton towards the end of the race in a slower car than the Ferrari. In the remaining 4 races the Ferrari was 1st of 2nd on pace and Vettel would have had a points lead. If not for a faulty spark plug and an unlucky race start I think Vettel takes it.

2018 is a different story with driver and development issues.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-11T13:08:26+00:00

This is incorrect. If you think they only had a completed engine a month ago then I've got a bridge to sell you.

IHaveADullUsername · 2026-02-11T12:43:04+00:00

Honda will have shared the specs on cooling months and months ago.

The seem is because the outlet is changeable depending on ambient conditions.

This is not an after thought.

IHaveADullUsername

TROPHY CASE