The Official Japanese GP 2019 **Spoilers**
Discussion
Big Nanas said:
I saw a twitter video (in car) of Leclerc holding on to his broken mirror whilst driving one handed around 130R! Impressive
https://twitter.com/LarryNak/status/11833607402262...mattikake said:
Man merc's strategy calls bug the hell out of me. That was either brainless or an engineered win for bottas.
Is it a requirement for a merc race strategist to be a gunshot to the head survivor or something?
I think they are just laser focused on securing WCC as soon as possible, it was engineered to do just that. They've always been that way and I doubt either driver is surprised or upset.Is it a requirement for a merc race strategist to be a gunshot to the head survivor or something?
And in a way, I think as a by-product, nice for bottas to take another win. He's certainly played a vital role for the team.
FourWheelDrift said:
Big Nanas said:
I saw a twitter video (in car) of Leclerc holding on to his broken mirror whilst driving one handed around 130R! Impressive
https://twitter.com/LarryNak/status/11833607402262...https://twitter.com/burgrid7/status/11833591484838...
FourWheelDrift said:
Big Nanas said:
I saw a twitter video (in car) of Leclerc holding on to his broken mirror whilst driving one handed around 130R! Impressive
https://twitter.com/LarryNak/status/11833607402262...It's also sad that 130R used to be one of the most feared corners in F1, but now it's easy flat, one-handed, while not even giving it full attention.
Deesee said:
There's something a bit Thunderbirds about that.mattikake said:
Man merc's strategy calls bug the hell out of me. That was either brainless or an engineered win for bottas.
Is it a requirement for a merc race strategist to be a gunshot to the head survivor or something?
And why shouldn't they let Bottas keep the win that he's earned? He took the lead before the first corner and had built a decent lead, so it would be pretty sIs it a requirement for a merc race strategist to be a gunshot to the head survivor or something?
tty of his own team then to engineer a strategy that gave his teammate the win ahead of him, especially as they are now guaranteed both WCC and WDC regardless of which relative order they finish on the track.TheDeuce said:
I think they are just laser focused on securing WCC as soon as possible, it was engineered to do just that. They've always been that way and I doubt either driver is surprised or upset.
And in a way, I think as a by-product, nice for bottas to take another win. He's certainly played a vital role for the team.
WCC was in the bag but nice to get it at Japan I suppose. LH may lose mathematically but if you look at the bookie odds that's about as sure as it can be as well. So that leaves Bottas getting a second (for the first time) in the WCC which, after today, is also pretty much assured. And in a way, I think as a by-product, nice for bottas to take another win. He's certainly played a vital role for the team.
thegreenhell said:
mattikake said:
Man merc's strategy calls bug the hell out of me. That was either brainless or an engineered win for bottas.
Is it a requirement for a merc race strategist to be a gunshot to the head survivor or something?
And why shouldn't they let Bottas keep the win that he's earned? He took the lead before the first corner and had built a decent lead, so it would be pretty sIs it a requirement for a merc race strategist to be a gunshot to the head survivor or something?
tty of his own team then to engineer a strategy that gave his teammate the win ahead of him, especially as they are now guaranteed both WCC and WDC regardless of which relative order they finish on the track.And their strategy not only deliberately favoured Hamilton's only title rival, it also lost him more points by letting Vettel take second place. In addition it cost the team points as they lost out on a 1-2. Just completely indefensible.
jm doc said:
There is a clue in the name. It's called racing.
And their strategy not only deliberately favoured Hamilton's only title rival, it also lost him more points by letting Vettel take second place. In addition it cost the team points as they lost out on a 1-2. Just completely indefensible.
It's easily defensible. It's just some Hamilton fanatics seem upset that he wasn't gifted a win that he didn't deserve on the day.And their strategy not only deliberately favoured Hamilton's only title rival, it also lost him more points by letting Vettel take second place. In addition it cost the team points as they lost out on a 1-2. Just completely indefensible.
jm doc said:
There is a clue in the name. It's called racing.
And their strategy not only deliberately favoured Hamilton's only title rival, it also lost him more points by letting Vettel take second place. In addition it cost the team points as they lost out on a 1-2. Just completely indefensible.
They have access to a lot more data than we have and also now 6 WCC's, i'm going with Mercedes knowing they needed to pit Hamilton to secure a podium. What if he'd not pitted and there was a safety car? And their strategy not only deliberately favoured Hamilton's only title rival, it also lost him more points by letting Vettel take second place. In addition it cost the team points as they lost out on a 1-2. Just completely indefensible.
jm doc said:
There is a clue in the name. It's called racing.
And their strategy not only deliberately favoured Hamilton's only title rival, it also lost him more points by letting Vettel take second place. In addition it cost the team points as they lost out on a 1-2. Just completely indefensible.
If Hamultin was quick enough he'd have been in front of Bottas and got that strategy insteadAnd their strategy not only deliberately favoured Hamilton's only title rival, it also lost him more points by letting Vettel take second place. In addition it cost the team points as they lost out on a 1-2. Just completely indefensible.
thegreenhell said:
It's easily defensible. It's just some Hamilton fanatics seem upset that he wasn't gifted a win that he didn't deserve on the day.
It's nothing to do with Hamilton, they keep making these bizarre calls for both drivers. Last time they did this strange "stay out even though you are losing several seconds per lap" (Singapore) it messed up the race for both Bottas and Hamilton. Other times they've got it wrong (Britain, Monaco) and been bailed out by Hamilton making the tyres last when they shouldn't have. Then there is when they go into paralysis mode during VSC/SC situations (Germany). Quite possibly there have been some other races I've just forgotten about. Because Mercedes have won the WCC it's easy to overlook the sheer quantity of dodgy strategy calls, but when you look back over the year there's been an awful lot of bad calls.
thegreenhell said:
It's easily defensible. It's just some Hamilton fanatics seem upset that he wasn't gifted a win that he didn't deserve on the day.
I do sometimes get the impression people think there's something wrong if he doesn't win. I have no problem conceding he's as good as any of the other greats, but luckily Mercedes don't engineer ways for him to always be on top in some effort to make him seem like a god, Schumacher style.Bottas was fastest all weekend and won the race.. what more is there to say? Meanwhile the team focused on what was best for the whole team, which is reasonable enough.
I'm sure if pushed they could demonstrate the maths behind their decision and that they had a higher probability of securing the minimum points to take WCC than the probability of taking a small gamble for even more points. Just because we can't appreciate all of their decisions doesn't mean they weren't in the end wise decisions - that's my view at least.
They're clearly the F1 experts after all!
TheDeuce said:
I have no problem conceding he's as good as any of the other greats, but luckily Mercedes don't engineer ways for him to always be on top in some effort to make him seem like a god, Schumacher style.
This is my biggest issue with some of Schumacher's and Vettel's WDCs. But I guess that is the Ferrari way. thegreenhell said:
jm doc said:
There is a clue in the name. It's called racing.
And their strategy not only deliberately favoured Hamilton's only title rival, it also lost him more points by letting Vettel take second place. In addition it cost the team points as they lost out on a 1-2. Just completely indefensible.
It's easily defensible. It's just some Hamilton fanatics seem upset that he wasn't gifted a win that he didn't deserve on the day.And their strategy not only deliberately favoured Hamilton's only title rival, it also lost him more points by letting Vettel take second place. In addition it cost the team points as they lost out on a 1-2. Just completely indefensible.
In theory the 1 stop was meant to be best, but Mercedes correctly edged their bets given the lack of running.
Edited by 37chevy on Sunday 13th October 14:38
My take on the Bottas / Hamilton call is that they had to put Bottas on a two stop to shadow Seb. That opened the opportunity for Lewis on a one stop and they also needed to put him on a one stop to cover off other eventualities (such as a Bottas technical issue).
By pure good luck / the way it played out, the covering of Seb gifted Lewis the advantage over Bottas. Strategy calls have gone both ways over the years so that’s just one of those things and its quite reasonable to swap the cars and restore Bottas lead..... what was simply an error as to pit Lewis and gift track position back to Seb when we know how difficult overtaking a car with similar performance is. Should have just swapped cars on track.... Is it possible they think this looked better? They think people will believe it was in both drivers best interest?
James can justify it all he wants but that was a simple tactical error that turned a team 1 - 2 into a team 1 - 3.... An error, they happen.
Getting the mediums to the end would be no problem. Lewis brought them in slowly, hadn’t pushed at all until his in lap he managed Q2 plus 22 laps with high fuel on the Softs... 31 on the mediums, on half fuel was never a major challenge, there was no threat of ever finishing below 3rd. It was an error to bring him in..... They should have swapped the cars on track.
By pure good luck / the way it played out, the covering of Seb gifted Lewis the advantage over Bottas. Strategy calls have gone both ways over the years so that’s just one of those things and its quite reasonable to swap the cars and restore Bottas lead..... what was simply an error as to pit Lewis and gift track position back to Seb when we know how difficult overtaking a car with similar performance is. Should have just swapped cars on track.... Is it possible they think this looked better? They think people will believe it was in both drivers best interest?
James can justify it all he wants but that was a simple tactical error that turned a team 1 - 2 into a team 1 - 3.... An error, they happen.
Getting the mediums to the end would be no problem. Lewis brought them in slowly, hadn’t pushed at all until his in lap he managed Q2 plus 22 laps with high fuel on the Softs... 31 on the mediums, on half fuel was never a major challenge, there was no threat of ever finishing below 3rd. It was an error to bring him in..... They should have swapped the cars on track.
Hungrymc said:
My take on the Bottas / Hamilton call is that they had to put Bottas on a two stop to shadow Seb. That opened the opportunity for Lewis on a one stop and they also needed to put him on a one stop to cover off other eventualities (such as a Bottas technical issue).
By pure good luck / the way it played out, the covering of Seb gifted Lewis the advantage over Bottas. Strategy calls have gone both ways over the years so that’s just one of those things and its quite reasonable to swap the cars and restore Bottas lead..... what was simply an error as to pit Lewis and gift track position back to Seb when we know how difficult overtaking a car with similar performance is. Should have just swapped cars on track.... Is it possible they think this looked better? They think people will believe it was in both drivers best interest?
James can justify it all he wants but that was a simple tactical error that turned a team 1 - 2 into a team 1 - 3.... An error, they happen.
Getting the mediums to the end would be no problem. Lewis brought them in slowly, hadn’t pushed at all until his in lap he managed Q2 plus 22 laps with high fuel on the Softs... 31 on the mediums, on half fuel was never a major challenge, there was no threat of ever finishing below 3rd. It was an error to bring him in..... They should have swapped the cars on track.
The error would have been to risk both drivers once Bottas cruised up to Hamilton. The pair could easily fall off the track squabbling got position. If they ordered Bottas to hold position and Hamilton's tyres had gone off, Vettel would close right up and both Hamilton and Bottas would be exposed to a Ferrari that is far faster on the straights.By pure good luck / the way it played out, the covering of Seb gifted Lewis the advantage over Bottas. Strategy calls have gone both ways over the years so that’s just one of those things and its quite reasonable to swap the cars and restore Bottas lead..... what was simply an error as to pit Lewis and gift track position back to Seb when we know how difficult overtaking a car with similar performance is. Should have just swapped cars on track.... Is it possible they think this looked better? They think people will believe it was in both drivers best interest?
James can justify it all he wants but that was a simple tactical error that turned a team 1 - 2 into a team 1 - 3.... An error, they happen.
Getting the mediums to the end would be no problem. Lewis brought them in slowly, hadn’t pushed at all until his in lap he managed Q2 plus 22 laps with high fuel on the Softs... 31 on the mediums, on half fuel was never a major challenge, there was no threat of ever finishing below 3rd. It was an error to bring him in..... They should have swapped the cars on track.
In the end they picked a conservative strategy to bring Hamilton in, preventing either confrontation with Bottas or Bottas being pushed back towards Vettel if Hamilton slowed. The fresh tyres allowed them to go for fastest lap and the team stood to secure the WCC.
Yeah it screwed Hamilton's chance of winning (I think he could have kept ahead of Vettel and Bottas to the end), however Mercedes are there to win the team prize and despite what people think that's where their concentration lay today. One of their drivers is going to win the WDC and they don't care which one.
Not buying it, they’ve engineered the cars to swap position on track previously. Why not now?
There is risk in a pit stop, risk in chasing a fastest lap..... And gifting Ferrari a 2nd place.
I’m not complaining about Lewis being pulled in from a race winning position (that he had been very fortunate to be in). But not for a second do I believe they couldn’t arrange the swap and take 1st and 2nd.... which of course wraps up the WCC.
At best this is the old “over thinking” it. And at worst it’s clumsy management, did they tell Lewis they were putting him to keep the cars apart on track? I think they told him the mediums wouldn’t get to the end..... it’s a bad idea to mislead the drivers when you want them to follow your instructions without question.
There is risk in a pit stop, risk in chasing a fastest lap..... And gifting Ferrari a 2nd place.
I’m not complaining about Lewis being pulled in from a race winning position (that he had been very fortunate to be in). But not for a second do I believe they couldn’t arrange the swap and take 1st and 2nd.... which of course wraps up the WCC.
At best this is the old “over thinking” it. And at worst it’s clumsy management, did they tell Lewis they were putting him to keep the cars apart on track? I think they told him the mediums wouldn’t get to the end..... it’s a bad idea to mislead the drivers when you want them to follow your instructions without question.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff