planetf1.com

It is currently Fri Jul 19, 2019 8:51 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 4:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 10:02 am
Posts: 1811
Location: Far side of Koozebane
It's so difficult to get a gauge on how good the RB is simply because the performance gap between Verstappen & Ghasly is so vast.

Is Verstappen really driving the wheels off it or is he simply putting it where it deserves to be & Ghasl'ys just performing very poorly?

_________________
Races since last non RB, Merc, Ferrari winner (After Britain- 19) - 128 & counting.( Last win, Lotus, 17/3/13)

Non RB, Merc, Ferrari podiums won in Hybrid era - 330 trophies available, 23 won

2017 WCC CPTTC - Jalopy Racing (Herb & Me)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 4:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1894
Jezza13 wrote:
It's so difficult to get a gauge on how good the RB is simply because the performance gap between Verstappen & Ghasly is so vast.

Is Verstappen really driving the wheels off it or is he simply putting it where it deserves to be & Ghasl'ys just performing very poorly?


Easy he's putting it where it belongs.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 5:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 3176
Location: UK
Jezza13 wrote:
It's so difficult to get a gauge on how good the RB is simply because the performance gap between Verstappen & Ghasly is so vast.

Is Verstappen really driving the wheels off it or is he simply putting it where it deserves to be & Ghasl'ys just performing very poorly?

A bit of both I'd say. No matter how poor you think Gasly is, no one at this level is that far off the pace when they have the best car at their disposal. Max was just really on it; for me it's reminiscent of what Hamilton used to do in the McLaren, in that the car could be 2nd or 3rd fastest but so long as it was close enough he could make up the different to snatch some seemingly unlikely wins.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 5:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Posts: 949
Location: India
The car is designed for Max. He seems to have all the grip in the world where as poor Gasly is struggling. Some one in commentary was saying he got blister on his tyres on both soft and hard tyres. There is no way he is that bad and getting lapped. Alonso also used to have such advantage where he is able to attack but his team mate used to struggle. They are not going to make a new car for him. He will be dropped next year if he or the team can't find a fix for his problems.

_________________
Sir Stirling Moss "Quite frankly, Kimi Raikkonen is the fastest driver in the world"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 5:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6559
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Mercedes for some reason lacked pace through out the weekend. The commentator was saying their car was overheating. So may be they were driving at 90% or something in the race. Ferrari and RBR had some updates. RBR in particular seems to have got that magic grip again this race. On hard tyres Max was amazing.

The Mercedes has always had issues managing heat when the temperatures get extremely high. This has been their Achilles heel for years now; going back even before the V6 hybrid era.

The Red Bull still handles these types of conditions best. it's not that they had the outright single lap speed advantage but they had the ability to push hard during the race without suffering nearly as much as Ferrari or especially Mercedes. I think you have to give Max credit for sustaining that amazing pace but you must also credit the car for allowing him to push so hard on such a hot day without overheating. From Hamilton and Bottas's comments, it seems the Mercs were struggling literally from lap 4 or 5 with overheating.

The Ferrari had the outright pace here and it was really tire management that cost them the race relative to Max.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 6:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:04 pm
Posts: 786
Any particular reason as to why RB car is a much better racing car(not the fastest) than the rest? They are able to follow others without losing too much and their braking is just out of this world.

What is their secret?? (Look at how RIC is struggling to replicate his RB tactics)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 7:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:57 am
Posts: 705
Location: Scotland/Lancashire
Pullrod wrote:
Any particular reason as to why RB car is a much better racing car(not the fastest) than the rest? They are able to follow others without losing too much and their braking is just out of this world.

What is their secret?? (Look at how RIC is struggling to replicate his RB tactics)


Tbf Austria is quite a technically simple track, a bit like Interlagos.

I suspect that being a bit old school, without the complexes and radial bends that test the cars technical limits has a lot to do with it.

_________________
I'm competing this season, if anyone is interested in how I am getting on.

Car #36 - Blog


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 30, 2019 7:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:04 pm
Posts: 786
Badgeronimous wrote:
Pullrod wrote:
Any particular reason as to why RB car is a much better racing car(not the fastest) than the rest? They are able to follow others without losing too much and their braking is just out of this world.

What is their secret?? (Look at how RIC is struggling to replicate his RB tactics)


Tbf Austria is quite a technically simple track, a bit like Interlagos.

I suspect that being a bit old school, without the complexes and radial bends that test the cars technical limits has a lot to do with it.


It is something I have noticed with RIC too Last year and the year before. Sometimes they are able to overtake the Ferrari and Mercedes like they were not even there.

Even today GAS was able to run the car ahead very close.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 8:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2192
Well for once Merc laid an egg.

I'd suggest the order was RBR, Ferrari, Mercedes. Verstappen would have likely won by a landslide had he not had that terrible start and I don't think the qualifying difference between Ferrari and RBR was enough to overcome the sheer advantage RBR had in the race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 8:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7012
Location: Michigan, USA
Invade wrote:
Well for once Merc laid an egg.

I'd suggest the order was RBR, Ferrari, Mercedes. Verstappen would have likely won by a landslide had he not had that terrible start and I don't think the qualifying difference between Ferrari and RBR was enough to overcome the sheer advantage RBR had in the race.

I'd say Ferrari, RBR, Mercedes. I think Ferrari had the fastest car, and shot themselves in the foot on race day with the soft tyre start.

_________________
PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 15 podiums): 3rd in 2016
TOP THREE CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): Champions in 2015 & 2018 | 2nd in 2017
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 USA & P-F1 Champion | #2 in the world in 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 8:37 am 
Online

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15266
Exediron wrote:
Invade wrote:
Well for once Merc laid an egg.

I'd suggest the order was RBR, Ferrari, Mercedes. Verstappen would have likely won by a landslide had he not had that terrible start and I don't think the qualifying difference between Ferrari and RBR was enough to overcome the sheer advantage RBR had in the race.

I'd say Ferrari, RBR, Mercedes. I think Ferrari had the fastest car, and shot themselves in the foot on race day with the soft tyre start.


Ferrari had an edge with the car for me. Red Bull had the better strategy and perhaps the quicker driver.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 8:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:33 pm
Posts: 2192
Exediron wrote:
Invade wrote:
Well for once Merc laid an egg.

I'd suggest the order was RBR, Ferrari, Mercedes. Verstappen would have likely won by a landslide had he not had that terrible start and I don't think the qualifying difference between Ferrari and RBR was enough to overcome the sheer advantage RBR had in the race.

I'd say Ferrari, RBR, Mercedes. I think Ferrari had the fastest car, and shot themselves in the foot on race day with the soft tyre start.



Fair and good argument.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 1015
Ferrari had the fastest car, Leclerc had a slower race pace than Vettel. If Ferrari were 1-2 during this race with Vettel in P2 we may have seen a Vettel is faster than you.. Seb seemed to have a couple of tenths on Leclerc for race pace, which means he would have held on against Verstappen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 31524
It's hard to go with the notion of Ferrari being the quickest car given what Verstappen did, likewise it's hard to go with Red Bull having the quickest car given what Gasly did so I call it close to even with Mercedes obviously 3rd quickest, so:-

1. Mercedes 183
2. Ferrari 159
3. Red Bull 139

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 21st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2013 4:42 pm
Posts: 2118
I think Red Bull was the car to have, despite Gasly's showing.

Verstappen's fastest was 2 tenths quicker than Vettel's, despite Vettel pitting for new softs.

_________________
Top Three Team Champions 2017 (With Jezza13)
Group Pick 'Em 2016 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6559
Herb wrote:
I think Red Bull was the car to have, despite Gasly's showing.

Verstappen's fastest was 2 tenths quicker than Vettel's, despite Vettel pitting for new softs.

Yeah, I think that, in the race, the Red Bull was better than the Ferrari. Over one lap, the Ferrari was king but they did struggle with the tires during the race. Only Red Bull and Mclaren seemed to be able to go the whole race without tire issues.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 31524
sandman1347 wrote:
Herb wrote:
I think Red Bull was the car to have, despite Gasly's showing.

Verstappen's fastest was 2 tenths quicker than Vettel's, despite Vettel pitting for new softs.

Yeah, I think that, in the race, the Red Bull was better than the Ferrari. Over one lap, the Ferrari was king but they did struggle with the tires during the race. Only Red Bull and Mclaren seemed to be able to go the whole race without tire issues.

Leclerc never used new tyres and pitted quite early for hard tyres, I don't believe his strategy was maximised, also it tends to be a case of how much credit you give to the Red Bull and how much credit to Verstappen?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 21st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 4:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6559
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Herb wrote:
I think Red Bull was the car to have, despite Gasly's showing.

Verstappen's fastest was 2 tenths quicker than Vettel's, despite Vettel pitting for new softs.

Yeah, I think that, in the race, the Red Bull was better than the Ferrari. Over one lap, the Ferrari was king but they did struggle with the tires during the race. Only Red Bull and Mclaren seemed to be able to go the whole race without tire issues.

Leclerc never used new tyres and pitted quite early for hard tyres, I don't believe his strategy was maximised, also it tends to be a case of how much credit you give to the Red Bull and how much credit to Verstappen?

No not really. It takes the car and the driver to pull off a win like that. I agree that Ferrari did not optimize their strategy but Max was able to push very hard throughout the entire race. The Mercs were lifting and coasting 400 meters from the corner and both Ferrari drivers struggled a bit on tires as well. It was the ability to push hard while not burning through the tires that separated the Red Bull IMO.

Even Gasly was stuck behind Kimi and on his gearbox for almost 30 laps without suffering with his tires. If he were a better driver, a better result would have been there for the taking. As I mentioned earlier; Gasly's Q2 time would have netted him P5 in Q3 and he would have started P4 after Hamilton's penalty. The problem was that he actually went slower in Q3. That basically determined his race because Gasly is one of the worst overtakers out there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 4:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 31524
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Herb wrote:
I think Red Bull was the car to have, despite Gasly's showing.

Verstappen's fastest was 2 tenths quicker than Vettel's, despite Vettel pitting for new softs.

Yeah, I think that, in the race, the Red Bull was better than the Ferrari. Over one lap, the Ferrari was king but they did struggle with the tires during the race. Only Red Bull and Mclaren seemed to be able to go the whole race without tire issues.

Leclerc never used new tyres and pitted quite early for hard tyres, I don't believe his strategy was maximised, also it tends to be a case of how much credit you give to the Red Bull and how much credit to Verstappen?

No not really. It takes the car and the driver to pull off a win like that. I agree that Ferrari did not optimize their strategy but Max was able to push very hard throughout the entire race. The Mercs were lifting and coasting 400 meters from the corner and both Ferrari drivers struggled a bit on tires as well. It was the ability to push hard while not burning through the tires that separated the Red Bull IMO.

Even Gasly was stuck behind Kimi and on his gearbox for almost 30 laps without suffering with his tires. If he were a better driver, a better result would have been there for the taking. As I mentioned earlier; Gasly's Q2 time would have netted him P5 in Q3 and he would have started P4 after Hamilton's penalty. The problem was that he actually went slower in Q3. That basically determined his race because Gasly is one of the worst overtakers out there.

Gasly's fastest lap in Q2 was barely any quicker that that of a Haas, McLaren and Alfa Romeo and he may of not have out qualified Sainz who didn't take part in qualifying and was clearly the fastest driver in the race outside of the top 5?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 21st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 5:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2510
The 2019 Mercedes is less dominant than the 2014-2016 cars, but it’s still the clear best car on the grid.

The 2019 Mercedes is similar to the 2011 and 2013 Red Bull cars.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 5:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 8:02 am
Posts: 949
Location: India
Max was obviously the fastest driver even after the horrible start. Also setting the fastest lap. RBR had the best car for the race.

Vettel spent 47.4secs on pits compared to 21.8 by Charles and 21.1 by Max.
https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2019/races/1008/austria/pit-stop-summary.html
He finished some 17secs behind Charles and 19.6secs behind Max. Considering he spent more laps in traffic especially in the start where as Charles usually had clear track. Vettel was clearly the faster of the two driver. Had he not have problems on Saturday I think Vettel had a better chance of win.

_________________
Sir Stirling Moss "Quite frankly, Kimi Raikkonen is the fastest driver in the world"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6559
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Herb wrote:
I think Red Bull was the car to have, despite Gasly's showing.

Verstappen's fastest was 2 tenths quicker than Vettel's, despite Vettel pitting for new softs.

Yeah, I think that, in the race, the Red Bull was better than the Ferrari. Over one lap, the Ferrari was king but they did struggle with the tires during the race. Only Red Bull and Mclaren seemed to be able to go the whole race without tire issues.

Leclerc never used new tyres and pitted quite early for hard tyres, I don't believe his strategy was maximised, also it tends to be a case of how much credit you give to the Red Bull and how much credit to Verstappen?

No not really. It takes the car and the driver to pull off a win like that. I agree that Ferrari did not optimize their strategy but Max was able to push very hard throughout the entire race. The Mercs were lifting and coasting 400 meters from the corner and both Ferrari drivers struggled a bit on tires as well. It was the ability to push hard while not burning through the tires that separated the Red Bull IMO.

Even Gasly was stuck behind Kimi and on his gearbox for almost 30 laps without suffering with his tires. If he were a better driver, a better result would have been there for the taking. As I mentioned earlier; Gasly's Q2 time would have netted him P5 in Q3 and he would have started P4 after Hamilton's penalty. The problem was that he actually went slower in Q3. That basically determined his race because Gasly is one of the worst overtakers out there.

Gasly's fastest lap in Q2 was barely any quicker that that of a Haas, McLaren and Alfa Romeo and he may of not have out qualified Sainz who didn't take part in qualifying and was clearly the fastest driver in the race outside of the top 5?

Actually Gasly was nearly half a second quicker than Magnussen in Q2. The difference is that Gasly didn't improve his time in Q3 (pretty much unheard of). Because Gasly is performing so poorly we're going to suggest that the Red Bull is a slow car? Is Gasly supposed to be an established star now or something?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7837
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Max was obviously the fastest driver even after the horrible start. Also setting the fastest lap. RBR had the best car for the race.

Vettel spent 47.4secs on pits compared to 21.8 by Charles and 21.1 by Max.
https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2019/races/1008/austria/pit-stop-summary.html
He finished some 17secs behind Charles and 19.6secs behind Max. Considering he spent more laps in traffic especially in the start where as Charles usually had clear track. Vettel was clearly the faster of the two driver. Had he not have problems on Saturday I think Vettel had a better chance of win.

I doubt he would have finished ahead of Leclerc starting in second unless he got a good run in the first few corners (or team orders) but yeah Vettels pace looked better in the race overall IMO. Although it's worth noting Vettel had a different strategy, how much of his overall pace was down to that is an unknown.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 8:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6559
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Max was obviously the fastest driver even after the horrible start. Also setting the fastest lap. RBR had the best car for the race.

Vettel spent 47.4secs on pits compared to 21.8 by Charles and 21.1 by Max.
https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2019/races/1008/austria/pit-stop-summary.html
He finished some 17secs behind Charles and 19.6secs behind Max. Considering he spent more laps in traffic especially in the start where as Charles usually had clear track. Vettel was clearly the faster of the two driver. Had he not have problems on Saturday I think Vettel had a better chance of win.

I doubt he would have finished ahead of Leclerc starting in second unless he got a good run in the first few corners (or team orders) but yeah Vettels pace looked better in the race overall IMO. Although it's worth noting Vettel had a different strategy, how much of his overall pace was down to that is an unknown.

Probably a lot of that is down to strategy. He was pushing harder and he had fresher, softer tires for most of the race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 8:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7837
sandman1347 wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Max was obviously the fastest driver even after the horrible start. Also setting the fastest lap. RBR had the best car for the race.

Vettel spent 47.4secs on pits compared to 21.8 by Charles and 21.1 by Max.
https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2019/races/1008/austria/pit-stop-summary.html
He finished some 17secs behind Charles and 19.6secs behind Max. Considering he spent more laps in traffic especially in the start where as Charles usually had clear track. Vettel was clearly the faster of the two driver. Had he not have problems on Saturday I think Vettel had a better chance of win.

I doubt he would have finished ahead of Leclerc starting in second unless he got a good run in the first few corners (or team orders) but yeah Vettels pace looked better in the race overall IMO. Although it's worth noting Vettel had a different strategy, how much of his overall pace was down to that is an unknown.

Probably a lot of that is down to strategy. He was pushing harder and he had fresher, softer tires for most of the race.

Well yes obviously but the offset to that is he lost more time in the pits by pitting twice. It comes down to whether the 1 stop or 2 stop was quickest overall and since there aren't many 2 stoppers it's hard to judge.

I'm just not convinced Leclerc had great pace in the race, I think the difference between Red Bull & Ferrari in race pace was largely attributable to a brilliant Verstappen performance and a not brilliant Leclerc performance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 10:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 31524
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Yeah, I think that, in the race, the Red Bull was better than the Ferrari. Over one lap, the Ferrari was king but they did struggle with the tires during the race. Only Red Bull and Mclaren seemed to be able to go the whole race without tire issues.

Leclerc never used new tyres and pitted quite early for hard tyres, I don't believe his strategy was maximised, also it tends to be a case of how much credit you give to the Red Bull and how much credit to Verstappen?

No not really. It takes the car and the driver to pull off a win like that. I agree that Ferrari did not optimize their strategy but Max was able to push very hard throughout the entire race. The Mercs were lifting and coasting 400 meters from the corner and both Ferrari drivers struggled a bit on tires as well. It was the ability to push hard while not burning through the tires that separated the Red Bull IMO.

Even Gasly was stuck behind Kimi and on his gearbox for almost 30 laps without suffering with his tires. If he were a better driver, a better result would have been there for the taking. As I mentioned earlier; Gasly's Q2 time would have netted him P5 in Q3 and he would have started P4 after Hamilton's penalty. The problem was that he actually went slower in Q3. That basically determined his race because Gasly is one of the worst overtakers out there.

Gasly's fastest lap in Q2 was barely any quicker that that of a Haas, McLaren and Alfa Romeo and he may of not have out qualified Sainz who didn't take part in qualifying and was clearly the fastest driver in the race outside of the top 5?

Actually Gasly was nearly half a second quicker than Magnussen in Q2. The difference is that Gasly didn't improve his time in Q3 (pretty much unheard of). Because Gasly is performing so poorly we're going to suggest that the Red Bull is a slow car? Is Gasly supposed to be an established star now or something?

Both Alfa drivers went slower in Q3 as well so hardly unheard of, Norris only went a tenth quicker, KMag was the only one with a big improvement and like I said the fastest driver outside the top 5, Sainz, didn't take part in qualifying, Gasly's Q2 time is probably about the best he could do?

I don't understand the post about Gasly needing to be some kind of established star in order to inflate Verstappen's performance, being a bit less than average would suffice but we are pushing towards Gasly being about the worse driver on the grid?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 21st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 8:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7474
Mercedes-Benz wrote:
Max was obviously the fastest driver even after the horrible start. Also setting the fastest lap. RBR had the best car for the race.

Vettel spent 47.4secs on pits compared to 21.8 by Charles and 21.1 by Max.
https://www.formula1.com/en/results.html/2019/races/1008/austria/pit-stop-summary.html
He finished some 17secs behind Charles and 19.6secs behind Max. Considering he spent more laps in traffic especially in the start where as Charles usually had clear track. Vettel was clearly the faster of the two driver. Had he not have problems on Saturday I think Vettel had a better chance of win.

That's all true, but it ultimately means nothing. Saturday compromised his race, it does not matter if he was the fastest Ferrari, he had to start from further back and also had a knee jerk botched pit stop to top it off!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 3:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6559
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
No not really. It takes the car and the driver to pull off a win like that. I agree that Ferrari did not optimize their strategy but Max was able to push very hard throughout the entire race. The Mercs were lifting and coasting 400 meters from the corner and both Ferrari drivers struggled a bit on tires as well. It was the ability to push hard while not burning through the tires that separated the Red Bull IMO.

Even Gasly was stuck behind Kimi and on his gearbox for almost 30 laps without suffering with his tires. If he were a better driver, a better result would have been there for the taking. As I mentioned earlier; Gasly's Q2 time would have netted him P5 in Q3 and he would have started P4 after Hamilton's penalty. The problem was that he actually went slower in Q3. That basically determined his race because Gasly is one of the worst overtakers out there.

Gasly's fastest lap in Q2 was barely any quicker that that of a Haas, McLaren and Alfa Romeo and he may of not have out qualified Sainz who didn't take part in qualifying and was clearly the fastest driver in the race outside of the top 5?

Actually Gasly was nearly half a second quicker than Magnussen in Q2. The difference is that Gasly didn't improve his time in Q3 (pretty much unheard of). Because Gasly is performing so poorly we're going to suggest that the Red Bull is a slow car? Is Gasly supposed to be an established star now or something?

Both Alfa drivers went slower in Q3 as well so hardly unheard of, Norris only went a tenth quicker, KMag was the only one with a big improvement and like I said the fastest driver outside the top 5, Sainz, didn't take part in qualifying, Gasly's Q2 time is probably about the best he could do?

I don't understand the post about Gasly needing to be some kind of established star in order to inflate Verstappen's performance, being a bit less than average would suffice but we are pushing towards Gasly being about the worse driver on the grid?

I'd say he is undoubtedly among the bottom 5. On current performance he is only possibly better than Kubica in 2019 IMO. Let's say that his Q2 time was the best he could do. It was still well off of his teammate but strong enough to qualify P5. So he didn't need to be better than he was in Q2 because after Hamilton's penalty; he would have started the race right behind his teammate with that time.

There is no real need to inflate Max's performance. It was an objectively excellent performance. Suggesting that Gasly's race is a true representation of what the car was capable of that day is a joke IMO. Gasly's race pace was dictated by Raikkonen most of the day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 31524
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
No not really. It takes the car and the driver to pull off a win like that. I agree that Ferrari did not optimize their strategy but Max was able to push very hard throughout the entire race. The Mercs were lifting and coasting 400 meters from the corner and both Ferrari drivers struggled a bit on tires as well. It was the ability to push hard while not burning through the tires that separated the Red Bull IMO.

Even Gasly was stuck behind Kimi and on his gearbox for almost 30 laps without suffering with his tires. If he were a better driver, a better result would have been there for the taking. As I mentioned earlier; Gasly's Q2 time would have netted him P5 in Q3 and he would have started P4 after Hamilton's penalty. The problem was that he actually went slower in Q3. That basically determined his race because Gasly is one of the worst overtakers out there.

Gasly's fastest lap in Q2 was barely any quicker that that of a Haas, McLaren and Alfa Romeo and he may of not have out qualified Sainz who didn't take part in qualifying and was clearly the fastest driver in the race outside of the top 5?

Actually Gasly was nearly half a second quicker than Magnussen in Q2. The difference is that Gasly didn't improve his time in Q3 (pretty much unheard of). Because Gasly is performing so poorly we're going to suggest that the Red Bull is a slow car? Is Gasly supposed to be an established star now or something?

Both Alfa drivers went slower in Q3 as well so hardly unheard of, Norris only went a tenth quicker, KMag was the only one with a big improvement and like I said the fastest driver outside the top 5, Sainz, didn't take part in qualifying, Gasly's Q2 time is probably about the best he could do?

I don't understand the post about Gasly needing to be some kind of established star in order to inflate Verstappen's performance, being a bit less than average would suffice but we are pushing towards Gasly being about the worse driver on the grid?

I'd say he is undoubtedly among the bottom 5. On current performance he is only possibly better than Kubica in 2019 IMO. Let's say that his Q2 time was the best he could do. It was still well off of his teammate but strong enough to qualify P5. So he didn't need to be better than he was in Q2 because after Hamilton's penalty; he would have started the race right behind his teammate with that time.

There is no real need to inflate Max's performance. It was an objectively excellent performance. Suggesting that Gasly's race is a true representation of what the car was capable of that day is a joke IMO. Gasly's race pace was dictated by Raikkonen most of the day.

When did I suggest that Gasly's performance was the true performance of the Red Bull when I said that alongside the Ferrari it was the fastest car, faster than the Mercedes?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place
2019: Currently 21st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (8)


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: amirb, DOLOMITE, mikeyg123, SteveW 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