Monaco 2014 - Hamilton wanted immediate pitstop

[Sevach]

LH did make comparison about race strategist at Merc vs Mclaren. At Mclaren, I think he mention the team have 1 dedicated race strategist for himself, while Merc has got 1 race strategist for both drivers.

And Lewis should be happy with that, otherwise Rosberg could've attempted to undercut him on both Bahrain and Spain and in the future.

[thomin]

Toto Wolff was questioned about this post monoco, and he seemed to imply that if Lewis did that they would not service the car,

Source?

I'm guessing it was the Twitter-Interview he did just now. And he did not suggest that the team wouldn't service a driver if he came in, he said that the team makes the call and when the driver comes in nonetheless, they won't be ready and prepared to service him.
https://twitter.com/mercedesamgf1/statu ... 1584369665

[siskue2005]

Toto Wolff was questioned about this post monoco, and he seemed to imply that if Lewis did that they would not service the car,

Source?

I'm guessing it was the Twitter-Interview he did just now. And he did not suggest that the team wouldn't service a driver if he came in, he said that the team makes the call and when the driver comes in nonetheless, they won't be ready and prepared to service him.

https://twitter.com/mercedesamgf1/statu ... 1584369665

Yes thank u
I also dont see where he says they will not service the car....like 'elf341' said in the post above
The tyres won't be ready is normal, as they need at least half a laps time to get the mechanics and tyres ready

[elf341]

It was on Sky interview with Johnny Herbert and Damon Hill:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3w495YDvYxg

Around the 1 min mark. Perhaps I am stretching an interpretation of exactly what he said, but I don't think it's clear either way.

[MercedesAMGSpy]

LH did make comparison about race strategist at Merc vs Mclaren. At Mclaren, I think he mention the team have 1 dedicated race strategist for himself, while Merc has got 1 race strategist for both drivers.

And Lewis should be happy with that, otherwise Rosberg could've attempted to undercut him on both Bahrain and Spain and in the future.

Well, just forget the positons they were during the races this season and you can ask yourself the question is this a good and fair strategy of Mercedes. With such a big gap between their drivers and the rest of the field, why can't they undercut each other, why can't they use different tactics and strategies? Why is the leader given an advantage? Is that a fair fight? I think when Hamilton is P2, he disagrees and when Nico is P2, he disagrees.

[bill shoe]

Tough situation for the team to handle. I think they actually make it worse by trying to actively control it. Teams should leave final strategy decisions to each driver and his individual strategist.

Go back to the famous year of Hamilton vs Alonso at McLaren. At the very first race both drivers were in a 1-2 battle by themselves for the win for essentially the entire race. They both did (I think) 4 stints on 3 stops. At some point during the third stint (with one stop remaining), Hamilton had the edge over Alonso in terms of how many laps he could do until his next stop.

Back then, running longer than your opposition was advantageous because the tires didn't wear out and you would be on a light fuel load at the end of your stint while your opposition was on a heavier load at the beginning of his next stint. If you could crank out an extra lap or two under these conditions and have an equal pitstop then you end up ahead of your opponent.

Anyway, Hamilton was perfectly poised to do this and take the win in his first F1 race, but then McLaren actively chose to call Hamilton in early at a disadvantageous (for Hamilton) time in order to ensure that Alonso (the "front" driver at that point in the race) would stay in front. Hamilton didn't complain at the time, and the top-down powers-that-be at McLaren were happy that they had correctly "managed" the situation.

There was a cost that they failed to take into account. This cost came from the frustration of two drivers who were competitive and ultimately did not accept being actively controlled/slowed from the pits relative to their teammate. I believe this unaccounted cost for McLaren ended up being $100 million cash plus the driver's championship.

Now Mercedes is making the same mistake and again not counting the cost. They seem to have such an advantage that there is no logical reason to actively manage it, but human nature is such that when someone is a manager they feel an intense need to actively manage things instead of saying "ah, this will work better if I let it be".

Interesting to watch it develop, and notice you don't have to be passionate for Hamilton or Rosberg to enjoy it.

[dans79]

Now Mercedes is making the same mistake and again not counting the cost. They seem to have such an advantage that there is no logical reason to actively manage it, but human nature is such that when someone is a manager they feel an intense need to actively manage things instead of saying "ah, this will work better if I let it be".

This is exactly what I think Wolff is doing, over managing.

[Rodzilla]

Nice analysis using times and logic, guys.
But aren't we getting answers to the wrong question, especially Lewis? Either he is willing to follow the team's wishes or he isn't. If he is, they called to give Rosberg (the driver ahead) priority, which probably reflects rules of engagement accepted by all parties involved.
If he is not willing to follow the team's wishes, then he was behind in track, meaning that he had the chance to physically duck in to the pits after Rosberg had passed them. In that case (and with all the time he imagines gaining), the mechanics would have gotten tires ready for him, which even if cold, would do fine once the safety car was out. And (with the time gain he is imagining) he would likely have won the race. And he would have had 2007 all over again.

So Hamilton is asking whether he could have won the race. I think he should be asking whether he wanted to win the race like this. Because if pitting had been the right call, then the team would have wanted it to make the right call, but for Rosberg.

That's a good point. I think we are however missing something. From my impression, it wasn't necessarely about "winning the race by doing an undercut" - in fact, I personally think the undercut was non-existant at Monaco, hence why I'm disappointed the safety car ruined what could possibly been a chance for Lewis to get ahead under normal pitting circumstances - but because he wanted to avoid the scenario he had last year when the safety car made him lose places to Redbull by losing time in the pits.

I think the logic was - "guys, there was an accident - is Nico pitting? If he isn't, bring me in now.". I don't think he was trying to get an first pit over Nico, but wanted to avoid doing an extra lap and then lose time behind his team-mate in the pits. Luckily, the gap between him and Raikkoennen was so big, that even despite the holdup, he didn't lose position. At the same time, he probably was left wondering why Nico didn't pit at the first instance and why the team didn't allow him pitting instead. In hindsight, as the analysis shows, he would have been worse off indeed, so I guess it's a non-issue in the end.

+1 finally someone else understood what I was saying previously in the thread
If there was a situation of stacking up he would have lost his second place to someone else, like last year
That is why he was so agitated

Here is what I wrote before

Many of you are immediately ready to bash Lewis, just understand what happened

He said he knew there will be a safety car for that crash as they both passed the crashed car....Lewis wanted to pit immediately but they couldn't do it coz Nico gets choice as he is leading
All he is implying is Nico or team didn't call to come into pits immediately as the second time they all stacked up and could have lost lewis second place to Ricardo ...which was pretty much the risk In stacking up (similar to what happened to Schumacher at turkey 2006)

explain why he would be so agitated at losing 2nd place when he didnt lose 2nd place (he was complaining well after the pitstops happened and even after the race) and he never had any chance to lose 2nd place because the gap was so big

lewis clearly wanted to win, he had the tunnel vision focused on Rosberg and was interested in getting ahead of him at the stop, for example where was the agitation at losing 2nd place when his team told him the gap to Ricciardo, in his own words he said he didnt care about that

[ringo]

People are ignoring the fact that if Hamilton had pitted then and there, then he would be ahead of everyone sooner or later when they come in to pit.
Tyres would be warmer and so on. So i woudln't say coming in as the car crashed would have been a mistake.
Come in early to get your pitstop out of the way, and then get ahead of the others on warmer tyres when they pit, maybe even giving you a chance to get ahead of your teammate who has to pass the crash scene a second time.

[Rodzilla]

People are ignoring the fact that if Hamilton had pitted then and there, then he would be ahead of everyone sooner or later when they come in to pit.
Tyres would be warmer and so on. So i woudln't say coming in as the car crashed would have been a mistake.
Come in early to get your pitstop out of the way, and then get ahead of the others on warmer tyres when they pit, maybe even giving you a chance to get ahead of your teammate who has to pass the crash scene a second time.

you are ignoring many things as well, like the safety car coming out, the safety car delta time and that hamilton also has to pass the crash scene a second time unless he knows a secret shortcut route that rosberg doesnt know about

but please process this information because it is important to understand, that the fundamentals of the undercut is you go quicker on your outlap than your opponent can go on his in lap to make it work because you have fresher tyres and clean air, if the safety car comes out on your outlap and you have to slow down then it doesnt matter if you have tyres directly from the sun, the undercut wont work

i think the close battle for 3rd Raikkonen, Ricciardo and Alonso understood this, they all passed the crash, nobody decided to pit and nobody complained about not pitting

[Rodzilla]

Interestingly if Hamilton did pit early and lost his 2nd place to Raikkonen, he would radio in that his team are idiots

[hollus]

... With such a big gap between their drivers and the rest of the field, why can't they undercut each other, why can't they use different tactics and strategies?...

If you let driver B stop early, not no optimize race time, but to undercut driver A, the next logical thing to happen is that driver A will then stop early himself to undercut driver B's undercut. By now you have both drivers in a suboptimal strategy. But since that is now a fact, driver B would adapt his strategy to undercut A's new strategy...
I think by the time you undercut the undercut's undercut's undercut, no matter how big your gap, a Red Bull will breeze by.

It is ruductio ad absurdum, of course, but this is where a "free strategy" would lead, to a match race where slowing the other driver down is more important than being fast yourself.

[ringo]

What are you trying to prove RodZilla?
You have the gift of knowing what happened. But you never know what could have been. Button in fact did enter the pits first IIRC, and it turned his race around.
The whole point of the matter is, even if it was beneficial to pit, the team would not have pit the driver that is not leading regardless of what he thinks, or even what they think. They will always chose to have the first driver pit in the most favourable circumstances to him retaining the lead when he exits the pits.

[Phil]

I pretty much agree with ringo. In hindsight, it's easy to do the armchair math and deduct what would be if x, y and z unfolded. In the heat of the moment, from Lewis's point-of-view - it was simple: He lost Q3 by a fraction of a difference, then, on the lap that well could have been pole, his team-mate, either on purpose or by error, aware or unaware, prevented it by causing yellow-flags.

This being Monaco; Lewis had 3 chances to win it:

a.) get ahead at the start
b.) force Nico into a error by putting pressure on him
c.) jump him in the pits (by having better pace on used super-softs vs. Nico on fresh primes)

Option a.) proved to be impossible and even if it had been close, probably a bit risky considering it might end up in DNF for both or him at the first corner. Nico's clean start and the short run to the first corner solved this one. Then there is option b.) - this being Monaco, quite unlikely, as you need quite a performance differential to pass on track. Option c.) was likeliest and most realistic of all, if he could keep the pace, stay close and have enough (more) performance left in the tyre as Nico pits. This was his best chance.

As it turned out - Option c.) was precisely looking good. He was able to stay close to Nico through the entirety of the first stint and even put Nico under pressure (Nico outbraked himself twice, potentially damaging his tyres a bit with the lock ups).

When the Sutil crashed - it pretty much eliminated this option of ever working. Sutil crash and safety car means free-pitstop and that as the 2nd pitting car, he would always stay behind his team-mate. The only hope to still win, being option B.) which as I said previously was always going to be unlikely around Monaco. Not in the same car on identical tyres. The alternative strategy would always be prefered.

Perhaps Lewis felt that after Nico deprived him of his lap in Q3 that could have been pole, he could "repay" the favour by forcing an early stop and attempting the undercut or perhaps he was also concerned that the safety car and Nico not pitting right after the crash would lead him to even lose 2nd place and net a higher point loss to his team-mate in the WDC standings. After what happenend on Saturday, I think it's easy to relate to the amount of frustration Lewis must have been feeling in that moment. Then this is also Monaco - one of the most prestigous wins in F1.

[tim|away]

Button in fact did enter the pits first IIRC, and it turned his race around.

Button did pit on lap 25, a lap earlier than most others including both Mercs. More interestingly, both Hülkenberg (who was ahead of Button) and Bottas (who was behind Button) pitted on lap 26 - a lap later. Despite keeping his position, Button lost time on Bottas and Hülkenberg by pitting early.

Lap 24:
Hülkenberg: 1.2s ahead of Button
Bottas: 3.1s behind Button

Lap 26:
Hülkenberg: 2.5s ahead of Button
Bottas: 2.0s behind Button

Pitting early never worked out for Button. In fact, had Bottas managed to stay within a second, Button could have even lost a place. Button was lucky to keep track position - this gamble was never going to pay out for him.