FrukostScones wrote: ↑22 Jul 2018, 22:50
They pitted RAI to keep him in Front of HAM. They didn't pit VET to cover the rain risk and to make it a secure one stop if had stayed dry. They should have moved RAI imediately out of the way. Made absolutely no sense.
HAM was incoming Very fast on the US during mixed conditions. If VET would not have binned it, HAM might still have won.
i don't think they were pitting raikkonen early to hold hamilton back, because merc could've responded by taking hamilton in when he caught up with raikkonen, making him fastest of all.
in fact, hamilton was getting a tow from raikkonen which made his chances and pace even better. ferrari must've known that was going to happen if their plan was to hold hamilton back, because raikkonen was faster on fresher tyres.
furthermore that tactic is mostly just used when the other car (in this case raikkonen) hasn't pitted yet. it's used to hold back the driver who has conciderably better pace than the driver the team wants to protect (in this case vettel). but vettel at that point was still faster than hamilton i think.
to pit raikkonen early in order to hold back hamilton, would've been absolutely bonkers from ferrari, as raikkonen dropped behind verstappen after his pit stop, whom hamilton would also have to overtake along with bottas and iirc hamilton was over 20 seconds behind vettel.
why settle for much less points for the team, if you're only going to give a very minimum advantage to your other driver?
ferrari was hoping the rain would come by the time raikkonen would have to change tyres again.
i have dyslexia and english is not my native language. please be gentle.