2012 Canadian GP - Gilles Villeneuve

[Red Schneider]

Fernando's team leadership and outlook just warm my heart.

Okay, slightly exaggerating, but my God, he is like the most amazing No. 1 driver, team leader, catalyst, rallying point, personal savior, etc. etc. you could ever hope for. Superlative in and out of the cockpit.

Tip of the hat to him.

[QLDriver]

I expect the Championship to level out a little and the cream start to rise & stay at the top. The development race is still alive and kicking of course but there aren't many teams who are going to keep up with the Ferraris, McLarens & Red Bulls. IMHO.

I think this is more or less the case already. Looking at the championship table, I'd say that the guys who are at the top are there through consistently good performances, and the guys who are out of place are out of place because they or their team screwed up.

Or in the case of Maldonado managed to bottle lightning in Spain, but that's not unheard of for there to be one race where the team comes from nowhere with a great performance (e.g. Force India, Spa 2009; Arrows, Hungary 1997). And Williams were on fire all that weekend (tasteless, but I couldn't resist... sorry).

[rifrafs2kees]

Fernando's team leadership and outlook just warm my heart.

Okay, slightly exaggerating, but my God, he is like the most amazing No. 1 driver, team leader, catalyst, rallying point, personal savior, etc. etc. you could ever hope for. Superlative in and out of the cockpit.

Tip of the hat to him.

I share those exact sentiments about him. 2 years ago I was a fervent Alonso basher..no more

[dave34m]

Has it been reported what was being said between Alonso and the team when they were speaking Spanish and/or Italian over the team radio. Could be interesting reading.

[Cam]

I don't agree with the call, but Ferrari gambled today, for the first time this year & it bit them in the arse. Fernando was leading the WDC in part due to a little luck but mostly because of smart sound and damn near perfect strategy. They got away from that today and lost the WDC lead. Had they pitted shortly after Lewis, Fernando would have more than likely taken 2nd. With the WDC so tight this year, these type of gambles can't happen often. It was a decent result that could have been better on one of the worse tracks for Ferrari.

Valencia will be interesting as well but the F2012 should be quite strong & quite competitive in the upcoming European GP's: Silverstone, Hockenheim, Hungary, Spa.

I expect the Championship to level out a little and the cream start to rise & stay at the top. The development race is still alive and kicking of course but there aren't many teams who are going to keep up with the Ferraris, McLarens & Red Bulls. IMHO.

What is strange about that gamble is that for months now, everyone talks about consistency - simply bagging good points at every race should win the WDC. So why gamble at all? They had far more to loose than win and Räikkönen had already showed what can happen. A sound second or third place would have been a great result, especially when there continues to be questions over the Ferrari in general. Alonso was lucky not to have slipped further back.

[zeph]

It has all been explained by Alonso here: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/100296

When the car wasn't competitive, they felt they needed to be consistent because they were unable to fight for wins. This weekend they felt they had the edge and could afford to take a bit of a risk.

When it didn't work out, maybe Alonso could have salvaged 4th by pitting around the same time as Vettel did.

And maybe he could have held on to 2nd if he had pitted right after Hamilton, but I don't think he would have won. The stars aligned for Hamilton today and he really deserved this victory. He's been driving great all season.

[bhall]

We made the decision to try to win the race and it didn't work out, not because of the strategy, but because of the tyre degradation. I want that to be very clear because there will be confusion tomorrow, from people who don't understand the race.

That's all well and good, but if the team didn't properly factor race conditions into the equation, of which tire wear is one, then their strategy wasn't all that good and is ripe for scrutiny.

They clearly started on a two-stop plan, but changed after McLaren's now-traditional pit stop adventures - getting better, though - brought them closer to Hamilton than they should have been. This strategy, however, was pretty much doomed to fail, because Alonso's car was not set up for a one-stopper - like Grosjean and Perez - and he didn't start out his second/final stint with a mindset to conserve the tires. What eventually happened was inevitable.

Ferrari just got greedy. It happens.

[raymondu999]

Even during the race - after Hamilton set very good S2 and S3 times on his OUTlap - I thought that Vettel and/or Alonso would stretch it out to lap 50 - and take the last 20 laps (their start-stint tyres lasted 17 race laps on heavy fuel+ a flying, out and in for qualifying) on options.

Once Hamilton had set a quick time there was no turning back for Alonso/Vettel in that from that point on they would have just been inexorably sliding backwards, time-gap wise. And once Hamilton caught them - and it was quite clear from the outlap he would - they would be dead meat anyways. They both had a set of new supersofts they hadn't used at that stage (if I have my sums correct).

[Cam]

We made the decision to try to win the race and it didn't work out, not because of the strategy, but because of the tyre degradation. I want that to be very clear because there will be confusion tomorrow, from people who don't understand the race.

So does that mean they calculated that the 'cliff' wouldn't occur and would make it home - and were wrong? If so, it proves the top teams still have absolutely no idea about these tyres.

[foxmulder_ms]

First I want to say subtitle of the race report on the home page got it wrong: Mclaren was the one with brave strategy not Ferrari I was really surprised Alonso didnt pit in the following lab after Hamilton. He should have been at least second. I got the reasoning for Vettel not pitting. Horner's explanation was clear.

Enjoyable race. I was really happy to see not only Hamilton win but also Lotus and Sauber were really successful. It has to be terrible for Button, though.

[raymondu999]

So does that mean they calculated that the 'cliff' wouldn't occur and would make it home - and were wrong? If so, it proves the top teams still have absolutely no idea about these tyres.

If they were anywhere near confident of said calculation (which they would have to be to make such a bold gamble on strategy) then they know quite a lot about these tyres. Enough to actually make the calculation. But what it does prove is that the teams are finding such calculations tricky.

I know you don't like the current Pirellis and the current format of F1. Neither do I. But I don't think what you said is a fair comment.

Mclaren was the one with brave strategy not Ferrari

The reason Ferrari's is touted as braver is because it was a gamble. Hamilton just stuck to their guns on a 2-stopper, especially when Paddy Lowe confirmed that a 1-stopper was not possible with the MP4-27 anyways. McLaren went for a safe option they knew could last the race distance. Ferrari went and tried to make their tyres last.

I was really surprised Alonso didnt pit in the following lab after Hamilton. He should have been at least second. I got the reasoning for Vettel not pitting. Horner's explanation was clear.

I'm surprised they didn't do a stop on L50 or before that for supersofts actually. Based on the 2nd stint we know that Hamilton, on similarly-aged tyres had better pace than Vettel or Alonso. If they had mirrored Hamilton again by copying the tyres he was on - there would have been nothing ventured, nothing gained. They had to have a different strategy - it was clear those 2 didn't have the pace to beat Hamilton on an equal strategy. I was thinking already at about L45 that Red Bull and Ferrari should pit for supersofts with about 23 or so laps to go - using the set of supersofts they saved. Why 23? Their race-start set of options lasted for an out, flying and inlap during qualifying, a formation lap, and 17 race laps on heavy fuel. let's say the out/in laps and the formation laps are negligible - then they still did 17 laps on heavy fuel + 1 on light fuel.

Had they not taken that path, then they would have been doomed anyways - Hamilton would've taken them both, as was clear straight from his outlap, in which S2 and S3 saw Hamilton quicker than Alonso and Vettel.

[Hail22]

Has it been reported what was being said between Alonso and the team when they were speaking Spanish and/or Italian over the team radio. Could be interesting reading.

Yes the Radio chatter was about gaps, drivers (they referred them by car number) and also the decision that Ferrari would stay out for the remainder of the race.

[timbo]

Also, Alonso didn't start off the second stint with a controlled, make-this-set-last mindset.

I think he actually did. but he pushed the tyres just before Hamilton's second stop and that might be too much.

[Cam]

So does that mean they calculated that the 'cliff' wouldn't occur and would make it home - and were wrong? If so, it proves the top teams still have absolutely no idea about these tyres.

But what it does prove is that the teams are finding such calculations tricky.

Tricky, don't understand, it's the same thing isn't it? The teams either understand the tyres or don't. To get 'caught out' would assume they didn't fully understand? They either knew what to expect and it didn't occur or they knew what to expect and did it anyway. I'm asking which one it might have been? From Alonsos statement it appeared that they knew they thought they would make it home but the tyres went away against what they thought.

This has nothing to do with what I think of the tyres, I'm just interested how they might have came to the decision to leave him out.

[beelsebob]

I think McLaren took a riskier strategy than it seems at first. Hamilton was pushing all the way, with the exception maybe of the first 10 laps... At a track where 70% of races involve the safety car, that means he must have been very heavy fueled compared to most.