2019 British Grand Prix - Silverstone, July 12-14

[Just_a_fan]

It's not about the two stops, it's about what tire was used for the 2nd stint.

Bottas could have done what Hamilton did and take the hard. He elected not to believing, it appears, that the tyres chosen gave the faster overall race pace. Hamilton tried something different. Hamilton made his own luck and made it work.

[Restomaniac]

This is a quote from racefans from Saturday after Q:


Fits very well with what happened on Sunday, doesn't it?

It does then when you consider that tiny gap in qualy. It was obvious that the writing was on the wall for Sunday. Hamilton being all over Bottas like a cheap suit early on pointed at who had the better driver/car combo. I just don’t buy the argument that Bottas was unlucky because Hamilton’s 1 stopper was always going to be far faster than Bottas’ 2 stopper.

You still don't get it. It's not about the 1 stopper or 2 stopper, it's the fact the team decided to "split" strategies when both could have gone med-hard and raced to the end. Splitting strategies unnecessarily forced one of the two to decide to go med-med which automatically guarantees you have to 2 stop to change to a different compound. But we now know Hamilton had the strategy in mind like a few here did. It was a no-brainer and Bottas' side of the garage got duped into the inferior strategy.

The team didn’t. Read what Mark Hughes wrote. Both drivers were given the option if they were the 2nd Mercedes to go longer in the 1st stop.

Hamilton made the call for a 1 stopper and Hard tyres.. The same Hamilton that refused to come in again late on because he was so sure. A point he backed up by setting a fastest lap time on 30 lap old Hards that his team mate couldn’t match on far younger tyres.

Please stop looking for excuses. It’s doing nothing but making you look somewhat bitter.

[zibby43]

It's not about the two stops, it's about what tire was used for the 2nd stint.

Bottas could have done what Hamilton did and take the hard. He elected not to believing, it appears, that the tyres chosen gave the faster overall race pace. Hamilton tried something different. Hamilton made his own luck and made it work.

Concise and 100% spot-on. That Hughes piece did a great job of highlighting Hamilton's pre-race strategy, racecraft, and in-race decision making.

The same Hamilton that refused to come in again late on because he was so sure. A point he backed up by setting a fastest lap time on 30 lap old Hards that his team mate couldn’t match on far younger tyres.

Precisely.

"With more than a pit-stop’s worth of gap over Leclerc, Mercedes called in Hamilton – leading Bottas by around 3sec – for his tyre stop. 'Are you sure?' queried Hamilton, feeling he was doing just fine without stopping."

[richardn]

Hamilton demonstrated he was a good team player by pushing so much on the hards that Bottas was able to pit and come out in second. Of course then Hamilton also had the option of a free pit stop, if he needed it. The race was won by switching onto hard tyres and not by luck from the safety car, though.

[izzy]

Hamilton demonstrated he was a good team player by pushing so much on the hards that Bottas was able to pit and come out in second. Of course then Hamilton also had the option of a free pit stop, if he needed it. The race was won by switching onto hard tyres and not by luck from the safety car, though.

well it was won in four different ways all at once really. Or five even. Pace was the main one, then on top of that the tyre whispering, strategy call, safety car and staying out. Oh and racing wheel to wheel without tangling, Six

[ispano6]

It's not about the two stops, it's about what tire was used for the 2nd stint.

Bottas could have done what Hamilton did and take the hard. He elected not to believing, it appears, that the tyres chosen gave the faster overall race pace. Hamilton tried something different. Hamilton made his own luck and made it work.

Concise and 100% spot-on. That Hughes piece did a great job of highlighting Hamilton's pre-race strategy, racecraft, and in-race decision making.

The same Hamilton that refused to come in again late on because he was so sure. A point he backed up by setting a fastest lap time on 30 lap old Hards that his team mate couldn’t match on far younger tyres.

Precisely.

"With more than a pit-stop’s worth of gap over Leclerc, Mercedes called in Hamilton – leading Bottas by around 3sec – for his tyre stop. 'Are you sure?' queried Hamilton, feeling he was doing just fine without stopping."

Mark Hughes??????

Mercedes will check to make sure it is not 'unconsciously favouring' either of its Formula 1 drivers by allowing them to execute different strategies, like in the British Grand Prix.

https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/14480 ... avouritism

[ispano6]

It does then when you consider that tiny gap in qualy. It was obvious that the writing was on the wall for Sunday. Hamilton being all over Bottas like a cheap suit early on pointed at who had the better driver/car combo. I just don’t buy the argument that Bottas was unlucky because Hamilton’s 1 stopper was always going to be far faster than Bottas’ 2 stopper.

You still don't get it. It's not about the 1 stopper or 2 stopper, it's the fact the team decided to "split" strategies when both could have gone med-hard and raced to the end. Splitting strategies unnecessarily forced one of the two to decide to go med-med which automatically guarantees you have to 2 stop to change to a different compound. But we now know Hamilton had the strategy in mind like a few here did. It was a no-brainer and Bottas' side of the garage got duped into the inferior strategy.

The team didn’t. Read what Mark Hughes wrote. Both drivers were given the option if they were the 2nd Mercedes to go longer in the 1st stop.

Hamilton made the call for a 1 stopper and Hard tyres.. The same Hamilton that refused to come in again late on because he was so sure. A point he backed up by setting a fastest lap time on 30 lap old Hards that his team mate couldn’t match on far younger tyres.

Please stop looking for excuses. It’s doing nothing but making you look somewhat bitter.

Clearly no sense in trying to explain the obvious to you.

[Restomaniac]

You still don't get it. It's not about the 1 stopper or 2 stopper, it's the fact the team decided to "split" strategies when both could have gone med-hard and raced to the end. Splitting strategies unnecessarily forced one of the two to decide to go med-med which automatically guarantees you have to 2 stop to change to a different compound. But we now know Hamilton had the strategy in mind like a few here did. It was a no-brainer and Bottas' side of the garage got duped into the inferior strategy.

The team didn’t. Read what Mark Hughes wrote. Both drivers were given the option if they were the 2nd Mercedes to go longer in the 1st stop.

Hamilton made the call for a 1 stopper and Hard tyres.. The same Hamilton that refused to come in again late on because he was so sure. A point he backed up by setting a fastest lap time on 30 lap old Hards that his team mate couldn’t match on far younger tyres.

Please stop looking for excuses. It’s doing nothing but making you look somewhat bitter.

Clearly no sense in trying to explain the obvious to you.

No I can see the obvious. Hamilton made the right call himself despite his teams wishes.

[ispano6]

The team didn’t. Read what Mark Hughes wrote. Both drivers were given the option if they were the 2nd Mercedes to go longer in the 1st stop.

Hamilton made the call for a 1 stopper and Hard tyres.. The same Hamilton that refused to come in again late on because he was so sure. A point he backed up by setting a fastest lap time on 30 lap old Hards that his team mate couldn’t match on far younger tyres.

Please stop looking for excuses. It’s doing nothing but making you look somewhat bitter.

Clearly no sense in trying to explain the obvious to you.

No I can see the obvious. Hamilton himself made the right call himself.

Toto Wolff

"Strategy and the safety car just went against him, it's just bad luck."

[Restomaniac]

Clearly no sense in trying to explain the obvious to you.

No I can see the obvious. Hamilton himself made the right call himself.

Toto Wolff

"Strategy and the safety car just went against him, it's just bad luck."

Thanks for quoting such an open and honest chap

Did you expect him to admit that Hamilton has all their collective pants down

[Roman]

From my point of view the SC did not rob us from a HAM-BOT fight, that was already decided. Bottas could not gain any time on Hamilton, neither before nor after his pitstop while having to stop once more. Hamilton would have won no matter what.

For me the question was who would be 2nd? Bottas with his 2 stopper or maybe Vettel who was also on a one stop strategy (didnt stop until the SC either).

The fact that Hamilton could do the fastest lap with old hards shows the superiority of the MERC-HAM package. Truly incredible but unfortunate for the sport (just like the Ferrari-MSC package was).

[ispano6]

No I can see the obvious. Hamilton himself made the right call himself.

Toto Wolff

"Strategy and the safety car just went against him, it's just bad luck."

Thanks for quoting such an open and honest chap

Did you expect him to admit that Hamilton has all their collective pants down

Like Hamilton, such a team player!

(Team Hamilton, that is)

[Restomaniac]

Toto Wolff

Thanks for quoting such an open and honest chap

Did you expect him to admit that Hamilton has all their collective pants down

Like Hamilton, such a team player!

(Team Hamilton, that is)

A racing driver who wants to win. Who would have thought it!

[Just_a_fan]

Toto Wolff

"Strategy and the safety car just went against him, it's just bad luck."

And as has been pointed out ad nauseam Hamilton changed his strategy to make the difference. Hamilton, not the team. Bottas just drove the race without thinking about the options. Hamilton used his experience and the knowledge he personally gained on Friday, to try an alternative.

Sorry that your driver didn't win. "Must try harder" as it says on so many school reports.

[turbof1]

Guys, it is getting a little bit toxic in here. Why all the drama about Hamilton and Bottas? Yes, Hamilton did make the correct strategy choices. However, you can't also ignore he had some luck with the safety car. Would it have mattered? Well maybe not, but for sure it gave Hamilton much more of a cushion then he would have had if there was no safety car. Hamilton also was in a better position, the chasing car, to off set the strategy. It could very well have been that Hamilton would have made the same choice as Bottas if the former was in the lead.

I think both drove a very respectful race. Lets not convolute that performance with subjective performance from strategic choices.