I don't know how autosport have come up with these figures but they have compared all the current champions on the grid including Schumacher at his current form to Schumacher when he was at his peak. Percentage of Prime-spec Schumacher Current Shumacher Speed: 80% relentlessness: 100% leadership: 80% error rate: 100% (the higher the error rate percentage the better) Alonso speed: 95% relentlessness: 100% leadership: 98% error rate: 110% Vettel speed: 98% relentlessness: 100% leadership: 90% error rate: 110% Raikkonen speed: 98% relentlessness: 85% leadership: 70% error rate: 115% Hamilton speed: 101% relentlessness: 90% leadership: 70% error rate: 95% Button speed: 95% relentlessness: 95% leadership: 100% error rate: 110%
Well that's all as clear as Donkey droppings.... What we can read in to that though is that given the percentages and their relative spread, it's quite clear for everybody to see that the creator was totally off his mash.
Sounds like they want to do some genetic engineering. If we mix hamiltons speed to Raikkonens error rate......
Not sure who thought that up.. but how can a high error rate be good? At an error rate of 115% you'd have had to have bombed out at every race and crashed on the way in or out of plenty too.
The whole comparison is very stupid, but the error rates can only mean than Alonso, for example, is 10% more error prone that Schumacher was in his first career and Hamilton is 5% less error prone. Anyway, it's spam in my opinion.
So in Autosports eyes for who they think are the top 3 drivers... 1st: Alonso 2nd: Button 3rd: Vettel
He must be so good at not making mistakes, he helps his teammate to not make mistakes as well for the hell of it?
I'm not spamming, this is genuinely in the autosport magazine. But I agree they appear to have got the numbering the wrong way for error rate. They mean the least error prone to the most error prone is 1: Raikkonen 2/2/2: Button/Alonso/Vettel 3: Schumacher 4: Hamilton
Vettel? Button is taking points away from Lewis when he gets ahead while Webber cant challenge Seb over the season?.........that..........must be the 5%!!!!!!!! I HAVE SOLVED IT GENTLEMEN!!!!!!
I believe you about Autosport and I don't want to be antagonistic but, in my opinion and without seeking to prejudice anyone else, copying and plastering the same thread over multiple forums just shows a lack of involvement in and respect for this one because we're not the same as the other forums and, for that matter, they're not the same as each other. I'm sorry, it's just the way I feel.
I've always quite enjoyed seeing the same topic on several forums, get to see different views caused by the different surroundings.
I always dismiss anything that rates over 100%. How someone who drove into the wrong pit-box even have a 100% error rate, or someone who flat-spotted their tyres so badly the suspension exploded and cost them a win?
please log in to view this image + please log in to view this image = please log in to view this image
I agree the forums are different. On Muzz a thread aqquires comments very slowly but for a very long time On not606 a thread aqquires comments very quickly for a day or two. This thread already has multiple comments, the muzz one has 1 comment, but will probably eventually have more. Posting on not606 is means you can see what people think straight away, posting on muzz means you can see what people think for a far greater amount of time. I'm not spamming
Who said wanting to see more people's opinions shows a lack of respect? I didn't. Misrepresenting what people post or say shows a lack of respect or understanding. You may well be typing out these posts individually but the output is the same as that of a spambot - identical posts on multiple forums. It's not a huge deal and I'm glad to see you post here. It's just a bugbear of mine, as much to do with my attitude to forum communities as anything to do with you.
