2019 Singapore Grand Prix - Marina Bay, 20-22 September

[basti313]

Lead car getting the pit choice is a standard thing in F1 for every team, and every other team in every other motorsport, it's just the done thing.

Where does this come from? This "rule" was introduced a few years ago by Mercedes when they were playing with each other. I have never seen such a nonsense in any other motorsport before or after this nor in any other competing F1 team.

[Mamba]

https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/opin ... ng-leclerc

I think there is plenty people on this forum who need to read this race report/review. It explains things very well without going into biased fan behavior. Things simply didn't go as expected. For some they went better, and for some not so much. THAT IS RACING. Now move on to Russia.

[drunkf1fan]

Lead car getting the pit choice is a standard thing in F1 for every team, and every other team in every other motorsport, it's just the done thing.

Where does this come from? This "rule" was introduced a few years ago by Mercedes when they were playing with each other. I have never seen such a nonsense in any other motorsport before or after this nor in any other competing F1 team.

No it wasn't, what on earth. It's been a thing in F1 since long before Hamilton ever raced let alone before he moved to Mercedes.

Unless it's a refueling regulation period then pitting first is generally an advantage and offered to the team mate who is ahead, it's that simple. Merc never introduced such a rule even for Mercedes, they simply articulated when they did something different what the 'rule' was. IE they always operated under that assumption, when they pit Rosberg first once or twice while he was there they simply explained why they didn't pit Hamilton first when he was ahead 'as normal' because it was normal across the sport not just for Mercedes. The time they did it for Rosberg was the same as for Bottas, because they were in danger of losing positions and Hamilton wasn't.

[matt_b]

I like Red Bulls strategy because its hard to overtake around this track so why use the mediums and risk running out of tyres like Mercedes did in Monaco so likely Soft-Hard until the end. However there is a massive undercut here so a team could try what Mercedes did in Hungary, then there might be sufficient tyre offset for an overtake.

Why are so many surprised at the undercut? It was so obvious before the event even begun based on all the races we have had in Singapore, teams strategists obviously know a lot more than me yet the calls from yesterday were made.

[Zarathustra]

I like Red Bulls strategy because its hard to overtake around this track so why use the mediums and risk running out of tyres like Mercedes did in Monaco so likely Soft-Hard until the end. However there is a massive undercut here so a team could try what Mercedes did in Hungary, then there might be sufficient tyre offset for an overtake.

Why are so many surprised at the undercut? It was so obvious before the event even begun based on all the races we have had in Singapore, teams strategists obviously know a lot more than me yet the calls from yesterday were made.

Because ‘normally’ you get stuck in traffic, it’s also the reason for Hamilton to no avail trying to pull a gap after Leclerc pitted.

[ferkan]

This is what Binotto said to Leclerc.

"Good job Charles, I'm happy for you as well. Now go on the podium and enjoy it, we'll talk later"

Now, I'm thinking there is going to be some fireworks in Ferrari for next 6 races. Being happy for guy who overqualified his team mate and lost his place during pit stops? Not sure someone competitive as Leclerc will take it good.

[Bill_Kar]

I like Red Bulls strategy because its hard to overtake around this track so why use the mediums and risk running out of tyres like Mercedes did in Monaco so likely Soft-Hard until the end. However there is a massive undercut here so a team could try what Mercedes did in Hungary, then there might be sufficient tyre offset for an overtake.

Why are so many surprised at the undercut? It was so obvious before the event even begun based on all the races we have had in Singapore, teams strategists obviously know a lot more than me yet the calls from yesterday were made.

Many people argued that Vettel couldn't undercut Verstappen last year so it would be the same this year as well.

I can't believe that Mercedes with all the data couldn't figure it would work eventually, comfortably even.

And the 2-stopping Ferrari is bs, how could they be in tyre trouble when the pace in the first stint was so slow?

[matt_b]

I like Red Bulls strategy because its hard to overtake around this track so why use the mediums and risk running out of tyres like Mercedes did in Monaco so likely Soft-Hard until the end. However there is a massive undercut here so a team could try what Mercedes did in Hungary, then there might be sufficient tyre offset for an overtake.

Why are so many surprised at the undercut? It was so obvious before the event even begun based on all the races we have had in Singapore, teams strategists obviously know a lot more than me yet the calls from yesterday were made.

Because ‘normally’ you get stuck in traffic, it’s also the reason for Hamilton to no avail trying to pull a gap after Leclerc pitted.

In the race there was a perfect 13 second gap between Hulk and Stroll, Seb pitted on Lap 19 and came out 11 seconds behind Stroll which was perfect for laps 7-8 super fast laps before he caught Stroll. That gap was actually available for Lewis and Charles the lap before (Lap 18) as they were around two seconds ahead of Seb at that stage. That's is the part I don't get, Mercedes had two bites at the cherry (Lap 18 and Lap 19) and didn't do anything.

[NL_Fer]

I like Red Bulls strategy because its hard to overtake around this track so why use the mediums and risk running out of tyres like Mercedes did in Monaco so likely Soft-Hard until the end. However there is a massive undercut here so a team could try what Mercedes did in Hungary, then there might be sufficient tyre offset for an overtake.

Why are so many surprised at the undercut? It was so obvious before the event even begun based on all the races we have had in Singapore, teams strategists obviously know a lot more than me yet the calls from yesterday were made.

Many people argued that Vettel couldn't undercut Verstappen last year so it would be the same this year as well.

I can't believe that Mercedes with all the data couldn't figure it would work eventually, comfortably even.

And the 2-stopping Ferrari is bs, how could they be in tyre trouble when the pace in the first stint was so slow?

Mercedes couldn’t get the tyre to right temperature on the outlap. They could not make the undercut work for them.

[Edax]

As for the switch of Leclerc and Vettel, Binotto told that they considered it, but then ditched the idea because they thought that Vettel would have been punished for something he was not to blame for.

That's a fair argument except it ignores the fact that Leclerc was punished for something he was not to blame for. He drove the team's strategy and was punished by a win and points loss. If they switched them, Vettel would still have been better off than he was before the pit stop.

The reality is that Ferrari are still favouring Vettel. Maybe Vettel has a contract that requires it. That's about the only reason for doing it when the other driver is doing the job better.

To be fair I don’t think the team expected vettel to jump Leclerc, since Leclerc was still 3.6 seconds ahead when they pitted Vettel. That distance you normally don’t make up in a pitstop unless someone drops a wheelgun.

Vettel had a very good in- and outlap, Leclerc had a very bad inlap. So the team created the opportunity but both drivers had a hand in determining the outcome, both positively and negatively. That of course may be affected by tires. But if Vettel had better tires left after running 20 laps in dirty air than the leader he has done something better.

So I think the team were right in not reversing the order.

[ferkan]

How did Vettel had great in lap and Leclerc had bad one, when they where ~0.050s on their inlaps.

[wesley123]

Before Charles boxed, Lewis said: “Let’s undercut him”

Afterall this would have been the right strategy. Was he genuine, or just luring Charles into an early stop?

I'm not sure this would have been the better strategy. Hamilton would have cleared them both if he stopped the lap after.

The strategy they had would have worked out perfectly, if it wasn't for the three safety cars. In the past x amount of races their tactic has solely been to have a battle at the end with having much better tires.

Frankly enough this race shows that they were practically just competing for fun for the rest of the season, no one in their right mind would have opted for this strategy knowing a safety car in Singapore is a certainty.

What exactly should have Mercedes done instead of waiting for even longer once the opportunity for an undercut was gone? Going for as long as possible is what you should do, if you hope for SC to come.

Their strategy in the past x amount of races might have been to have a battle at the end with better tyres, but surely not at Singapore.
Mercedes went for a race setup? Hamilton couldn't even come close to overtaking Verstappen in the last couple of laps even though Max reported that his tyres were in a bad condition and he was sliding around already.
The difficulty to overtake at Singapore cannot be known more. Really hard to believe that the Mercedes engineers were not more clever than us on this forum.

I'm fairly certain it was even noted on the board radio that the race will be near the end.

It's really the sole reason for the strategy, although a safety car or VSC would have come in very handy for them. Race pace was so slow this year(just like last year) that it was very difficult to get, or keep, heat in the tires

[Zynerji]

Did Charles immediately pit the next time by the pit entrance. Or did he go by on Sebs outlap? I thought there was a full lap between.

And inlaps being that close proves they did tell Charles that Seb had pitted, or he would just kept his pace.

[Hammerfist]

Why are so many surprised at the undercut? It was so obvious before the event even begun based on all the races we have had in Singapore, teams strategists obviously know a lot more than me yet the calls from yesterday were made.

Because ‘normally’ you get stuck in traffic, it’s also the reason for Hamilton to no avail trying to pull a gap after Leclerc pitted.

In the race there was a perfect 13 second gap between Hulk and Stroll, Seb pitted on Lap 19 and came out 11 seconds behind Stroll which was perfect for laps 7-8 super fast laps before he caught Stroll. That gap was actually available for Lewis and Charles the lap before (Lap 18) as they were around two seconds ahead of Seb at that stage. That's is the part I don't get, Mercedes had two bites at the cherry (Lap 18 and Lap 19) and didn't do anything.

Yeah this is what I don't get. How long was that gap between Hulk and Stroll available? It seemed that Ferrari acted like it just became available when they decided to pit Seb at the last second. Did someone just pit in front of Hulkenberg and created that gap? If not it is really a big mistake for Mercedes not to have seen that gap.

[LM10]

Did Charles immediately pit the next time by the pit entrance. Or did he go by on Sebs outlap? I thought there was a full lap between.

And inlaps being that close proves they did tell Charles that Seb had pitted, or he would just kept his pace.

He directly pitted the next lap. And I just checked that his inlap was even 1.5 tenths faster than Vettel's.

I don't know, if this proves that they told Leclerc Seb had pitted, though. Because I don't know, if Vettel's inlap was particularly fast as he was ordered to pit just at the last turn before pit entry.