planetf1.com

It is currently Mon Oct 22, 2018 7:39 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

How will Kimi lose the lead?
Slow off the line 32%  32%  [ 12 ]
Precautionary gearbox change, pit lane start 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
Pit stop strategy where he loses out 32%  32%  [ 12 ]
Seb will squeeze him at the start 16%  16%  [ 6 ]
Kimi, Seb is quicker than you pit call 13%  13%  [ 5 ]
Other 8%  8%  [ 3 ]
Total votes : 38
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1583
Zoue wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Hamilton had undercut Raikkonen like how Bottas undercut Vettel at China, people would claim that Ferrari made a tactical mistake by not reacting to Mercedes getting ready for a pit stop.

The reality of the situation is that Kimi lost the race by not being good enough. Vettel finished only 7 seconds behind in the end with a damaged car.

The gap behind is horrendously misleading. Kimi had to back off massively in the final laps and frankly it's a bit of a miracle that he managed to nurse the car to the finish at all.

I agree it's possible that Vettel may have won it had the situations been reversed, but at this point we don't know for sure whether Kimi's tyre issues were self inflicted or something out of his control. If the latter, then he's not really at fault for his drive. He showed good pace and until the tyre problem had Hamilton covered.


Nothing was misleading about the gap, Kimi was horrendously poor in that race and Ferrari have themselves to blame for that.
Of course the gap was misleading. Horrendously poor is just emotions talking. In the closing laps Kimi was dropping a good second per lap on what he had been doing before, if not more. He was obviously nursing the car home as the rear tyre was in a bad way. Maybe Vettel could have done better, but there again he's a better driver overall. Horrendously poor is just ridiculous hyperbole


What is the hyperbole there? Hamilton was closer to Kimi than he was closer to Bottas when he really needed to pass Bottas not one attempt in the "so called fastest car" I think I'm being fair to him, it was a really <insert expletive> performance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:40 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Rockie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Hamilton had undercut Raikkonen like how Bottas undercut Vettel at China, people would claim that Ferrari made a tactical mistake by not reacting to Mercedes getting ready for a pit stop.

The reality of the situation is that Kimi lost the race by not being good enough. Vettel finished only 7 seconds behind in the end with a damaged car.

The gap behind is horrendously misleading. Kimi had to back off massively in the final laps and frankly it's a bit of a miracle that he managed to nurse the car to the finish at all.

I agree it's possible that Vettel may have won it had the situations been reversed, but at this point we don't know for sure whether Kimi's tyre issues were self inflicted or something out of his control. If the latter, then he's not really at fault for his drive. He showed good pace and until the tyre problem had Hamilton covered.


Nothing was misleading about the gap, Kimi was horrendously poor in that race and Ferrari have themselves to blame for that.
Of course the gap was misleading. Horrendously poor is just emotions talking. In the closing laps Kimi was dropping a good second per lap on what he had been doing before, if not more. He was obviously nursing the car home as the rear tyre was in a bad way. Maybe Vettel could have done better, but there again he's a better driver overall. Horrendously poor is just ridiculous hyperbole


What is the hyperbole there? Hamilton was closer to Kimi than he was closer to Bottas when he really needed to pass Bottas not one attempt in the "so called fastest car" I think I'm being fair to him, it was a really <insert expletive> performance.

He was already having tyre issues then, is the point. And Hamilton only managed to complete a successful pass when Kimi was really struggling.

You can argue that Kimi could maybe have been quicker, but the worst you can say about his performance was that it wasn't good enough, really. Describing is as terrible - or similar - doesn't tally at all with what we saw on Sunday. He defended very well against Hamilton up to the point where he ran out of tyre and if you look at the state of the tyre at the end of the race there's an argument to say he actually did very well to bring the thing home and not drop speed even further which would have left him vulnerable to the cars behind. The tyre was an absolute wreck

The key is whether his tyre issues were self-inflicted, IMO (which at the moment is subject to theory but nothing concrete). Without them he almost certainly would have won as he was quick enough to keep a hard-charging Hamilton at bay up to that point. That's not terrible driving


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Fiki wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Zoue wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Hamilton had undercut Raikkonen like how Bottas undercut Vettel at China, people would claim that Ferrari made a tactical mistake by not reacting to Mercedes getting ready for a pit stop.

The reality of the situation is that Kimi lost the race by not being good enough. Vettel finished only 7 seconds behind in the end with a damaged car.

The gap behind is horrendously misleading. Kimi had to back off massively in the final laps and frankly it's a bit of a miracle that he managed to nurse the car to the finish at all.

I agree it's possible that Vettel may have won it had the situations been reversed, but at this point we don't know for sure whether Kimi's tyre issues were self inflicted or something out of his control. If the latter, then he's not really at fault for his drive. He showed good pace and until the tyre problem had Hamilton covered.


Nothing was misleading about the gap, Kimi was horrendously poor in that race and Ferrari have themselves to blame for that.
Did we see the same race? I saw a Räikkönen demonstrating once again what Hamilton said sometime last year I believe; you can't follow behind another car in F1 at present, without consequences for your tyres. That he found himself in that position was due in large part to the fact that he wasn't driving for a team, while the Mercedes drivers were.
I may not like it, but I'm constantly being reminded that F1 is a team sport.

If anybody at Ferrari was horrendous, it was their number 5 driver living up to his race number...

Well the counter to that of course is that Hamilton very much followed closely behind Kimi for a good length of time in the first stint and his tyres were fine. Agreed that Mercedes' strategy helped to put the pressure on Kimi and contributed heavily to the outcome but ultimately it was his tyres going - for whatever reason - that did him in. And they started blistering before he even reached Bottas IIRC.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:06 am
Posts: 7363
Location: Belgium
Zoue wrote:
Fiki wrote:
Rockie wrote:
Nothing was misleading about the gap, Kimi was horrendously poor in that race and Ferrari have themselves to blame for that.
Did we see the same race? I saw a Räikkönen demonstrating once again what Hamilton said sometime last year I believe; you can't follow behind another car in F1 at present, without consequences for your tyres. That he found himself in that position was due in large part to the fact that he wasn't driving for a team, while the Mercedes drivers were.
I may not like it, but I'm constantly being reminded that F1 is a team sport.

If anybody at Ferrari was horrendous, it was their number 5 driver living up to his race number...

Well the counter to that of course is that Hamilton very much followed closely behind Kimi for a good length of time in the first stint and his tyres were fine. Agreed that Mercedes' strategy helped to put the pressure on Kimi and contributed heavily to the outcome but ultimately it was his tyres going - for whatever reason - that did him in. And they started blistering before he even reached Bottas IIRC.
True, Hamilton did so in the first stint, with the distinction that he wasn't following a car that was deliberately slowing him down. A second point to remember is that Hamilton was driving a different car, so a direct comparison is a bit naughty.My thinking was that perhaps Ferrari had the fastest car, but not the best balance. I hope to read a bit more about that in the specialist press.

I was also reminded of the time when drivers about to be lapped were allowed to race, and didn't have to get out of the way. What would that do to Pirelli's circus tyres?

_________________
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: Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2275
Zoue wrote:
The gap behind is horrendously misleading. Kimi had to back off massively in the final laps and frankly it's a bit of a miracle that he managed to nurse the car to the finish at all.

Vettel had huge damage to his floor, which likely cost him a lot more time over a race distance than Raikkonen's worn tyres at the end did.

Quote:
I agree it's possible that Vettel may have won it had the situations been reversed, but at this point we don't know for sure whether Kimi's tyre issues were self inflicted or something out of his control. If the latter, then he's not really at fault for his drive. He showed good pace and until the tyre problem had Hamilton covered.

According to Hamilton's post race interview, Kimi's tyre troubles were self inflicted by pushing too hard around the fast corners like Lesmo and Parabolica.

Kimi never had "Hamilton covered" at any point in the race. If you want an example of a driver who has the lead covered, watch Vettel in Belgium.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
KingVoid wrote:
Zoue wrote:
The gap behind is horrendously misleading. Kimi had to back off massively in the final laps and frankly it's a bit of a miracle that he managed to nurse the car to the finish at all.

Vettel had huge damage to his floor, which likely cost him a lot more time over a race distance than Raikkonen's worn tyres at the end did.

Quote:
I agree it's possible that Vettel may have won it had the situations been reversed, but at this point we don't know for sure whether Kimi's tyre issues were self inflicted or something out of his control. If the latter, then he's not really at fault for his drive. He showed good pace and until the tyre problem had Hamilton covered.

According to Hamilton's post race interview, Kimi's tyre troubles were self inflicted by pushing too hard around the fast corners like Lesmo and Parabolica.

Kimi never had "Hamilton covered" at any point in the race. If you want an example of a driver who has the lead covered, watch Vettel in Belgium.

Hamilton was offering an opinion, not a fact. He pushed even harder than Kimi (albeit for fewer laps) after his stop.

According to Pirelli it came down simply to the teams not having had the chance to run the tyres properly during practice and it only affected Kimi more because of circumstance.

Without the tyre issues I see no evidence that Hamilton was guaranteed a win. Kimi did have him covered as he maintained his lead after Hamilton's stop. Could Hamilton have passed him? Maybe, but he still had to do it and just having fresher tyres was no guarantee (as evidenced when Kimi was held behind Bottas).

It's all opinion, at the end of the day, but just focusing on the gap doesn't properly take into account the situation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1731
Zoue wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Hamilton had undercut Raikkonen like how Bottas undercut Vettel at China, people would claim that Ferrari made a tactical mistake by not reacting to Mercedes getting ready for a pit stop.

The reality of the situation is that Kimi lost the race by not being good enough. Vettel finished only 7 seconds behind in the end with a damaged car.

The gap behind is horrendously misleading. Kimi had to back off massively in the final laps and frankly it's a bit of a miracle that he managed to nurse the car to the finish at all.

I agree it's possible that Vettel may have won it had the situations been reversed, but at this point we don't know for sure whether Kimi's tyre issues were self inflicted or something out of his control. If the latter, then he's not really at fault for his drive. He showed good pace and until the tyre problem had Hamilton covered.


KR was needlessly pushing too hard in the early stages of stint #2. There was no benefit at all to doing that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 7:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:31 am
Posts: 2078
ReservoirDog wrote:
Zoue wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Hamilton had undercut Raikkonen like how Bottas undercut Vettel at China, people would claim that Ferrari made a tactical mistake by not reacting to Mercedes getting ready for a pit stop.

The reality of the situation is that Kimi lost the race by not being good enough. Vettel finished only 7 seconds behind in the end with a damaged car.

The gap behind is horrendously misleading. Kimi had to back off massively in the final laps and frankly it's a bit of a miracle that he managed to nurse the car to the finish at all.

I agree it's possible that Vettel may have won it had the situations been reversed, but at this point we don't know for sure whether Kimi's tyre issues were self inflicted or something out of his control. If the latter, then he's not really at fault for his drive. He showed good pace and until the tyre problem had Hamilton covered.


KR was needlessly pushing too hard in the early stages of stint #2. There was no benefit at all to doing that.


Why do you say that? If he hadn't, Bottas would not have pushed either and both would have come out behind Hamilton after his pitstop.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 7:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1731
bourbon19 wrote:
ReservoirDog wrote:
Zoue wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Hamilton had undercut Raikkonen like how Bottas undercut Vettel at China, people would claim that Ferrari made a tactical mistake by not reacting to Mercedes getting ready for a pit stop.

The reality of the situation is that Kimi lost the race by not being good enough. Vettel finished only 7 seconds behind in the end with a damaged car.

The gap behind is horrendously misleading. Kimi had to back off massively in the final laps and frankly it's a bit of a miracle that he managed to nurse the car to the finish at all.

I agree it's possible that Vettel may have won it had the situations been reversed, but at this point we don't know for sure whether Kimi's tyre issues were self inflicted or something out of his control. If the latter, then he's not really at fault for his drive. He showed good pace and until the tyre problem had Hamilton covered.


KR was needlessly pushing too hard in the early stages of stint #2. There was no benefit at all to doing that.


Why do you say that? If he hadn't, Bottas would not have pushed either and both would have come out behind Hamilton after his pitstop.


What?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2018 9:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
ReservoirDog wrote:
Zoue wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Hamilton had undercut Raikkonen like how Bottas undercut Vettel at China, people would claim that Ferrari made a tactical mistake by not reacting to Mercedes getting ready for a pit stop.

The reality of the situation is that Kimi lost the race by not being good enough. Vettel finished only 7 seconds behind in the end with a damaged car.

The gap behind is horrendously misleading. Kimi had to back off massively in the final laps and frankly it's a bit of a miracle that he managed to nurse the car to the finish at all.

I agree it's possible that Vettel may have won it had the situations been reversed, but at this point we don't know for sure whether Kimi's tyre issues were self inflicted or something out of his control. If the latter, then he's not really at fault for his drive. He showed good pace and until the tyre problem had Hamilton covered.


KR was needlessly pushing too hard in the early stages of stint #2. There was no benefit at all to doing that.

You may as well argue that there's no benefit to Vettel opening ip a gap whenever he's in front but it clearly works for him. Of course there's a benefit. The more air you have between you and the guy behind the less pressure you're under later in the race and the more you can drive without constantly looking in your mirrors.

I think all this hindsight is wonderful but people are talking as though pushing after a stop is some kind of rookie error but even Pirelli have said it was a perfect storm that caused Kimi's problems. If the tyres hadn't been so sensitive he'd probably have won the race instead of watching it slip through his fingers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 3:15 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2003 11:31 am
Posts: 1731
Zoue wrote:
ReservoirDog wrote:
Zoue wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Hamilton had undercut Raikkonen like how Bottas undercut Vettel at China, people would claim that Ferrari made a tactical mistake by not reacting to Mercedes getting ready for a pit stop.

The reality of the situation is that Kimi lost the race by not being good enough. Vettel finished only 7 seconds behind in the end with a damaged car.

The gap behind is horrendously misleading. Kimi had to back off massively in the final laps and frankly it's a bit of a miracle that he managed to nurse the car to the finish at all.

I agree it's possible that Vettel may have won it had the situations been reversed, but at this point we don't know for sure whether Kimi's tyre issues were self inflicted or something out of his control. If the latter, then he's not really at fault for his drive. He showed good pace and until the tyre problem had Hamilton covered.


KR was needlessly pushing too hard in the early stages of stint #2. There was no benefit at all to doing that.

You may as well argue that there's no benefit to Vettel opening ip a gap whenever he's in front but it clearly works for him. Of course there's a benefit. The more air you have between you and the guy behind the less pressure you're under later in the race and the more you can drive without constantly looking in your mirrors.

I think all this hindsight is wonderful but people are talking as though pushing after a stop is some kind of rookie error but even Pirelli have said it was a perfect storm that caused Kimi's problems. If the tyres hadn't been so sensitive he'd probably have won the race instead of watching it slip through his fingers


I wouldn't argue that since opening up the gap at the front is #1 reason why Vettel has won so many races. I know from empirical evidence that that's the best strategy to employ at the front (and a talent too, not everyone's as good as Vettel at it).

You can probably say that I am only criticizing KR in hindsight, and at that you'd be right. When I was watching it live, I didn't think it was stupid. But then I'd argue Ferrari and Raikkonen should've known better.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2018 7:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3415
ReservoirDog wrote:
Zoue wrote:
KingVoid wrote:
If Hamilton had undercut Raikkonen like how Bottas undercut Vettel at China, people would claim that Ferrari made a tactical mistake by not reacting to Mercedes getting ready for a pit stop.

The reality of the situation is that Kimi lost the race by not being good enough. Vettel finished only 7 seconds behind in the end with a damaged car.

The gap behind is horrendously misleading. Kimi had to back off massively in the final laps and frankly it's a bit of a miracle that he managed to nurse the car to the finish at all.

I agree it's possible that Vettel may have won it had the situations been reversed, but at this point we don't know for sure whether Kimi's tyre issues were self inflicted or something out of his control. If the latter, then he's not really at fault for his drive. He showed good pace and until the tyre problem had Hamilton covered.


KR was needlessly pushing too hard in the early stages of stint #2. There was no benefit at all to doing that.


It wasn't needless. He had to push to avoid Hamilton over cutting him. And even when he covered the over cut, he surely wanted to build the gap because he knew Hamilton was coming later in the race on fresher rubber. So it was necessary to push. His bigger problem was Bottas imo. He would have been able to breathe easier and manage things better had Bottas not been there imo.


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: JN23, Paolo_Lasardi, P.S, Vettel Fan 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