![Image](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CvZ9apsWIAEbtvw.jpg)
They surprise us all now and then buddy.Juzh wrote:34.999, but yeah. Tbh i had low 35s in mind initially but merc sandbagged a bit higher than usual in FPs.justmoi wrote:Hows 1.34.9s for ya?Juzh wrote:On the other note, 36.7 is quite slow. mid 35s for pole I'd say.
I don't think so. Apparently Hamilton has an engine problem which is costing him some performance.Juzh wrote:I predict this to be the dullest race of 2016. Almost all cars are in their correct pace-wise position.
Thank you for the effort!Mark4211 wrote:My latest one!
Annotated wheel adjustments: Pole position lap - USA 2016
https://vimeo.com/188451131
When Mercedes pushes the magic botton its incredible to see how much the difference is increased. I expect them to also have a better race pace. If the first corner is clean we should see a easy 1-2 but....iotar__ wrote:- 0,5 between Merc and RB - predictable, slightly bigger than expected
- Red Bull - split tyre strategies but rather weirdly, why not give softs to the quicker driver, the one closer to Merc? He stays behind after start + x laps and then what? Before you ask, they knew who'd be quicker.
- Hulkenberg - close enough to Ferraris.
Apparently?Hammer44 wrote: I don't think so. Apparently Hamilton has an engine problem which is costing him some performance.
Surely not on COTA. If he tries to play games like this, he makes himself an easy target. On the one hand for Ros due to DRS and on the other hand for Ric due to the undercut on SS.Vasconia wrote: Do you guys think that Hamilton will have a intentionally slower race pace? He could use(again) this strategy to have the RB just behind Rosberg, this could give them the chance of making an undercut.
RBR say that ricci feels using an alternative strategy gives the best chance of beating mercedes and wanted to try that , and that ves feels soft gives him his best chance so they went with thatbasti313 wrote:On which times are you basing your expectations? FP times would suggest lower time difference, but the season so far suggest more difference.iotar__ wrote:- 0,5 between Merc and RB - predictable, slightly bigger than expected
To me the problem is the tire: On the SS the Bulls might be 0.5sec away. But on the S both Merc drivers bottled the Q2 lap with at least a laptime deficit of 0.3sec. To me it looks like at least 0.8sec on the S and Merc on the S faster than a Bull on the SS.
They have to profit from the usual bad start or first corner crash, otherwise the SS strategy is pointless. And it makes only sense for the driver starting in front, driving with the SS behind you teammate on S is more than stupid.iotar__ wrote:- Red Bull - split tyre strategies but rather weirdly, why not give softs to the quicker driver, the one closer to Merc? He stays behind after start + x laps and then what? Before you ask, they knew who'd be quicker.
So I think using Ric was a good choice. He starts better and may have the chance to attack P1 in the initial laps and make the Merc use his tires. Or undercut.
On the other hand I do not see much benefit from the S for Ves. Running on P4 I do not see much chance to gap the cars behind and he will inevitably end up in traffic. This is a strategy for the disappearing Mercs, nothing for a podium contender in the pack.
But, as usual, surely not on race pace.iotar__ wrote:- Hulkenberg - close enough to Ferraris.
I do not expect too much. If the Mercs make it through turn one on 1/2, they will disappear. I do not expect the Bulls to have the pace to attack them. The same for Bulls vs. Ferrari vs. FI. Maybe a little bit of spicing up due to the Bull on Soft, but in the end the differences are too big if nothing happens at the start.
guess what? External factor according to PirelliFifty wrote:Any details come out on Sainz back to back tire punctures?