planetf1.com

It is currently Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:16 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

What Should Ferrari Do?
Just let them race 35%  35%  [ 12 ]
Implement strict rules of engagement 6%  6%  [ 2 ]
Back Vettel 100% 12%  12%  [ 4 ]
Back Charles 100% 3%  3%  [ 1 ]
Keep trying to make the right call in the moment as they have been 38%  38%  [ 13 ]
Other 6%  6%  [ 2 ]
Total votes : 34
Author Message
 Post subject: What Should Ferrari Do?
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 9:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6977
We have seen Ferrari make a mess of most of their races this year. Ironically, the very thing they criticized Maurizio Arrivabene for most (indecision with regards to team orders/strategy) has been exacerbated under Mattia Binotto. Race after race, their quicker driver loses massive amounts of time stuck behind the slower one. It's not even race after race at this point; it's stint after stint. They spent half of the race in Barcelona holding each other up. It's embarrassing.

What do you think they should do moving forward?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 9:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33185
I think they made the right decisions but were just too slow in making those decisions, not sure about putting Leclerc on the hards that did look a bit like a sacrifice move?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 9:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:17 pm
Posts: 284
Just let them race.

The championships are out of reach, no need to think of the team first anymore.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 9:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7951
pokerman wrote:
I think they made the right decisions but were just too slow in making those decisions, not sure about putting Leclerc on the hards that did look a bit like a sacrifice move?

Looked like they split the strategy with Leclerc on a 1 stop and Vettel on a 2 stop.

But yeah I agree they did make the right calls in the end, moving Vettel over, moving Leclerc over, splitting the strategy to try make something happen. They just took too long and lost time tripping over themselves needlessly.


Last edited by Black_Flag_11 on Sun May 12, 2019 9:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 9:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 12:45 pm
Posts: 1022
pokerman wrote:
I think they made the right decisions but were just too slow in making those decisions, not sure about putting Leclerc on the hards that did look a bit like a sacrifice move?


I don't think they put Leclerc on hards to sacrifice him. After the decision to let him pass this wouldn't make any sense at all. I think they really thought they could go for a one stop race but the strategy was binned by a safety car and tyres that didn't behave as they hoped for.

They should let them race, perhaps with clear rules when they are on different strategies.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 9:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
pokerman wrote:
I think they made the right decisions but were just too slow in making those decisions, not sure about putting Leclerc on the hards that did look a bit like a sacrifice move?

Yes I agree with this. It made perfect sense to let Leclerc by Vettel initially, just as it did to let Vettel back past Leclerc. But it took a ridiculous time to do it on both occasions. Letting them race, which seems to be the popular option here, wouldn't have made it any better and probably would have made it even worse.

Ferrari looked paralysed by indecision and that's what's hurting them. They need to be far quicker and more decisive and this is where they are floundering. Binotto doesn't yet appear to be managing things effectively and questions have to be asked about whether they made the right call in giving him this job.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 10:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6977
Altair wrote:
Just let them race.

The championships are out of reach, no need to think of the team first anymore.

There is still the battle with RBR in the constructor's to think about. I agree though that the WDC (as far as teams are concerned) and WCC have been put to bed earlier than I can ever remember. Merc are strong and both drivers are delivering. Even when Rosberg was in the car, I don't think they ever took 5 consecutive 1-2 finishes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 10:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:14 am
Posts: 1353
sandman1347 wrote:
Altair wrote:
Just let them race.

The championships are out of reach, no need to think of the team first anymore.

There is still the battle with RBR in the constructor's to think about. I agree though that the WDC (as far as teams are concerned) and WCC have been put to bed earlier than I can ever remember. Merc are strong and both drivers are delivering. Even when Rosberg was in the car, I don't think they ever took 5 consecutive 1-2 finishes.


It happened twice:

Malaysia, Bahrain, China, Spain and Monaco 2014

USA, Mexico, Brazil, Abu Dhabi 2015 and Australia 2016

Ferrari have done five consecutive 1-2 finishes twice before in 1952 and 2002. So another 1-2 in Monaco will be a record for Mercedes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 10:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6977
pokerman wrote:
I think they made the right decisions but were just too slow in making those decisions, not sure about putting Leclerc on the hards that did look a bit like a sacrifice move?

In that case; they didn't make the right decisions, did they? For example; Vettel flat-spotted his tires on lap one and Charles was quicker than him the entire first stint yet they didn't let Leclerc by until lap 13. Every lap that they allowed Vettel to hold him up was a decision. Pitting Leclerc when they did was also an extremely dubious call as they sent him onto the track right in Vettel's way. Obviously, having switched Vettel to the two-stop, they should not have pit Charles until Vettel was clear of where he would come out on track. The way they did things just held Vettel up (especially since they put Charles on hard tires). They then took about 5 laps to let Vettel by (again, each one of those laps is a decision).

This is exactly what Arrivabene was criticized for. Races like Germany where he took too long to let Vettel by on Kimi. The problem has gotten worse. They have held each other up multiple times in multiple races. It just goes to show that having two top-class drivers is NOT the best way to win championships. Always better to have one be clearly faster than the other so they don't trip over each other.


Last edited by sandman1347 on Sun May 12, 2019 11:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 11:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 11:51 am
Posts: 4796
sandman1347 wrote:
It just goes to show that having two top-class drivers is NOT the best way to win championships. Always better to have one be clearly faster than the other so they don't trip over each other.

Completely agree.

Because of two strong drivers Williams lost in 1981 and 1986. Mclaren and possibly Renault lost in 1982.
Brabham in 80's got two WDC's just because of having one stronger and one weaker driver. However if you have a dominant car, it's not important do you have one or two dominant drivers.

_________________
The end is near


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 11:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 5:47 pm
Posts: 3408
I voted 'let them race' but having started typing out a response, I sort of want to change that.

Yes, right now it looks like they're not going to be able to fight Mercedes for either title. But things change in F1. I mean in Bahrain it sort of looked like all that pre-season promise was actually there and that Melbourne had been a mirage. The points gap to Mercedes is huge but there are so many points still available that it isn't insurmountable, not yet. So for now I do think they need to keep trying to prioritise one driver, at least for the next five/six races while they try and catch/get ahead of Mercedes. Because if they do manage to turn things around and they keep letting the drivers take points off each other, it could actually end up meaning something at the end of the year, particularly if they were to get to a point where they're the team to beat. Considering they've already said they're prioritising Seb, I think that has to be what they do. Then, if in five/six races they're still slower than Mercedes, then you just let the pair race for the rest of the year.

FWIW I don't see them catching Mercedes this year, which is why I originally went with letting the two drivers race. But at this early stage in the season it's too early to write it all off, no matter how bleak things may appear.

_________________
Pick 10 | 1st x3, 2nd x3, 3rd x8
2019: 11th | 2018: 5th | 2017: 6th | 2016: 8th | 2015: 2nd | 2014: 15th | 2013: 17th | 2012: 11th


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 11:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7445
Location: Michigan, USA
I think they should make the decision that helps the team at the moment -- they just shouldn't take five laps to do it. That's pretty slow.

_________________
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: Sun May 12, 2019 11:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1882
Fact that it took at least 3 laps for both sides of the garage to figure out the strategy of the other side is a level of incompetence you wouldn't even see from you local karting team being run by 16 year olds.

Binotto just sat there clueless every time the camera showed. Compare that to Toto when things are on a knife-edge. Binotto showed less concern that I was. Make the freaking swaap, I was yelling at the screen.

I am at a loss for words what was going on.

I cannot recall another instance of such a clueless, hapless, useless team principal. Within one lap of Leclerc catching up to Vettel, he should've been on top of things.

Unreal. Totally unreal.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 12, 2019 11:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 7445
Location: Michigan, USA
Serious question: if Ferrari outsourced their strategy to a random group of Motorsport Manager players, how much better would the result be?

_________________
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 May 13, 2019 12:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 1545
Location: UK
Ferrari are in transition in relation to their drivers, letting them race will mean they slow each other up and, as stated above let Red Bull in.
Vettel has to realise he is at the end of his tenure and Leclerc has to realise he has to comply with his team orders. They need to shake up the chain of command in my view. They should appoint a race manager, an ex driver, Vettel would be perfect if he wasn't racing. The race manager would make the calls Arrivabene and Binotto are fumbling with, I also think Vettel could direct the cars development as well as an ex driver.

Doesn't solve the immediate problem but this season is gone for Ferrari despite the fact they are saying they will never give up. They need to plan for the future, if Mercedes get the hang of the new rules Ferrari could be second or even third team for another 5 years.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 12:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1882
Option or Prime wrote:
Ferrari are in transition in relation to their drivers, letting them race will mean they slow each other up and, as stated above let Red Bull in.
Vettel has to realise he is at the end of his tenure and Leclerc has to realise he has to comply with his team orders. They need to shake up the chain of command in my view. They should appoint a race manager, an ex driver, Vettel would be perfect if he wasn't racing. The race manager would make the calls Arrivabene and Binotto are fumbling with, I also think Vettel could direct the cars development as well as an ex driver.

Doesn't solve the immediate problem but this season is gone for Ferrari despite the fact they are saying they will never give up. They need to plan for the future, if Mercedes get the hang of the new rules Ferrari could be second or even third team for another 5 years.


That position is called the chief strategist. Who is Ferrari's CS anyway?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 12:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:39 pm
Posts: 3617
Ultimately, there is no right call at the moment that will deliver either championship - unless there is a form upheaval the championships will be Mercedes's regardless of how well Ferrari execute their race weekend.

With that reality, then they should optimise for best two car result - and that means not allowing a slower car to impede a faster one between the two. That means LeClerc should have been let straight past Vettel at the start and Vettel should have been let past LeClerc after the pitstops.

Of course, this all changes if Ferrari suddenly have a car that can win races. If that happens, then they have to back and favour Vettel. The only way to reign in Mercedes is to back one driver as both Mercedes drivers are already so far ahead. As the leading Ferrari driver, and the only who has delivered on average the best this season (albeit by a narrow margin) Vettel is the more likely to deliver the WDC, however only if he has a car capable of winning.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 6:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 9:50 am
Posts: 1545
Location: UK
ReservoirDog wrote:
Option or Prime wrote:
Ferrari are in transition in relation to their drivers, letting them race will mean they slow each other up and, as stated above let Red Bull in.
Vettel has to realise he is at the end of his tenure and Leclerc has to realise he has to comply with his team orders. They need to shake up the chain of command in my view. They should appoint a race manager, an ex driver, Vettel would be perfect if he wasn't racing. The race manager would make the calls Arrivabene and Binotto are fumbling with, I also think Vettel could direct the cars development as well as an ex driver.

Doesn't solve the immediate problem but this season is gone for Ferrari despite the fact they are saying they will never give up. They need to plan for the future, if Mercedes get the hang of the new rules Ferrari could be second or even third team for another 5 years.


That position is called the chief strategist. Who is Ferrari's CS anyway?


Thanks RD, I didn't know that position it existed, if it does exist at Ferrari then why are we told its Binotto seeming to make those decisions? Is it possible he has usurped it? I would say that an ex driver is one of the few people who could empathise with the need to decide quickly on those matters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 7:37 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 7:35 pm
Posts: 198
Design a better and faster car.

Then they can worry about strategy...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 9:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10285
Location: Ireland
The season is lost, it's all over. So just let them race

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 9:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7831
Location: Belgium
FrusEldar wrote:
Design a better and faster car.

Then they can worry about strategy...
Voilà! Of course, that still leaves them time to develop a (few) decent race tactician(s) while they don't have the best car.

_________________
Use every man after his desert, and who should scape whipping? Use them after your own honour and dignity.

Maria de Villota - Jules Bianchi


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:39 pm
Posts: 342
FrusEldar wrote:
Design a better and faster car.

Then they can worry about strategy...


Amen to that!

(Plus stop pretending that it's the Mercedes car that's got them the five 1-2s. It's the Mercedes team as a whole that's done that, aided and abetted by Ferrari's incompetence)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 11:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 25158
TedStriker wrote:
FrusEldar wrote:
Design a better and faster car.

Then they can worry about strategy...


Amen to that!

(Plus stop pretending that it's the Mercedes car that's got them the five 1-2s. It's the Mercedes team as a whole that's done that, aided and abetted by Ferrari's incompetence)
I doubt anyone is suggesting that the teamm isn't involved with creating the car? Who's pretending? Ferrari have been quite open in saying they've not been good enough. Binotto's said that the Merc is only slightly better but Mercedes have pulled things together better than Ferrari have done and both Leclrc and Vettel have admitted they haven't been good enough


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 11:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 31, 2014 12:48 pm
Posts: 38
None of the above, just make the decisions quicker.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 11:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33185
zaar wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I think they made the right decisions but were just too slow in making those decisions, not sure about putting Leclerc on the hards that did look a bit like a sacrifice move?


I don't think they put Leclerc on hards to sacrifice him. After the decision to let him pass this wouldn't make any sense at all. I think they really thought they could go for a one stop race but the strategy was binned by a safety car and tyres that didn't behave as they hoped for.

They should let them race, perhaps with clear rules when they are on different strategies.

Maybe it was more of a desperation strategy then?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 11:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2939
Paint the Mercedes red.

_________________
Where I'm going, I don't need roads


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 11:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33185
Zoue wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I think they made the right decisions but were just too slow in making those decisions, not sure about putting Leclerc on the hards that did look a bit like a sacrifice move?

Yes I agree with this. It made perfect sense to let Leclerc by Vettel initially, just as it did to let Vettel back past Leclerc. But it took a ridiculous time to do it on both occasions. Letting them race, which seems to be the popular option here, wouldn't have made it any better and probably would have made it even worse.

Ferrari looked paralysed by indecision and that's what's hurting them. They need to be far quicker and more decisive and this is where they are floundering. Binotto doesn't yet appear to be managing things effectively and questions have to be asked about whether they made the right call in giving him this job.

Yeah just letting them race would not have worked at all then the drivers just get stuck behind one another on tracks were you can't really overtake.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 11:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 11:31 am
Posts: 7787
I bet Arrivabene will be having a serious case of schadenfreude this nice morning!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 11:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 33185
sandman1347 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
I think they made the right decisions but were just too slow in making those decisions, not sure about putting Leclerc on the hards that did look a bit like a sacrifice move?

In that case; they didn't make the right decisions, did they? For example; Vettel flat-spotted his tires on lap one and Charles was quicker than him the entire first stint yet they didn't let Leclerc by until lap 13. Every lap that they allowed Vettel to hold him up was a decision. Pitting Leclerc when they did was also an extremely dubious call as they sent him onto the track right in Vettel's way. Obviously, having switched Vettel to the two-stop, they should not have pit Charles until Vettel was clear of where he would come out on track. The way they did things just held Vettel up (especially since they put Charles on hard tires). They then took about 5 laps to let Vettel by (again, each one of those laps is a decision).

This is exactly what Arrivabene was criticized for. Races like Germany where he took too long to let Vettel by on Kimi. The problem has gotten worse. They have held each other up multiple times in multiple races. It just goes to show that having two top-class drivers is NOT the best way to win championships. Always better to have one be clearly faster than the other so they don't trip over each other.

Yeah I see the point you are making I was just looking to be nice about it.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

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

2017: 9th Place
2018: 7th place

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 3:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:17 pm
Posts: 657
Location: illinois
wave the white flag.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 4:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 10285
Location: Ireland
Verstappen is now ahead of both Ferraris on the points table. That's the real eye opener for me. Mercedes being out of reach isn't even their biggest problem - they're losing to a guy in a slower car

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 13, 2019 5:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2018 4:28 pm
Posts: 67
Exediron wrote:
Serious question: if Ferrari outsourced their strategy to a random group of Motorsport Manager players, how much better would the result be?

If a third party strategy group managed their strategy for Barcelona, then I think Vettel would have at least been challenging for third. It seems Ferrari are afraid of making the wrong call, so instead they don't make any call. They set their strategy based on what's most likely to be the optimal strategy, and they don't deviate from it until it's blatantly obvious they're going down the wrong path.

Vettel made a mistake by flat-spotting and threw plan A out the window at that moment. He was begging to get onto new tires as soon as possible, and he was holding up Leclerc. They didn't change position until lap 12, and Vettel pitted six laps later. So Leclerc was stuck behind Vettel for 2/3 of the laps Vettel was on bad tires. Leclerc then pitted another six laps later and came out right in front of a charging Vettel. That switch didn't happen for another 10 laps, and Vettel pitted a second time five laps later anyway. So nearly half the time Vettel was on fresh rubber, he was stuck behind Leclerc. All the time the two are stuck behind each other, their second driver is wearing out their tires faster.

Vettel was on the back foot from turn one. To try and stick with the pre-race optimal strategy at that point is leaving the door wide open for others to take points off you. You have to be decisive and aggressive. Let Leclerc through immediately, pit Vettel within eight laps, and go from there. Eight laps would likely have been way too early for RBR to react and bring Verstappen in, so Vettel would have been less likely to race Verstappen on track (assuming he caught him, which he probably would, because Ferrari would have also kept Leclerc out of Vettel's the way). Pitting Vettel sooner also would have made a pit under safety car a lot easier to call, so he would have had some pace to attack after the safety car.

Nobody was going to challenge Mercedes, but I think being a lot more decisive very well could have earned Ferrari 3rd and 5th, maybe even 3rd and 4th.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 12:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 707
Lt. Drebin wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
It just goes to show that having two top-class drivers is NOT the best way to win championships. Always better to have one be clearly faster than the other so they don't trip over each other.

Completely agree.

Because of two strong drivers Williams lost in 1981 and 1986. Mclaren and possibly Renault lost in 1982.
Brabham in 80's got two WDC's just because of having one stronger and one weaker driver. However if you have a dominant car, it's not important do you have one or two dominant drivers.


Having two strong drivers is the best way to win the Constructors Championship though, (assuming the drivers don't crash into each other of course). For example 2007 if McLaren weren't already disqualifed from the Constructors Championship, they would have managed to win it due to having two strong drivers that avoided crashing into each other, even though Ferrari had the slightly faster car but two weaker drivers. If McLaren had Hamilton and Kovalainen instead of Hamilton and Alonso, then they probably wouldn't have scored the most team points that year.

And yes, I am aware that in 2007 they probably benefitted from Spygate etc. and that they cheated; but that season was merely used as an example to demonstrate that assuming a close top two teams championship battle that occurs legitimately without cheating, then you are more likely to win the Constructors Championship with two great drivers than one great driver and one decent or mediocre driver.

1994 is another example, with Benetton not winning the Constructors Championship because they had two poor drivers sharing the second seat alongside Michael. Had an average or better driver been in the other seat, like Johnny Herbert say, then they would have won the WCC comfortably, as they indeed proved the following year in 1995. And again I am aware of cheating being involved in 1994 too, but that is just a coincidence surely? ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 12:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 1:19 pm
Posts: 577
Don't worry, they are doing what they love and that's what really matters.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 14, 2019 1:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 8:31 am
Posts: 1610
One area I feel particularly strong about for Ferrari is their inability to act on instinct in a race and make fast calls that would potentially benefit the team. I feel like lots of people who have watched the sport for many years can make better strategic calls than the team with all the data.

Last race there were a number of options available to them, they may not of got the win but could have forced other to react differently during the race and presented themselves with opportunity.

1, As soon as Vettel reported the vibration bring him straight into the pits and put him on the hard tyre, when he comes out of the pits he will have clear track at the back of the grid to set competitive times forcing the likes of merc and rbr to re-evaluate their pit strategies based on not knowing how long the hard tyre lasts.
or
2, immediately allow leclerc to get track position if leaving seb out on flat spotted tyres.
or
3, immediately move leclerc later on when seb was on fresh boots,
or
4, Keep leclerc on the hard tyre at the safety car hopefully backing max up into seb at the restart - we all know track position is strong around here.

These were all calls I made during the race immediately when the race was happening, it takes the Ferrari teams so much time to make decisions and I cant tell if its fear of fan reaction or fear of driver reaction. If you want to win they have to put team first and be ruthless for now while on the back foot with the car.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 4:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1882
stevey wrote:
One area I feel particularly strong about for Ferrari is their inability to act on instinct in a race and make fast calls that would potentially benefit the team. I feel like lots of people who have watched the sport for many years can make better strategic calls than the team with all the data.

Last race there were a number of options available to them, they may not of got the win but could have forced other to react differently during the race and presented themselves with opportunity.

1, As soon as Vettel reported the vibration bring him straight into the pits and put him on the hard tyre, when he comes out of the pits he will have clear track at the back of the grid to set competitive times forcing the likes of merc and rbr to re-evaluate their pit strategies based on not knowing how long the hard tyre lasts.
or
2, immediately allow leclerc to get track position if leaving seb out on flat spotted tyres.
or
3, immediately move leclerc later on when seb was on fresh boots,
or
4, Keep leclerc on the hard tyre at the safety car hopefully backing max up into seb at the restart - we all know track position is strong around here.

These were all calls I made during the race immediately when the race was happening, it takes the Ferrari teams so much time to make decisions and I cant tell if its fear of fan reaction or fear of driver reaction. If you want to win they have to put team first and be ruthless for now while on the back foot with the car.


You don't even need to make these calls during the race.

You should have a table of all the possibilities and required action. All possibilities that that have a good probability of happening. Flat spot is something that can always be expected in the first lap. So they should know beforehand what they need to do. Other such "probable possibilities" include Driver X being held by Driver Y, and vice versa. What to do when a safety car comes out on lap X, for every lap. And so on. They should know what to do, and train for it. And also should be quick enough to know when NOT to follow that table based on the race situation.

Ferrari never have a plan. And can never come up with a plan mid-race. I have no idea why they even have a cheif strategist, and what he even does.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 8:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 11, 2010 5:05 pm
Posts: 2675
Location: Finland
I find it kind of funny how an organisation of this caliber that invests hundreds of millions to their F1 operation ultimately manage to constantly fail at the end point that is the management of their drivers on the track. I mean, they do everything leading up to the race with extreme precision on order to gain all the precious tenths they possibly can and then fail to make simple calls that continue to cost them valuable seconds or even tens of seconds race after race. Amazing.

I get it that you cannot always make the right strategy call but it seems like it always takes them several laps to make any call at all and by then valuable time has already been lost.

_________________
“I'm happy, but there's nothing to jump around about.”


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: No registered users 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