Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Year of our Lord; 2016. A crowd will gather for a Grand Prix in Hungary.

Recommended Posts

Platy said:

No, you just used my exact sentence and called every other Hamilton fan other than me butthurt, right? Such a coincidence we wrote the same sentence. :neutral:

"Hey, you're a Hamilton hater, I'm just treating you like I would any one of them. I've seen Hamilton haters using racist terms against him so how I am to know if you would or wouldn't? "

But hey, you didn't accuse me of being racist, right?
Lol, I have no idea what you're trying to prove by highlighting that sentence... At no point do I say you are a racist, and at no point do I say Hamilton haters are racist. I said I've seen racist terms used against him, not that Hamilton haters are racist. So nice try.

Thing is, I am a Hamilton fan, so by calling Hamilton fans butthurt you're calling me butthurt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

                                                        

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Platy said:

No, you just used my exact sentence and called every other Hamilton fan other than me butthurt, right? Such a coincidence we wrote the same sentence. :neutral:

"Hey, you're a Hamilton hater, I'm just treating you like I would any one of them. I've seen Hamilton haters using racist terms against him so how I am to know if you would or wouldn't? "

But hey, you didn't accuse me of being racist, right?
Lol, I have no idea what you're trying to prove by highlighting that sentence... At no point do I say you are a racist, and at no point do I say Hamilton haters are racist. I said I've seen racist terms used against him, not that Hamilton haters are racist. So nice try.

Thing is, I am a Hamilton fan, so by calling Hamilton fans butthurt you're calling me butthurt.
I think after knowing me for 5 or 6 years you'd know I'm not racist nor would I ever even consider using racist terms against someone.
The fact that you even had to stoop to that level shows what type of person you are. 

Well there's also this one "Don't forget to stick the knife in real deep mate, give it a good twist too, maybe use some racist terms."

But yeah, being called butthurt is just as bad as being accused of being racist.

Any way, I'm done, the thread is bored of this, have your final word and we'll move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Platy said:
Because in Rosberg's whole career the only way he's ever taken pole is because Hamilton had bad luck. Got it.
Can you think of an occasion of the top of your head where Rosberg took pole because he was genuinely faster when neither driver had an issue? No? Didn't think so.
Baku... Hamilton crashed, unforced errors aren't bad luck.

If you don't like that, 2015 Abu Dhabi, Brazil, Mexico (another Hamilton unforced error), Russia (Hamilton mistake), Japan... Soon really not as crazy as you make it out to be. In fact a couple of those races Hamilton set the fastest times in Q1 and Q2, and failed to beat Rosberg in Q3. 
But crashing is bad luck :p My point still stands, if something goes wrong for Hamilton, that seems to be the only times Rosberg can take pole. He's slower, that's a fact.
How about no. Unforced errors are not bad luck they are errors plain and simple. Hamilton crashed, not bad luck he screwed up, his fault not luck.

And you conveniently avoid all my other points that disprove your theory. How about the times where Hamilton set the fastest laps in Q1 and Q2 only to get beaten by Rosberg when it matters in Q3? It's easy to write off another drivers accomplishments when you claim your driver only loses because of bad luck.
So you don't consider it bad luck if you make a mistake and let a rival ahead of you?

You mentioned yourself, in 2 of the 5 you list, Hamilton made a mistake. So that's 3 occasions in 3 1/2 years you can think of where Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace? Yeaaaaaaa.
No that isn't bad luck at all, if you make a mistake and let your rival ahead, you F%@# up, luck had nothing to do with it. That was something entirely in Hamilton's control, he and he alone messed up and put the car in the wall. There was no tire fault, no gearbox issue, nothing, plain and simple it was all Hamilton's fault. The fact that Rosberg capitalized on it is irrelevant, he in order to be the fastest you have to complete the lap; Hamilton didn't complete the lap, couldn't be the fastest. That simple.

Yeah I went back to the last bunch of poles Rosberg got, and most were due to his outright pace over Hamilton. This is further evidenced when we see both drivers swapping fastest times in Q3 which happened in a number of my examples (which guess what wasn't an exhaustive list, I just took enough to prove my point). So yeah 3 instances I looked up in the past year (which happen to be most of Rosberg's poles in that time) Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace in qualifying. That's a long shot from your statement that Rosberg has never done it. 

The fact that you can't admit the a driver can be better than Hamilton absent "bad luck"  proves you are blinded by fandom, further illustrating so many people hate Hamilton fans.
Right, can't be bothered, here's some simple facts for you. Hamilton has won 2 WDC in his fight against Rosberg. Rosberg has won 0 WDC.

Hamilton has won 26 races, and Rosberg has won 18 races, in their times as team mates.

Can't be bothered to find more stats than that for you, Hamilton is better, deal with your hate.

Since it was your go to answer in your other posts... Did I ever say Rosberg was better than Hamilton? Show me a post where I said that, you can't because I didn't. Plus we were talking about Qualifying. NOT races NOT Championships. Yes Hamilton is faster and better than Rosberg, I never said he wasn't.

But you started with claiming Rosberg has never beaten Hamilton in qualifying without Hamilton suffering some sort of "bad luck." To which I provided a number of instances where your statement was incorrect. You then claimed desperately and wildly that a driver crashing was bad luck and didn't count; I think because you realized I proved you wrong and you had nothing to back up your statement. Now you want to sit here and spout Hamilton's wins and championship record compared to Rosberg and expect that to have any relevance on this discussion? 

Fine then. Vettel has 4 WDC, Hamilton only has 3. Schumacher has 7, Hamilton only has 3. can't one bother to find more stats than that for you, Schumacher and Vettel are better better, deal with your hate. 

Plus you want to impliedly call someone who was critical of Hamilton a racist for calling Hamilton fans butthurt?  If you have such thin skin that you are offended by someone making a general statement that the Hamilton fandom is butthurt after complaining how Hamilton only loses because of "bad luck," then you need to rethink if the internet is a smart place for you to spend your time. Seriously take a time out, you need it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Platy said:
Platy said:

No, you just used my exact sentence and called every other Hamilton fan other than me butthurt, right? Such a coincidence we wrote the same sentence. :neutral:

"Hey, you're a Hamilton hater, I'm just treating you like I would any one of them. I've seen Hamilton haters using racist terms against him so how I am to know if you would or wouldn't? "

But hey, you didn't accuse me of being racist, right?
Lol, I have no idea what you're trying to prove by highlighting that sentence... At no point do I say you are a racist, and at no point do I say Hamilton haters are racist. I said I've seen racist terms used against him, not that Hamilton haters are racist. So nice try.

Thing is, I am a Hamilton fan, so by calling Hamilton fans butthurt you're calling me butthurt.
I think after knowing me for 5 or 6 years you'd know I'm not racist nor would I ever even consider using racist terms against someone.
The fact that you even had to stoop to that level shows what type of person you are. 

Well there's also this one "Don't forget to stick the knife in real deep mate, give it a good twist too, maybe use some racist terms."

But yeah, being called butthurt is just as bad as being accused of being racist.

Any way, I'm done, the thread is bored of this, have your final word and we'll move on.

And I thought after knowing me for 5 or 6 years you wouldn't be a jackass towards me just because I support a driver you dislike.
And at what point do I stoop to the level you're claiming I did? As I've already said twice, I never said you were a racist.

Another quote where yet again, I don't say you are a racist.

And for the 5th time, I did not accuse you of being a racist. It doesn't matter how many times you say it, it's quite clearly untrue. There is nothing in any single one of my posts that accuses you of being so.

Enjoy your hatred of Hamilton, every time he wins a race I'll have a little smile, knowing that it's upsetting you deeply that he's enjoying success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Platy said:
Because in Rosberg's whole career the only way he's ever taken pole is because Hamilton had bad luck. Got it.
Can you think of an occasion of the top of your head where Rosberg took pole because he was genuinely faster when neither driver had an issue? No? Didn't think so.
Baku... Hamilton crashed, unforced errors aren't bad luck.

If you don't like that, 2015 Abu Dhabi, Brazil, Mexico (another Hamilton unforced error), Russia (Hamilton mistake), Japan... Soon really not as crazy as you make it out to be. In fact a couple of those races Hamilton set the fastest times in Q1 and Q2, and failed to beat Rosberg in Q3. 
But crashing is bad luck :p My point still stands, if something goes wrong for Hamilton, that seems to be the only times Rosberg can take pole. He's slower, that's a fact.
How about no. Unforced errors are not bad luck they are errors plain and simple. Hamilton crashed, not bad luck he screwed up, his fault not luck.

And you conveniently avoid all my other points that disprove your theory. How about the times where Hamilton set the fastest laps in Q1 and Q2 only to get beaten by Rosberg when it matters in Q3? It's easy to write off another drivers accomplishments when you claim your driver only loses because of bad luck.
So you don't consider it bad luck if you make a mistake and let a rival ahead of you?

You mentioned yourself, in 2 of the 5 you list, Hamilton made a mistake. So that's 3 occasions in 3 1/2 years you can think of where Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace? Yeaaaaaaa.
No that isn't bad luck at all, if you make a mistake and let your rival ahead, you F%@# up, luck had nothing to do with it. That was something entirely in Hamilton's control, he and he alone messed up and put the car in the wall. There was no tire fault, no gearbox issue, nothing, plain and simple it was all Hamilton's fault. The fact that Rosberg capitalized on it is irrelevant, he in order to be the fastest you have to complete the lap; Hamilton didn't complete the lap, couldn't be the fastest. That simple.

Yeah I went back to the last bunch of poles Rosberg got, and most were due to his outright pace over Hamilton. This is further evidenced when we see both drivers swapping fastest times in Q3 which happened in a number of my examples (which guess what wasn't an exhaustive list, I just took enough to prove my point). So yeah 3 instances I looked up in the past year (which happen to be most of Rosberg's poles in that time) Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace in qualifying. That's a long shot from your statement that Rosberg has never done it. 

The fact that you can't admit the a driver can be better than Hamilton absent "bad luck"  proves you are blinded by fandom, further illustrating so many people hate Hamilton fans.
Right, can't be bothered, here's some simple facts for you. Hamilton has won 2 WDC in his fight against Rosberg. Rosberg has won 0 WDC.

Hamilton has won 26 races, and Rosberg has won 18 races, in their times as team mates.

Can't be bothered to find more stats than that for you, Hamilton is better, deal with your hate.

Since it was your go to answer in your other posts... Did I ever say Rosberg was better than Hamilton? Show me a post where I said that, you can't because I didn't. Plus we were talking about Qualifying. NOT races NOT Championships. Yes Hamilton is faster and better than Rosberg, I never said he wasn't.

But you started with claiming Rosberg has never beaten Hamilton in qualifying without Hamilton suffering some sort of "bad luck." To which I provided a number of instances where your statement was incorrect. You then claimed desperately and wildly that a driver crashing was bad luck and didn't count; I think because you realized I proved you wrong and you had nothing to back up your statement. Now you want to sit here and spout Hamilton's wins and championship record compared to Rosberg and expect that to have any relevance on this discussion? 

Fine then. Vettel has 4 WDC, Hamilton only has 3. Schumacher has 7, Hamilton only has 3. can't one bother to find more stats than that for you, Schumacher and Vettel are better better, deal with your hate. 

Plus you want to impliedly call someone who was critical of Hamilton a racist for calling Hamilton fans butthurt?  If you have such thin skin that you are offended by someone making a general statement that the Hamilton fandom is butthurt after complaining how Hamilton only loses because of "bad luck," then you need to rethink if the internet is a smart place for you to spend your time. Seriously take a time out, you need it.
No you did not, did I claim you said that? And yes Hamilton is faster and better, glad we can agree on that.

Actually mate, go back and read my posts properly. Each time I said it "seems" like that. Not that it is that. I never claimed that Rosberg ONLY takes poles when Hamilton has a problem. Wanna try that again now? And I also never said that it "didn't count". FFS man, try actually reading my posts properly before spouting off some bullshit about I said this or I said that. If I actually said it then fair shout, but I didn't. These are the exact things I said if you need your memory refreshed: "But crashing is bad luck :p" "So you don't consider it bad luck if you make a mistake and let a rival ahead of you?". I don't see anything in there where I said it "didn't count" as you claim.

The funny thing is you haven't proven anything. I said "I said nothing particularly bad about Rosberg, just that he only seems to take pole when Hamilton has bad luck, which happen to be true.". Again, same as each post where I said it, it seems that way, not that it is that way.

You're trying to prove me wrong on things I never actually said were true. To any general fan of Hamilton it SEEMS like Rosberg get's pole whenever Hamilton has an issue, what the fuck is wrong with me having said that twice?

And that's fine, Vettel's 4 WDC's are an amazing achievement, and for Schumacher to have 7 truly cements him as a legend, not just in Formula 1 but in the history of motorsport. Both have done incredible things in their career.

So I get called butthurt after saying Rosberg got pole because Hamilton got bad luck, and you think that was deserved? Maybe you should be browsing 4chan instead of here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Platy said:
"which happen to be true"                    
Yea man, it happens to be true that it seems like Rosberg only gets pole when Hamilton has a problem ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surprised there wasn't an official stewards inquiry into Rosberg's lap time, unless it was done quickly with the telemetry. Setting the fastest time in the middle sector while there were yellow flags doesn't seem right. Rosberg said he was slower in that section than the previous lap, which makes the rest of the section ridiculous if true, and Toto has said there was a big lift too. Hard to take their word on it though, might be slight bias in their comments.

Things like this would benefit from transparency in the sport, but that's never going to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Platy said:
Because in Rosberg's whole career the only way he's ever taken pole is because Hamilton had bad luck. Got it.
Can you think of an occasion of the top of your head where Rosberg took pole because he was genuinely faster when neither driver had an issue? No? Didn't think so.
Baku... Hamilton crashed, unforced errors aren't bad luck.

If you don't like that, 2015 Abu Dhabi, Brazil, Mexico (another Hamilton unforced error), Russia (Hamilton mistake), Japan... Soon really not as crazy as you make it out to be. In fact a couple of those races Hamilton set the fastest times in Q1 and Q2, and failed to beat Rosberg in Q3. 
But crashing is bad luck :p My point still stands, if something goes wrong for Hamilton, that seems to be the only times Rosberg can take pole. He's slower, that's a fact.
How about no. Unforced errors are not bad luck they are errors plain and simple. Hamilton crashed, not bad luck he screwed up, his fault not luck.

And you conveniently avoid all my other points that disprove your theory. How about the times where Hamilton set the fastest laps in Q1 and Q2 only to get beaten by Rosberg when it matters in Q3? It's easy to write off another drivers accomplishments when you claim your driver only loses because of bad luck.
So you don't consider it bad luck if you make a mistake and let a rival ahead of you?

You mentioned yourself, in 2 of the 5 you list, Hamilton made a mistake. So that's 3 occasions in 3 1/2 years you can think of where Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace? Yeaaaaaaa.
No that isn't bad luck at all, if you make a mistake and let your rival ahead, you F%@# up, luck had nothing to do with it. That was something entirely in Hamilton's control, he and he alone messed up and put the car in the wall. There was no tire fault, no gearbox issue, nothing, plain and simple it was all Hamilton's fault. The fact that Rosberg capitalized on it is irrelevant, he in order to be the fastest you have to complete the lap; Hamilton didn't complete the lap, couldn't be the fastest. That simple.

Yeah I went back to the last bunch of poles Rosberg got, and most were due to his outright pace over Hamilton. This is further evidenced when we see both drivers swapping fastest times in Q3 which happened in a number of my examples (which guess what wasn't an exhaustive list, I just took enough to prove my point). So yeah 3 instances I looked up in the past year (which happen to be most of Rosberg's poles in that time) Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace in qualifying. That's a long shot from your statement that Rosberg has never done it. 

The fact that you can't admit the a driver can be better than Hamilton absent "bad luck"  proves you are blinded by fandom, further illustrating so many people hate Hamilton fans.
Right, can't be bothered, here's some simple facts for you. Hamilton has won 2 WDC in his fight against Rosberg. Rosberg has won 0 WDC.

Hamilton has won 26 races, and Rosberg has won 18 races, in their times as team mates.

Can't be bothered to find more stats than that for you, Hamilton is better, deal with your hate.

Since it was your go to answer in your other posts... Did I ever say Rosberg was better than Hamilton? Show me a post where I said that, you can't because I didn't. Plus we were talking about Qualifying. NOT races NOT Championships. Yes Hamilton is faster and better than Rosberg, I never said he wasn't.

But you started with claiming Rosberg has never beaten Hamilton in qualifying without Hamilton suffering some sort of "bad luck." To which I provided a number of instances where your statement was incorrect. You then claimed desperately and wildly that a driver crashing was bad luck and didn't count; I think because you realized I proved you wrong and you had nothing to back up your statement. Now you want to sit here and spout Hamilton's wins and championship record compared to Rosberg and expect that to have any relevance on this discussion? 

Fine then. Vettel has 4 WDC, Hamilton only has 3. Schumacher has 7, Hamilton only has 3. can't one bother to find more stats than that for you, Schumacher and Vettel are better better, deal with your hate. 

Plus you want to impliedly call someone who was critical of Hamilton a racist for calling Hamilton fans butthurt?  If you have such thin skin that you are offended by someone making a general statement that the Hamilton fandom is butthurt after complaining how Hamilton only loses because of "bad luck," then you need to rethink if the internet is a smart place for you to spend your time. Seriously take a time out, you need it.
No you did not, did I claim you said that? And yes Hamilton is faster and better, glad we can agree on that.

Actually mate, go back and read my posts properly. Each time I said it "seems" like that. Not that it is that. I never claimed that Rosberg ONLY takes poles when Hamilton has a problem. Wanna try that again now? And I also never said that it "didn't count". FFS man, try actually reading my posts properly before spouting off some bullshit about I said this or I said that. If I actually said it then fair shout, but I didn't. These are the exact things I said if you need your memory refreshed: "But crashing is bad luck :p" "So you don't consider it bad luck if you make a mistake and let a rival ahead of you?". I don't see anything in there where I said it "didn't count" as you claim.

The funny thing is you haven't proven anything. I said "I said nothing particularly bad about Rosberg, just that he only seems to take pole when Hamilton has bad luck, which happen to be true.". Again, same as each post where I said it, it seems that way, not that it is that way.

You're trying to prove me wrong on things I never actually said were true. To any general fan of Hamilton it SEEMS like Rosberg get's pole whenever Hamilton has an issue, what the **** is wrong with me having said that twice?

And that's fine, Vettel's 4 WDC's are an amazing achievement, and for Schumacher to have 7 truly cements him as a legend, not just in Formula 1 but in the history of motorsport. Both have done incredible things in their career.

So I get called butthurt after saying Rosberg got pole because Hamilton got bad luck, and you think that was deserved? Maybe you should be browsing 4chan instead of here.
What "seems" and what "is" are in fact entirely different things. Fine you wanna say that you only stated it "seems" like X is true, that's great, but when I provide facts, that tend to prove what you perceived as "seemingly" you can't reject those facts as false. You made a statement on emotion because your driver lost, I made one that proved your statement was unwarranted and incorrect by the facts. Nothing is wrong with you having said that. I am merely saying and backing it up with facts to tell you your statement is incorrect. It may "seem" that way to you, however the facts suggests your observation "is" incorrect. See the difference

Why don't you take your own advice and reread his post again, you didn't get called butthurt. Hamilton fans got called butthurt. Just because your a member of that class of individuals and just because he stylized his comment to be like yours does not mean he called you butthurt. And again, if you perceive any critizism of a fandom you belong to as a personal attack on you, you really need to reconsider posting anything on the internet.  

Maybe you're the exception to butthurt Hamilton fans. By this discussion, it doesn't "seem" that way to me, it "seems" you are acting within the general characterization of Hamilton as butthurt when Hamilton loses. 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Platy said:
Surprised there wasn't an official stewards inquiry into Rosberg's lap time, unless it was done quickly with the telemetry. Setting the fastest time in the middle sector while there were yellow flags doesn't seem right. Rosberg said he was slower in that section than the previous lap, which makes the rest of the section ridiculous if true, and Toto has said there was a big lift too. Hard to take their word on it though, might be slight bias in their comments.

Things like this would benefit from transparency in the sport, but that's never going to happen.
I thought that too. If you watch the video, he does lift at the double yellows. Not really sure what the exact rule is so I don't know if a penalty is in order. 

http://www.formula1.com/en/video/2016/7/Onboard_pole_position_lap_-_Nico_Rosberg__Hungary_2016.html 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Platy said:
Because in Rosberg's whole career the only way he's ever taken pole is because Hamilton had bad luck. Got it.
Can you think of an occasion of the top of your head where Rosberg took pole because he was genuinely faster when neither driver had an issue? No? Didn't think so.
Baku... Hamilton crashed, unforced errors aren't bad luck.

If you don't like that, 2015 Abu Dhabi, Brazil, Mexico (another Hamilton unforced error), Russia (Hamilton mistake), Japan... Soon really not as crazy as you make it out to be. In fact a couple of those races Hamilton set the fastest times in Q1 and Q2, and failed to beat Rosberg in Q3. 
But crashing is bad luck :p My point still stands, if something goes wrong for Hamilton, that seems to be the only times Rosberg can take pole. He's slower, that's a fact.
How about no. Unforced errors are not bad luck they are errors plain and simple. Hamilton crashed, not bad luck he screwed up, his fault not luck.

And you conveniently avoid all my other points that disprove your theory. How about the times where Hamilton set the fastest laps in Q1 and Q2 only to get beaten by Rosberg when it matters in Q3? It's easy to write off another drivers accomplishments when you claim your driver only loses because of bad luck.
So you don't consider it bad luck if you make a mistake and let a rival ahead of you?

You mentioned yourself, in 2 of the 5 you list, Hamilton made a mistake. So that's 3 occasions in 3 1/2 years you can think of where Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace? Yeaaaaaaa.
No that isn't bad luck at all, if you make a mistake and let your rival ahead, you F%@# up, luck had nothing to do with it. That was something entirely in Hamilton's control, he and he alone messed up and put the car in the wall. There was no tire fault, no gearbox issue, nothing, plain and simple it was all Hamilton's fault. The fact that Rosberg capitalized on it is irrelevant, he in order to be the fastest you have to complete the lap; Hamilton didn't complete the lap, couldn't be the fastest. That simple.

Yeah I went back to the last bunch of poles Rosberg got, and most were due to his outright pace over Hamilton. This is further evidenced when we see both drivers swapping fastest times in Q3 which happened in a number of my examples (which guess what wasn't an exhaustive list, I just took enough to prove my point). So yeah 3 instances I looked up in the past year (which happen to be most of Rosberg's poles in that time) Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace in qualifying. That's a long shot from your statement that Rosberg has never done it. 

The fact that you can't admit the a driver can be better than Hamilton absent "bad luck"  proves you are blinded by fandom, further illustrating so many people hate Hamilton fans.
Right, can't be bothered, here's some simple facts for you. Hamilton has won 2 WDC in his fight against Rosberg. Rosberg has won 0 WDC.

Hamilton has won 26 races, and Rosberg has won 18 races, in their times as team mates.

Can't be bothered to find more stats than that for you, Hamilton is better, deal with your hate.

Since it was your go to answer in your other posts... Did I ever say Rosberg was better than Hamilton? Show me a post where I said that, you can't because I didn't. Plus we were talking about Qualifying. NOT races NOT Championships. Yes Hamilton is faster and better than Rosberg, I never said he wasn't.

But you started with claiming Rosberg has never beaten Hamilton in qualifying without Hamilton suffering some sort of "bad luck." To which I provided a number of instances where your statement was incorrect. You then claimed desperately and wildly that a driver crashing was bad luck and didn't count; I think because you realized I proved you wrong and you had nothing to back up your statement. Now you want to sit here and spout Hamilton's wins and championship record compared to Rosberg and expect that to have any relevance on this discussion? 

Fine then. Vettel has 4 WDC, Hamilton only has 3. Schumacher has 7, Hamilton only has 3. can't one bother to find more stats than that for you, Schumacher and Vettel are better better, deal with your hate. 

Plus you want to impliedly call someone who was critical of Hamilton a racist for calling Hamilton fans butthurt?  If you have such thin skin that you are offended by someone making a general statement that the Hamilton fandom is butthurt after complaining how Hamilton only loses because of "bad luck," then you need to rethink if the internet is a smart place for you to spend your time. Seriously take a time out, you need it.
No you did not, did I claim you said that? And yes Hamilton is faster and better, glad we can agree on that.

Actually mate, go back and read my posts properly. Each time I said it "seems" like that. Not that it is that. I never claimed that Rosberg ONLY takes poles when Hamilton has a problem. Wanna try that again now? And I also never said that it "didn't count". FFS man, try actually reading my posts properly before spouting off some bullshit about I said this or I said that. If I actually said it then fair shout, but I didn't. These are the exact things I said if you need your memory refreshed: "But crashing is bad luck :p" "So you don't consider it bad luck if you make a mistake and let a rival ahead of you?". I don't see anything in there where I said it "didn't count" as you claim.

The funny thing is you haven't proven anything. I said "I said nothing particularly bad about Rosberg, just that he only seems to take pole when Hamilton has bad luck, which happen to be true.". Again, same as each post where I said it, it seems that way, not that it is that way.

You're trying to prove me wrong on things I never actually said were true. To any general fan of Hamilton it SEEMS like Rosberg get's pole whenever Hamilton has an issue, what the **** is wrong with me having said that twice?

And that's fine, Vettel's 4 WDC's are an amazing achievement, and for Schumacher to have 7 truly cements him as a legend, not just in Formula 1 but in the history of motorsport. Both have done incredible things in their career.

So I get called butthurt after saying Rosberg got pole because Hamilton got bad luck, and you think that was deserved? Maybe you should be browsing 4chan instead of here.
What "seems" and what "is" are in fact entirely different things. Fine you wanna say that you only stated it "seems" like X is true, that's great, but when I provide facts, that tend to prove what you perceived as "seemingly" you can't reject those facts as false. You made a statement on emotion because your driver lost, I made one that proved your statement was unwarranted and incorrect by the facts. Nothing is wrong with you having said that. I am merely saying and backing it up with facts to tell you your statement is incorrect. It may "seem" that way to you, however the facts suggests your observation "is" incorrect. See the difference

Why don't you take your own advice and reread his post again, you didn't get called butthurt. Hamilton fans got called butthurt. Just because your a member of that class of individuals and just because he stylized his comment to be like yours does not mean he called you butthurt. And again, if you perceive any critizism of a fandom you belong to as a personal attack on you, you really need to reconsider posting anything on the internet.  

Maybe you're the exception to butthurt Hamilton fans. By this discussion, it doesn't "seem" that way to me, it "seems" you are acting within the general characterization of Hamilton as butthurt when Hamilton loses. 


You know what, you win. Enjoy your satisfaction of beating somebody into submission with words and stats on an internet forum, even though you didn't actually provide any numbers that prove otherwise that the majority of the time Rosberg gets pole when Hamilton has issues ;)

Does it not come across as a jab to you though? Say for example if you'd said something similar, and then somebody had replied in the exact manner he did, would you not feel it was somewhat directed towards you? Because that's how it came across to me. And before you give me advice on my internet usage, why did you even bother getting involved in this when at no point was any comment directed towards you?

I wouldn't call myself butthurt you know, Hamilton still starts from 2nd on the grid, and in past seasons Hamilton has managed to beat Rosberg from 2nd on multiple occasions. I am worried about how the start might go though seeing as how Rosberg has had better getaways than Hamilton has this season. Here's hoping too that neither driver does anything that could potentially cause another teammate collision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He is under investigation, also this from Carlin 

https://twitter.com/CarlinRacing/status/756910312260046849?s=09

I don't feel he'll get penalised going on what has happened previously

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Platy said:
Surprised there wasn't an official stewards inquiry into Rosberg's lap time, unless it was done quickly with the telemetry. Setting the fastest time in the middle sector while there were yellow flags doesn't seem right. Rosberg said he was slower in that section than the previous lap, which makes the rest of the section ridiculous if true, and Toto has said there was a big lift too. Hard to take their word on it though, might be slight bias in their comments.

Things like this would benefit from transparency in the sport, but that's never going to happen.
I thought that too. If you watch the video, he does lift at the double yellows. Not really sure what the exact rule is so I don't know if a penalty is in order. 

http://www.formula1.com/en/video/2016/7/Onboard_pole_position_lap_-_Nico_Rosberg__Hungary_2016.html 
He went faster than his previous lap/sector
I think that's the rule which is probably why Lewis backed off more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Platy said:
Because in Rosberg's whole career the only way he's ever taken pole is because Hamilton had bad luck. Got it.
Can you think of an occasion of the top of your head where Rosberg took pole because he was genuinely faster when neither driver had an issue? No? Didn't think so.
Baku... Hamilton crashed, unforced errors aren't bad luck.

If you don't like that, 2015 Abu Dhabi, Brazil, Mexico (another Hamilton unforced error), Russia (Hamilton mistake), Japan... Soon really not as crazy as you make it out to be. In fact a couple of those races Hamilton set the fastest times in Q1 and Q2, and failed to beat Rosberg in Q3. 
But crashing is bad luck :p My point still stands, if something goes wrong for Hamilton, that seems to be the only times Rosberg can take pole. He's slower, that's a fact.
How about no. Unforced errors are not bad luck they are errors plain and simple. Hamilton crashed, not bad luck he screwed up, his fault not luck.

And you conveniently avoid all my other points that disprove your theory. How about the times where Hamilton set the fastest laps in Q1 and Q2 only to get beaten by Rosberg when it matters in Q3? It's easy to write off another drivers accomplishments when you claim your driver only loses because of bad luck.
So you don't consider it bad luck if you make a mistake and let a rival ahead of you?

You mentioned yourself, in 2 of the 5 you list, Hamilton made a mistake. So that's 3 occasions in 3 1/2 years you can think of where Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace? Yeaaaaaaa.
No that isn't bad luck at all, if you make a mistake and let your rival ahead, you F%@# up, luck had nothing to do with it. That was something entirely in Hamilton's control, he and he alone messed up and put the car in the wall. There was no tire fault, no gearbox issue, nothing, plain and simple it was all Hamilton's fault. The fact that Rosberg capitalized on it is irrelevant, he in order to be the fastest you have to complete the lap; Hamilton didn't complete the lap, couldn't be the fastest. That simple.

Yeah I went back to the last bunch of poles Rosberg got, and most were due to his outright pace over Hamilton. This is further evidenced when we see both drivers swapping fastest times in Q3 which happened in a number of my examples (which guess what wasn't an exhaustive list, I just took enough to prove my point). So yeah 3 instances I looked up in the past year (which happen to be most of Rosberg's poles in that time) Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace in qualifying. That's a long shot from your statement that Rosberg has never done it. 

The fact that you can't admit the a driver can be better than Hamilton absent "bad luck"  proves you are blinded by fandom, further illustrating so many people hate Hamilton fans.
Right, can't be bothered, here's some simple facts for you. Hamilton has won 2 WDC in his fight against Rosberg. Rosberg has won 0 WDC.

Hamilton has won 26 races, and Rosberg has won 18 races, in their times as team mates.

Can't be bothered to find more stats than that for you, Hamilton is better, deal with your hate.

Since it was your go to answer in your other posts... Did I ever say Rosberg was better than Hamilton? Show me a post where I said that, you can't because I didn't. Plus we were talking about Qualifying. NOT races NOT Championships. Yes Hamilton is faster and better than Rosberg, I never said he wasn't.

But you started with claiming Rosberg has never beaten Hamilton in qualifying without Hamilton suffering some sort of "bad luck." To which I provided a number of instances where your statement was incorrect. You then claimed desperately and wildly that a driver crashing was bad luck and didn't count; I think because you realized I proved you wrong and you had nothing to back up your statement. Now you want to sit here and spout Hamilton's wins and championship record compared to Rosberg and expect that to have any relevance on this discussion? 

Fine then. Vettel has 4 WDC, Hamilton only has 3. Schumacher has 7, Hamilton only has 3. can't one bother to find more stats than that for you, Schumacher and Vettel are better better, deal with your hate. 

Plus you want to impliedly call someone who was critical of Hamilton a racist for calling Hamilton fans butthurt?  If you have such thin skin that you are offended by someone making a general statement that the Hamilton fandom is butthurt after complaining how Hamilton only loses because of "bad luck," then you need to rethink if the internet is a smart place for you to spend your time. Seriously take a time out, you need it.
No you did not, did I claim you said that? And yes Hamilton is faster and better, glad we can agree on that.

Actually mate, go back and read my posts properly. Each time I said it "seems" like that. Not that it is that. I never claimed that Rosberg ONLY takes poles when Hamilton has a problem. Wanna try that again now? And I also never said that it "didn't count". FFS man, try actually reading my posts properly before spouting off some bullshit about I said this or I said that. If I actually said it then fair shout, but I didn't. These are the exact things I said if you need your memory refreshed: "But crashing is bad luck :p" "So you don't consider it bad luck if you make a mistake and let a rival ahead of you?". I don't see anything in there where I said it "didn't count" as you claim.

The funny thing is you haven't proven anything. I said "I said nothing particularly bad about Rosberg, just that he only seems to take pole when Hamilton has bad luck, which happen to be true.". Again, same as each post where I said it, it seems that way, not that it is that way.

You're trying to prove me wrong on things I never actually said were true. To any general fan of Hamilton it SEEMS like Rosberg get's pole whenever Hamilton has an issue, what the **** is wrong with me having said that twice?

And that's fine, Vettel's 4 WDC's are an amazing achievement, and for Schumacher to have 7 truly cements him as a legend, not just in Formula 1 but in the history of motorsport. Both have done incredible things in their career.

So I get called butthurt after saying Rosberg got pole because Hamilton got bad luck, and you think that was deserved? Maybe you should be browsing 4chan instead of here.
What "seems" and what "is" are in fact entirely different things. Fine you wanna say that you only stated it "seems" like X is true, that's great, but when I provide facts, that tend to prove what you perceived as "seemingly" you can't reject those facts as false. You made a statement on emotion because your driver lost, I made one that proved your statement was unwarranted and incorrect by the facts. Nothing is wrong with you having said that. I am merely saying and backing it up with facts to tell you your statement is incorrect. It may "seem" that way to you, however the facts suggests your observation "is" incorrect. See the difference

Why don't you take your own advice and reread his post again, you didn't get called butthurt. Hamilton fans got called butthurt. Just because your a member of that class of individuals and just because he stylized his comment to be like yours does not mean he called you butthurt. And again, if you perceive any critizism of a fandom you belong to as a personal attack on you, you really need to reconsider posting anything on the internet.  

Maybe you're the exception to butthurt Hamilton fans. By this discussion, it doesn't "seem" that way to me, it "seems" you are acting within the general characterization of Hamilton as butthurt when Hamilton loses. 


You know what, you win. Enjoy your satisfaction of beating somebody into submission with words and stats on an internet forum, even though you didn't actually provide any numbers that prove otherwise that the majority of the time Rosberg gets pole when Hamilton has issues ;)

Does it not come across as a jab to you though? Say for example if you'd said something similar, and then somebody had replied in the exact manner he did, would you not feel it was somewhat directed towards you? Because that's how it came across to me. And before you give me advice on my internet usage, why did you even bother getting involved in this when at no point was any comment directed towards you?

I wouldn't call myself butthurt you know, Hamilton still starts from 2nd on the grid, and in past seasons Hamilton has managed to beat Rosberg from 2nd on multiple occasions. I am worried about how the start might go though seeing as how Rosberg has had better getaways than Hamilton has this season. Here's hoping too that neither driver does anything that could potentially cause another teammate collision.
If you can't see how the facts disprove your statement, I can't help that. I was only showing examples of instances that Rosberg took the pole on pace over Hamilton. I was not making broad statements that Rosberg or Hamilton is better. I was just stating that what you "seemed" to believe was not what the facts showed, that's all. Sorry if you can't see that, but you're right it's over. I apologize to the forum for this discussion. 

It's a public forum, I can respond to any post I want whether it was directed at me or not, that's how the internet works. 

The last 2 Hungarian GPs have been pretty good, I too am looking forward to a good race tomorrow. Despite Hamilton's poor starts he always is there by the end. Hopefully it's a good race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Platy said:
Because in Rosberg's whole career the only way he's ever taken pole is because Hamilton had bad luck. Got it.
Can you think of an occasion of the top of your head where Rosberg took pole because he was genuinely faster when neither driver had an issue? No? Didn't think so.
Baku... Hamilton crashed, unforced errors aren't bad luck.

If you don't like that, 2015 Abu Dhabi, Brazil, Mexico (another Hamilton unforced error), Russia (Hamilton mistake), Japan... Soon really not as crazy as you make it out to be. In fact a couple of those races Hamilton set the fastest times in Q1 and Q2, and failed to beat Rosberg in Q3. 
But crashing is bad luck :p My point still stands, if something goes wrong for Hamilton, that seems to be the only times Rosberg can take pole. He's slower, that's a fact.
How about no. Unforced errors are not bad luck they are errors plain and simple. Hamilton crashed, not bad luck he screwed up, his fault not luck.

And you conveniently avoid all my other points that disprove your theory. How about the times where Hamilton set the fastest laps in Q1 and Q2 only to get beaten by Rosberg when it matters in Q3? It's easy to write off another drivers accomplishments when you claim your driver only loses because of bad luck.
So you don't consider it bad luck if you make a mistake and let a rival ahead of you?

You mentioned yourself, in 2 of the 5 you list, Hamilton made a mistake. So that's 3 occasions in 3 1/2 years you can think of where Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace? Yeaaaaaaa.
No that isn't bad luck at all, if you make a mistake and let your rival ahead, you F%@# up, luck had nothing to do with it. That was something entirely in Hamilton's control, he and he alone messed up and put the car in the wall. There was no tire fault, no gearbox issue, nothing, plain and simple it was all Hamilton's fault. The fact that Rosberg capitalized on it is irrelevant, he in order to be the fastest you have to complete the lap; Hamilton didn't complete the lap, couldn't be the fastest. That simple.

Yeah I went back to the last bunch of poles Rosberg got, and most were due to his outright pace over Hamilton. This is further evidenced when we see both drivers swapping fastest times in Q3 which happened in a number of my examples (which guess what wasn't an exhaustive list, I just took enough to prove my point). So yeah 3 instances I looked up in the past year (which happen to be most of Rosberg's poles in that time) Rosberg beat Hamilton on pace in qualifying. That's a long shot from your statement that Rosberg has never done it. 

The fact that you can't admit the a driver can be better than Hamilton absent "bad luck"  proves you are blinded by fandom, further illustrating so many people hate Hamilton fans.
Right, can't be bothered, here's some simple facts for you. Hamilton has won 2 WDC in his fight against Rosberg. Rosberg has won 0 WDC.

Hamilton has won 26 races, and Rosberg has won 18 races, in their times as team mates.

Can't be bothered to find more stats than that for you, Hamilton is better, deal with your hate.

Since it was your go to answer in your other posts... Did I ever say Rosberg was better than Hamilton? Show me a post where I said that, you can't because I didn't. Plus we were talking about Qualifying. NOT races NOT Championships. Yes Hamilton is faster and better than Rosberg, I never said he wasn't.

But you started with claiming Rosberg has never beaten Hamilton in qualifying without Hamilton suffering some sort of "bad luck." To which I provided a number of instances where your statement was incorrect. You then claimed desperately and wildly that a driver crashing was bad luck and didn't count; I think because you realized I proved you wrong and you had nothing to back up your statement. Now you want to sit here and spout Hamilton's wins and championship record compared to Rosberg and expect that to have any relevance on this discussion? 

Fine then. Vettel has 4 WDC, Hamilton only has 3. Schumacher has 7, Hamilton only has 3. can't one bother to find more stats than that for you, Schumacher and Vettel are better better, deal with your hate. 

Plus you want to impliedly call someone who was critical of Hamilton a racist for calling Hamilton fans butthurt?  If you have such thin skin that you are offended by someone making a general statement that the Hamilton fandom is butthurt after complaining how Hamilton only loses because of "bad luck," then you need to rethink if the internet is a smart place for you to spend your time. Seriously take a time out, you need it.
No you did not, did I claim you said that? And yes Hamilton is faster and better, glad we can agree on that.

Actually mate, go back and read my posts properly. Each time I said it "seems" like that. Not that it is that. I never claimed that Rosberg ONLY takes poles when Hamilton has a problem. Wanna try that again now? And I also never said that it "didn't count". FFS man, try actually reading my posts properly before spouting off some bullshit about I said this or I said that. If I actually said it then fair shout, but I didn't. These are the exact things I said if you need your memory refreshed: "But crashing is bad luck :p" "So you don't consider it bad luck if you make a mistake and let a rival ahead of you?". I don't see anything in there where I said it "didn't count" as you claim.

The funny thing is you haven't proven anything. I said "I said nothing particularly bad about Rosberg, just that he only seems to take pole when Hamilton has bad luck, which happen to be true.". Again, same as each post where I said it, it seems that way, not that it is that way.

You're trying to prove me wrong on things I never actually said were true. To any general fan of Hamilton it SEEMS like Rosberg get's pole whenever Hamilton has an issue, what the **** is wrong with me having said that twice?

And that's fine, Vettel's 4 WDC's are an amazing achievement, and for Schumacher to have 7 truly cements him as a legend, not just in Formula 1 but in the history of motorsport. Both have done incredible things in their career.

So I get called butthurt after saying Rosberg got pole because Hamilton got bad luck, and you think that was deserved? Maybe you should be browsing 4chan instead of here.
What "seems" and what "is" are in fact entirely different things. Fine you wanna say that you only stated it "seems" like X is true, that's great, but when I provide facts, that tend to prove what you perceived as "seemingly" you can't reject those facts as false. You made a statement on emotion because your driver lost, I made one that proved your statement was unwarranted and incorrect by the facts. Nothing is wrong with you having said that. I am merely saying and backing it up with facts to tell you your statement is incorrect. It may "seem" that way to you, however the facts suggests your observation "is" incorrect. See the difference

Why don't you take your own advice and reread his post again, you didn't get called butthurt. Hamilton fans got called butthurt. Just because your a member of that class of individuals and just because he stylized his comment to be like yours does not mean he called you butthurt. And again, if you perceive any critizism of a fandom you belong to as a personal attack on you, you really need to reconsider posting anything on the internet.  

Maybe you're the exception to butthurt Hamilton fans. By this discussion, it doesn't "seem" that way to me, it "seems" you are acting within the general characterization of Hamilton as butthurt when Hamilton loses. 


You know what, you win. Enjoy your satisfaction of beating somebody into submission with words and stats on an internet forum, even though you didn't actually provide any numbers that prove otherwise that the majority of the time Rosberg gets pole when Hamilton has issues ;)

Does it not come across as a jab to you though? Say for example if you'd said something similar, and then somebody had replied in the exact manner he did, would you not feel it was somewhat directed towards you? Because that's how it came across to me. And before you give me advice on my internet usage, why did you even bother getting involved in this when at no point was any comment directed towards you?

I wouldn't call myself butthurt you know, Hamilton still starts from 2nd on the grid, and in past seasons Hamilton has managed to beat Rosberg from 2nd on multiple occasions. I am worried about how the start might go though seeing as how Rosberg has had better getaways than Hamilton has this season. Here's hoping too that neither driver does anything that could potentially cause another teammate collision.
If you can't see how the facts disprove your statement, I can't help that. I was only showing examples of instances that Rosberg took the pole on pace over Hamilton. I was not making broad statements that Rosberg or Hamilton is better. I was just stating that what you "seemed" to believe was not what the facts showed, that's all. Sorry if you can't see that, but you're right it's over. I apologize to the forum for this discussion. 

It's a public forum, I can respond to any post I want whether it was directed at me or not, that's how the internet works. 

The last 2 Hungarian GPs have been pretty good, I too am looking forward to a good race tomorrow. Despite Hamilton's poor starts he always is there by the end. Hopefully it's a good race.
Nah, what I mean is I'd kinda like to see some stats that show how many times Rosberg has taken a pole becuase of Hamilton's issues, and how many times he's taken a pole purely because he was faster on the day. I don't expect you to do the research to find out though, and I really can't be bothered to do it myself :p So I don't mind just leaving it. If anybody does decide to try and find out those numbers though, I'd be interested to know them!

And I'll just reply in kind, I'll post where I want and how I want, and nobody can tell me otherwise. So that's clear from both of us.

They have indeed, last year's race was probably one of the best of the entire year, and 2014 where you didn't know who was gonna win right until the end was fantastic! So yea, agreed, hopefully it is a good race.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Juice29 said:
Platy said:
Surprised there wasn't an official stewards inquiry into Rosberg's lap time, unless it was done quickly with the telemetry. Setting the fastest time in the middle sector while there were yellow flags doesn't seem right. Rosberg said he was slower in that section than the previous lap, which makes the rest of the section ridiculous if true, and Toto has said there was a big lift too. Hard to take their word on it though, might be slight bias in their comments.

Things like this would benefit from transparency in the sport, but that's never going to happen.
I thought that too. If you watch the video, he does lift at the double yellows. Not really sure what the exact rule is so I don't know if a penalty is in order. 

http://www.formula1.com/en/video/2016/7/Onboard_pole_position_lap_-_Nico_Rosberg__Hungary_2016.html 
He went faster than his previous lap/sector
I think that's the rule which is probably why Lewis backed off more
So I looked it up, the regs have this for double yellows 
Double waved: Reduce your speed significantly, do not overtake, and be prepared to change direction or stop. There is a hazard wholly or partly blocking the track and/or marshals working on or beside the track. 

He probably broke this, but the question is how much is significant? It doesn't say whether that applies to the sector or just between the flags. Theoretically you could slow down significantly between the flags and make up the time outside enough to set a fast sector. Gray area. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosberg given all clear
https://twitter.com/InsideLineMedia/status/756918350178025472

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely the weather conditions cancel out the 107% rule in this situation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently not...
https://twitter.com/ChrisMedlandF1/status/756929109096267776

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
https://twitter.com/ChrisMedlandF1/status/756933530517667840

Can't be a real F1 race without a bit of a farce around the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What's tiring, boring, and pathetic is people hating on Hamilton because he's winning. Hating someone because they're doing well is not adult behaviour. Go into any comment section on any F1 website where the article is about Hamilton and every other person is a whiny **** going on about Hamilton because he's winning. Most of their comments are the same as yours.
lmao. You know I love ya Prawn, but you can't be serious with this. Pot, kettle, black.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VetteIfan said:
What's tiring, boring, and pathetic is people hating on Hamilton because he's winning. Hating someone because they're doing well is not adult behaviour. Go into any comment section on any F1 website where the article is about Hamilton and every other person is a whiny **** going on about Hamilton because he's winning. Most of their comments are the same as yours.
lmao. You know I love ya Prawn, but you can't be serious with this. Pot, kettle, black.  
Don't you start too :p Just carry on rubbing your hands and giggling with the knowledge that everybody likes Vettel now ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A Mexicola-topic did it again, the activeness, only got like 4 pages out of it before the start of the race even and all he had to do is pretend to be a religious nut in the topic title.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×