According to Haug Rosbergs car got damaged on start and his race was over after the pitstop mistake (btw, what was wrong?) After that he stuck behind slower cars most of the time, that's why your calculation is a bit misleading.

Instead of trolling and laughing, show me the last time Rosberg finished a race 2 minutes behind.
Don´t respond or quote me before you shown me that, ok?

You have to go back to China 2005 to find a performance which matched MS's at China 2010....

And...?

Show me a race where Rosberg had a damaged car, a first messed up pit stop and a second extra pit stop while the 95% of the field were on a one-stop strategy in the past and I´ll tell you

Instead of just repeating your fairytale conspiracies like a broken record, show me your answer to Rosberg's own denial and explanation I referred to above.
Don't make any more accusations until you explain that, ok?

Based on the interview it didn't sound like Norbert was impressed with Kubica's move after lights went off. Nico gave him (K) benefit of doubt, but still, it has cost him initially four race positions and what is now being reported a damaged car.

You'd be the laughing stock of a debate team if you really think you're making a strong argument by saying that Rosberg's results in previous years prove anything at all about this current Mercedes. Why don't you go into the Red Bull thread and claim that there's a conspiracy of favoritism for Webber because the updates to the car "screwed" Vettel? It's silly and yet funny how adamant you are. I keep checking this thread specifically to see what you'll say next, as it gets more amusing by the second.

In qualifying they were 2 tenths apart, in best race laps they were 1 tenth apart, with Nico having a better lap likely because he had fresher rubber with less fuel due to an extra stop, but clearly the relative pace of the drivers is still very close as it has been all year, Nico just discovered as MS did in Oz that starting further back leads to exponentially worse races as you are far more likely to get caught up in incidents/stuck behind cars.

Dear god this is turning into another pathetic bash party by the same old farts again.

It's very simple: Brawn updated the car and got faster with it, but the other teams also updated the car and simply also got faster. That's one, and the other one is that Barcelona is a aero track and red bull simply is king this year and it showed here. Nico simply had a bad weekend and couldn't get everything out of the car and had a terrible race as well that's why he finished this low.

It's all so simple.

You´re another one that needs to watch the race again.
The RedBull drivers have been close to each others all year, both in qualifying
and in the races.
If either Webber or Vettel all of a sudden was 1-2 seconds slower then I maybe would start to wonder
but they are still very close.

Rosberg was not stuck behind a slower driver like many in this thread has claimed. At least not in the first part or half of the race.
He was first behind Kubica but the gap increased all the time. During this time, he lapped 2 seconds slower than Webber.

Rosbergs car was damaged. You can't judge about performance based on damaged cars.

Forget about it. He´ll continue to ignore that point.

Then why isn´t there one singel written line on that?
I suspect it´s just something made up.

It's here.

http://www.motorsport-total.com/f1/news/20...m_10050932.html

Strange, Rosberg doesn´t say it. And there was no contact between the cars, yet
it was damaged

It was damaged from going over the grass at the start.

Post race interview with Nick Fry on the BBC forum confirmed it. Why must you insist on ignoring everyone who is telling you this?

+1

it´s really getting annoying with Mr. Fortymark
I think it´s time to add a new name to my ignone-list.

Ok, forgetting everything else- Why was Rosberg's best race lap faster than Schumacher's? He set the time on lap 50 of 66, so it was fairly late in the race. I'm having a harder and harder time understanding exactly what point you're trying to make. It's pretty clear that when Nico was in the clear and under ideal conditions, he was fast enough, he just had a rough race and struggled with a bit of underfloor damage/bad setup. Are you trying to say that the Merc the team provided him with was inferior not just to the previous version of the car, which is clearly a load of crap, but that it was sabotaged vs. the car in Michael's hands today? Either way, it's all funny stuff so I hope you keep it up. It's not often you find someone so dogged in their beliefs that they go against the quotes of team members and even the driver they're trying to put on a pedestal, not to mention the facts of the race. It's almost like Jesus coming back from the dead to tell everyone that our planet is indeed several billion years old and evolution does indeed occur, yet some people will still thump their bibles and claim that it's just a test of our faith for him to say such heresy, just like the dinosaur bones, and that the Earth is a few thousand years old and the center of the universe.

Rosberg was on the softs.

New tyres + low fuel load.

Best get used to it if you plan on staying There are none so blind as those who don't want to see, and as pointed out by Buttoneer above, some of our residents are very blind indeed.

Group B: long time!

For Schumacher vs Rosberg: Michael had a good weekend, Nico had an off one and we will meet again in a week and see how everyone's second drive on the new chassis goes

For Fortymark vs Schumacher: Grab a chair, get some popcorn! Michael has just fooled a 3rd team into destroying its car and a better driver on behalf of his chin!

Rosberg has shown what he can do already this season, Michael has now found a better balance, and they've both said they like similar general characteristics, so IF Merc can only find some overall time in the car then we could be discussing MS vs KR for podium places instead of points finishes.

On topic, Nico had a bad time of it, but it seemed really one of those case like Michaels race a few weeks ago, where things just compound each other to make a mediocre performance into a dreadful race. He will bounce back, probably next weekend where the car should suit the track a lot better

Oh and to the mods.. Britney is Nico's (perhaps friendly) nickname among some drivers also. Just so ya know.

Yeah, too long; good to see you mate

For the sake of exactness it was 1994 not 1995 and he also had traction control which helped immensely as Hill and Hakkinen didn't have it.

You could always just copy and paste "I pathelogically loathe MS" into every thread, it would save a bit of typing

Oh, and just for fun, how does TC alter gear ratios?

Please stop discussing each other.

I said earlier in this thread that I felt Schumacher has lost his race craft. Now I feel I can say it has returned as his defensive driving yesterday was brilliant. However, I do feel that he was holding other drivers up some what at one stage during the race and Button really wasn't being aggressive enough. I wonder what would have happened in the same situation with a driver like Hamilton...

He would have been stuck behind as well.

Possibly, though on some occasions I dont think Button was being agressive enough. Hamilton is known to be happy to bomb dive down the inside of someone, even taking to the grass if he has too. In other words, sometimes you have to force an opponent out of the way. Not so agressively that you damage your car or theirs, but not being afraid to bang wheels just a tad.

Schui would have ran him to the grass because Hammy would have pushed the issue. Schui got a bit of his spark back this race. He has never been shy to show others the chrome bumper. Not knocking it either. I strongly dislike all the neutering of those who want to RACE.

NOT a Schui or Hammy fan but much respect for the will to win at all costs.......

I doubt Hamilton would have passed schumacher either. There isn't much speed difference between button and hamilton, and schumacher is only overtaken when the car behind is ridiculously faster. I almost wish it was hamilton behind schumacher so that he too would have gotten a lesson in driving from the master.

JB is little more polite, than LH; that one would just try to buldozer his way through knowing that stewards will do nothing to him.

Agree with all of that.
I very much respect Brundle's opinion (who obviously is lightyears ahead of me re. F1) , but unlike him, I think Lewis -or anyone- trying to take on MS more agressivley would have ended in tears .

Remember Ham-Schu in China, and this time MS had a much better handling car and working tyres.

Bummer for Nico this weekend, pretty solid drive by Schumacher, quali in particular; amazing how much better MS looked through the turns.

I really hope Mercedes can squeeze something out of that lemon they have right now, and we get to see what the oldtimer really got.
Nothing against Nico, but Michael is just the better show for me .

He was slowing Button up on purpose. He controls the pace and when the time comes he can shoot away like he did yesterday and pull out a 2 second + lap. Same thing he did at Imola in 06.

If that were true, why didn't he just speed away from Button and challenge the cars ahead so that he could have been on the podium? Yea, his tires came into their own a few laps after Button's challenge failed and he pulled a gap, but to think he could have been lapping 2 seconds a lap faster the whole time is crazy, it's not like he was in the lead.

I think he meant a 2 sec+ gap, not 2s a lap.

I believe that by the time the gap to Button normalised around 2s, Buttons tyres were already done. JB drove a good dozen+ laps behind MSC and that surely did not help to conserver his tyres.

I am pretty amazed by some of the comments here. Mercedes is nowhere near able to challenge the top cars. How can you possibly expect Schumacher to show an attacking drive when the car simply isn't fast enough? I mean just look at the speed on the straights. It was pathetic, not to mention the lack of grip in corners.

In such a situation, even defensive driving won't take you anywhere because the car behind you will overtake you eventually but here it was Schumacher who made all the difference in a slow car. Held up the current WDC in a much much faster car for 50 laps. That really deserves some special accolade. That been said, talking about Attacking display from Schumacher would be suitable only when Mercedes have a demonstrable fast car

So did Merc updated the car to suit Schumi but in fact it is a slower car?

Oh ...
YES. It IS a slower car.

FACTS

1)Rosberg himself admitted in various interviews that he contributed towards the developments, admitted the car is faster, admitted that car should perform better and it suits him
2)Schumacher was slower than Redbulls by over 60 secs and from both McLaren and RB by over 1 sec each lap. If the car had not been developed for this race, Mercedes would have been staring at the back of backmarkers. Mercedes themselves admitted that the updates and developments saved their face otherwise they would have been wayy down the order. They also admitted that others progressed much better
3)Rosberg sucks. Cant attack and cant defend and what more, needs lessons from the PIT on how to overtake. I CHALLENGE you to show me more than 3 races each where Rosberg had done decent attacking or defending. One time flukes can happen with any driver. Show me consistent performance of his. Show me how he has overtaken and impressed. Show me how he has defended and impressed. Show me the youtube links. Its a CHALLENGE.

exactly.

the only reason brawn is listening to schumi is because he is a definite ''known'' quantity...hes ability to point out exactly whats wrong with the car and point out percisely what he wants is undebatable.brawn knows from experience that following schumi's demands had very high probability of them gaining pace everytime..

Gary anderson(with star now) made a very important point yesterday too..he said that while all drivers would be able to give their suggestions about changes in car development,all of them wouldnt necessarily go quicker every time their demand was met..theres are only very few guys around that have the ability to pinpoint exactly what they want and will go quicker every time their demand is met.Schumacher is definitely one of them..Brawn knows hes a very safe bet when it comes to development.he will respond every time the team listens to him.such a guy is a great asset to any team principal..

none of rosberg's comments show he was hampered by the new updates..its just a case of not finding the ideal setup for the weekend which is bound to happen at some point.he'll come back at monaco

Very well spoken - I also like to believe at this point that a "bad" chassis is the most likely explanation for Michael´s exploits, especially in China.
Still I believe that this years´regs do not fit with Schumi´s driving style, so that is the second factor.

And Nico just had an off-weekend, like Mark in Australia. It happens, and look what Mark did this weekend...

To sum it up, and I am here reiterating several perspectives that different posters here have bestowed upon us (they do not reflect my personal opinion, which is just posted above this post) - maybe these perspectives help you to answer your question:

Brawn listened to Schumi (the known quantity) and applied the changes to the Merc. Any team principal can be happy to have a driver like Michael who they can trust and listen to. Schumacher will be able to be quicker each time his demands on how to modify the car are met.

As a result, the Merc is now 1,3 secs off the pace in quali and more than 1 minute off the pace over a race distance.

Ross Brawn explained why: the others teams have also updated their cars and obviously more successfully than Mercedes GP. So whether it is that RBR, McLaren and Ferrari have better engineers or that their drivers give more accurate input than the drivers of MGP, Mercedes went backwards in absolute terms and were lucky for their fourth place by MS, which in itself was well deserved, nonetheless.

It may well be that Mercedes will not be getting their act together for the rest of the year, as their chassis is "inherently flawed" in which case it would be wise to dedicate already resources to the 2011 car....which is what they so successfully did in 2008 to win the 2009 season.

2011 is better than 2010 anyway, as Schumi prefers odd numbers (the last two being my personal addendums ).

ms titles...1994, 2000, 2002, 2004
odd..1995, 2001, 2003



also, 2006 was far better than 2005 for instance....1997/8 kind of the same, but 1999 not very lucky for him

Very well observed, MikeTekRacing!

I know, it is ironic that he got more WDCs in the even years 1994, 2000, 2002 and 2004, whereas he got only three in the odd years: 1995, 2001 and 2003. And of these 2003 was shaky till the very end. 1997 was a nightmare with the disqualification and in 1999 he broke his leg.

From that point of view Schumi rather does well in 2010, as 2011 might not be as kind to him

The joke about the odd numbers of course was referring to the fact that Schumi himself did not like the #4 on his car and demanded to get the #3 that was originally Rosberg's.
Schumi's explanation was that he prefers odd numbers....

hasn't demanded, he asked. It's not an explanation, it is the funny truth, brainiac.

Apart from the usage of the last word in your post, which is not appropriate, I know that it is the "funny" truth. Which is why I mentioned it in the post above that Schumi prefers odd numbers.

'He asked in a demanding way' is how it should possibly be phrased most accurately. Who would deny anything when Schumacher asks for it?

No mate I exactly meant what I said, and I exactly know your trolling phraseology. He has not asked in a demanding way. He just asked. That ominous last word I stand by.