The Official Japanese GP 2019 **Spoilers**

[LaurasOtherHalf]

Derek Smith said:

Merc tactics: even after sleeping on it they've become no clearer. Really rather odd. Is it that they feared a coming together to knacker their WCC? Or was it because one of the myriad reasons doing the rounds here and on other F1 forums. Every explanation has its counters.

Very strange.

HAM was on the radio saying his mediums were shot-people seem to think he should have stayed out for the one stopper when he himself was complaining it wouldn't work-I think that's right isn't it? I know the graphic showed his mediums in good condition but he said they were shot so perhaps their optimum speed was lost?

I doubt they think they can't risk HAM & BOT racing each other, they've proved many times they can.

[anonymous-user]

He was on the radio before his first stop complaining about his tyres. Was he complaining before the second stop? Could be wrong but don't recall it.

Vettel not being penalised for the false start seems fair to me. He didn't cross the white line and wasn't moving when the lights turned and, in any case, it totally knackered his get away so was self punishing. It's the kind of common sense we all seem to have asked for from the stewards.

[London424]

First stop he did, second he was fine. I think he even said his tyres were fine.

He would easily have made the end of the race.

Seb had zero chance of catching him. Bottas would likely have caught him but doubt he could overtake.

[North West Tom]

This chequered flag rule still seems a bit silly. So, that panel is the be-all and end-all of the race ending? Any circumstances in that law?

In Singapore, when Giovinazzi was leading for a few laps, if a Sauber employee stormed the control room and pushed the button, they would have to end the race there and then, going by the rules, irrespective of the punishment of Sauber?

I'm just imagining someone stealing a referee's whistle in a football match and blowing for full time, and the ref says "well, that's that then!"

[London424]

The more I look at it the more obvious it is that Merc engineered the outcome.

https://www.racefans.net/2019/10/13/2019-japanese-...

Good site there to look at tyre stint length and also lap times.

Look at Hulkenberg, Stroll and Gasly. All did longer stints on the medium than Hamilton would have done. Their tyres fell off for the last 5 laps granted but they’re in inferior cars in the midfield.

Hamilton in the Merc in clear air would have easily done it.

Edited by London424 on Monday 14th October 10:11

[ukaskew]

North West Tom said:

This chequered flag rule still seems a bit silly. So, that panel is the be-all and end-all of the race ending? Any circumstances in that law?

In Singapore, when Giovinazzi was leading for a few laps, if a Sauber employee stormed the control room and pushed the button, they would have to end the race there and then, going by the rules, irrespective of the punishment of Sauber?

I'm just imagining someone stealing a referee's whistle in a football match and blowing for full time, and the ref says "well, that's that then!"

I was thinking about this earlier, seems crazy to have zero contingency in place. Imagine if Hamilton had passed Vettel on the last lap only to have it taken away due to an admin error. Imagine if that overtake was for the championship!

[anonymous-user]

Flags tend to rule sovereign on track.

[Frimley111R]

i felt like Merc engineered that for Bottas as a thank you for Bottas playing the obedient second driver on many occasions. It makes little difference in the big picture of things but Hamitlon definitely could have won that without the tyre stop

[Hungrymc]

LaurasOtherHalf said:

HAM was on the radio saying his mediums were shot-people seem to think he should have stayed out for the one stopper when he himself was complaining it wouldn't work-I think that's right isn't it? I know the graphic showed his mediums in good condition but he said they were shot so perhaps their optimum speed was lost?

I doubt they think they can't risk HAM & BOT racing each other, they've proved many times they can.

It was the first stint when Ham was saying the tyres were dead. Lap 21 on the radio. He also complained that they’d left him out too long In the first stint and cost too much time.

Your optimum speed point is maybe fair. But could they really have overlooked the importance of track position again? He had 18 seconds over Seb when he came in.

[robbom3]

Yeah, seems pretty clear that Lewis could have made the flag on his first set of mediums, and whilst VB may have caught him, I doubt he'd have been able to get past. I think this was a little "thank you" from Merc for VB being the great support driver that he has become. Lewis may well wrap up his 6th title in Mexico anyway, so no harm, no foul.

[vaud]

London424 said:

Hamilton in the Merc in clear air would have easily done it.

I'm not sure. I can't put my finger on it, but I just don't think Hamilton was 100% this weekend. Obvs, a 95% Hamilton is still excellent, but I think Bottas had the upper hand, marginally.

[iandc]

vaud said:

I'm not sure. I can't put my finger on it, but I just don't think Hamilton was 100% this weekend. Obvs, a 95% Hamilton is still excellent, but I think Bottas had the upper hand, marginally.

With that big a gap your mum could have won that race! No problem with Mercedes wanting to thank Bottas by gifting him the race but they are insulting our intelligence with all this crap about ensuring they won the WCC. If Ham and Bottas had come in 1-2 they would have won it anyway.

[rdjohn]

robbom3 said:

Yeah, seems pretty clear that Lewis could have made the flag on his first set of mediums, and whilst VB may have caught him, I doubt he'd have been able to get past. I think this was a little "thank you" from Merc for VB being the great support driver that he has become. Lewis may well wrap up his 6th title in Mexico anyway, so no harm, no foul.

I think that you are right about the little “Thank you”.

Toto on C4 seemed pretty dismissive that there could not have been any other race outcome.

Valteri made a fantastic start and optimised on Ferrari’s mistakes, so I don’t think that he wanted to alter that outcome by giving Lewis an advantage through strategy. There were several occasions during the ROS / HAM wars that they insisted on that philosophy.

[The Surveyor]

robbom3 said:

Yeah, seems pretty clear that Lewis could have made the flag on his first set of mediums, and whilst VB may have caught him, I doubt he'd have been able to get past. I think this was a little "thank you" from Merc for VB being the great support driver that he has become. Lewis may well wrap up his 6th title in Mexico anyway, so no harm, no foul.

I don't think he would have made it to the end on the medium tyre, he certainly wouldn't have if he had needed to put any effort into defending a position.

Hamiltons complaint was that they didn't put him onto the hard tyre for his second stint, for me that was their error.

[95 fiesta si]

Charles is starting to annoy me a little

First knocking off Verstappen, then not obeying the rules by coming in for body damage, The end plate that flow off hitting Hamilton's car could of been dangerous had it not been for the Halo. Losing a friend recently in a accident i thought he would of put safety first ?

[kambites]

95 fiesta si said:

First knocking off Verstappen, then not obeying the rules by coming in for body damage, The end plate that flow off hitting Hamilton's car could of been dangerous had it not been for the Halo. Losing a friend recently in a accident i thought he would of put safety first ?

I agree it was a very clumsy accident, but after that did he actually know what was wrong with the car? There's no way he could see the wing so it comes down to what his engineer told him. If his engineer told him to come in and he stayed out that's pretty bad, especially if the engineer told him it was a potential safety risk; if his engineer told him to stay out (which was the impression I got) then you can't really blame the driver.

Someone certainly deserves a stern talking to for what happened, but whether it's Leclerc or the Ferrari pit wall I don't know. Whoever's fault it was, the penalty seemed incredibly lenient to me.

Edited by kambites on Monday 14th October 13:16

[London424]

The Surveyor said:

robbom3 said:

Yeah, seems pretty clear that Lewis could have made the flag on his first set of mediums, and whilst VB may have caught him, I doubt he'd have been able to get past. I think this was a little "thank you" from Merc for VB being the great support driver that he has become. Lewis may well wrap up his 6th title in Mexico anyway, so no harm, no foul.

I don't think he would have made it to the end on the medium tyre, he certainly wouldn't have if he had needed to put any effort into defending a position.

Hamiltons complaint was that they didn't put him onto the hard tyre for his second stint, for me that was their error.

He’d easily have done it. Worse cars ran longer stints to do it in a midfield battle. Lewis would have been in clean air the rest of the way.

If the plan all along was to 2 stop the letting him run long was a balls up.

They can’t have it both ways.

[Derek Smith]

London424 said:

He’d easily have done it. Worse cars ran longer stints to do it in a midfield battle. Lewis would have been in clean air the rest of the way.

If the plan all along was to 2 stop the letting him run long was a balls up.

They can’t have it both ways.

Just before he came in for tyres there was that strange tyre-wear graphic. It showed 70% all round wear available. The commentators, which included Webber, said that there was no reason to call him in for new rubber. I don't remember if there'd been a radio message to say LH was to be called in again.

[jm doc]

kambites said:

95 fiesta si said:

First knocking off Verstappen, then not obeying the rules by coming in for body damage, The end plate that flow off hitting Hamilton's car could of been dangerous had it not been for the Halo. Losing a friend recently in a accident i thought he would of put safety first ?

I agree it was a very clumsy accident, but after that did he actually know what was wrong with the car? There's no way he could see the wing so it comes down to what his engineer told him. If his engineer told him to come in and he stayed out that's pretty bad, especially if the engineer told him it was a potential safety risk; if his engineer told him to stay out (which was the impression I got) then you can't really blame the driver.

Someone certainly deserves a stern talking to for what happened, but whether it's Leclerc or the Ferrari pit wall I don't know. Whoever's fault it was, the penalty seemed incredibly lenient to me.

Edited by kambites on Monday 14th October 13:16

He was instructed to come in by the race director and didn't. By doing so he damaged another car and almost caused a very serious accident, the debris missed Hamilton's helmet by 6 inches travelling at 300kph. He should have been disqualified immediately.

[StevieBee]

janesmith1950 said:

Vettel not being penalised for the false start seems fair to me. He didn't cross the white line and wasn't moving when the lights turned and, in any case, it totally knackered his get away so was self punishing. It's the kind of common sense we all seem to have asked for from the stewards.

Seems fair. Was a self-penalising incident. No different to gaining a place by cutting a corner and then giving the place back before you're asked to.