Wayne DR wrote:I think Mercedes only maintain their edge on Ferrari (at rear tyre limited tracks) when they match tyre strategy, so this is what we will see them doing for the rest of the year - covering off every move. (We need a tyre with no markings to hide teams strategies from each other!)
I think some here are being sidetracked by Kimis performance. Comparing his Ferrari with the Mercedes is difficult, because they weren't running the same race. Kimi was on a OPO - Rosberg and Hamilton were on a OOP. The reason why Kimi even got a chance to pass Rosberg for P2 wasn't because the Ferrari was quicker (it wasn't), but because Mercedes compromised their race in order not to give up track position. In effect, they compromized Rosbergs race more than Lewis's at a crucial point in the race (end of 2nd stint).
Ferrari was very cunning. As Sector already rightly pointed out, they lured Mercedes into pitting early with both cars - first with Rosberg where the undercut worked, and then Lewis who was vulnerable and nearly got passed by both when they pitted him. That saw a 6 second gap evaporate into less than a second (he also had a slightly slow stop), which shows how much of an effect the "undercut" had at this race. Pitting early ment they were slightly outside their comfort zone and Ferrari brilliantly exploited this by running Kimi on pretty much optimal stints for a OPO strategy. The same happened at the end of the 2nd stint, when the gap was small between Ham, Ros and Vet and again, Ferrari pitted Vettel early. Mercedes at this point had two options; pit Rosberg first to neutralize the undercut from Vettel but leave Lewis vulnerable, or secure the win by pitting Hamilton first and leave Rosberg out vulnerable. They opted for the latter which was perfectly reasonable, but again that ment that Rosberg again found himself behind Vettel after he came out.
Meanwhile, Kimi was simply driving his race, in clean air and not being pushed into early stops...
Had Mercedes run their stints accoarding to their optimum range, they wouldn't have covered the Ferraris for the undercut. They would have run longer, but naturally found themselves behind the Ferraris at some point of the race and would have needed to pass them. On the plus side though, they would have been able to run a higher pace because their stints would have been optimally set-up for their performance and the tyres. If they had done that, Kimi's strategy would have been less effective because the gaps would have been bigger and he probably wouldn't have caught either Mercedes. That is assuming Vettel wouldn't have been able to hold up both Mercedes...
Also, regarding Kimi's strong middle stint on the medium tyres. This is nothing new, really. Anyone with doubts over the OPO strategy should just watch last years race when Rosberg was precisely on the same strategy vs. Lewis on OOP and they will see that even then, the prime tyre did a wonderful job in the middle stint. Last year too, I think the OPO strategy was the better strategy. The end to the race with the safety car just made us forget that.
because ferraris ability to match their race pace in FP2 and 3 was legitimate and it also explains why mercedes race pace was better in the race than expected..
