|
Eric Mc
67,256 posts
134 months
|
I would have thought that you pay attention to all clues that come your way - no matter what the source is. Obviously, you might put more credence on some sources compared to others - but the information is taken on board none the less.
Or am I being ignorant of the inner machinations of top rank racing teams?
|
|
|
Scuffers
10,417 posts
143 months
|
Eric,
do you honestly think that any team is ever going to give away that kind of info if there was any validity to it in either an interview or press conference at a race weekend?
Miss-information is as much a tool as any other... People like Steve are more than used to this, it;s the same in jsut about every level of Motorsport (and other sports too I would suggest)
|
|
|
Eric Mc
67,256 posts
134 months
|
Bluff and double bluff - it's all part of the game. I wasn't suggesting that they had to believe what other teams say. But they most certainly pay attention to comments other team members make. What they decide to do with that information is up to them.
|
|
|
rdjohn
Original Poster
869 posts
64 months
|
Ahonen said: Eric Mc said: So you pay no attention to what the other teams might do? You just run your own race blindly ignoring other teams' stated intentions? Of course you plan for other teams. As I said above, you try to work out what they're up to also. But what I was largely getting at was the fact that you don't tend to base your strategy on what a driver says in a press conference - although rdjohn has now brought me up to speed, for which I'm grateful. Do you not concede that, even with multiples of your years of race experience, and possible better resources, both Alonso's and Vettel's race engineers looked pretty dumb with the outcome of the race on Sunday? To quote EricM the main "known" about these tyres is that once they hit-the-wall they will be useless if an attacking role is required in the latter part of the race. A two-stop was the only safe option for those starting the race on options. Alonso was presumably lightly fuelled and so could not increase his pace, had he tried to cover Hamilton’s two-stop.
|
|
|
Bedazzled
4,061 posts
90 months
|
rdjohn said: Do you not concede that, even with multiples of your years of race experience, and possible better resources, both Alonso's and Vettel's race engineers looked pretty dumb with the outcome of the race on Sunday?
To quote EricM the main "known" about these tyres is that once they hit-the-wall they will be useless if an attacking role is required in the latter part of the race. A two-stop was the only safe option for those starting the race on options. Alonso was presumably lightly fuelled and so could not increase his pace, had he tried to cover Hamilton’s two-stop. It's all too easy with hindsight; but there are several scenarios which would have vindicated their strategy, such as a safety car period (highly probable at Canada), or Lewis making a mistake (he was pushing hard on an unforgiving track). This time it didn't work out, in the past it has (Monaco 2011). I was delighted to see them try it, in an attempt to win, rather than 'doing a Sauber' and choosing the safe option - the infamous "we need this position" was the low-point of the season for me.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
John D.
9,554 posts
78 months
|
Only got round to watching the Canadian GP on Sat. The limited lifespan of the tyres made for a fascinating race in my book. Watching Alonso slithering around trying to make the end and Perez seemingly able to go so far and quick. Yeah Alonso/Ferrari looked pretty stupid in the end but it could have been a great outflanking of Hamilton - certainly had the team going for a while!
Great stuff.
|
|
|
rdjohn
Original Poster
869 posts
64 months
|
|
|
zac510
4,962 posts
75 months
|
You are definitely not random.. I saw that article on Autosport and thought 'I bet there's a post about this from rdjohn in GM' and there it was 
|
|
|
SRT77
509 posts
87 months
|
rdjohn said: I expect Schuey would like that too. Will my Merc breakdown or will it actually finish a race.
|
|
