2015 Chinese Grand Prix - Shanghai, April 10-12

[Regle]

I don't think it's as easy as saying “Nico should have attacked if he was faster“. He knew very well that Lewis wasn't showing his true race pace, knowing the car, the tyres and Lewis. He knew that Lewis might let him get as close as 1.5 seconds and then pull away in that clean air Lewis was enjoying, meaning Nico would have destroyed his tyres needlessly.
There actually is no point in attacking the leader if you know he can go faster effortlessly, as sad as it sounds.

[TBone]

Some thoughts ...
1. Bearing in mind Lewis's race strategy in the second part of the 2014 (with a car setup more towards the race, if not entirely to it !?!) I think Nico is shadowing this tactic, but unfortunately for him this year Ferrari is much closer and he must now go back to alter his setup more towards the qualy for not faceing the same China 2015 race issue.

An absurd assumption, despite repeated clarifications from Merc that they both get same setup and Nico explaining in Suzuka that he and Lewis had exactly same setup, but Nico was struggling with a lot of oversteer compared to Lewis. If indeed Lewis' set up was race oriented (assuming i means a compromise on quali) in second half last season, then he must be some of a god to go and get pole in Monza (by almost half a second), Singapore and Sochi, despite having race oriented setup?
My argument has always been that, Lewis was loosing out in qualifying last year, because of break problems (failed breaks, glazing etc., that made him lose confidence in late breaking) and trying to overdo things (mistakes). Last year, almost in every qualifying Lewis was locking up the wheels (radio rant - "THIS THING IS GETTING LOCKED UP MAN"), but this year, no sign of it as Merc would have resolved that problem. We are not at all talking about Brembo and Carbon Industrie for the last 3 GPs, co-incidence? More confidence in breaking this year, resulting in better qualifying performances. He got 2 poles this year just with banker laps and not on final fliers.

Isn't it possible though that while they may have near identical set ups it actually suits one driver more for qualifiying and the other more for a race? Ie, a s etup gives a certain amount of oversteer but Hamilton can cope with that over 50+ laps while Rosberg can't (as we kept hearing about last year?). In any event, I think Lowe only said their setups were close, not identical, so that gives soom room for variation and that statement was made fairly early in the season before Hamilton changed tack. I'm sure I read somewhere that at Monza last year Hamilton carried more wing into the race and in Brazil, Rosberg's setup favoured the final sector, hence why Hamilton couldn;t get close enough even with DRS.

[WaikeCU]

I think Rosberg explaining an attempt to overtake Hamilton would destroy his tires does makes sense. Perhaps Rosberg already knew Hamilton wasn't even going on the limit just to manage his race and the gap behind him. So therefor, if Rosberg was going harder and closed the gap to Hamilton, Hamilton would've reacted and upped his pace. Knowing that Rosberg was slower than Hamilton all weekend, Rosberg would've reached his limit earlier than Hamilton. So if Hamilton continuously reacted to Rosberg and upped his pace bit by bit. Rosberg would still wear his tires even quicker. So therefor there was nothing he could do as a driver Rosberg is. I do believe if the roles were reversed, we would've seen Hamilton to manage to overtake, because Hamilton is more determine in the eye than Rosberg. He's more a fighter than Rosberg is.

[Phil]

I think there is more to it than meets the eye. Surely, this scenario was talked about in the pre-race strategy meeting (as Rosberg himself said in the post-race interview). Perhaps not in the sense that Hamilton would do this on purpose, but I'm sure there was talk about what if Ferrari were right on their tail during the race and what that might mean in regards to overal strategy and lap-time deltas. The problem I think for Mercedes was, was that Friday practice 2 showed that the Ferrari had again exceptional tyre-deg and performance. It was probably assumed they could stay out longer while remaining more or less competitive which might give them an advantage at some stage of the race, especially if they were to pass one of the Mercedes.

This is why Hamilton drove cautiously, in order to stretch the life of his tyres to be able to react and not make himself vulnerable at any point in the race. So his goal was not to push too hard. Rosberg just found himself between a rock and a hardplace. He knew it was unlikely to pass Hamilton on the track, but couldn't opt for any alternative strategy because dropping himself further back (to give him clean air and a chance towards the end of the stint) would make him vulnerable towards Vettel behind. So he tried to keep the gap as is and became frustrated when he feared that he might be left to dry if his tyres go off as a result of running in dirty air, not being able to challenge Hamilton at any point in the race and perhaps, because of Lewis having priority in the pits, would see him lose more time and perhaps even position to Vettel.

[condor]

I think Rosberg explaining an attempt to overtake Hamilton would destroy his tires does makes sense. Perhaps Rosberg already knew Hamilton wasn't even going on the limit just to manage his race and the gap behind him. So therefor, if Rosberg was going harder and closed the gap to Hamilton, Hamilton would've reacted and upped his pace. Knowing that Rosberg was slower than Hamilton all weekend, Rosberg would've reached his limit earlier than Hamilton. So if Hamilton continuously reacted to Rosberg and upped his pace bit by bit. Rosberg would still wear his tires even quicker. So therefor there was nothing he could do as a driver Rosberg is. I do believe if the roles were reversed, we would've seen Hamilton to manage to overtake, because Hamilton is more determine in the eye than Rosberg. He's more a fighter than Rosberg is.

I agree. Nothing wrong with Rosberg's explanation that there was no point in fighting. Logically it makes sense and I don't agree with Hamilton's assertion that Rosberg should have pushed and tried to exert pressure. Hamilton had the pace to just toy with him in the race and they both knew it.

However, I think Hamilton is being sincere when he claims that had he been in his position he would have tried harder to pressure the leader, even if he knew Rosberg had the pace to keep the lead and that it could really compromise his race in the likely event he didn't make the pass and he burns up his tyres. Rosberg will make a logical decision based on the balance of probabilities and take the safer and known option, whereas Hamilton would have done his best to create an alternative opportunity or go down fighting. Hamilton is correct that it indeed is the difference between the two drivers.

[atanatizante]

...
For an undercut to work, the time delta of the new tyre + in-lap needs to be greater than the other driver on the older-tyre and his outlap.
...

I might be wrong but it's rather the new tyre out-lap vs. old tyre in-lap?

[Phil]

Yeah, probably. I keep mixing up in and out-lap. Is the in-lap the one when you go from the pit onto the track, or the one where you are on the way to the pits? Damn. So in-lap meaning as in ... "in to the pits"?

[Silent Storm]

Yeah, probably. I keep mixing up in and out-lap. Is the in-lap the one when you go from the pit onto the track, or the one where you are on the way to the pits? Damn. So in-lap meaning as in ... "in to the pits"?

In easy words In-lap means into the pits and out-lap mean out of the pits.

[PlatinumZealot]

I think Rosberg explaining an attempt to overtake Hamilton would destroy his tires does makes sense. Perhaps Rosberg already knew Hamilton wasn't even going on the limit just to manage his race and the gap behind him. So therefor, if Rosberg was going harder and closed the gap to Hamilton, Hamilton would've reacted and upped his pace. Knowing that Rosberg was slower than Hamilton all weekend, Rosberg would've reached his limit earlier than Hamilton. So if Hamilton continuously reacted to Rosberg and upped his pace bit by bit. Rosberg would still wear his tires even quicker. So therefor there was nothing he could do as a driver Rosberg is. I do believe if the roles were reversed, we would've seen Hamilton to manage to overtake, because Hamilton is more determine in the eye than Rosberg. He's more a fighter than Rosberg is.

I agree. Nothing wrong with Rosberg's explanation that there was no point in fighting. Logically it makes sense and I don't agree with Hamilton's assertion that Rosberg should have pushed and tried to exert pressure. Hamilton had the pace to just toy with him in the race and they both knew it.

However, I think Hamilton is being sincere when he claims that had he been in his position he would have tried harder to pressure the leader, even if he knew Rosberg had the pace to keep the lead and that it could really compromise his race in the likely event he didn't make the pass and he burns up his tyres. Rosberg will make a logical decision based on the balance of probabilities and take the safer and known option, whereas Hamilton would have done his best to create an alternative opportunity or go down fighting. Hamilton is correct that it indeed is the difference between the two drivers.

I think Fangio or Alain Prost would have done just the same as Hamilton.

Rosberg needs to grow some balls and be a racer for once. Hamilton would have attacked whether Vettel is behind or not. At the end of the day Rosbeg is his rival why would he make Rosberg's race easier when the 1-2 was on the cards anyway?

[Alexgtt]

Regardless of what Nico says, we all know if Lewis was behind and in the same situation, he would have closed up as close as possible and attacked. Maybe not sustained but for a couple of laps before backing off and trying again later. Think about this:

1. How many times did Nico competitively pass and make it stick on Lewis last year?
2. Now the same for Lewis on Nico?

I'm not sure Nico did it once and we can't count Spa.

[atanatizante]

@Phil
(I highly rate your race analysis and that is not coz we have the same analytic mind but for the fact that we're almost every time do almost the same reasoning and above that I found someone who could write and speak fluently in English, coz as you could have figured out by now I'm not an native English speaker )

On another note I did some further race analysis and found something interesting ...
So the in the first stint Lewis did 15 laps, Nico 14, Seb 13 and Kimi 15.
On the second stint Lewis did 19 laps on the same soft tyre, Nico and Seb 18 with Kimi doing 23 laps !
After the race both Lewis and Niky said they prolonged with 2 to 3 laps the tyre life with that conservative managing tyre driving so had they not being convervative and rather driving with their full speed they could have been 0,4-0,5s per lap faster than Ferrari (as Niky and FP2 race sims told us) but in return their tyre lifespan would have last somewhere between 12 to 13 laps in the first stint and maybe 16 to 17 laps on the second one.
So if we do the math they could have been 13 to 15sec. in front of Seb before the second pit stop and they could have done a longer (4 to 6 laps) medium tyre final stint, bearing in mind that they could be in conservative tyre mode and also track temperature have been lowering ...

[condor]

@Phil
(I highly rate your race analysis and that is not coz we have the same analytic mind but for the fact that we're almost every time do almost the same reasoning and above that I found someone who could write and speak fluently in English, coz as you could have figured out by now I'm not an native English speaker )

On another note I did some further race analysis and found something interesting ...
So the in the first stint Lewis did 15 laps, Nico 14, Seb 13 and Kimi 15.
On the second stint Lewis did 19 laps on the same soft tyre, Nico and Seb 18 with Kimi doing 23 laps !
After the race both Lewis and Niky said they prolonged with 2 to 3 laps the tyre life with that conservative managing tyre driving so had they not being convervative and rather driving with their full speed they could have been 0,4-0,5s per lap faster than Ferrari (as Niky and FP2 race sims told us) but in return their tyre lifespan would have last somewhere between 12 to 13 laps in the first stint and maybe 16 to 17 laps on the second one.
So if we do the math they could have been 13 to 15sec. in front of Seb before the second pit stop and they could have done a longer (4 to 6 laps) medium tyre final stint, bearing in mind that they could be in conservative tyre mode and also track temperature have been lowering ...

Yes this is true, but of course hindsight is a wonderful thing. At the time though they wouldn't have known what running 0.4 s per lap would have done to the tyre life. During practise where track temp was lower than on race day, Lewis got 12 laps out of the option tyres before it fell off a cliff and he started losing up to 2 s a lap. That's the problem with the tyres, once they go off they literally drop off a cliff and it doesn't just become a case of a slightly compromised strategy but rather their whole race plan goes out the window and they would likely had a repeat of Malaysia.

[condor]

Regardless of what Nico says, we all know if Lewis was behind and in the same situation, he would have closed up as close as possible and attacked. Maybe not sustained but for a couple of laps before backing off and trying again later. Think about this:

1. How many times did Nico competitively pass and make it stick on Lewis last year?
2. Now the same for Lewis on Nico?

I'm not sure Nico did it once and we can't count Spa.

Lewis overtook Nico on track several times in 2013 and 2014 - as far as I can remember Monza 2013, Brazil 2013, Bahrain 2014, Monza 2014, US 2014, and was about to pull off a pass in the braking zone at the end of the straight just before the chicane in Canada 2014 just as his brakes failed. Any I've forgotten?

Nico never passed Lewis on track in either 2013 or 2014 as far as I'm aware. Anyone else have examples where he had?

[WaikeCU]

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/form ... 33001.html

Mercedes and Hamilton have set a new pitstop record. During his first stop, the pitstop only took 1,83s.

[TAG]

I kept on asking myself why they didn't just pick up the front of the car and pivot it when they were recovering Verstappen's Toro Rosso.