2014 Bahrain Grand Prix

[Traction]

But i have noticed now Vettel has an excuse for anything now. Ricardo beats him in quali - he has a downshift issue, Ricardo overtakes him - he has a straight line issue (although i don't recall anyone else overtaking him)

Vettel is now Mr Excuse

As others have pointed out, Vettel did have problems with the car. I was actually watching qualy on the Swiss channel (SRF2) where Buemi is part of the moderation and also mentioned some insight that Vettel has problems with his car (though he clarified that he would not be able to go into any specific details).

I'm not a fan of Vettels and I am as happy as the next one to seeing Dan doing well and especially against Vettel. I also think though that no matter how Vettel will fair, if he beats Dan this season or not, will not take anything away from what he achieved the past 4 years. I don't think the team internal battle with Webber was always fair, but there's also a fair point to be made that Vettel drove brilliantly under the set of rules, the Pirelli tyres and the EBD 'era', with that car. This is a slightly new Formula now, new engines, more driver influenced, different downforce levels and traits to the car, so it will be tricky for some drivers to shine. Also, the Redbull is still quite a fragile car, so I would take any comparison between Dan and Vettel with a bit of skeptism until both cars seem to work identically and flawlessly. The season is still long and a lot can change. But for now, I'm loving Dan's work and hope he can continue to impress. His career is dependant on it.

I really like your reply. Its balanced and fair and an accurate assessment of the status of the RB team.

[FoxHound]

If it wasn't for the safety car the race would not have been as exciting. It was classic NASCAR, late caution, bunch the field up, save some fuel and then fight.

So Rosberg and Hamilton would not have had a dice then, no?
They where due to be pitting with 16 laps to go, and the switch of compounds meant Ros would've been 0.7 to 1 second a lap quicker than Ham of the remaining 15/6 laps with a gap of 9.5 seconds.
I'll let you make that calculation.

[Phil]

If you start bullying like that you should at least explain your point.
For me point 1 is not clear.
Point 2 is very clear, Hamilton clearly pushed Rosberg off the track in turn 1. Remember Vettel/Alonso in Monza? Without big tarmac runoffs this would have ended in a big dust cloud and a drive-through.
Point 3 is also very clear. There was just 0.3sec pace difference between hard and soft between lap 24 and 34. Later there was no real difference. And 0.3sec is normally not enough to overtake.
Point 4...well...I would not read anything into the radio. Rosberg was just too nice as he allowed Hamilton to push him easily off the track in two further attempts. Just driving away is just not enough there, a bit of wheel banging would not have been too much.

Some minor points, but:

There was more 0.3sec pace difference alone by the fact that Rosberg was well within the DRS zone. He was already practically ahead in the first stint and before the 1st stop - I'm still amazed how well Hamilton defended in the last 10 laps while on the slower tyre. I'd also argue that there's no way to know for sure how big the speed differential between softs and mediums were on that last stint, because Rosberg was somewhat limited in pace by Hamilton (and dirty air). If Rosberg had gotten ahead, we would have seen him disappear into the distance, yet because he couldn't pull off the move, we can only speculate on how much quicker the tyre might have been.

I also don't think Rosberg was in any way nice. He tried the moves and if it were not for Hamilton being as agressive as he was, he would have pulled them off. At this point, beyond trying a different strategy/overtake, I don't know what Rosberg could have done differently if not to cause a crash. Him being the overtaker and behind, I also think the onus is on him more so to take avoiding action if the car in front does not wave you through. Hamilton defended hard, no doubt, but Rosberg always knew the door was going to close on corner exit. His aim was to effectively carry more speed (higher speed differential) and get into Hamiltons view before he closed the door, but never quite got that far - or hope, Hamilton might yield. Given that the cars are committed to a corner at a certain point, you don't want to be on the outside on corner exit, unless you are either 1.) well alongside and 2.) carrying a higher speed differential (e.g. "I'm coming through").

As for strategy change: I don't think Rosberg was shafted or at a huge disadvantage by going onto the medium tyre on his 2nd stint. In hindsight, if there hadn't been a safety car, I'm pretty confident he wouldn't have cought Hamilton (and passed him), but I'm not sure he would have faired any better by staying on his tail. When Hamilton remained in first position and therefore got pit priority - it was clear the gap was going to increase slightly. When Rosberg rejoined the track after his pitstop, I think there was a gap of 5+ seconds and due to his medium tyre, that gap further increased. By going on the medium tyre, he was safe in regards to any potential safety-car (which ironically is just what happened), but by going on an alternative strategy also gave him the opportunity to beat his team-mate on strategy. If he had gone OOP like Hamilton, he was always going to remain behind him, on equal tyres, equal terms. Going OPO gave him potential advantage for a safety-car situation and if it had worked out, might have given a higher advantage at the end, assuming he would have caught him and tyre-wear would have proven to be worse.

It's always easy to analyse in hindsight, but I genuinely believe from Rosbergs point of view, it was the right strategy call and between two bad calls, the lesser of two evils.

[Waywardism]

I agree point 1 isn't clear.
As for point 2, I don't know. I've seen many drivers forcing another car across the track when the following car just had a wing or wheel up alongside them, though not usually as sharply and aggressively as that. To me what he did is akin to purposely slowing a cross-cutting car on the apex to stop their momentum, either way you're causing the other driver to take evasive action to avoid a crash. I don't like it personally, but it's deemed acceptable.
Point 3. Rosberg was a lot quicker than him when the safety car came in, it seemed that the difference in pace was more than at the end of the first stint. I don't think Lewis would have been able to retake him like he did earlier, had Rosberg got past at any point.
Point 4. I don't know how anyone could see Rosberg's attempts as unconvincing, he was clearly trying very hard to get past as I saw it. Sure in turn 4 he could have kept his foot in it when Lewis ran him wide but then he would have made the pass by leaving the track, he would just have to give the position back again so no point really.

[Vettel Maggot]

If it wasn't for the safety car the race would not have been as exciting. It was classic NASCAR, late caution, bunch the field up, save some fuel and then fight.

So Rosberg and Hamilton would not have had a dice then, no?
They where due to be pitting with 16 laps to go, and the switch of compounds meant Ros would've been 0.7 to 1 second a lap quicker than Ham of the remaining 15/6 laps with a gap of 9.5 seconds.
I'll let you make that calculation.

Those tyres would not have lasted. Plus Merc would have called it off anyway.

If F1 wants to be entertaining they need to be way more trigger happy with the safety car. The race was great after the safety car period because the field was bunched up and some cars were on 2 some on 3 stop strategies. I wouldn't get carried away like the media has say "OH F1 IS BRILLIANT WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU ALL COMPLAINING ABOUT!?!"

1 race influenced by a safety car doesn't mean everything is OK.

[Emerson.F]

First mini battle was Hamilton rather dirty driving cutting across and almost crashing but for Rosberg's reaction, no leaving space there

How quikly people seem to forget when it suits their agenda.. Lol Nico should be happy Lewis was so clean. In the same race he also ran Lewis off the track but he still managed to overtake with less traction.





For the people who say Vettel is just another champion in lesser car, i say its a bit too early too judge. The season is long and i for ine expect Seb to be back. If he can show he can win this year it will be very entertaining.

[FoxHound]

Let me just point out that those tyres lasted 19 laps at the start of the race with a heavier fuel load and less rubber on the track.
And that Mercedes allowed their dudes to race....unless the Staropramen I was drinking was in fact a hallucinogenic absinthe.

Hell...what do I know.

[Phil]

1. They should be asking why there wasn't one after start when cars are heavy and there are opportunities to overtake. The answer - because they quickly separated them with different fuel strategies.

I actually already covered this in my last post (basically, running the same strategy as your team mate will always get you at a slight disadvantage because of the 'undercut'), but I also recall prior to Nico attempting to overtake Lewis before the 1st stop, that there were radio messages to Nico, reminding him to take care of his tyres, because they were going to run longer - or implying something to that extend. The RTL commentators were actually speculating that Nico would attempt one stop less, though i think the strategy for him after losing position at the start of the race was always to go medium on the 2nd stint. These radio messages were well before Nico started to get close to Lewis, so I think any political reasoning on behalf of Mercedes GP can be ruled out.

[chrispphunt]

Wot a great race, very hard/good racing at the front and such a spectacle behind them! so much for all the mercedes cars running away with it. i think Red Bull where quicker down the straights than ferrari so not that bad.

Bring on more racing like that, wheel to wheel and still amazingly fast- I'm a bit of a Hamilton fanboy so i was on the edge of my seat and honestly throught Lewis would be powerless once the safety car came in!

[kooleracer]

Also big thanks for Pirelli for giving F1 back to the drivers. Yesterday we say drivers really attacking each other and fighting for position unlike last year were drivers would simply yield to preserve tires. Drivers can fight again in F1 and that is the biggest improvement since Pirelli joined to sport, it was like watching drivers fight in the Bridgestone and Michelin era. We can now conclude that Webber robbed F1 from 4 potentially titanic battle's in F1. Daniel is making Vettel look ordinary, if Daniel beets Vettel this year his four previous WC are meaningless in my eyes. F1 could have been so much better if the likes of Kimi,Alonso,Lewis or Rosberg would have been in the second Red Bull.

[basti313]

Some minor points, but:

There was more 0.3sec pace difference alone by the fact that Rosberg was well within the DRS zone.

I am not talking about the first or the last stint. I am talking about the second stint in which Rosberg never had DRS. There you can clearly see a 0.3sec advantage of the option for the first 10 laps and no advantage anymore after lap 34.

I also don't think Rosberg was in any way nice. He tried the moves and if it were not for Hamilton being as agressive as he was, he would have pulled them off. At this point, beyond trying a different strategy/overtake, I don't know what Rosberg could have done differently if not to cause a crash.

In corner 4 you just have to make clear that you do not want to drive off the circuit. Rosberg was always aiming for driving on the furthest left side in corner 4 even when he was in front...

Him being the overtaker and behind, I also think the onus is on him more so to take avoiding action if the car in front does not wave you through.

I think you miss the rule change in 2013 because of Bahrain 2012. The driver in front has to leave room for the other driver when he has some piece of his car next to him.

[Vettel Maggot]

Let me just point out that those tyres lasted 19 laps at the start of the race with a heavier fuel load and less rubber on the track.
And that Mercedes allowed their dudes to race....unless the Staropramen I was drinking was in fact a hallucinogenic absinthe.

Hell...what do I know.

Yeah when they were going a lot slower, in cruise mode. They upped the pace at the end (2+ seconds a lap faster than anyone else) and Rosberg said his tyres had melted 3 laps from the end. Facts are without Maldonado The Peanut we would not have been treated to that racing at the end throughout the pack. And I don't know what Strapmoen is.

[thevlack]

In fairness a lot of champions were champion in the best car, but not all. The rules and tyres suited vettel, and he had the best car every time. This year they dont and he doesnt, and he isnt even close to winning.

Vettel is a myth. Obvious team bias towards him, unbelievable "bad luck" happening every other race to his teammate, flexi wings, ride hight adjusters, diffusers........and now it's all gone, and he's just another good driver mid pack driver.

4 times world champion *****************************

You should wait a little more time before calling names and letting all YOUR Hatred loose.

Only 3 races, and for them RBR, no Race was a clean one.

[Phil]

I am not talking about the first or the last stint. I am talking about the second stint in which Rosberg never had DRS. There you can clearly see a 0.3sec advantage of the option for the first 10 laps and no advantage anymore after lap 34.

While that is true, I don't think you can compare the performance of Hamilton's soft 2nd stint to Rosbergs medium and drawing conclusion to their respective performance at the end of the race, when both had 10 laps to go. For one, in the 2nd stint, both drivers were in a state of preserving fuel (note team radio to Hamilton at some point when he was past that phase), and I also think it was clear that Hamilton was making his tyres last, knowing that Rosberg was on Primes and would have an advantage at the end (note same team radio when Hamilton was answering he was looking after his tyres). The respective performance of especially the soft tyre in Hamiltons 2nd stint was dictated by strategic driving. It was crucial to Hamiltons race to find the right balance between pulling a gap to Rosberg, but getting as far as possible, not knowing exactly how the mediums would fair against fresh softs on a determined Rosberg.

Fast forward to the last 10 laps when both are on fresh rubber, light(er) cars and only 10 laps to make the best of them with no fuel or power constraints and I think it is clear that the performance differential between tyres would be greater than mid race where there are still other factors to consider.

Lauda, post race, also mentioned that Lewis was able to get a lot out of the mediums at the end because he drove extremely agressive (this was also quite visible before the safety car went in) to get heat into them.

I think you miss the rule change in 2013 because of Bahrain 2012. The driver in front has to leave room for the other driver when he has some piece of his car next to him.

I believe the rule change you are mentioning was posted a few pages back, article 20.4 refering to especially the straights and not corner exit.

[astracrazy]

I personally don't see anything wrong with Hamilton's driving. He was entitled to the racing line so he took it. If Rosberg wants to try and overtake on the outside (turn 4) then he can try but the door will always close unless he is in a stronger position. You'll see the same level of aggressiveness from the other top drivers. Alonso for example is one who rarely lets anyone around the outside of him.

Rosberg a number of times, more or less, completed the move in turn 1 but out braked himself and re-opened the door for Hamilton.

It was good aggressive racing with both drivers wanting to make there mark.

I would rather watch that than a Vettel/Hamilton procession 20sec in the lead. I hope we see more of this in the future and I would expect Rosberg to be a bit more street wise in the future.