Quote:
Originally Posted by RWill2073
He asked to go opposite to hamilton, which to me didn't come across as defeatist, but as someone trying to strategize. Then the call comes for him to box first for "safety reasons". Lol. Like he couldn't have stayed out one lap longer so hamilton could get on his tire to give bottas the alternate. C'mon... that was engineered to give preferential treatment to hamilton. Not that there's anything wrong with giving preferential treatment to the number one driver, but dont pretend bottas is getting equal treatment.
|
They have to pretend giving Bottas equal treatment. It's very important as it's horrendously, possibly irreversible PR (For MB, Hamilton, F1, etc.)
Someone like yourself (And many others) can conclude MB are giving Hamilton preferential treatment (I personally have no doubt). You may be bang on in your observations, but it's only on anecdotal evidence and not facts.
If MB admit to preferential treatment, then it completely changes the way everything is seen for the worse. It diminishes MB, Hamilton, F1, the experience for the fans (even Hamilton fans). It's not worth dragging down all of that just to redeem Bottas. Who otherwise gets better contracts, pay and opportunities than he normally would have.
Fans can think whatever they want. But if there's no hard evidence, then it doesn't matter and MB/F1 can carry on as they are.
Where it gets blurry for critics, is that even if there was equal treatment for Bottas and Hamilton, fans can't conclusively say that Bottas would be better (head to head, get close, or beat Hamilton).
Quote:
Originally Posted by RWill2073
And I'm with those that say dont change anything about restarts. Make the supposed best drivers in the world (I dont think that's the case, tbh) figure out what amateurs in other series have figured out.
|
It's a generalisation which gets blurred when you start scrutinising the mid and back field. But the generalisation should be accurate for the front running F1 drivers for all but the top WRC drivers.