Sebastian Vettel
Discussion
Was there not a question about whether CLC compromised SV’s final qualy lap or something? I’m sure I read that somewhere?
Notwithstanding that, the people down on Vettel seem to think that once you get a car out front that it basically drives itself, which is a shame.
CLC suffered from the undercut yesterday but there was no malice involved. The logic of it - covering off Hamilton - was explained in the commentary.
Notwithstanding that, the people down on Vettel seem to think that once you get a car out front that it basically drives itself, which is a shame.
CLC suffered from the undercut yesterday but there was no malice involved. The logic of it - covering off Hamilton - was explained in the commentary.
Had a little laugh at first at the "sebs back" then realised, if qualifying behind his junior team mate and a slower car then being gifted first place at a track you can't pass so no-one even bothers to drive quick represents seb at his peak, then me and all his fans and apologists are actually in agreement.
According to the BBC 5 live podcast, Leclerc was kept in the dark about what Vettel was up to until it was too late. If true, the comparison between Vettel's outlap and Leclerc's laptime is completely irrelevant as Leclerc was driving to a delta at the team's instruction.
It worked out well for Ferrari and for Vettel but on this occasion they treated Leclerc as a number two driver. They didn't give him the opportunity to fight Vettel on pace.
It worked out well for Ferrari and for Vettel but on this occasion they treated Leclerc as a number two driver. They didn't give him the opportunity to fight Vettel on pace.
HustleRussell said:
According to the BBC 5 live podcast, Leclerc was kept in the dark about what Vettel was up to until it was too late. If true, the comparison between Vettel's outlap and Leclerc's laptime is completely irrelevant as Leclerc was driving to a delta at the team's instruction.
It worked out well for Ferrari and for Vettel but on this occasion they treated Leclerc as a number two driver. They didn't give him the opportunity to fight Vettel on pace.
That was maybe a quick reminder to Leclerc that when you drive for Ferrari, you do as your told, he didn't do the job he was asked to do during Monza qualifying session and destroy Vettel chance to have a go at pole position. Luckily for him he won Monza but Leclerc has been reminded that he is not bigger than Ferrari.It worked out well for Ferrari and for Vettel but on this occasion they treated Leclerc as a number two driver. They didn't give him the opportunity to fight Vettel on pace.
E34-3.2 said:
That was maybe a quick reminder to Leclerc that when you drive for Ferrari, you do as your told, he didn't do the job he was asked to do during Monza qualifying session and destroy Vettel chance to have a go at pole position. Luckily for him he won Monza but Leclerc has been reminded that he is not bigger than Ferrari.
That thought occurred to me, in a more basic form, when CLC came out behind Vettel in what obviously was a planned move. CLC was getting a bit uppity. They slapped him down. Job done. I'm not sure they would have done it if it had meant a 1-3.'Hi, Charles. Here's a bit of reality' sort of thing.
E34-3.2 said:
HustleRussell said:
According to the BBC 5 live podcast, Leclerc was kept in the dark about what Vettel was up to until it was too late. If true, the comparison between Vettel's outlap and Leclerc's laptime is completely irrelevant as Leclerc was driving to a delta at the team's instruction.
It worked out well for Ferrari and for Vettel but on this occasion they treated Leclerc as a number two driver. They didn't give him the opportunity to fight Vettel on pace.
That was maybe a quick reminder to Leclerc that when you drive for Ferrari, you do as your told, he didn't do the job he was asked to do during Monza qualifying session and destroy Vettel chance to have a go at pole position. Luckily for him he won Monza but Leclerc has been reminded that he is not bigger than Ferrari.It worked out well for Ferrari and for Vettel but on this occasion they treated Leclerc as a number two driver. They didn't give him the opportunity to fight Vettel on pace.
Derek Smith said:
E34-3.2 said:
That was maybe a quick reminder to Leclerc that when you drive for Ferrari, you do as your told, he didn't do the job he was asked to do during Monza qualifying session and destroy Vettel chance to have a go at pole position. Luckily for him he won Monza but Leclerc has been reminded that he is not bigger than Ferrari.
That thought occurred to me, in a more basic form, when CLC came out behind Vettel in what obviously was a planned move. CLC was getting a bit uppity. They slapped him down. Job done. I'm not sure they would have done it if it had meant a 1-3.'Hi, Charles. Here's a bit of reality' sort of thing.
Teddy Lop said:
Had a little laugh at first at the "sebs back" then realised, if qualifying behind his junior team mate and a slower car then being gifted first place at a track you can't pass so no-one even bothers to drive quick represents seb at his peak, then me and all his fans and apologists are actually in agreement.
"being gifted first place at a track you can't pass"You must of watched a different race as I saw loads of overtaking. There wasn't much action at the front but the mid-pack was full of overtakes, proving that it isn't impossible at all.
Gad-Westy said:
Derek Smith said:
E34-3.2 said:
That was maybe a quick reminder to Leclerc that when you drive for Ferrari, you do as your told, he didn't do the job he was asked to do during Monza qualifying session and destroy Vettel chance to have a go at pole position. Luckily for him he won Monza but Leclerc has been reminded that he is not bigger than Ferrari.
That thought occurred to me, in a more basic form, when CLC came out behind Vettel in what obviously was a planned move. CLC was getting a bit uppity. They slapped him down. Job done. I'm not sure they would have done it if it had meant a 1-3.'Hi, Charles. Here's a bit of reality' sort of thing.
They don't care which of them wins and which finishes second, as long as they don't take eachother out. They gave LeClerc the freedom to go for the win, once the team had optimised its result for the race (the 1-2).
EDIT: Or perhaps the call for a faster engine mode was to go for fastest lap point, or to make sure he wasn't threatened for 2nd place?
The undercut wasn't obvious. If it had been then any of the top 6 could/would have pitted too.
Ferrari pitted Vettel to cover other teams options not as a winning strategy. They got lucky with it.
Leclerc held up the field significantly in his first stint trying to save his tyres. In hindsight he should have used his pace/clear air advantage to get a decent lead.
I feel dirty for defending Vettel but I really can't see how Ferrari engineered that victory. He turned a defensive (no.2 driver) strategy into a winner.
Ferrari pitted Vettel to cover other teams options not as a winning strategy. They got lucky with it.
Leclerc held up the field significantly in his first stint trying to save his tyres. In hindsight he should have used his pace/clear air advantage to get a decent lead.
I feel dirty for defending Vettel but I really can't see how Ferrari engineered that victory. He turned a defensive (no.2 driver) strategy into a winner.
Paul671 said:
The undercut wasn't obvious. If it had been then any of the top 6 could/would have pitted too.
Ferrari pitted Vettel to cover other teams options not as a winning strategy. They got lucky with it.
Yep, this. On the C4 program they were interviewing Binotto, who basically said 'it was a simple case of pitting Seb to cover off Verstappen, then pitting Charles 2nd as you do not pit first when you are the leader in Singapore. End of story'.Ferrari pitted Vettel to cover other teams options not as a winning strategy. They got lucky with it.
I really don't think they had some master plan here, it was reactive to other drivers. Add a bit of luck and some good pace by Seb when needed and you get this result.
Nico Rosberg's review was interesting. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnCUWPTPch0
Basically Vettel had a monster outlap and CLC didn't have a great in lap.
Basically Vettel had a monster outlap and CLC didn't have a great in lap.
Well, I got that one completely wrong, didn't I? ajprice said:
37chevy said:
Probably knew, like most of us without blinkers that he was a bit lucky, and his teammate was faster...
Yes and yes, Leclerc did get shafted again. No argument there. But still, he crossed the line first and there was not a hint of a happy reaction.[/quoteCLC on the radio 'we will talk about what happened with the team after the race'.
Sorry mate, you've won a couple of races. Don't get cocky.
Sa Calobra said:
ajprice said:
37chevy said:
Probably knew, like most of us without blinkers that he was a bit lucky, and his teammate was faster...
Yes and yes, Leclerc did get shafted again. No argument there. But still, he crossed the line first and there was not a hint of a happy reaction.[/quoteCLC on the radio 'we will talk about what happened with the team after the race'.
Sorry mate, you've won a couple of races. Don't get cocky.
He didn’t come across cocky at all, in fact I thought in the post race interviews he acted with maturity.
37chevy said:
Sa Calobra said:
ajprice said:
37chevy said:
Probably knew, like most of us without blinkers that he was a bit lucky, and his teammate was faster...
Yes and yes, Leclerc did get shafted again. No argument there. But still, he crossed the line first and there was not a hint of a happy reaction.[/quoteCLC on the radio 'we will talk about what happened with the team after the race'.
Sorry mate, you've won a couple of races. Don't get cocky.
He didn’t come across cocky at all, in fact I thought in the post race interviews he acted with maturity.
“Who is Number 1?”
“That would be telling. Ahahahahaha!”
To which I would say, “don’t worry son.
He’s a 4x WDC and rank has its privileges.
You are the New Messiah. You have years of No1 status in front of you”.
37chevy said:
Sa Calobra said:
ajprice said:
Probably knew, like most of us without blinkers that he was a bit lucky, and his teammate was faster...
Yes and yes, Leclerc did get shafted again. No argument there. But still, he crossed the line first and there was not a hint of a happy reaction.[/quoteCLC on the radio 'we will talk about what happened with the team after the race'.
Sorry mate, you've won a couple of races. Don't get cocky.
He didn’t come across cocky at all, in fact I thought in the post race interviews he acted with maturity.
king tanty and call everyone a I dont know what is.And yup he handled himself very professionally afterwards, but as I've said several times, leclerc is going to be one of those drivers that really knows and uses his politics, you can see little glimpses of it in him. I may well end up hating him!
Paul671 said:
The undercut wasn't obvious. If it had been then any of the top 6 could/would have pitted too.
Ferrari pitted Vettel to cover other teams options not as a winning strategy. They got lucky with it.
Leclerc held up the field significantly in his first stint trying to save his tyres. In hindsight he should have used his pace/clear air advantage to get a decent lead.
I feel dirty for defending Vettel but I really can't see how Ferrari engineered that victory. He turned a defensive (no.2 driver) strategy into a winner.
Try telling that to lewis!Ferrari pitted Vettel to cover other teams options not as a winning strategy. They got lucky with it.
Leclerc held up the field significantly in his first stint trying to save his tyres. In hindsight he should have used his pace/clear air advantage to get a decent lead.
I feel dirty for defending Vettel but I really can't see how Ferrari engineered that victory. He turned a defensive (no.2 driver) strategy into a winner.
Seriously though do these teams need some racers on their strategy teams, someone with some instinct to complement the white coated people with their flip charts and spreadsheets?
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff