2018 Japanese Grand Prix - Suzuka, 5-7 October

[timbo]

1. How does Vettel make so much contact with others and never seem to break his car! I mean he seems to have a tank under him every time he goes to war! He gets a lot of luck in these situations.

What do you mean? In Monza and Japan he came out as the one having a damaged car.

[turbof1]

1. How does Vettel make so much contact with others and never seem to break his car! I mean he seems to have a tank under him every time he goes to war! He gets a lot of luck in these situations.

What do you mean? In Monza and Japan he came out as the one having a damaged car.

He means why did it not yet result in race ending damage.

[NathanOlder]

1. How does Vettel make so much contact with others and never seem to break his car! I mean he seems to have a tank under him every time he goes to war! He gets a lot of luck in these situations.

What do you mean? In Monza and Japan he came out as the one having a damaged car.

I mean he never seems to break suspension or retire from races despite all his bumps and knocks.

[Restomaniac]

@restomaniac: Yeah you can indeed debate that. Vettel does know Verstappen is really a hard defender. But put yourself in Vettel's position: you are rapidly closing in due an abnormal and visible difference in power, you know you have to basically win the Grand Prix to stay in WDC contestion and Verstappen would keep you up from closing in on the Mercedes cars. Wouldn't you go for it, realizing chances might get scarcer and fewer further up the race? I personally would; I wouldn't pay respect to Verstappen's reputation and stick that nose also there as long as I can keep reasonable control over the car, because why would you pay respect to him? He's a competitor, let him fight for his position instead of letting his reputation fight for him.

If we had ran a straw poll just before Vettel made his move on here (or anywhere that takes a real interest in F1) I’m pretty certain the answer would come back that it’s highely likely not to work due to Verstappen previous driving. Vettel MUST have known that.

As such no I wouldn’t I would have saved my batteries and got him with DRS, stronger engine and full batteries on the straight. Why did he rush? He would have had him around 30 seconds later anyway.

Like I say Vettel needs to be smarter. Vettel seems to have a strange situation with Verstappen though. So much so that my son is starting to think I can see into the future. It seems almost every time Vettel comes within contact distance there is indeed contact and I’ve started saying as such before it happens which amazes my 6 year old. I get the impression that there is no love lost between Vettel and Verstappen either.

I'd argue to never respect your opponent beyond what you are required to do. playing with the thought that Verstappen is a hard defender in your head will make you also unsure in other situations. I can understand your reasoning though, there is certainly merit to it. Vettel could have waited. On the other hand, you never know if Vettel would have gotten another chance. Verstappen might have generated enough power again when coming out of the Spoon Curve and Vettel would have to drop back due the turbulent flow. Although a lot of overtakes did happen exiting out of 130R, you just can't predict your future and I think Vettel tried to grasp an opportunity he saw.

Should Vettel be smarter? He needs to make first of all less mistakes (I'm not going to attack his intellect directly, I'll leave that to anybody's personal opinion) throughout the season. The mistakes he made throughout the season culminated to this situation where he cannot afford to be smart and careful. He did the right thing in my eyes, taking risks (which is not the same as reckless behaviour), because what was he going to loose realistically if it backfired (which it did)? Realistically the WDC was always going to be over if he was not going to win in Japan.

Look at Singapore last season. Does Vettel need to be so aggressive against a guy who he knows won’t give him an inch.

This is the issue. It’s like rutting stags with those 2 and as I say it happens over and over again to the point you can almost predict it. I think it goes back to when Vettel pretty much talked Charlie into a penalty for Verstappen. It’s predictable and as such Vettel needed to pick a better spot than a place that isn’t a normal overtaking place.

Please don’t misunderstand me. I’m not laying into Vettel as I try my best to be impartial but I can’t see the logic in going in like that against a driver who you know won’t give you personally an inch. It was never going to end any other way.

[NathanOlder]

1. How does Vettel make so much contact with others and never seem to break his car! I mean he seems to have a tank under him every time he goes to war! He gets a lot of luck in these situations.

What do you mean? In Monza and Japan he came out as the one having a damaged car.

He means why did it not yet result in race ending damage.

Exactly my point. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks it ? I dunno.

[Yurasyk]

1. How does Vettel make so much contact with others and never seem to break his car! I mean he seems to have a tank under him every time he goes to war! He gets a lot of luck in these situations.

What do you mean? In Monza and Japan he came out as the one having a damaged car.

I mean he never seems to break suspension or retire from races despite all his bumps and knocks.

Because he did not hardly torpedo other cars last years, except maybe Malaysia' 16. But he spun almost every time after contacts this year.

[turbof1]

Please don’t misunderstand me.

Nono, I do understand you. And I also think you are understanding my point of view. We are just looking this from 2 sides, so no worries.

[Restomaniac]

Please don’t misunderstand me.

Nono, I do understand you. And I also think you are understanding my point of view. We are just looking this from 2 sides, so no worries.

That’s cool.

[Restomaniac]

What do you mean? In Monza and Japan he came out as the one having a damaged car.

He means why did it not yet result in race ending damage.

Exactly my point. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks it ? I dunno.

I agree. How many is that now? I can think of at least 2 now against Verstappen and 1 against Hamilton in Italy. That’s off the top of my head.

Then there is things like him slapping a wall in Singapore with a rear tyre and getting real no damage, etc. He is living a charmed life which I’m thankful that he is.

[timbo]

What do you mean? In Monza and Japan he came out as the one having a damaged car.

He means why did it not yet result in race ending damage.

Exactly my point. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks it ? I dunno.

Oh, I see. But you could ask why the cars which were involved in the crashes I mentioned came out with no damage at all? E.g. how Verstappen after crashes on both sides managed to continue and maintain enough pace to push Bottas (even if just a little).
Now, if I can hazard a guess (and my guess will not only include Vettel, but Hamilton for Britain and Italy) It is because the situations in question involved just a tiny "crossing of the line" by either driver involved? Meaning that all were risky but yet calculated moves (both on attacking and defending sides). It would be interesting to compare how many such crashes each driver has.

[Phil]

I do hear the question than coming: "if he was going to have to scrub off more speed anyhow, than why commit to this move at all". Good question! Well, you can't predict always the outcome of your move. Vettel committed to it when he dove inside, which was even before the braking point. Where he would up in relation to Verstappen was not clear at that point. If he got his nose ahead, it would have been Vettel dictating the line and pushing wide.

I feel we are more or less in agreement, then. This paragraph is indeed a question I'd have asked - and in my opinion, is the conclusion on that this was an opportunistic move that never would have worked.

If Verstappen had left a bit more room, Vettel would have to have reduce his speed more than Max in order to make the corner. This would have put him behind Max anyway in a compromised position.

Even if Verstappen had left more room, I am to some point legitimately thinking that contact would have been very probably given the trajectories, the momentum and the speed of Vettel. There'a s high probability he would have understeered into Verstappen anyway.

Ergo, my conclusion is that Vettels move was doomed to fail and the collision more or less inevitable. I don't think Max had any moral responsibility to take that corner any other way he did.

To be also fair to Vettel though - I think the margin between pulling off that move and it being the way it turned out was perhaps extremely small. Had he been able to place his car 5 meters further up ahead and put himself completely alogside Max or even slightly ahead before his space ran out, the dynamics of the move would have completely changed. By being equally alongside or even slightly ahead means he could have pushed Max wide and the fact that he would have to significantly reduce the speed to make the corner would have meant he would have forced Max to do the same (being on the outside).

It didn't work out this way and in the end, he miscalculated it slightly, he never got far enough alongside and thus Max closed the door on him. Arguably, a more observant driver [than Max] would have seen this unfolding and made more effort to avoid a collision.


One last point: "Verstappen was really down on power, you know that."

Relative to Vettel, yes, relative to any other driver taking that corner, I'm not convinced. Vettel was deploying - that was his choice. I don't think that's the 'normal' part on where you'd be deploying. Most drivers would be doing that on the long straight, where the DRS zone is. Max was harvesting, as he should have been, because that area is not one where his position is that vulnerable. It's rather narrow there to attempt any overtakes so your position is usually rather safe. So in my opinion, Vettel was deploying there because (and he confirmed this in the post-race interviews) that he felt it was the best chance he had on getting past Max, because he wouldn't be suspecting an attempt there.

[f1316]

I think what we’re seeing this year - and tbh the previous two - is that Ferrari’s revamped structure under Marchionne unlocked some great engineering talent in Maranello that had previously been overlooked by the influx of ‘name’ talent (Pat Fry, James Allison etc.) but that their track operations is still quite poor. Since 2016 - in which they should have won a couple of races - they’ve squandered countless chances

Since 2010 at least actually

Not really. They won lots of races they shouldn’t have won in 2012 and maximised their potential in what was, at best, a mediocre car. Same can be said in 2015 - the car was second best but a huge leap away from Mercedes, but they maximised all their opportunities to score three wins.

Now they have a good car but they’re not even remotely close to maximising; and it’s not just the post-summer breakdown they’ve had both years, their strategy has been poor throughout the last theee campaigns.

[TAG]

Vetttel describing closing the door on Hamilton into the wall in Russia, "it was tough but fair". Verstappen's squeeze on him, "unacceptable". The guy in front controls and in this one instance Vertappen's defense was masterful and textbook CLEAN.

[Vasconia]

Please don’t misunderstand me. I’m not laying into Vettel as I try my best to be impartial but I can’t see the logic in going in like that against a driver who you know won’t give you personally an inch. It was never going to end any other way.

I don´t like this because its conclusion is do not try to overtake Max because he will close the door whatever it happens. Back in time Senna used to have this threatening attitude and it was pretty unfair in my opinion. Tough being hard Max should learn to be more aware of what is going on around him.

[marvin78]

Please don’t misunderstand me. I’m not laying into Vettel as I try my best to be impartial but I can’t see the logic in going in like that against a driver who you know won’t give you personally an inch. It was never going to end any other way.

I don´t like this because its conclusion is do not try to overtake Max because he will close the door whatever it happens. Back in time Senna used to have this threatening attitude and it was pretty unfair in my opinion. Tough being hard Max should learn to be more aware of what is going on around him.

That's exactly what I think. They created a driver which is not overtakable and that's completely mad.