2024 Miami Grand Prix - Miami Intl. Autodrome, May 03 - 05

[TFSA]

Sorry, but I do not know why this nonsense about a safety car is going in circles with complete nonsense arguments. The facts:
1. If they think they need a SC they have to deploy it for safety. There is no "wait with VSC", otherwise they can just keep the VSC. In contrast, with the shifted TecPro it was rather a question if they even need to put a red flag out.
2. Once they deploy the SC, it goes out. In case they are in the middle of the pack and the situation allows it, they can wait at the SC line. They tried to catch the leader, but Norris was already on the pit straight, so they simply could not. Some years ago we saw a very similar example in Monza where a Mercedes even passed the SC because they could before the SC line. This was just a rare issue, where the leader was already on the pit straight and it is completely ok to not catch the leader in this case.
3. I do not know why people at McLaren and RedBull had the idea of Norris being maybe a lap ahead. It would have always been the rule to let the pack pass and have Norris behind the SC for the restart.
3. It changed NOTHING. Norris had a gap of roughly 11 seconds before the SC was deployed. A pitstop under SC costs 8 seconds. So even a bad stop would have been covered.

It's not non-sense at all.

Not all situations require you to deploy a safety car instantly. In this particular case, we had two cars who had crashes OFF the track (in the run-off), where one of them got going again. While that might require a safety car to bunch up the pack in order to clean up properly, it does not require the immeditate deployment of the actual safety car under those track conditions. The VSC has the advantage that it can be cancelled almost immediately, where the full SC procedure requires several laps to cancel. It's definitely my assessment that they were too quick to deploy the full SC here, and the fact that the SC didn't catch Norris - even if it didn't change the outcome of the race - is clearly a mistake.

The "lap ahead" idea is of course ridiculous, we agree on that, although i will note that we have seen that happen under Red Flag conditions - in this case at the 2023 Brazilian GP, where Tsunoda and Piastri started a lap down after the Red Flag, in a situation where they clearly should have been allowed to "unlap" themselves before the race restart.

As for your final point: That it didn't change anything in this race doesn't mean it won't in another race. And your argument about "Even a bad stop" doesn't make sense to me, because you seem to assume that a bad stop just means a 4-5 second pit stop. But that's not a fact - it could easily be 10-12, like we saw happen to both Verstappen and Vettel at Austin 2022. Or, in extreme cases, Stake F1 bad.

[SharkY]

And your Lando's pace estimate with regards to FER and RBR is off. I'm going to exclude LEC from this, as he was on much older tyres. So, average SAI's lap time after he overtook PIA was 1:31,32 (laps 42-56), while NOR's was 1:31,19. So on average Lando was 0,13s quicker than Carlos. With Max the average for the same period was 1:31,47, so 0,28s slower.

24 laps after restart resulting in a 7.6s lead with P2 ; and P2-P3 gap maintained steadily around 2s mark for the entire duration. The last 10 laps or so, Lando was simply cruising, not at all hitting kerbs and driving very conservatively (which Max and LeClerc are unlikely to have, as there was only 2s gap separating them), So add a tenth to 0.28 and it's almost 0.4s per lap. It was only a back of the hand calculation.

Well, excluding the restart lap, avg for the first 10 laps after SC was 1:31:19 for NOR and 1:31,45 for VER, so 0,26s difference. Charles wasn't in such a great shape, so I doubt Max was pushing hard, more like managing that gap not to kill the tyres. That's why I chose Carlos - he had a bit of free air, but I doubt he was pushing that much, as the only one he could get was his own teammate, and he used a bit of these tyres to fight Oscar for multiple laps.

I agree, that McLaren was the fastest car on track, but it wasn't 4-5 tenths over FER and RBR, more like 2-3 tenths (and Ferrari had a suboptimal strategy).

[michl420]

From the 2024 F1 Sporting Regulations, page 61:

The rules aren't the issue here. It's how they're employed in practice. Even with said rules in play, it was possible for Race Control to not have this happen.

First: Just because you "can" deploy it regardless of where the leader is, doesn't mean you should. You have other options, including deploying a VSC first, and then upgrading said VSC to a full Safety Car when the leader is approaching the end of his current lap.

Second: Even after they screwed it up initially, where the SC didn't catch the leading car, they were way too slow at allowing the cars by, so they could catch Norris. This resulted in several wasted laps that could have been used for racing, rather than just trotting around the track.

This was not well-managed at all.

Sorry, but I do not know why this nonsense about a safety car is going in circles with complete nonsense arguments. The facts:
1. If they think they need a SC they have to deploy it for safety. There is no "wait with VSC", otherwise they can just keep the VSC. In contrast, with the shifted TecPro it was rather a question if they even need to put a red flag out.
2. Once they deploy the SC, it goes out. In case they are in the middle of the pack and the situation allows it, they can wait at the SC line. They tried to catch the leader, but Norris was already on the pit straight, so they simply could not. Some years ago we saw a very similar example in Monza where a Mercedes even passed the SC because they could before the SC line. This was just a rare issue, where the leader was already on the pit straight and it is completely ok to not catch the leader in this case.
3. I do not know why people at McLaren and RedBull had the idea of Norris being maybe a lap ahead. It would have always been the rule to let the pack pass and have Norris behind the SC for the restart.
3. It changed NOTHING. Norris had a gap of roughly 11 seconds before the SC was deployed. A pitstop under SC costs 8 seconds. So even a bad stop would have been covered.

I am fully with your opinion, however, it became the norm that in situations where the reason for the safety car is primary for bring the pack together, they pick the leader immediatly. This time they make a fail here. The best way to wipe out this fail would be to turn on the green lights on the safety car immediatly. Also happened before. In the end it changes nothing.

[michl420]

I read that magnussen is giving a penalty for not changing tyres by his pit stop. Never heard about this rule and I think it is nonsense. When someone would like to change or repair something on the car, it should be easy possible. Brings strategie in the race and I see no negative effect. But I admit it will happen very rarely.

[Mogster]

Also, I think people are fooling themselves. Norris's "fresher" tire wasn't decisive and probably made no difference. He was just plain faster. It was seen in flashes on friday and saturday.

I do think Max was also reluctant to push because he was happy to see his pal Norris win the the race.

Mclaren winning will annoy Merc for sure..

Not a chance of Max doing that. Max ignore his own team to get an extra point for the fastest lap from his team mate, he has a ruthless attitude to winnng.

Lando and the McLaren were just faster in the final stint on the hards.

Aye, Verstappen is more concerned about his wins streak.

Without the SC I don’t see Norris winning. He’d have had to overtake 2/3 cars. Podium yes, win, no.

[Cs98]

Also, I think people are fooling themselves. Norris's "fresher" tire wasn't decisive and probably made no difference. He was just plain faster. It was seen in flashes on friday and saturday.

Agreed, the tyres were not a major factor, maybe a tenth. Fact is Norris was just plain faster in S1, by around 3 tenths a lap, and pretty much even everywhere else.

As soon as he gets out from behind Perez his pace increases and he becomes the fastest medium runner on track, gaining around 3 tenths a lap on Max. In the last stint he's around 4 tenths a lap faster, with most of that being genuine pace and maybe a little bit of tyre advantage.

[avantman]

Max had significant damage to his diffuser throat. Easily worth 0.2-0.3s if not more. It could've and should've been a lot closer between them for P1. Can't wait for Imola, where both Max and Lando performed wonders being superb historically.

[bluechris]

Max had significant damage to his diffuser throat. Easily worth 0.2-0.3s if not more. It could've and should've been a lot closer between them for P1. Can't wait for Imola, where both Max and Lando performed wonders being superb historically.

I am still trying to find a video to back this up but no luck. In my eyes Perez incident was a near miss so he must got the damage somewhere else if it's not snake oil from RB.

[Cs98]

Max had significant damage to his diffuser throat. Easily worth 0.2-0.3s if not more. It could've and should've been a lot closer between them for P1. Can't wait for Imola, where both Max and Lando performed wonders being superb historically.

I am still trying to find a video to back this up but no luck. In my eyes Perez incident was a near miss so he must got the damage somewhere else if it's not snake oil from RB.

It wasn't Perez, it was when he hit the bollard according to Horner.

[avantman]

Max had significant damage to his diffuser throat. Easily worth 0.2-0.3s if not more. It could've and should've been a lot closer between them for P1. Can't wait for Imola, where both Max and Lando performed wonders being superb historically.

I am still trying to find a video to back this up but no luck. In my eyes Perez incident was a near miss so he must got the damage somewhere else if it's not snake oil from RB.

3:06, look at the mount(that was keeping the bollard in place) under the rear of the car when it landed, in slow motion, all is clear and the damage was very big. No damage came from the bollard, all damage was caused by its mount (and that high kerb of course that put a car in the air), normally made of cast iron or concrete. Very unfortunate.

[venkyhere]

3:06, look at the mount(that was keeping the bollard in place) under the rear of the car when it landed, in slow motion, all is clear and the damage was very big. No damage came from the bollard, all damage was caused by its mount (and that high kerb of course that put a car in the air), normally made of cast iron or concrete. Very unfortunate.

Thank you. This is clinching evidence. We can even see carbon shards flying. This must have completely screwed aero balance. Wasn't it not some races before (Australia?) where Perez was deemed to have lost downforce because of a tearoff stuck somewhere in the caves of the floor ?

[basti313]

The rules aren't the issue here. It's how they're employed in practice. Even with said rules in play, it was possible for Race Control to not have this happen.

First: Just because you "can" deploy it regardless of where the leader is, doesn't mean you should. You have other options, including deploying a VSC first, and then upgrading said VSC to a full Safety Car when the leader is approaching the end of his current lap.

Second: Even after they screwed it up initially, where the SC didn't catch the leading car, they were way too slow at allowing the cars by, so they could catch Norris. This resulted in several wasted laps that could have been used for racing, rather than just trotting around the track.

This was not well-managed at all.

Sorry, but I do not know why this nonsense about a safety car is going in circles with complete nonsense arguments. The facts:
1. If they think they need a SC they have to deploy it for safety. There is no "wait with VSC", otherwise they can just keep the VSC. In contrast, with the shifted TecPro it was rather a question if they even need to put a red flag out.
2. Once they deploy the SC, it goes out. In case they are in the middle of the pack and the situation allows it, they can wait at the SC line. They tried to catch the leader, but Norris was already on the pit straight, so they simply could not. Some years ago we saw a very similar example in Monza where a Mercedes even passed the SC because they could before the SC line. This was just a rare issue, where the leader was already on the pit straight and it is completely ok to not catch the leader in this case.
3. I do not know why people at McLaren and RedBull had the idea of Norris being maybe a lap ahead. It would have always been the rule to let the pack pass and have Norris behind the SC for the restart.
3. It changed NOTHING. Norris had a gap of roughly 11 seconds before the SC was deployed. A pitstop under SC costs 8 seconds. So even a bad stop would have been covered.

I am fully with your opinion, however, it became the norm that in situations where the reason for the safety car is primary for bring the pack together, they pick the leader immediatly. This time they make a fail here. The best way to wipe out this fail would be to turn on the green lights on the safety car immediatly. Also happened before. In the end it changes nothing.

Yes. But as far as I know, they can not do this before the track is safe. They had Sargeant limping around, a truck coming for the car...in case they would have seen it not severe and letting the cars cycle without the SC, they would have at least needed to stop all works until the SC has the pack. That would have been at least the same time as they afterwards used to let them overtake after the track was clean. Your suggestion would have worked in the past for situations like the pollard removal, but for this they now have the VSC.

[venkyhere]

After looking at that floor-damage clip, my perspective has changed completely.
Notwithstanding the RB20 config leading to non-deal balance on H tyres, Max drove almost 2/3rd the laps with underfloor damage and poor tyre grip, and still maintained P2. Hats off.
So Max/RedBull fans can breath a sigh of relief -
"VER wasn't relegated to P2 purely on pace delta, the car was injured"

[bluechris]

Max had significant damage to his diffuser throat. Easily worth 0.2-0.3s if not more. It could've and should've been a lot closer between them for P1. Can't wait for Imola, where both Max and Lando performed wonders being superb historically.

I am still trying to find a video to back this up but no luck. In my eyes Perez incident was a near miss so he must got the damage somewhere else if it's not snake oil from RB.

It wasn't Perez, it was when he hit the bollard according to Horner.

Ah ok so it was his own mistake, so i don't understand the excuses of why he had no pace after.

[Sieper]

It's both, he also struggled to build a lead on piastri before the bollard hit.