planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Aug 22, 2018 1:05 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 12:28 pm
Posts: 20
Bottas was having too much air in his tyres for the first stint due to generator fault. Was this confirmed by the team?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 5:28 pm
Posts: 371
Location: b. c. canada
That was just a bad call on that penalty. I would argue that call no matter who got the penalty. Nobody gained any advantage so what did the penalty accomplish. Wasn't everybody posting last week "let them just race" now it's "well lets penalize every little chickens##t move".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:24 am
Posts: 2189
spiritone wrote:
That was just a bad call on that penalty. I would argue that call no matter who got the penalty. Nobody gained any advantage so what did the penalty accomplish. Wasn't everybody posting last week "let them just race" now it's "well lets penalize every little chickens##t move".


Hamilton gained an advantage over Ricciardo.

All pit stops being equal, Dan should have passed Lewis as the latter was stacked behind VB. Slowing down the pair of them ensured Lewis maintained his advantage unfairly. Correct decision IMO and silly from Lewis.

_________________
I remember when this website was all fields.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 4:09 pm
Posts: 4250
Location: LONDON...!
Iron_Ripper wrote:
Bottas was having too much air in his tyres for the first stint due to generator fault. Was this confirmed by the team?

It was by Toto.

Doesn't explain the second stint.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 243
Location: Liverpool
spiritone wrote:
That was just a bad call on that penalty. I would argue that call no matter who got the penalty. Nobody gained any advantage so what did the penalty accomplish. Wasn't everybody posting last week "let them just race" now it's "well lets penalize every little chickens##t move".



Precedent. Hamilton was rightly punished in my opinion for deliberately slowing a competitor, however Ricciardo was only ever going to make up one place, and any time lost, would have been clawed back under the safety car.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 12:28 pm
Posts: 20
spiritone wrote:
That was just a bad call on that penalty. I would argue that call no matter who got the penalty. Nobody gained any advantage so what did the penalty accomplish. Wasn't everybody posting last week "let them just race" now it's "well lets penalize every little chickens##t move".

It's not about getting penalized by gaining an advantage, but getting penalized by holding back an other driver, which in this case was Ricciardo. I don't think he would've got any penalty if Ricciardo wasn't there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 4:59 pm
Posts: 485
Banana Man wrote:
spiritone wrote:
That was just a bad call on that penalty. I would argue that call no matter who got the penalty. Nobody gained any advantage so what did the penalty accomplish. Wasn't everybody posting last week "let them just race" now it's "well lets penalize every little chickens##t move".


Hamilton gained an advantage over Ricciardo.

All pit stops being equal, Dan should have passed Lewis as the latter was stacked behind VB. Slowing down the pair of them ensured Lewis maintained his advantage unfairly. Correct decision IMO and silly from Lewis.


How did he maintain an advantage when he came out behind Ricciardo?

He was in the wrong and admits it, but penalising him when it hasn't changed the outcome for Ricciardo just ruined a chance of a few laps battling with Vettel at the end...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 12:28 pm
Posts: 20
Clarky wrote:
Iron_Ripper wrote:
Bottas was having too much air in his tyres for the first stint due to generator fault. Was this confirmed by the team?

It was by Toto.

Doesn't explain the second stint.

Yes, Bottas lost this race in the second stint. He lost too much time for undercut to work, and ended up with oldest tyres at the end.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1804
Rockie wrote:
Nah matey was watching the race, people getting carried with Hamilton's final stint and he couldn't get past Bottas without team order!


Hamilton had enough pace to get by Bottas.

Mercedes knew Hamilton was their only shot at winning the race so told Bottas not to hold him up, in contrast to Ferrari who wasted 10 laps of the Chinese Grand Prix with Vettel being held up by Raikkonen.

However, Mercedes still boobed strategically, if they knew Bottas was struggling with over inflated tyres then why did they not pit him early?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 7:06 pm
Posts: 213
So out of curiosity, if you drive 5 to 10 seconds slower per lap around Monaco holding up everyone else this is deemed OK? {see 2013}


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 8:01 pm
Posts: 90
Lewis blocked Ricc in the pit lane which got the penalty. As DC said everything Lewis did before the pit lane was fine as that is still the race track. Regardless of any advantage got or not got what Lewis did was dangerous.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1804
spiritone wrote:
That was just a bad call on that penalty. I would argue that call no matter who got the penalty. Nobody gained any advantage so what did the penalty accomplish. Wasn't everybody posting last week "let them just race" now it's "well lets penalize every little chickens##t move".

As we've seen with Verstappen, you won't deter poor driving if you don't penalise it.

It's nonsense to say Ricciardo's race wasn't affected because given Bottas' slow stop it is likely Ricciardo would've run in 2nd place had he not been unfairly backed up by Lewis. That he would have been unlikely to maintain it due to problems switching on his tyres is immaterial to the point, which is that Hamilton cost him a position with illegal driving.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 12:28 pm
Posts: 20
GingerFurball wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Nah matey was watching the race, people getting carried with Hamilton's final stint and he couldn't get past Bottas without team order!


Hamilton had enough pace to get by Bottas.

Mercedes knew Hamilton was their only shot at winning the race so told Bottas not to hold him up, in contrast to Ferrari who wasted 10 laps of the Chinese Grand Prix with Vettel being held up by Raikkonen.

However, Mercedes still boobed strategically, if they knew Bottas was struggling with over inflated tyres then why did they not pit him early?

He would've come out in traffic, which certainly wouldn't help, and we don't know how the race would have panned out regarding Ferrari's strategy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2774
Iron_Ripper wrote:
GingerFurball wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Nah matey was watching the race, people getting carried with Hamilton's final stint and he couldn't get past Bottas without team order!


Hamilton had enough pace to get by Bottas.

Mercedes knew Hamilton was their only shot at winning the race so told Bottas not to hold him up, in contrast to Ferrari who wasted 10 laps of the Chinese Grand Prix with Vettel being held up by Raikkonen.

However, Mercedes still boobed strategically, if they knew Bottas was struggling with over inflated tyres then why did they not pit him early?

He would've come out in traffic, which certainly wouldn't help, and we don't know how the race would have panned out regarding Ferrari's strategy.


Ferrari pitted and Redbull a lap later. I'm sure I read somewhere Vettel was 2 seconds quicker going through traffic than Bottas once he pitted, I'm sure someone can confirm if true or not. If it is true surely that gives Mercedes the signal like Verstappen and Redbull reacted.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2016: 24th place
2017: 4th place

Wins: Spain 2016, Canada 2017, Malaysia 2017
Podiums: 2nd Germany 2016, 3rd Mexico 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:20 pm
Posts: 1804
sandman1347 wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
F1Tyrant wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
Plus Mercedes should of pitted one of their drivers earlier like RB and Ferrari which would of meant no stacking, Mercedes just seem to react to late to everything.

It was rules of engagment that caused the delay. Brawn would have pitted Hamilton the same lap or lap after Vettel so he could chase him down. Mercedes were likely mulling over the question of pitting Bottas first, then the safety car decided for them.


Very true, don't see that from Ferrari. They take risks, they will give each driver different strategies.

What I meant was Mercedes should of pitted one driver to react to Vettel but they did nothing. Even just pitting one of their drivers would of benifeted their fastest driver to some degree. Pit Bottas and you give Hamilton clear air or if he has to pit under SC then no stacking. Or pit Hamilton to react to Vettel, Bottas would of pit under SC.

With how slow Bottas was it seemed like common sense. The second Vettel pitted I thought react. It's 2v1 with your drivers.

I totally agree with you here. I think this team is too used to having a massive margin for error. Now that they have to react in a timely fashion, a weakness has been exposed. Really it's three races in a row where Ferrari have outsmarted them now (they were saved by the safety car in China).

Also, I hate to be that guy but, it's "would have" not "would of". Sorry I really never do that but you wrote that so many times.

I think it's telling that the driver who reacted to Vettel stopping was Verstappen in 4th.

It's hardly surprising Mercedes drop the ball strategically because they've had no competition for 3 seasons. They don't know how to react to things like Vettel pitting early because they've never had to deal with it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:39 am
Posts: 1428
Why is this an issue? He broke a rule and was rightly punished for it. I couldn't see the incident as I had to follow the race via autosports livefeed but 5 seconds seem fair. Just because Ricciardo came out infront doesn't mean a penalty should be left out.

_________________
Winner of the [Charging Hamilton Trophy] !
Winner of the [Dominant Hamilton Trophy] !

Lewis Hamilton 4 x WDC


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4450
Iron_Ripper wrote:
spiritone wrote:
That was just a bad call on that penalty. I would argue that call no matter who got the penalty. Nobody gained any advantage so what did the penalty accomplish. Wasn't everybody posting last week "let them just race" now it's "well lets penalize every little chickens##t move".

It's not about getting penalized by gaining an advantage, but getting penalized by holding back an other driver, which in this case was Ricciardo. I don't think he would've got any penalty if Ricciardo wasn't there.

True. But also, he probably would not drive slower if Ricciardo was not there. Correct decision to stop drivers using this slowing tactics in future, although Lewis used it before (Abu Dhabi 2016).

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 12:28 pm
Posts: 20
F1_Ernie wrote:
Iron_Ripper wrote:
GingerFurball wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Nah matey was watching the race, people getting carried with Hamilton's final stint and he couldn't get past Bottas without team order!


Hamilton had enough pace to get by Bottas.

Mercedes knew Hamilton was their only shot at winning the race so told Bottas not to hold him up, in contrast to Ferrari who wasted 10 laps of the Chinese Grand Prix with Vettel being held up by Raikkonen.

However, Mercedes still boobed strategically, if they knew Bottas was struggling with over inflated tyres then why did they not pit him early?

He would've come out in traffic, which certainly wouldn't help, and we don't know how the race would have panned out regarding Ferrari's strategy.


Ferrari pitted and Redbull a lap later. I'm sure I read somewhere Vettel was 2 seconds quicker going through traffic than Bottas once he pitted, I'm sure someone can confirm if true or not. If it is true surely that gives Mercedes the signal like Verstappen and Redbull reacted.

Yes, actually Mercedes should've pitted Bottas a lap after Vettel to retain the lead. If not for the brake failure Verstappen would've made the undercut on both Mercs as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 8:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2012 7:06 pm
Posts: 213
Still curious about the penalty. Can you get a penalty for driving too slow on the track if you aren't swerving all over the place?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:03 pm 
GingerFurball wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Nah matey was watching the race, people getting carried with Hamilton's final stint and he couldn't get past Bottas without team order!


Hamilton had enough pace to get by Bottas.

Mercedes knew Hamilton was their only shot at winning the race so told Bottas not to hold him up, in contrast to Ferrari who wasted 10 laps of the Chinese Grand Prix with Vettel being held up by Raikkonen.

However, Mercedes still boobed strategically, if they knew Bottas was struggling with over inflated tyres then why did they not pit him early?


He caught him at 2 seconds per lap, closed down 8 seconds in 4 laps. I think he had enough pace to pass, it seemed you needed to be about 1 second per lap quicker to pass today


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:04 pm 
JamWalsh wrote:
Lewis blocked Ricc in the pit lane which got the penalty. As DC said everything Lewis did before the pit lane was fine as that is still the race track. Regardless of any advantage got or not got what Lewis did was dangerous.


Don't you have to maintain pace behind the SC? Oh but they weren't behind the SC at that point. Interesting. So Hamilton got a penalty for just holding Riciardo by about 1 second? Most of the slowing down was done by Lewis in the last corner - that is legal?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4450
cmberry20 wrote:
Still curious about the penalty. Can you get a penalty for driving too slow on the track if you aren't swerving all over the place?

Apparently not (Abu Dhabi 2016) but is it really in the spirit of the sport?

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 12:28 pm
Posts: 20
Lt. Drebin wrote:
Iron_Ripper wrote:
spiritone wrote:
That was just a bad call on that penalty. I would argue that call no matter who got the penalty. Nobody gained any advantage so what did the penalty accomplish. Wasn't everybody posting last week "let them just race" now it's "well lets penalize every little chickens##t move".

It's not about getting penalized by gaining an advantage, but getting penalized by holding back an other driver, which in this case was Ricciardo. I don't think he would've got any penalty if Ricciardo wasn't there.

True. But also, he probably would not drive slower if Ricciardo was not there. Correct decision to stop drivers using this slowing tactics in future, although Lewis used it before (Abu Dhabi 2016).

Yes, his intention was clear: not lose a position by standing behind Bottas, which wasn't successful. So, I think they were right to punish him to avoid any future "hold-ups" by drivers causing maybe a slow train and chaos in the pitlane.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 16, 2010 5:21 pm
Posts: 5402
cmberry20 wrote:
Still curious about the penalty. Can you get a penalty for driving too slow on the track if you aren't swerving all over the place?

Well, if Alonso can get a penalty for holding up Hamilton during quali at Hungary in 2008 by just sitting in his pit box, it seems like the same offence to me.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 12:28 pm
Posts: 20
lamo wrote:
JamWalsh wrote:
Lewis blocked Ricc in the pit lane which got the penalty. As DC said everything Lewis did before the pit lane was fine as that is still the race track. Regardless of any advantage got or not got what Lewis did was dangerous.


Don't you have to maintain pace behind the SC? Oh but they weren't behind the SC at that point. Interesting. So Hamilton got a penalty for just holding Riciardo by about 1 second? Most of the slowing down was done by Lewis in the last corner - that is legal?

Any similarities to Hungary 2010?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:14 pm 
Iron_Ripper wrote:
Yes, actually Mercedes should've pitted Bottas a lap after Vettel to retain the lead. If not for the brake failure Verstappen would've made the undercut on both Mercs as well.


The lead was long gone, Vettel was 0.5 behind Bottas when he dived into the pits. He had made up over 2 seconds by the time Bottas came to the pit entry the next lap. Bottas would have been 1.5 seconds behind Vettel. I suspect Mercedes were hoping Vettel would hit traffic and start to lose time, that or maybe they were going to try to one stop at least one of there drivers.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 12:49 pm
Posts: 798
F1_Ernie wrote:
Iron_Ripper wrote:
GingerFurball wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Nah matey was watching the race, people getting carried with Hamilton's final stint and he couldn't get past Bottas without team order!


Hamilton had enough pace to get by Bottas.

Mercedes knew Hamilton was their only shot at winning the race so told Bottas not to hold him up, in contrast to Ferrari who wasted 10 laps of the Chinese Grand Prix with Vettel being held up by Raikkonen.

However, Mercedes still boobed strategically, if they knew Bottas was struggling with over inflated tyres then why did they not pit him early?

He would've come out in traffic, which certainly wouldn't help, and we don't know how the race would have panned out regarding Ferrari's strategy.


Ferrari pitted and Redbull a lap later. I'm sure I read somewhere Vettel was 2 seconds quicker going through traffic than Bottas once he pitted, I'm sure someone can confirm if true or not. If it is true surely that gives Mercedes the signal like Verstappen and Redbull reacted.


Looking at the lap time charts, Vettel gained precisely 2.619 seconds on Bottas on his 1st full lap after pitting.

Edit: After double-checking, I figured out that my calculations about the outlap were wrong, so I removed them.


Last edited by Migen on Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:18 pm 
Re; Hamiltons block.

It wasn't a bad decision to try it. If he hadn't he would have been 4th with the possbility of being stuck behind DR the entire 2nd stint in traffic. That would have been worse than coming out 3rd (not stuck) but having a 5 second penalty. Calculated risk that didn't work.

In reality, DR couldn't get heat into his tyres and Lewis took the place right away but he could have easily been held up for 20 laps behind DR there and ended up 3rd/4th


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 11:52 am
Posts: 71
I think Lewis lost the race yesterday. If he was on pole and got to the first corner in the lead I think he would have won comfortably. Still it's all ifs and buts. Fair play to Seb. Think it's going to be a good season


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 12:28 pm
Posts: 20
lamo wrote:
Iron_Ripper wrote:
Yes, actually Mercedes should've pitted Bottas a lap after Vettel to retain the lead. If not for the brake failure Verstappen would've made the undercut on both Mercs as well.


The lead was long gone, Vettel was 0.5 behind Bottas when he dived into the pits. He had made up over 2 seconds by the time Bottas came to the pit entry the next lap. Bottas would have been 1.5 seconds behind Vettel. I suspect Mercedes were hoping Vettel would hit traffic and start to lose time, that or maybe they were going to try to one stop at least one of there drivers.

Well, sadly for them, this wasn't Albert Park and Vettel was able to overtake the traffic. Maybe they didn't want to repeat the "Australia", when they lost to Ferrari trying to make an early undercut.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2016 8:02 pm
Posts: 139
lamo wrote:
Re; Hamiltons block.

It wasn't a bad decision to try it. If he hadn't he would have been 4th with the possbility of being stuck behind DR the entire 2nd stint in traffic. That would have been worse than coming out 3rd (not stuck) but having a 5 second penalty. Calculated risk that didn't work.

In reality, DR couldn't get heat into his tyres and Lewis took the place right away but he could have easily been held up for 20 laps behind DR there and ended up 3rd/4th


I agree. Which is why a 5 second penalty was too lenient.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:49 pm 
optimisteprime wrote:
lamo wrote:
Re; Hamiltons block.

It wasn't a bad decision to try it. If he hadn't he would have been 4th with the possbility of being stuck behind DR the entire 2nd stint in traffic. That would have been worse than coming out 3rd (not stuck) but having a 5 second penalty. Calculated risk that didn't work.

In reality, DR couldn't get heat into his tyres and Lewis took the place right away but he could have easily been held up for 20 laps behind DR there and ended up 3rd/4th


I agree. Which is why a 5 second penalty was too lenient.


The same as Germany last year where Rosberg got a 5 second penalty for his overtaking move on Max, but track position was key and he was able to build more than a 5 second gap to him before the next pit stop and would have beaten him if Mercedes didn't give him an 8.5 second penalty in error.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26932
Laz_T800 wrote:
That race will surely make Mercedes ditch the fairness rule.
Merc needed to realise early on that Hamilton was the guy that could win the race.
By waiting so long to make a call they handed an easy win to Ferrari.
They should have been undercutting Bottas as he was just too slow, they had to know their competitors were thinking the same.

It won't happen anytime soon because they don't get it.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26932
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1Tyrant wrote:
Mercedes qualifying advantage may deliver Hamilton the title. Particularly if the Valterri train becomes a regular occurance. Starts will be critical to Vettel winning the title.

Bottas had an issue in the first stint. His team admittes this. He also have some more over heating issues early on in the 2nd stint. This wasn't his fault and he could well have pulled away from Vettel at the start if it wasn't for this. I don't actually see much wrong with holding drivers up anyway. I think it was a little unfai that Bottas had to cost himself some time on 2 occations to allow Hamilton through. He could very easily have managed 2nd or maybe 1st I think if he didn't have any issues or team orders.


If Mercedes admitted this then surely they could see pretty early in the race the longer they don't react the more the race win is getting away. Once Vettel pitted and Mercedes didn't respond with Hamilton stuck behind Bottas the race was getting away.

Bottas was also slow in the second stint.

My main point is that Bottas was unlucky to have have these issues which affected his performance as well as having to allow Hamilton through twice. I don't think his performance was actually that bad as he still kept Vettel behind him for quite some time even with an obvious issue.

He wasn't unlucky at all, it was the way he set his car up so it would be quick in qualifying.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:56 pm 
pokerman wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1Tyrant wrote:
Mercedes qualifying advantage may deliver Hamilton the title. Particularly if the Valterri train becomes a regular occurance. Starts will be critical to Vettel winning the title.

Bottas had an issue in the first stint. His team admittes this. He also have some more over heating issues early on in the 2nd stint. This wasn't his fault and he could well have pulled away from Vettel at the start if it wasn't for this. I don't actually see much wrong with holding drivers up anyway. I think it was a little unfai that Bottas had to cost himself some time on 2 occations to allow Hamilton through. He could very easily have managed 2nd or maybe 1st I think if he didn't have any issues or team orders.


If Mercedes admitted this then surely they could see pretty early in the race the longer they don't react the more the race win is getting away. Once Vettel pitted and Mercedes didn't respond with Hamilton stuck behind Bottas the race was getting away.

Bottas was also slow in the second stint.

My main point is that Bottas was unlucky to have have these issues which affected his performance as well as having to allow Hamilton through twice. I don't think his performance was actually that bad as he still kept Vettel behind him for quite some time even with an obvious issue.

He wasn't unlucky at all, it was the way he set his car up so it would be quick in qualifying.


His race pace in stint 1 Australia and all stints in Bahrain has been very poor, over 0.5 per lap slower than Hamilton and Vettel and took him out of contention of both races. China we can not tell due to his spin but his last stint against Hamilton still was down.

Lauda said in pre-season that Bottas was a couple of tenths behind on 1 lap and half a second behind on race pace. That still seems to be the case.


Last edited by lamo on Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 9:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26932
wolfticket wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
wolfticket wrote:
It was clear Hamilton, barring a big error, had no chance of catching Vettel from about 17 laps to go. I found it deeply irritating that it formed the narrative (on Sky UK at least) for the whole last part of the race:
Quote:
He's 15 seconds behind with 10 laps to go and catching about a second on average a lap. Will we have a barnstorming finish?!

Answer: No. You hardly need a calculator.

I think Hamilton/Mercedes are starting to worry they don't have an answer to Vettel/Ferrari on race pace at the moment. I don't think they even had it in China when the Ferrari's weren't stuck behind anyone or each other.

--------

Off topic, is anyone seeing GAPS on the signed in but free live timing on the F1 website? https://www.formula1.com/en/f1-live.html
Or the paid version for that matter if anyone uses it.

I'm didn't all race, nor in China.

This race wasn't decide by race pace. It was strategy and track position that determined this race just like the first two.

Superior race pace (even marginally superior) makes it a lot easier to find an effective strategy and track position though.

It was better strategy, Hamilton didn't have a chance once he found himself behind Bottas after the first lap.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26932
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Invade wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1Tyrant wrote:
Mercedes qualifying advantage may deliver Hamilton the title. Particularly if the Valterri train becomes a regular occurance. Starts will be critical to Vettel winning the title.

Bottas had an issue in the first stint. His team admittes this. He also have some more over heating issues early on in the 2nd stint. This wasn't his fault and he could well have pulled away from Vettel at the start if it wasn't for this. I don't actually see much wrong with holding drivers up anyway. I think it was a little unfai that Bottas had to cost himself some time on 2 occations to allow Hamilton through. He could very easily have managed 2nd or maybe 1st I think if he didn't have any issues or team orders.


I'll be sold on that when I see it.


This is not the first time this year that he has been slow relative to Vettel and Hamilton. The same was true in OZ. I think Toto is protecting him and saying that he had an issue to be honest. Currently he has no race pace at all. Big problem for him.

Did you not hear all the team radio about the over heating issues? There is no chance that Toto made this up. And about Austrailia, Bottas was quite a bit faster even after Bottas't tyres were the same age as Hamilton's. He didn't manage to get past but he was clearly faster towards the end of the race. I don't think Hamilton was actually much stronger in that race.

The team told Bottas that Hamilton had his engine turned down and was coasting.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26932
Andy2402 wrote:
This will be the story of the season. Mercedes inadequate strategies and the occasional Hamilton error like today. Meanwhile vettel performs consistently

It's called rules of engagement, what they came up with between Hamilton and Rosberg when they had a dominant car, but unfortunate the pace of the Ferrari does not compute.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1386
pokerman wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1_Ernie wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
F1Tyrant wrote:
Mercedes qualifying advantage may deliver Hamilton the title. Particularly if the Valterri train becomes a regular occurance. Starts will be critical to Vettel winning the title.

Bottas had an issue in the first stint. His team admittes this. He also have some more over heating issues early on in the 2nd stint. This wasn't his fault and he could well have pulled away from Vettel at the start if it wasn't for this. I don't actually see much wrong with holding drivers up anyway. I think it was a little unfai that Bottas had to cost himself some time on 2 occations to allow Hamilton through. He could very easily have managed 2nd or maybe 1st I think if he didn't have any issues or team orders.


If Mercedes admitted this then surely they could see pretty early in the race the longer they don't react the more the race win is getting away. Once Vettel pitted and Mercedes didn't respond with Hamilton stuck behind Bottas the race was getting away.

Bottas was also slow in the second stint.

My main point is that Bottas was unlucky to have have these issues which affected his performance as well as having to allow Hamilton through twice. I don't think his performance was actually that bad as he still kept Vettel behind him for quite some time even with an obvious issue.

He wasn't unlucky at all, it was the way he set his car up so it would be quick in qualifying.

So Bottas had uneven tyre pressures in qualifying too? I don't think so. In stint 1 in the race, It was certainly to do with this that affected his performance as his team confirmed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 26932
optimisteprime wrote:
F1Tyrant wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Nah matey was watching the race, people getting carried with Hamilton's final stint and he couldn't get past Bottas without team order!

It isn't in Mercedes interests to have their drivers fighting over second when only one driver showed the pace to potentiallt win it. They can't afford to be stupid anymore.

I really think Mercedes need to have a word with their strategy guy. A 33% success rate when the pressure's on would put anyone's job under threat.


It amazes me the ability some people have to deflect blame - it was Mercedes' fault that Hamilton kept demanding new tyres when Vettel was chasing him down in Australia, and it was Mercedes' fault that Lewis was unable to beat his own team-mate without the help of team orders in Bahrain.

I guess you don't see the bigger picture were Bottas basically won the race for Ferrari, it started in qualifying when he decided it was more important to qualify well then have a good race car.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 8th

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (5)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group