2017 Belgian Grand Prix - Spa Francorchamps, 25-27 August

[sosic2121]

After having thought about this for a while, I think I'm actually going to jump in and defend Perez. s Eau Rouge is... I just think it would have been very ambitious either way.

Perez is the senior driver at FI. He's troubled by Ocon, and worse instead of raising his game, he's lowering it to keep Ocon in his pace so to speak. It's not about one event, it's been multiples,it's been systemic, they've been "spoken" to and it shows poor leadership on track on his part. Perez has the lead role, IMO he's failing at it.

I don't think you're being unfair int he technical analysis but the whole thing was compromised by Perez from the start, and that's the problem.

Not the kind of performances you want teams to see if they're going to keep an eye out for him come contract renewal time. He's put himself in a situation where he can only lose, very little to gain otherwise. The team is paying the price. He's selfish, but no great driver isn't. That's not the problem, he's also using dirty tactics which IMO he's not earned the right to use. That's his biggest failing.

+1

[marvin78]

He did suggest that Vettel would not have passed HAM, even if there was no lifting by Hamilton or Vettel doing it differently. Concidering the huge Mercedes advantage on the PU side he may probably be right. We don't know.

This huge PU advantage? I've seen a lot of discussion just a few pages back as to how the tow would have added .05 and it being all Vettel beyond that. I'm just left scratching my head by the comments here sometimes because they seem to argue both sides of the coin. So if it was all Vettel and there's nothing between the cars, and the US compound was shown to have 1.4 to 1.6 second advantage on Friday, why would Vettel never have been able to overtake?

Scratching my head... know what I mean?

I think it is just to complex for you. It's never just the PU or the driver or the car. It is much more complex and there are things involved we don't even think about. But the PU advantage is visible. On every straight.

Just don't overthink my posts. I mean what I write and just that. I did not want to say, that Vettel was the better driver, or Hamilton or someone else. I don't know that so I don't say things like that. If you get that you don't have to read things from my posts that I never wrote. I have no favorite. I'm not a fan of any driver. I even don't get, why someone would be. So let it go.

[foxmulder_ms]

They acknowledged though that putting Bottas on the Soft was a mistake. He'd not have lost the position to both Kimi and Ricciardo so it's not all linear. Hamilton had to defend against Vettel in a car that is not just competitive but is challenging for a championship. To say that Vettel was never going to overtake is simply wrong. If anything it showed how complacent Vettel is in nursing his lead. The US tires were the choice, the only reason Mercedes didn't put it on is because they didn't have them. Regardless of where the cars were relative to their performance, the 1.4 to 1.6 second pace difference shown on Friday more that made up for the few tenths one way or another. Additionally, Hamilton put in his fastest times in sector two, not in the straights. That where the real difference was.

That is a significant point missed by many.

[dans79]

the only reason Mercedes didn't put it on is because they didn't have them.

According to the team it wasn't the only reason!

[TAG]

the only reason Mercedes didn't put it on is because they didn't have them.

According to the team it wasn't the only reason!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FFmIaGfg40&dummy=1

I was referring to Bottas, the video states specifically that it was a mistake to put them on his car because unlike Lewis he wasn't able to heat them up enough to be able to defend with them for the restart.

[Phil]

That Mercedes traded off S2 for straight line speed came straight from the horses mouth (Toto). Imagine how much faster they had been if they had optimized the car for the quickest lap...

[Chene_Mostert]

That Mercedes traded off S2 for straight line speed came straight from the horses mouth (Toto). Imagine how much faster they had been if they had optimized the car for the quickest lap...

I'll take a wild guess, as fast as Botas?

[Phil]

That Mercedes traded off S2 for straight line speed came straight from the horses mouth (Toto). Imagine how much faster they had been if they had optimized the car for the quickest lap...

I'll take a wild guess, as fast as Botas?

Apparently, Mercedes, Force-India and (???) were set-up with a higher top-speed. Ferrari, RedBull had more wing. McLaren had way more wing too apparently which was strange given this caused a very big disadvantage on the straights (28kmh deficit to some).

[maxxer]

Except getting pole position yesterday ?

"i'm not talking about driving, just purely some strategic thinking that was purely him alone making the decision... "

So what part of getting on pole doesnt sound strategic to you ?

[fiohaa]

Except getting pole position yesterday ?

"i'm not talking about driving, just purely some strategic thinking that was purely him alone making the decision... "

So what part of getting on pole doesnt sound strategic to you ?

yes because.....no other drivers try and get pole, its not like it has obvious advantages... (sarcasm)
you make 'getting pole' sound like some kind of tactical thing.

[ChrisDanger]

Just saw this on F1's twitter feed, posted about a year ago after Rosberg's 200th start. Hamilton's 200th start in Spa with a victory puts him in 2nd with 58 wins, 22 ahead of Alonso and 18 behind Schumacher.