OK understand your basketball analogy and I agree.
I'm more into football(that's playing a round ball kicking it with your feet
)
and in tournaments sometimes the number one just got lucky or whatever and the runner up deserved it because they played better. But that's FIFA's 'choice' so to speak. Anyway...
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlhymb
1) The editorial in the OP shows that given their testing methodology, the m2c was 2ms faster than the m3 zcp around that circuit.
2) It's unclear that the m2c is actually faster than the m3 zcp or whether the result is just by chance.
|
1) That's THEIR testing methodology and many(let's say 9-10)car testers, and I think it's 10-10) test/lap their cars like that afaik.
In this case(never) they won't go repeating 'the same old song' over and over again, just because they only just have one car to do their laptimes with and many times the other car just isn't there to try it out. There are supertests with '10 new performance cars' but I haven't seen any of them doing a laptime over again because another car was just faster or whatever the reason. It is what it is.
I think:Sorry for the car which should be faster but performed less than expected, kudos to the car which performed better. But that's the way it is. One chance, don't screw it.
When there is a new(er) model, they will use that one to see what's the difference. M2 vs M2C in the Magny-Course case.
2) I won't say 'by chance' because M2C is competitive being just as fast as M4 on the Nordschleife.
But in this particular case (just this case)at this time the M2C had the faster laptime. What can we do about it. Nothing.
If it was the other way around we wouldn't have this discussion I guess
Cheers
Robin