What cliffhangers
![Question :?:](./images/smilies/icon_question.gif)
- Grosjean did the same in terms of (relative) pace
- Raikkonen was embarrassingly slow. Hamliton although not Ferrari
![Smile :-)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
- Strategy turned out it to be more simple US - SS, simple and boring. Worst track.
What cliffhangers
He kept his lead till the end. Close to losing it.iotar__ wrote:What cliffhangersBottas did Russia repeat and more. Race ended very early on USs, that was hammer time.
- Grosjean did the same in terms of (relative) pace
- Raikkonen was embarrassingly slow. Hamliton although not Ferrarishould be grateful. Not catching Ricciardo, bit of a surprise but only one place lost from Q position.
- Strategy turned out it to be more simple US - SS, simple and boring. Worst track.
I prefer races like this insteadn of mercedes gt safety cars race like Baku.iotar__ wrote: ↑09 Jul 2017, 15:42What cliffhangersBottas did Russia repeat and more. Race ended very early on USs, that was hammer time.
- Grosjean did the same in terms of (relative) pace
- Raikkonen was embarrassingly slow. Hamliton although not Ferrarishould be grateful. Not catching Ricciardo, bit of a surprise but only one place lost from Q position.
- Strategy turned out it to be more simple US - SS, simple and boring. Worst track.
how could he retained 4th... Hamilton jumped him with his outlap already. Raikkonen is just slow on sundays. His pace is dropping. I was watching live timing. Once Hamilton got rid Grosjean I think, he was consistently faster than Raikkonen. Mercedes is clearly faster car (At least on US)GPR-A wrote: ↑09 Jul 2017, 15:49Such a shame on Ferrari to be using Raikkonen as a pawn to help Vettel! Had they pit him early, he could have retained fourth place! They kept giving wrong messages to slow him down and create wake for Hamilton. What they did not anticipate was Hamilton pitting and neither did they trusted the Red Bull pace. That ruined the race for him.
Even if Raikkonen entered in pits, Ham would overcut him easily. Raikkonen was just off the pace today.GPR-A wrote: ↑09 Jul 2017, 16:16Some people want to read they way they wish. The strategy for Hamilton was clear, he was on SS and bound go long. As they already saw, it was so difficult to overtake between the top cars, pitting Kimi early and forcing Hamilton to go longer and once again hold him back when he comes back with Ultra Softs, would have definitely helped Kimi to get that fourth, who knows, even 3rd. He kept going on and on on those slower tyres and despite his repeated complaints, Ferrari did not pay heed. He lost it as soon as Hamilton pit, which was not expected. Once Hamilton pitted, the race was over for Kimi.
Seriously? When Raikkonen came out of pits, he started doing 1m07s and Hamilton would have not done that time on those used SS. So, no way he would have done an overcut. Instead, he would have gone longer to get his US for a much shorter stint. That was the reason for using SS in his first stint.F1NAC wrote: ↑09 Jul 2017, 16:19Even if Raikkonen entered in pits, Ham would overcut him easily. Raikkonen was just off the pace today.GPR-A wrote: ↑09 Jul 2017, 16:16Some people want to read they way they wish. The strategy for Hamilton was clear, he was on SS and bound go long. As they already saw, it was so difficult to overtake between the top cars, pitting Kimi early and forcing Hamilton to go longer and once again hold him back when he comes back with Ultra Softs, would have definitely helped Kimi to get that fourth, who knows, even 3rd. He kept going on and on on those slower tyres and despite his repeated complaints, Ferrari did not pay heed. He lost it as soon as Hamilton pit, which was not expected. Once Hamilton pitted, the race was over for Kimi.
In todays race Raikkonen hadn't had a pace to be in front of Mercedes
Yeah, I'm calling that a jump startSiLo wrote:https://media.giphy.com/media/mrFmmvlvtfv1e/giphy.gif
Lights on the steering wheel also change to indicate dropped clutch.