- Login or Register
No account yet? Sign up
Lewis Hamilton has won the Bahrain Grand Prix, leading nearly every lap but 5 due to a different strategy for Raikkonen. The Finn finished second for Ferrari, passing Rosberg 3 laps from the end. The latter finished in third place.
Lets be honest about it, Ferarri had the luxury of running two separate strategies because they had nothing to lose because everyone expects a Merc 1-2. So they lined it up as a 2 against one situation, if Merc defended against one (Vettel as it happens) then the other would gain (ie Kimi). It's just the same as Alonso v Vettel/Webber in Abu Dhabi 2010.Phil wrote:I agree. Vettels tyres started to drop earlier relative to the Mercedes, so at that point, it was clear that the Ferrari wouldn't be able to go longer than the Merc on either stint and gain an advantage there. So the logical move was to try an undercut which worked great. Doing so with both drivers would have only made things complicated for themselves, as both Kimi and Vettel would be fighting among themselves instead of challenging the Merc. Getting Kimi on an alternative strategy was brilliant, as it put him into clean air and because Merc were occupied covering Vettel, they stayed on the OOP strategy making Kimi's even more effective.SparkyAMG wrote:Somebody alluded to Ferrari highlighting Kimi for the best strategy prior to the race and using Vettel as a decoy. I don't think this was done deliberately in Bahrain, but I do think it's Ferrari's best chance of results for the short term.
Some members of this forum are going to absolutely hate this!
He says they were probably managing the tires a bit more in the second stint. But according to Merc fans here, they had absolutely no reason to worry about tire wear. So they lapped slower than necessary and just gifted second place to Kimi because they were tired of 1-2?dans79 wrote:Some members of this forum are going to absolutely hate this!
Kimi getting by, was down to the brake issues, not a gift. If it hadn't been for the break issues, I think Kimi would have had the same problem vettel did with Bottas, able to get right up to the gear box, but not able to pass.evered7 wrote: So they lapped slower than necessary and just gifted second place to Kimi because they were tired of 1-2?
They want as many WCC points as possible, and to a lesser extent as many wins as possible, and then as many 1-2 as possible.evered7 wrote: Either Mercs have a bunch of novices in the paddock or they were genuinely worried about tire wear to lap slower than optimum to save tires and prolong the stint.
Something you might want to consider is that both Ferrari's are already on the second ICE. If I was Merc I would block a 5th engine, as I get the feeling Ferrari is banking on it going through.evered7 wrote: I would have understood if they did that last year with a massive advantage they had over others. But to do it this year when Ferrari are close and with in-season development as well with regards to the PU, would be a massive disaster.
I would say most of the grid got the strategy wrong, and Kimi lucked into the alternate strategy (that ended up being the best one), as he was the second Ferrari.evered7 wrote: I think they simply underestimated the advantage Ferrari or in particular Kimi had in the second & third stint and paid the price for it with a lost second place.
The brake issues were not random but happened due to a setup change post FP2. Didn't most Merc fans tell about the changes that Mercedes did to their cars post FP2 that would allow them to lap faster? Something must have gone wrong then.dans79 wrote:
Kimi getting by, was down to the brake issues, not a gift. If it hadn't been for the break issues, I think Kimi would have had the same problem vettel did with Bottas, able to get right up to the gear box, but not able to pass.
They want as many WCC points as possible, and to a lesser extent as many wins as possible, and then as many 1-2 as possible.
Lewis is a win clear of Nico in the WDC, and Merc is 2 wins clear of Ferrari in the WCC.
Something you might want to consider is that both Ferrari's are already on the second ICE. If I was Merc I would block a 5th engine, as I get the feeling Ferrari is banking on it going through.
I would say most of the grid got the strategy wrong, and Kimi lucked into the alternate strategy (that ended up being the best one), as he was the second Ferrari.
Not on a braking, he went long because of being too optimistic when releasing the brakes... or hitting the throttle, but anycase not comparablemotobaleno wrote:dozen of timesAndres125sx wrote:
Have you ever seen any driver going too long on a braking without locking up his tires?
and vettel just in this race
What went wrong, was that the brakes overheated going through the back markers, and this pushed the break by wire system in a fault mode. This means they had no engine breaking (for lack of a better term), and thus a lot less breaking power.evered7 wrote:
The brake issues were not random but happened due to a setup change post FP2. Didn't most Merc fans tell about the changes that Mercedes did to their cars post FP2 that would allow them to lap faster? Something must have gone wrong then.
Yes and no, if they change the spec by introducing an upgrade, they can no longer use it, as it won't be the same spec. I'm not sure if it applies to practice, but it definitely does for the race. In other words, it behooves every team to push every component to the absolute limit, so they can delay using a new one as long as possible.evered7 wrote: Ferrari are on the second ICE but there is no mention that they have a problem with the first one. They can readily use it at another circuit where the demands on the ICE is less.
Rosberg had DRs for all of his passes except the last one where vettel ran off track and handed him the place.SparkyAMG wrote:Somebody alluded to Ferrari highlighting Kimi for the best strategy prior to the race and using Vettel as a decoy. I don't think this was done deliberately in Bahrain, but I do think it's Ferrari's best chance of results for the short term.
Merc are obviously concerned with covering whatever Ferrari do with their lead car, which I think is all they need to do at this stage. They've shown that their tyre wear isn't as bad as everyone first thought and can go as short / long as Ferrari dictate. I don't think Ferrari will ever win under normal circumstances using this strategy as I still don't think the lead Merc is really pushing as hard as it could, but if they can keep splitting them like in Bahrain then they'll be first in line to pick up on DNFs.
What's also interesting is the difference between the Merc and Ferrari engines. I think their race modes have a similar amount of usable Power (ie lap after lap), but the Merc engine can go into God mode for a lap or two (ie qualy and for overtakes/defending), which is why Rosberg caught and passed the Ferrari's so easily. Merc seem to have better traction out of corners too. Ferrari are almost there, but not quite.
This is the quote from Wolff himself "It's set-up issues," said Wolff. "We knew the changes we made on the car were compromising a little bit brake temperatures, so we knew what we were doing.dans79 wrote:
What went wrong, was that the brakes overheated going through the back markers, and this pushed the break by wire system in a fault mode. This means they had no engine breaking (for lack of a better term), and thus a lot less breaking power.
If there is one thing Ferrari got it right in the recent years, it is the reliability of the components. I am not sure how they are going to juggle the remaining allocations of the ICE but they seem not too much flustered by the situation as the other teams on the grid like Renault or Honda.dans79 wrote:Yes and no, if they change the spec by introducing an upgrade, they can no longer use it, as it won't be the same spec. I'm not sure if it applies to practice, but it definitely does for the race. In other words, it behooves every team to push every component to the absolute limit, so they can delay using a new one as long as possible.
why would some members hate this? vettel isnt saying anything groundbreaking..... in the middle stint mercedes were managing their tires.... and this is news why? any team thats out front manages their tires and drives as slowly as possible to maintain the lead.dans79 wrote:Some members of this forum are going to absolutely hate this!
Yes, Windwaves was and I was replying to himMarkedOne8 wrote:I did. If you sense you are going to have a lock up, it's better to decrease the pressure on the pedal and avoid lock up otherwise you will just damage your tyre without any benefit. Longer braking without lock up -> longer braking with lock up.Andres125sx wrote:Have you ever seen any driver going too long on a braking without locking up his tires?
No one is denying Merc' brake problems. Anyway, RAI had good enough pace to overtake ROS. It was just matter of time.Andres125sx wrote:He had brake issues, it´s obvious
Anycase your argument is a beautiful armchair argument, but when you´re on track it´s not a matter of feeling you´re going to lock up the brakes, but feeling you hit the brakes too late and you´re going long. Then your instinctively apply a bit more pressure on the brakes, and no, this is not useless, locking up the brakes you slow down faster... ruining your tires obviously, but when you know you´re going too long you´re not thinking about your tires but about avoiding the wall/gravelwindwaves wrote:man, of course the team will defend their drivers. Of course it was yet another crucial mistake at a crucial time.
Political cancer?MarkedOne8 wrote:The chances for beating Lewis this year are little to none, but why not next year? Alonso is not the person who should regret the decison. In my opinion, Ferrari as a family/franchise should be regreting why they didn't get rid of old office earlier. Anything between Todt and Arrivabene eras is black spot in history of Ferrari. Alonso is good and fast driver but political cancer.
