I wanted to point out a couple of interesting observations - one or two build on existing points made here and maybe one or two are new.
Firstly, like many here, it was slightly surprising to see Ferrari quickest in S1 and S2 in quali and Merc in S3, this is because there's been a lot of talk (probably wrongly) that due to the wheelbase differences Merc would be more suited to high speed and Ferrari to low speed. Saying this tech experts such as Scarbs have pointed out that this is often a myth, it's a little bit like the myths surrounding front pull rod suspension that were often portrayed inaccurately in the mainstream media, e.g. by Mr Kravitz.
Back to the point - some of you may remember after winter testing Vettel said he knew Ferrari were good but that they had some weaknesses and he specifically pointed out low speed as one of those, and indirectly suggested 'others', i.e. Merc were better there. So from Barca testing it was obvious this could happen come the race in May. I also wonder if this was something to do with why Vettel kept sandbagging at the last corner in testing because their first two sectors would look mighty but maybe he knew S3 was their weakness and thought by sandbagging others wouldn't notice this so much - the actual benefits of doing this are themselves open to debate.
Now onto the race. Something that I find particularly annoying is when the broadcasters and a lot of journalists completely miss a major point and then continue to keep on misportraying it after the event. So we have the VSC period and this is claimed as one of the main saviour's of Hamilton's race, yet to me and I imagine a lot of other viewers, it was obvious during the live coverage that the VSC ended as HAM was entering the pits and so he actually had a very negligible period of time where he'd gain any kind of advantage. This was completely obvious yet the commentators on both Sky F1 and BBC didn't make much of a deal about this at all and then after the event continually stated that he gained a free pit stop. There must be other reasons why he closed the 8 second gap right? Yes.. finally some proper analysis, cue espnf1 race analysis:
http://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/193 ... ule-change
I quote: "
The Virtual Safety Car for Stoffel Vandoorne's stricken McLaren also limited Vettel's soft tyre advantage in the middle stint before Mercedes mixed things up again and switched to the soft just as normal racing resumed on lap 37. Hamilton's out-lap on his fresh soft tyres was crucial in turning the tide against Ferrari and he delivered with truly awesome times in the middle sector (30.792s) and final sector (28.367). To put those figures in perspective, they were on the sort of pace that would have secured a place in Q3 during qualifying on Saturday despite Hamilton's car being laden with half a tank of fuel for the rest of the race.
Unsurprisingly, the two sector times were still the fastest of the race when the chequered flag fell 30 laps later and were nearly over a second quicker than the sector times from Hamilton's official fastest lap two laps from the end. If they'd been combined with a first sector that didn't involve exiting the pit lane, Hamilton's theoretical fastest race lap would have been in the high 1:21s -- a genuinely brilliant lap time for a car with that fuel load and one that would have been quick enough to secure pole position at last year's Spanish Grand Prix.
But the reward for Hamilton's uber-lap was even better than that as it gave him a shot at victory when Vettel made his pit stop on the following lap and rejoined minus the eight second lead he had had before the stops. Immediately after the race and before studying the lap times, Vettel couldn't comprehend how so much of his lead had gone missing so quickly, saying eight seconds had "disappeared" at his second stop. But the truth was that over six of those eight seconds had been down to the sheer pace of Hamilton's out lap versus his in lap and the other two could be accounted for by the advantage Hamilton gained by making his entry to the pit lane under VSC conditions."
So there we have it, the VSC was not a big influence and instead it was an insane lap from Hamilton which has largely gone unreported, a real shame, because it's actually a big selling point for this new Formula 1 showing how much drivers can push in a race. It also is just a remarkable lap because if with his best first sector he could do e.g. a 1.21.8, then if he'd have had a S1 at the same speed this may have been in the low 1.21s, then if you take out half a tank of fuel I'm not sure what the time would be (maybe someone can calculate), but this is in a race remember! I imagine his engine was turned up to 'monster mode' so to speak but it goes to show how much on the limit he was as he said after. Hopefully this will receive some more credit come the next race when they do the analysis of the previous one. Even Toto said in interviews that the VSC helped, and didn't really mention Ham's out lap - all pretty strange although it was easy to miss as you can never really judge a lap like that when the first sector is not accurate due to having pitted.
The final point I'd like to make is I really wonder whether Merc intended to do a 2 stop at the time of pitting Ham or whether they planned to do a 3 stop. If Ham had of got out in front of Vet, e.g. if the VSC period lasted for a few more seconds, then it would be quite a risk to put him out for 30 laps on softs, when he'd started to struggle after around 17 laps in his first stint, albeit they were used for quali and these were new I think. At the time my understanding at least was that he would go out and put in 15 quali laps on those softs and could probably have built a gap of around 20 sec considering Vet had Medium tyres and had to go to the end. He would then pit for another set of softs, i.e. 3 stop, and hope to come out in-front for an easy win, or he could have been behind but with new softs vs old mediums and a very high chance to pass. I felt this was the safer strategy and was really surprised his softs lasted 30 laps. In that scenario I don't see how Ferrari could respond because all they could do would be to put VET onto a 3 stop and undercut HAM but surely if HAM had a reasonable gap (which he'd have by the time they would think to switch VET to a 3 stop) then Merc would just pit HAM again sooner than anticipated but to mirror Ferrari's strategy and cover this off. It's a shame that whole scenario didn't happen as the end would have been even more exciting I feel.
A Merc or Ferrari could have started from the pitlane and would still be guaranteed P4. Yet the Merc or Ferrari who is third through the first corner will most likely remain in that place. There is almost no penalty at most tracks for starting far back. Ferrari aren't probably even too worried about using too many PU components. They will still be on the podium even if they start last 
