Its also very very likely that debris from that same incident and car (his own car thus) which gave him the slow puncture which made him come in and then kill his race, which he at that point STILL could have WON.fritticaldi wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 03:20Russell was in full control and heading for his maiden win until Ironically enough the mayhem was triggered by Jack Aitken (his replacement at Williams).
Best thing i read.
I think pitting them might have been the right call if they did not make that mistake. If they didn't pit, and everyone behind them decides to do so, then they might end up with a tire disadvantage that (as you can see happened to Bottas) could cost them the win.Moore77 wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 05:07Best thing i read.
Beyond all that which has already been highlighted, I was shocked they let Bottas fight after that cock up, instead of asking him to move away and let George have a go. The only good thing in that was George showed balls to pull a move in that tight section and not waste a lap waiting for DRS zone. Sometimes James Vowell comes with these crazy ideas to throw away races.
Being hindsight genius is easy for any idiot, but it still doesn't make any sense why James made a call to pit them.
The car was easily the fastest by a long margin, even against anyone behind if the pitted with new softs.
The mediums had done half the race with strong pace.
The new hards were there for only a handful of laps with less than half the tank of fuel.
All of that could have pointed to not bring in the drivers. Definitely not to double stack them.
Mercedes has induced pain upon themselves on so many occasions when they double stack. They are not Red Bull for that exercise. Yet, they decide to pit.
In last GP, they decide not to pit and take a risk of something going wrong, despite Hamilton having safe margin to do so. But here, they pit when not needed!
Bottas had more problems on his car than just old hards, besides being slow that could have contributed to his lack of pace. He was still in the box for eternity burning his breaks.e30ernest wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 05:11I think pitting them might have been the right call if they did not make that mistake. If they didn't pit, and everyone behind them decides to do so, then they might end up with a tire disadvantage that (as you can see happened to Bottas) could cost them the win.Moore77 wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 05:07Best thing i read.
Beyond all that which has already been highlighted, I was shocked they let Bottas fight after that cock up, instead of asking him to move away and let George have a go. The only good thing in that was George showed balls to pull a move in that tight section and not waste a lap waiting for DRS zone. Sometimes James Vowell comes with these crazy ideas to throw away races.
Being hindsight genius is easy for any idiot, but it still doesn't make any sense why James made a call to pit them.
The car was easily the fastest by a long margin, even against anyone behind if the pitted with new softs.
The mediums had done half the race with strong pace.
The new hards were there for only a handful of laps with less than half the tank of fuel.
All of that could have pointed to not bring in the drivers. Definitely not to double stack them.
Mercedes has induced pain upon themselves on so many occasions when they double stack. They are not Red Bull for that exercise. Yet, they decide to pit.
In last GP, they decide not to pit and take a risk of something going wrong, despite Hamilton having safe margin to do so. But here, they pit when not needed!
If the double-stack was successful we would be praising their strategic genius instead.
Sometimes when a driver has s solid consistent performance with no mistakes they can just cruise by unnoticed. With so much drama for P1 and so much drama for P3 nobody noticed P2.langedweil wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 05:37Funny that literally no one mentions Ocon being 2nd .. lucked in today.
Guess he just is that invisible one-day-fly; bet he'll drown next to Alonso next year, just like Stoffel ..
This x1000PlatinumZealot wrote: ↑06 Dec 2020, 21:54Acrually most HAM fans want Russel. They have an appetite for HAM destroying stars.lh13 wrote: ↑06 Dec 2020, 21:40Some Hamilton fans were hell bent on proving that Bottas is anything decent! I'm sure they're glad Russell did not win today. Bottas is there for a reason, to keep certain someone happy. It maybe a surprise for us, but Mercedes always knew how quick Russell was (is), yet he wasn't put in the car for next year. And people claim there is no #1/#2 in Mercedes.
Maybe those were mitigating factors, but to me it looks like the tires just fell off compared to the cars around him (which had fresh sets IIRC). He pitted at lap 63 and the race restarted on lap 69. He was on pace with Stroll up until lap 77 when Sainz passed him and he just fell back. Sainz' and Ricciardo's passes were on traction (vs braking) so it could be rear tires going off?Moore77 wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 05:14Bottas had more problems on his car than just old hards, besides being slow that could have contributed to his lack of pace. He was still in the box for eternity burning his breaks.e30ernest wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 05:11I think pitting them might have been the right call if they did not make that mistake. If they didn't pit, and everyone behind them decides to do so, then they might end up with a tire disadvantage that (as you can see happened to Bottas) could cost them the win.Moore77 wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 05:07Best thing i read.
Beyond all that which has already been highlighted, I was shocked they let Bottas fight after that cock up, instead of asking him to move away and let George have a go. The only good thing in that was George showed balls to pull a move in that tight section and not waste a lap waiting for DRS zone. Sometimes James Vowell comes with these crazy ideas to throw away races.
Being hindsight genius is easy for any idiot, but it still doesn't make any sense why James made a call to pit them.
The car was easily the fastest by a long margin, even against anyone behind if the pitted with new softs.
The mediums had done half the race with strong pace.
The new hards were there for only a handful of laps with less than half the tank of fuel.
All of that could have pointed to not bring in the drivers. Definitely not to double stack them.
Mercedes has induced pain upon themselves on so many occasions when they double stack. They are not Red Bull for that exercise. Yet, they decide to pit.
In last GP, they decide not to pit and take a risk of something going wrong, despite Hamilton having safe margin to do so. But here, they pit when not needed!
If the double-stack was successful we would be praising their strategic genius instead.
Bottas pitted for new hards on lap 49.e30ernest wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 07:34Maybe those were mitigating factors, but to me it looks like the tires just fell off compared to the cars around him (which had fresh sets IIRC). He pitted at lap 63 and the race restarted on lap 69. He was on pace with Stroll up until lap 77 when Sainz passed him and he just fell back. Sainz' and Ricciardo's passes were on traction (vs braking) so it could be rear tires going off?Moore77 wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 05:14Bottas had more problems on his car than just old hards, besides being slow that could have contributed to his lack of pace. He was still in the box for eternity burning his breaks.e30ernest wrote: ↑07 Dec 2020, 05:11
I think pitting them might have been the right call if they did not make that mistake. If they didn't pit, and everyone behind them decides to do so, then they might end up with a tire disadvantage that (as you can see happened to Bottas) could cost them the win.
If the double-stack was successful we would be praising their strategic genius instead.