planetf1.com

It is currently Tue Oct 16, 2018 9:05 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 3:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2011 4:09 pm
Posts: 4295
Location: LONDON...!
Lt. Drebin wrote:
Clarky wrote:
Zoue wrote:
er, did Perez swipe on purpose..?

Yes 100%.

They were never going to black flag him after not with Vettel.

Full speed accidents and low speed accidents are not falling int the same category IMHO. But others might differ in thinking.

This wasn't an accident and IMO whether is at speed or not ramming another car deliberately is a NO NO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 3:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 6672
Location: Mumbai, India
Because of this, Otmar has said they wouldn't hesitate bringing team orders back to the team!


_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 3:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 6672
Location: Mumbai, India
I read a comment by someone on a F1 news site that Ocon said this was his last race with the team! He said this while being interviewed to some channel.

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 3:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:09 am
Posts: 2794
Location: Perth, Australia
I wish Sky's F1 broadcast wasn't so much like Top Gear...

eg. Christian Horner gets a lift in a car that can drive on two wheels; Herbert goes on a zip line (complete with obnoxious screaming and extreme-close-up face camera); Jimmy Carr gets a surprise interview; the Force India drivers play a SNES; Ted cooks an egg on a hot tyre.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 3:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Clarky wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Ferrari appear to have messed up massively here. Thrown this race away by the looks of things

Thrown away, a win?
Thrown away a chance of won. And definitely thrown away 2nd place. Vettel had to spend the whole race nursing his tyres. Strange decision


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 3:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4515
Clarky wrote:
Lt. Drebin wrote:
Clarky wrote:
Zoue wrote:
er, did Perez swipe on purpose..?

Yes 100%.

They were never going to black flag him after not with Vettel.

Full speed accidents and low speed accidents are not falling int the same category IMHO. But others might differ in thinking.

This wasn't an accident and IMO whether is at speed or not ramming another car deliberately is a NO NO.

I actually agree with both of your statements. Incident is a better term, and deliberate incidents are a no no.

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 3:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5444
I think that Perez has shown why he will never again get a seat with a top team. He's too impetuous and hot headed. He's crashed his teammate out yet again and he's lost his cool in dealing with Sirotkin as well. Horrible day for Sergio and for Force India as well. They had 2 cars in the top 10 and didn't score a point!

Up front I think Hamilton was in control from start to finish. Mercedes executed perfectly over the weekend with Hamilton and he is now really in a strong position for the WDC.

I thought Vettel did a great job at the start to take that position from Max and get himself into the battle with Lewis but his team let him down strategically today. How did they not see Perez and where he was positioned? Getting by any car with either a Mercedes or Ferrari engine at this track was always going to be tough and they just dropped Seb into traffic. That combined with the razor sharp strategic work (as always) from the Red Bull team cost Sebastian the 2nd position that he had earned on lap 1. I think Ferrari's pit wall are back under focus this season after really having a strong start. They've been getting it wrong of late. I think they did a poor job in qualifying and the race this weekend.

For Max, this was another impressive drive; dealing with the mechanical issues and still maintaining a strong pace throughout. More importantly, there is seemingly a gulf in performance between him and Daniel. Max is undoubtedly a future champion.

For me, this race showed the prowess of drivers like Hamilton, Alonso and Verstappen. It also showed that Ferrari still have some structural vulnerabilities with their team.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 3:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:58 pm
Posts: 1335
Location: London
Zoue wrote:
Thrown away a chance of won. And definitely thrown away 2nd place. Vettel had to spend the whole race nursing his tyres. Strange decision


I have no idea what the thinking was to put Vettel onto those tyres. Frankly he did a very good job to make them last to the end and still keep 3rd.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 4:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:31 am
Posts: 2072
sandman1347 wrote:
I think that Perez has shown why he will never again get a seat with a top team. He's too impetuous and hot headed. He's crashed his teammate out yet again and he's lost his cool in dealing with Sirotkin as well. Horrible day for Sergio and for Force India as well. They had 2 cars in the top 10 and didn't score a point!

Up front I think Hamilton was in control from start to finish. Mercedes executed perfectly over the weekend with Hamilton and he is now really in a strong position for the WDC.

I thought Vettel did a great job at the start to take that position from Max and get himself into the battle with Lewis but his team let him down strategically today. How did they not see Perez and where he was positioned? Getting by any car with either a Mercedes or Ferrari engine at this track was always going to be tough and they just dropped Seb into traffic. That combined with the razor sharp strategic work (as always) from the Red Bull team cost Sebastian the 2nd position that he had earned on lap 1. I think Ferrari's pit wall are back under focus this season after really having a strong start. They've been getting it wrong of late. I think they did a poor job in qualifying and the race this weekend.

For Max, this was another impressive drive; dealing with the mechanical issues and still maintaining a strong pace throughout. More importantly, there is seemingly a gulf in performance between him and Daniel. Max is undoubtedly a future champion.

For me, this race showed the prowess of drivers like Hamilton, Alonso and Verstappen. It also showed that Ferrari still have some structural vulnerabilities with their team.


This was pretty much my take on this race as well. I would vary a little with respect to Daniel/Max. I agree Max is a future champ, but I think the gap in performance between them is not an accurate indicator of their comparative ability. Also, I think the Marina Bay Circuit shows the prowess of race drivers in general - so that was equal for all of them, imo. Sirotkin was perhaps the most fiesty out there for all the heat, but not always in a good way (hence the penalty).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 4:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 9:19 pm
Posts: 19
Location: Belfast
Lojik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Thrown away a chance of won. And definitely thrown away 2nd place. Vettel had to spend the whole race nursing his tyres. Strange decision


I have no idea what the thinking was to put Vettel onto those tyres. Frankly he did a very good job to make them last to the end and still keep 3rd.


I can kind of see why Ferrari gambled on putting Vettel on ultrasofts at the pitstop, they hopped Vettel would bang in an out lap to undercut Hamilton when he stopped and then use the pace of the ultrasofts to try pull away at the front and pit again further towards the end of the race. The problem is they pulled the trigger too early on this strategy, had they waited a few more laps, Hamilton's tyres may have been more worn and they may also have got out in front of Perez at the pitstop.

A bit of a boring race, with a few noteworthy highlights. Verstappen did extremely well overcutting Vettel at the pitstop. Perez clashing with Sirotkin was practically predictable. LeClerc pulled out a great overtaking move starting through turns 12 and 13 where it's extremely tight. Bottas was poor today, had he any pace similar to Hamilton, he could have pressured Vettel at the end. Lastly Hamilton didn't put a wheel wrong and played it safe when overaking the back markers. Drivers of the race for me would have to be Verstappen, Hamilton and Alonso in that order.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 4:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2583
Location: England
bourbon19 wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
I think that Perez has shown why he will never again get a seat with a top team. He's too impetuous and hot headed. He's crashed his teammate out yet again and he's lost his cool in dealing with Sirotkin as well. Horrible day for Sergio and for Force India as well. They had 2 cars in the top 10 and didn't score a point!

Up front I think Hamilton was in control from start to finish. Mercedes executed perfectly over the weekend with Hamilton and he is now really in a strong position for the WDC.

I thought Vettel did a great job at the start to take that position from Max and get himself into the battle with Lewis but his team let him down strategically today. How did they not see Perez and where he was positioned? Getting by any car with either a Mercedes or Ferrari engine at this track was always going to be tough and they just dropped Seb into traffic. That combined with the razor sharp strategic work (as always) from the Red Bull team cost Sebastian the 2nd position that he had earned on lap 1. I think Ferrari's pit wall are back under focus this season after really having a strong start. They've been getting it wrong of late. I think they did a poor job in qualifying and the race this weekend.

For Max, this was another impressive drive; dealing with the mechanical issues and still maintaining a strong pace throughout. More importantly, there is seemingly a gulf in performance between him and Daniel. Max is undoubtedly a future champion.

For me, this race showed the prowess of drivers like Hamilton, Alonso and Verstappen. It also showed that Ferrari still have some structural vulnerabilities with their team.


This was pretty much my take on this race as well. I would vary a little with respect to Daniel/Max. I agree Max is a future champ, but I think the gap in performance between them is not an accurate indicator of their comparative ability. Also, I think the Marina Bay Circuit shows the prowess of race drivers in general - so that was equal for all of them, imo. Sirotkin was perhaps the most fiesty out there for all the heat, but not always in a good way (hence the penalty).


I actually think Sirotkin was a bit unlucky with the penalty, I don't think he ran Hartley that far wide on purpose, his tyres were just completely shot. Other than that, his defensive driving was pretty impecable.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 3 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 4:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Posts: 809
Location: India
I missed the whole weekend except the race. It is usually little better than tracks like Monaco, Hungary but that is not saying much. Mercedes once again are constantly improving their package. This was a big weekend for them. In Qualifying Vettel, Bottas and Kimi were within 0.15secs. Hamilton and MV did pretty good job on Saturday. As expected top six finished in same order. Alonso did well not to get lapped. I think he was 1:43secs so may be if no SC he would have also got lapped. Mclaren strategy was good and other midfielder got stuck in traffic. Otherwise it would have been slightly more exciting for top 10.

_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM9-GK3MeLI


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 4:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:29 pm
Posts: 2442
sandman1347 wrote:
I think that Perez has shown why he will never again get a seat with a top team. He's too impetuous and hot headed. He's crashed his teammate out yet again and he's lost his cool in dealing with Sirotkin as well. Horrible day for Sergio and for Force India as well. They had 2 cars in the top 10 and didn't score a point!

Up front I think Hamilton was in control from start to finish. Mercedes executed perfectly over the weekend with Hamilton and he is now really in a strong position for the WDC.

I thought Vettel did a great job at the start to take that position from Max and get himself into the battle with Lewis but his team let him down strategically today. How did they not see Perez and where he was positioned? Getting by any car with either a Mercedes or Ferrari engine at this track was always going to be tough and they just dropped Seb into traffic. That combined with the razor sharp strategic work (as always) from the Red Bull team cost Sebastian the 2nd position that he had earned on lap 1. I think Ferrari's pit wall are back under focus this season after really having a strong start. They've been getting it wrong of late. I think they did a poor job in qualifying and the race this weekend.

For Max, this was another impressive drive; dealing with the mechanical issues and still maintaining a strong pace throughout. More importantly, there is seemingly a gulf in performance between him and Daniel. Max is undoubtedly a future champion.

For me, this race showed the prowess of drivers like Hamilton, Alonso and Verstappen. It also showed that Ferrari still have some structural vulnerabilities with their team.


Very good post. I agree with everything here :thumbup:

_________________
"Always believe you will become the best, but never believe you have done so"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 5:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:11 am
Posts: 221
Ferrari need Alonso back. They should Sign Alonso and Verstappen. Bury the Alonso hatchet and just move forward. Vettel is simply not performing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 5:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 633
F1-Dave wrote:
Lojik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Thrown away a chance of won. And definitely thrown away 2nd place. Vettel had to spend the whole race nursing his tyres. Strange decision


I have no idea what the thinking was to put Vettel onto those tyres. Frankly he did a very good job to make them last to the end and still keep 3rd.


I can kind of see why Ferrari gambled on putting Vettel on ultrasofts at the pitstop, they hopped Vettel would bang in an out lap to undercut Hamilton when he stopped and then use the pace of the ultrasofts to try pull away at the front and pit again further towards the end of the race. The problem is they pulled the trigger too early on this strategy, had they waited a few more laps, Hamilton's tyres may have been more worn and they may also have got out in front of Perez at the pitstop.

A bit of a boring race, with a few noteworthy highlights. Verstappen did extremely well overcutting Vettel at the pitstop. Perez clashing with Sirotkin was practically predictable. LeClerc pulled out a great overtaking move starting through turns 12 and 13 where it's extremely tight. Bottas was poor today, had he any pace similar to Hamilton, he could have pressured Vettel at the end. Lastly Hamilton didn't put a wheel wrong and played it safe when overaking the back markers. Drivers of the race for me would have to be Verstappen, Hamilton and Alonso in that order.


They did not go to early, it was the only time they could go for it. The very next lap Hamilton had pit window to Perez. Hence why Hamilton pitted and came out ahead of Perez the very next lap.

That was the space Mercedes were waiting to open up, once they pitted Hamilton into that it was race won really.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 5:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5444
Johnson wrote:
F1-Dave wrote:
Lojik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Thrown away a chance of won. And definitely thrown away 2nd place. Vettel had to spend the whole race nursing his tyres. Strange decision


I have no idea what the thinking was to put Vettel onto those tyres. Frankly he did a very good job to make them last to the end and still keep 3rd.


I can kind of see why Ferrari gambled on putting Vettel on ultrasofts at the pitstop, they hopped Vettel would bang in an out lap to undercut Hamilton when he stopped and then use the pace of the ultrasofts to try pull away at the front and pit again further towards the end of the race. The problem is they pulled the trigger too early on this strategy, had they waited a few more laps, Hamilton's tyres may have been more worn and they may also have got out in front of Perez at the pitstop.

A bit of a boring race, with a few noteworthy highlights. Verstappen did extremely well overcutting Vettel at the pitstop. Perez clashing with Sirotkin was practically predictable. LeClerc pulled out a great overtaking move starting through turns 12 and 13 where it's extremely tight. Bottas was poor today, had he any pace similar to Hamilton, he could have pressured Vettel at the end. Lastly Hamilton didn't put a wheel wrong and played it safe when overaking the back markers. Drivers of the race for me would have to be Verstappen, Hamilton and Alonso in that order.


They did not go to early, it was the only time they could go for it. The very next lap Hamilton had pit window to Perez. Hence why Hamilton pitted and came out ahead of Perez the very next lap.

That was the space Mercedes were waiting to open up, once they pitted Hamilton into that it was race won really.

Ferrari's reasoning is a bit faulty here I think. If their rationale was that Hamilton would be able to pit and come out in front of Perez in another lap; how could they combat that by pitting Vettel and having him come out behind Perez? The bottom line is that there was no genuine opportunity there for Vettel to gain that position on Lewis and their impetuous decision to bring him into the pits is what created the opportunity for Max to take back 2nd place; with Perez holding Vettel up so badly.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 5:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 9:19 pm
Posts: 19
Location: Belfast
Johnson wrote:
They did not go to early, it was the only time they could go for it. The very next lap Hamilton had pit window to Perez. Hence why Hamilton pitted and came out ahead of Perez the very next lap.

That was the space Mercedes were waiting to open up, once they pitted Hamilton into that it was race won really.


That's a good observation although I'm not as certain that Hamilton would have pitted the next lap.

Anyhow, the hypersofts still has pace as shown by Hamilton, who kept the gap between himself and Vettel, and Verstappen who had enough pace left to lap fast enough to exit the pits ahead of Vettel. Whilst I can see what they were thinking, Ferrari's strategists were just awful today.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 6:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2032
UnlikeUday wrote:
Because of this, Otmar has said they wouldn't hesitate bringing team orders back to the team!



Just fire Perez - problem solved.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 6:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14176
Paolo_Lasardi wrote:
UnlikeUday wrote:
Because of this, Otmar has said they wouldn't hesitate bringing team orders back to the team!



Just fire Perez - problem solved.


Firing the guy that's given them almost all their major success would not be an intelligent decision. He was stupid today but he's still the best of the journeymen divers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 633
sandman1347 wrote:
Johnson wrote:
F1-Dave wrote:
Lojik wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Thrown away a chance of won. And definitely thrown away 2nd place. Vettel had to spend the whole race nursing his tyres. Strange decision


I have no idea what the thinking was to put Vettel onto those tyres. Frankly he did a very good job to make them last to the end and still keep 3rd.


I can kind of see why Ferrari gambled on putting Vettel on ultrasofts at the pitstop, they hopped Vettel would bang in an out lap to undercut Hamilton when he stopped and then use the pace of the ultrasofts to try pull away at the front and pit again further towards the end of the race. The problem is they pulled the trigger too early on this strategy, had they waited a few more laps, Hamilton's tyres may have been more worn and they may also have got out in front of Perez at the pitstop.

A bit of a boring race, with a few noteworthy highlights. Verstappen did extremely well overcutting Vettel at the pitstop. Perez clashing with Sirotkin was practically predictable. LeClerc pulled out a great overtaking move starting through turns 12 and 13 where it's extremely tight. Bottas was poor today, had he any pace similar to Hamilton, he could have pressured Vettel at the end. Lastly Hamilton didn't put a wheel wrong and played it safe when overaking the back markers. Drivers of the race for me would have to be Verstappen, Hamilton and Alonso in that order.


They did not go to early, it was the only time they could go for it. The very next lap Hamilton had pit window to Perez. Hence why Hamilton pitted and came out ahead of Perez the very next lap.

That was the space Mercedes were waiting to open up, once they pitted Hamilton into that it was race won really.

Ferrari's reasoning is a bit faulty here I think. If their rationale was that Hamilton would be able to pit and come out in front of Perez in another lap; how could they combat that by pitting Vettel and having him come out behind Perez? The bottom line is that there was no genuine opportunity there for Vettel to gain that position on Lewis and their impetuous decision to bring him into the pits is what created the opportunity for Max to take back 2nd place; with Perez holding Vettel up so badly.


Ferrari's strategy wasn't just to attempt to take the lead, it was also to maintain 2nd and prevent a Verstappen undercut. Two things at play.

You also have to consider that they were dropping 0.5 per lap at that phase and 1-2 more laps any chance to win was gone as Hamilton had already got the gap to 2.8 seconds when Vettel pitted. If there was a HUGE delta between the brand new US and the used H then Vettel could have taken the lead if he met Perez at a fortunate part of the track. A small chance but on paper maintaining 2nd was most likely.

It wasn't close in the end, because the Mercedes is able to do ridiculous in laps like we have seen all season. Hamiltons in lap was 1.4 seconds quicker than Vettels and Vettel then lost 3 seconds behind Perez in one lap which is what cost him the Verstappen position. Note that, Vettel was 4 seconds per lap quicker than Perez at this phase so if it worked out well he would have got him a lot sooner than that and not lost as much time.

Everybody that thinks Ferrari's strategy was bad, what should they have actually done, even in Hindsight?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5444
Johnson wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Johnson wrote:
F1-Dave wrote:

I can kind of see why Ferrari gambled on putting Vettel on ultrasofts at the pitstop, they hopped Vettel would bang in an out lap to undercut Hamilton when he stopped and then use the pace of the ultrasofts to try pull away at the front and pit again further towards the end of the race. The problem is they pulled the trigger too early on this strategy, had they waited a few more laps, Hamilton's tyres may have been more worn and they may also have got out in front of Perez at the pitstop.

A bit of a boring race, with a few noteworthy highlights. Verstappen did extremely well overcutting Vettel at the pitstop. Perez clashing with Sirotkin was practically predictable. LeClerc pulled out a great overtaking move starting through turns 12 and 13 where it's extremely tight. Bottas was poor today, had he any pace similar to Hamilton, he could have pressured Vettel at the end. Lastly Hamilton didn't put a wheel wrong and played it safe when overaking the back markers. Drivers of the race for me would have to be Verstappen, Hamilton and Alonso in that order.


They did not go to early, it was the only time they could go for it. The very next lap Hamilton had pit window to Perez. Hence why Hamilton pitted and came out ahead of Perez the very next lap.

That was the space Mercedes were waiting to open up, once they pitted Hamilton into that it was race won really.

Ferrari's reasoning is a bit faulty here I think. If their rationale was that Hamilton would be able to pit and come out in front of Perez in another lap; how could they combat that by pitting Vettel and having him come out behind Perez? The bottom line is that there was no genuine opportunity there for Vettel to gain that position on Lewis and their impetuous decision to bring him into the pits is what created the opportunity for Max to take back 2nd place; with Perez holding Vettel up so badly.


Ferrari's strategy wasn't just to attempt to take the lead, it was also to maintain 2nd and prevent a Verstappen undercut. Two things at play.

You also have to consider that they were dropping 0.5 per lap at that phase and 1-2 more laps any chance to win was gone as Hamilton had already got the gap to 2.8 seconds when Vettel pitted. If there was a HUGE delta between the brand new US and the used H then Vettel could have taken the lead if he met Perez at a fortunate part of the track. A small chance but on paper maintaining 2nd was most likely.

It wasn't close in the end, because the Mercedes is able to do ridiculous in laps like we have seen all season. Hamiltons in lap was 1.6 seconds quicker than Vettels and Vettel then lost 3 seconds behind Perez in one lap which is what cost him the Verstappen position. Note that, Vettel was 4 seconds per lap quicker than Perez at this phase so if it worked out well he would have got him a lot sooner than that and not lost as much time.

Everybody that thinks Ferrari's strategy was bad, what should they have actually done, even in Hindsight?

Easy, they should have waited for Vettel to clear Perez and then pit to try for the undercut. Your explanation actually doesn't make sense because, whether attempting to undercut Lewis or to prevent the undercut from Max, they were always pitting Vettel into traffic there (thus undermining both objectives). They needed only another lap or 2 to get Vettel clear of Perez and then their options would have opened up. They just acted too soon and allowed others to methodically take advantage of them. If Lewis had pit first; so be it. They could have gone long with Seb or reacted right away. Doing what they did cost them a hard-earned position by allowing Max to overcut.

As for the gap that was opening up towards the end of the first stint; if you watched, there was a massive difference between driving in clean air and driving behind another car here once they actually started to push a little. Because of the walls, the turbulent air effect is exacerbated here so being behind another car makes a massive difference. Vettel had plenty of pace but they did not get the strategy right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 633
Hamilton was 3 seconds ahead of Vettel so by the time Vettel was clear of Perez, Hamilton would have been clear of him a lap earlier. So that represents 0% chance to win. As soon as Hamilton had gap to the midfield he was into his pit window. This is exactly what happened in Spa 2017, Hamilton pitting the very first opportunity he had the delta to the slow cars.

If Hamilton had a 4 second lead then maybe he had the luxury of allowing Vettel to pit first, but basically if Vettel waited any longer he had no chance to win because not only would Hamilton have clean air by the next lap (if he pitted) Vettel was also falling behind Hamilton at 0.5 per lap.

If they wanted a nailed on P2 then they should have pitted as soon as they had gap to Perez yes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5444
Johnson wrote:
Hamilton was 3 seconds ahead of Vettel so by the time Vettel was clear of Perez, Hamilton would have been clear of him a lap earlier. So that represents 0% chance to win. As soon as Hamilton had gap to the midfield he was into his pit window. This is exactly what happened in Spa 2017, Hamilton pitting the very first opportunity he had the delta to the slow cars.

If Hamilton had a 4 second lead then maybe he had the luxury of allowing Vettel to pit first, but basically if Vettel waited any longer he had no chance to win because not only would Hamilton have clean air by the next lap (if he pitted) Vettel was also falling behind Hamilton at 0.5 per lap.

If they wanted a nailed on P2 then they should have pitted as soon as they had gap to Perez yes.

Sorry but with all due respect that makes no sense. They pit Vettel at a time when he was going to come out BEHIND Perez. In other words, he was going to be in traffic. Unless Perez unexpectedly came into the pits, how were they ever going to get in front of Hamilton using this strategy? As you mentioned, Hamilton was a lap away from being clear of Perez so Vettel would have had to be so much faster than Lewis as to be able to catch and pass Perez and still make up the gap that Lewis had built before the stops all in a single lap! That's just not really a reasonable possibility. All they did was give Max the opportunity to regain P2. They were never going to get P1 by doing what they did.

I also disagree with your notion that they would have had no chance at the win had they not undercut Hamilton there. There was still a lot of race left to go and the potential for safety cars, mechanical problems or other opportunities was very much still there. Max had half of an opportunity himself later in the race when Hamilton was held up in traffic. Thinking about this the way that you have described is what got them in trouble.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 633
The numbers -

Play it safe and accept P2 - 37 points behind Hamilton
Take a gamble, small chance to win - 23 points behind Hamilton
Take a gamble, chance to come 3rd - 40 points behind Hamilton

The differences here are key for me. Even with Vettels strategy he was still favourite for P2, he was unlucky. It offered him a slim chance to win a race he didn't have to pace to really win. If they gamble failed its 37 vs 40 points (not much in it). But if it paid off the the rewards was over 3x bigger than the potential loss.

Basically, Ferrari needed to win this race... 37 or 40 points behinds is basically WDC over. 23 points and he was a lot more in it.


Last edited by Johnson on Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 7:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 633
sandman1347 wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Hamilton was 3 seconds ahead of Vettel so by the time Vettel was clear of Perez, Hamilton would have been clear of him a lap earlier. So that represents 0% chance to win. As soon as Hamilton had gap to the midfield he was into his pit window. This is exactly what happened in Spa 2017, Hamilton pitting the very first opportunity he had the delta to the slow cars.

If Hamilton had a 4 second lead then maybe he had the luxury of allowing Vettel to pit first, but basically if Vettel waited any longer he had no chance to win because not only would Hamilton have clean air by the next lap (if he pitted) Vettel was also falling behind Hamilton at 0.5 per lap.

If they wanted a nailed on P2 then they should have pitted as soon as they had gap to Perez yes.


Sorry but with all due respect that makes no sense. They pit Vettel at a time when he was going to come out BEHIND Perez. In other words, he was going to be in traffic. Unless Perez unexpectedly came into the pits, how were they ever going to get in front of Hamilton using this strategy? As you mentioned, Hamilton was a lap away from being clear of Perez so Vettel would have had to be so much faster than Lewis as to be able to catch and pass Perez and still make up the gap that Lewis had built before the stops all in a single lap! That's just not really a reasonable possibility. All they did was give Max the opportunity to regain P2. They were never going to get P1 by doing what they did.

I also disagree with your notion that they would have had no chance at the win had they not undercut Hamilton there. There was still a lot of race left to go and the potential for safety cars, mechanical problems or other opportunities was very much still there. Max had half of an opportunity himself later in the race when Hamilton was held up in traffic. Thinking about this the way that you have described is what got them in trouble.


That is with hindsight. Ferrari would have hoped for a larger delta between a new US and the used H.

Hamilton clearing Perez that lap was kind of 50/50 tbh. Perez was losing 5 seconds per lap to Hamilton at that stage so it was hard to be certain/predict, Perez might have suddenly found a bit more speed and it been the next lap.

I think everybody knows, Vettel wasn't winning the race if he was P2 after the final stop unless Hamilton blew up. Hamilton hasn't lost a race in that scenario since I can't remember, especially on a circuit you need to be 3 seconds a lap quicker to pass on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5444
Johnson wrote:
The numbers -

Play it safe and accept P2 - 37 points behind Hamilton
Take a gamble, small chance to win - 23 points behind Hamilton
Take a gamble, chance to come 3rd - 40 points behind Hamilton

The differences here are key for me. Even with Vettels strategy he was still favourite for P2, he was unlucky. If offered him a slim chance to win a race he didn't have to pace to really win. If they gamble failed its 37 vs 40 points (not much in it). But if it paid off the the rewards was over 3x bigger than the potential loss.

Basically, Ferrari needed to win this race... 37 or 40 points behinds is basically WDC over. 23 points and he was a lot more in it.

This would make sense if there was some reason to think the "gamble" could have paid off but with Perez positioned where he was, how was that ever going to happen? Pitting when he did did not provide Vettel with a shot at winning. It eliminated any shot he had at the win actually so your hypothetical breakdown is flawed.

Also the idea that Vettel didn't have the pace to win the race is completely unsubstantiated. He didn't lack pace, he lacked track position and then later he was just on the wrong tire.

I also disagree with the idea that Vettel needed to win here or the championship was over. There are still 6 races left in the season! It's not even close to over yet. All it would take is for Lewis to have a DNF and we'd be right back in a close fight again. Too much desperation is a bad thing.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 633
Indeed, he lacked track position. What is the only way to obtain track position at Singapore - undercuting. There is no other way for two similarly paced cars to overtake here.

If he lapped 2.4 seconds quicker and got lucky where he met Perez, he takes the lead. Like I said a long shot but it also prevented Verstappen undercutting him.

If he stayed another lap out he would have been 3.5 behind Hamilton (given he was getting dropped at 0.5), one more lap it would be 4.0 (by which point he would have cleared Perez himself).

37/40 points behind, its entirely out of Ferrari hands. Given how Hamilton has driven the last 2 years, the failure rate of the Mercedes, the fact Vettel has 2 wins in 8 races - they need a small miracle really.

Looking at the numbers, Vettel best chance to win was actually probably pitting 1 lap earlier. If Hamilton repsonded to that, Vettel likely would have been in the lead if he got the US to work on the out lap. With both behind Perez. If it was a Haas in that position, Vettel might have won this race. However, the big crux here is - the new US seems like it was no quicker than the old Hyper though.


Last edited by Johnson on Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Johnson wrote:
Hamilton was 3 seconds ahead of Vettel so by the time Vettel was clear of Perez, Hamilton would have been clear of him a lap earlier. So that represents 0% chance to win. As soon as Hamilton had gap to the midfield he was into his pit window. This is exactly what happened in Spa 2017, Hamilton pitting the very first opportunity he had the delta to the slow cars.

If Hamilton had a 4 second lead then maybe he had the luxury of allowing Vettel to pit first, but basically if Vettel waited any longer he had no chance to win because not only would Hamilton have clean air by the next lap (if he pitted) Vettel was also falling behind Hamilton at 0.5 per lap.

If they wanted a nailed on P2 then they should have pitted as soon as they had gap to Perez yes.

At the very least their choice of tyre was somewhat bizarre. It gave Vettel no chance to actually push as he had to conserve them until the end


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2955
The tyre choice was based on trying to get Vettel ahead of Hamilton and with track position then defend to the end. Ferrari took a gamble for the race win but it backfired.

_________________
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 Sep 16, 2018 8:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 633
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Hamilton was 3 seconds ahead of Vettel so by the time Vettel was clear of Perez, Hamilton would have been clear of him a lap earlier. So that represents 0% chance to win. As soon as Hamilton had gap to the midfield he was into his pit window. This is exactly what happened in Spa 2017, Hamilton pitting the very first opportunity he had the delta to the slow cars.

If Hamilton had a 4 second lead then maybe he had the luxury of allowing Vettel to pit first, but basically if Vettel waited any longer he had no chance to win because not only would Hamilton have clean air by the next lap (if he pitted) Vettel was also falling behind Hamilton at 0.5 per lap.

If they wanted a nailed on P2 then they should have pitted as soon as they had gap to Perez yes.

At the very least their choice of tyre was somewhat bizarre. It gave Vettel no chance to actually push as he had to conserve them until the end


I think the tyre choice shows they were going for a monster out lap to try a very bold undercut. It was aggressive. They needed to find 2.5 seconds whilst passing a car. At some tracks that is very much doable. Bottas did it to Vettel from 3.1 back in China. I think what they underestimated was that Hamiltons Hypers were practically brand new with hardly any wear - just 5 SC laps and 10 laps driving ridiculously slow, 3+ seconds off the pace.

I think the hope was, monster out lap, get track position and hold on. Its said you need to be over 2 seconds per lap quicker to pass here so track position is everything.


Last edited by Johnson on Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 8:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2583
Location: England
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Hamilton was 3 seconds ahead of Vettel so by the time Vettel was clear of Perez, Hamilton would have been clear of him a lap earlier. So that represents 0% chance to win. As soon as Hamilton had gap to the midfield he was into his pit window. This is exactly what happened in Spa 2017, Hamilton pitting the very first opportunity he had the delta to the slow cars.

If Hamilton had a 4 second lead then maybe he had the luxury of allowing Vettel to pit first, but basically if Vettel waited any longer he had no chance to win because not only would Hamilton have clean air by the next lap (if he pitted) Vettel was also falling behind Hamilton at 0.5 per lap.

If they wanted a nailed on P2 then they should have pitted as soon as they had gap to Perez yes.

At the very least their choice of tyre was somewhat bizarre. It gave Vettel no chance to actually push as he had to conserve them until the end


Yeah, I can get onboard with attempting the undercut up to a point.

As it was, they must have known it was going to be close with Perez so thats potential traffic problems right off the bat. To then compound that by putting him on a tyre that he did no long run testing on in practice, nailing him into a 2 stopper or a very slow 1 stopper given that they had no idea what the tyre life was going to be (what happened) giving Mercedes ample time to then tailor their strategy to suit (it was always going to be the soft tyre for Hamilton but the point stands). They probably thought the worst case scenario was coming out behind Perez but still being in 2nd on a potentially faster tyre than Max to start with to clear Perez and build a gap, but even then Max was always going to come back at him on the softs. Verstappen getting the jump on him was the icing on a particularly rancid cake of a strategy call.

He was pretty lucky Bottas was so utterly dire and unable to get past Hulkenberg, he had another 2 cars behind him who would have been all over Vettel on those tyres at the end.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 3 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 633
Flash> I think Vettel had no experience on the S tyre actually. Ferrari brought one set of S, so he couldn't have done any practise on those? He also missed his long runs in FP2 by hitting the wall.

Ferrari bringing just 1 set of softs was another error, the same as Monza although those decisions would have been made months ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 8:52 pm
Posts: 2955
Flash2k11 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Hamilton was 3 seconds ahead of Vettel so by the time Vettel was clear of Perez, Hamilton would have been clear of him a lap earlier. So that represents 0% chance to win. As soon as Hamilton had gap to the midfield he was into his pit window. This is exactly what happened in Spa 2017, Hamilton pitting the very first opportunity he had the delta to the slow cars.

If Hamilton had a 4 second lead then maybe he had the luxury of allowing Vettel to pit first, but basically if Vettel waited any longer he had no chance to win because not only would Hamilton have clean air by the next lap (if he pitted) Vettel was also falling behind Hamilton at 0.5 per lap.

If they wanted a nailed on P2 then they should have pitted as soon as they had gap to Perez yes.

At the very least their choice of tyre was somewhat bizarre. It gave Vettel no chance to actually push as he had to conserve them until the end


Yeah, I can get onboard with attempting the undercut up to a point.

As it was, they must have known it was going to be close with Perez so thats potential traffic problems right off the bat. To then compound that by putting him on a tyre that he did no long run testing on in practice, nailing him into a 2 stopper or a very slow 1 stopper given that they had no idea what the tyre life was going to be (what happened) giving Mercedes ample time to then tailor their strategy to suit (it was always going to be the soft tyre for Hamilton but the point stands). They probably thought the worst case scenario was coming out behind Perez but still being in 2nd on a potentially faster tyre than Max to start with to clear Perez and build a gap, but even then Max was always going to come back at him on the softs. Verstappen getting the jump on him was the icing on a particularly rancid cake of a strategy call.

He was pretty lucky Bottas was so utterly dire and unable to get past Hulkenberg, he had another 2 cars behind him who would have been all over Vettel on those tyres at the end.


Kimi would have never got past Vettel :lol:

_________________
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 Sep 16, 2018 9:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2583
Location: England
F1_Ernie wrote:
Flash2k11 wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Hamilton was 3 seconds ahead of Vettel so by the time Vettel was clear of Perez, Hamilton would have been clear of him a lap earlier. So that represents 0% chance to win. As soon as Hamilton had gap to the midfield he was into his pit window. This is exactly what happened in Spa 2017, Hamilton pitting the very first opportunity he had the delta to the slow cars.

If Hamilton had a 4 second lead then maybe he had the luxury of allowing Vettel to pit first, but basically if Vettel waited any longer he had no chance to win because not only would Hamilton have clean air by the next lap (if he pitted) Vettel was also falling behind Hamilton at 0.5 per lap.

If they wanted a nailed on P2 then they should have pitted as soon as they had gap to Perez yes.

At the very least their choice of tyre was somewhat bizarre. It gave Vettel no chance to actually push as he had to conserve them until the end


Yeah, I can get onboard with attempting the undercut up to a point.

As it was, they must have known it was going to be close with Perez so thats potential traffic problems right off the bat. To then compound that by putting him on a tyre that he did no long run testing on in practice, nailing him into a 2 stopper or a very slow 1 stopper given that they had no idea what the tyre life was going to be (what happened) giving Mercedes ample time to then tailor their strategy to suit (it was always going to be the soft tyre for Hamilton but the point stands). They probably thought the worst case scenario was coming out behind Perez but still being in 2nd on a potentially faster tyre than Max to start with to clear Perez and build a gap, but even then Max was always going to come back at him on the softs. Verstappen getting the jump on him was the icing on a particularly rancid cake of a strategy call.

He was pretty lucky Bottas was so utterly dire and unable to get past Hulkenberg, he had another 2 cars behind him who would have been all over Vettel on those tyres at the end.


Kimi would have never got past Vettel :lol:


Vettel was going that slowly by the end I dont think Kimi would have been able to keep himself behind lol

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 3 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Johnson wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Hamilton was 3 seconds ahead of Vettel so by the time Vettel was clear of Perez, Hamilton would have been clear of him a lap earlier. So that represents 0% chance to win. As soon as Hamilton had gap to the midfield he was into his pit window. This is exactly what happened in Spa 2017, Hamilton pitting the very first opportunity he had the delta to the slow cars.

If Hamilton had a 4 second lead then maybe he had the luxury of allowing Vettel to pit first, but basically if Vettel waited any longer he had no chance to win because not only would Hamilton have clean air by the next lap (if he pitted) Vettel was also falling behind Hamilton at 0.5 per lap.

If they wanted a nailed on P2 then they should have pitted as soon as they had gap to Perez yes.

At the very least their choice of tyre was somewhat bizarre. It gave Vettel no chance to actually push as he had to conserve them until the end


I think the tyre choice shows they were going for a monster out lap to try a very bold undercut. It was aggressive. They needed to find 2.5 seconds whilst passing a car. At some tracks that is very much doable. Bottas did it to Vettel from 3.1 back in China. I think what they underestimated was that Hamiltons Hypers were practically brand new with hardly any wear - just 5 SC laps and 10 laps driving ridiculously slow, 3+ seconds off the pace.

I think the hope was, monster out lap, get track position and hold on. Its said you need to be over 2 seconds per lap quicker to pass here so track position is everything.

His outlap wasn't anything to write home about and he went slower on brand new Hypers than Max was doing on tyres that were 16 laps older. They appeared to seriously underestimate how fast they'd be.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2583
Location: England
Johnson wrote:
Flash> I think Vettel had no experience on the S tyre actually. Ferrari brought one set of S, so he couldn't have done any practise on those? He also missed his long runs in FP2 by hitting the wall.

Ferrari bringing just 1 set of softs was another error, the same as Monza although those decisions would have been made months ago.


Yeah no running on the Soft at all, which was an error made before this weekend. You know the Soft was going to last till the end though, with the US it really wasn't a given, and it looked like for a long time he had no track position and was staring down the barrel of a 2nd stop. I understand why they wanted to go agressive on the strategy, but the planets that needed to line up to produce a good outcome for that gamble never looked remotely on. Hamilton was too fast and too far in front, Perez was in the way and Max was going to be an issue later on even if he came out in 2nd.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 3 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Johnson wrote:
Flash> I think Vettel had no experience on the S tyre actually. Ferrari brought one set of S, so he couldn't have done any practise on those? He also missed his long runs in FP2 by hitting the wall.

Ferrari bringing just 1 set of softs was another error, the same as Monza although those decisions would have been made months ago.

I'm sure I read a post-qualifying report where Hamilton said Merc made a mistake bringing too many Softs and they had to use a set in Q1 just to get rid of them. Can't win sometimes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2583
Location: England
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Flash> I think Vettel had no experience on the S tyre actually. Ferrari brought one set of S, so he couldn't have done any practise on those? He also missed his long runs in FP2 by hitting the wall.

Ferrari bringing just 1 set of softs was another error, the same as Monza although those decisions would have been made months ago.

I'm sure I read a post-qualifying report where Hamilton said Merc made a mistake bringing too many Softs and they had to use a set in Q1 just to get rid of them. Can't win sometimes


Possibly, though im sure you would rather have too many of a set of tyres than not enough. It's hard to be too harsh about the tyre choices because of how far in advance they are made, but I think choosing 1 set of a particular tyre has some fairly obvious ramifications if you actually end up needing to use them in the race.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2018: {Rookie Year}
Current positon: 1st | 3 Podiums | 1 Win


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 633
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Hamilton was 3 seconds ahead of Vettel so by the time Vettel was clear of Perez, Hamilton would have been clear of him a lap earlier. So that represents 0% chance to win. As soon as Hamilton had gap to the midfield he was into his pit window. This is exactly what happened in Spa 2017, Hamilton pitting the very first opportunity he had the delta to the slow cars.

If Hamilton had a 4 second lead then maybe he had the luxury of allowing Vettel to pit first, but basically if Vettel waited any longer he had no chance to win because not only would Hamilton have clean air by the next lap (if he pitted) Vettel was also falling behind Hamilton at 0.5 per lap.

If they wanted a nailed on P2 then they should have pitted as soon as they had gap to Perez yes.

At the very least their choice of tyre was somewhat bizarre. It gave Vettel no chance to actually push as he had to conserve them until the end


I think the tyre choice shows they were going for a monster out lap to try a very bold undercut. It was aggressive. They needed to find 2.5 seconds whilst passing a car. At some tracks that is very much doable. Bottas did it to Vettel from 3.1 back in China. I think what they underestimated was that Hamiltons Hypers were practically brand new with hardly any wear - just 5 SC laps and 10 laps driving ridiculously slow, 3+ seconds off the pace.

I think the hope was, monster out lap, get track position and hold on. Its said you need to be over 2 seconds per lap quicker to pass here so track position is everything.

His outlap wasn't anything to write home about and he went slower on brand new Hypers than Max was doing on tyres that were 16 laps older. They appeared to seriously underestimate how fast they'd be.



Yes a very odd race indeed at the start. It reminded me of Monaco 2013 when Mercedes ran a pace 3-4 seconds slow than they could and Vettel complained about the Silver buses infront of them.

How slow Hamilton ran that train is evident by the gap to Perez. The first car of the midfield.

At the end of lap 11 (after 7 racing laps) it was 9.8 seconds on which most of that was natural field spread. Hamilton then pushed. By lap 14 it was 22 seconds. By lap 18, they had both made a stop and Perez was 39 seconds behind.

He put 30 seconds on him in 7 laps and in the 7 laps before that put 4 seconds on him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 16, 2018 9:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 1:19 pm
Posts: 241
It really feels like championship over barring a reliability nightmare for Hamilton. Mercedes appear to have ironed out a lot of weaknesses.

I know Russia is coming up and low deg circuits haven't been Hamilton's friend in recent times. But 40 points feels too much of a gap and I expect him to be strong in Suzuka.


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: Alienturnedhuman, Siao7 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