2017 Chinese Grand Prix - Shanghai 07-09 April

[BanMeToo]

On a serious topic, why haven't we had the timing ticker in either of the two races this year? Is it gone for good? The race is muuuuuch harder to follow without it

[Chene_Mostert]

Marshalling during this event really impressed me, clearing of cars and track debris, even fixing of barriers seemed to be a lot more efficient when compared to more traditional race venues.

[ENGINE TUNER]

On a serious topic, why haven't we had the timing ticker in either of the two races this year? Is it gone for good? The race is muuuuuch harder to follow without it

The timing screens and FOM graphics have been terrible the first two races, missing timing screens, false infographics, incorrect tire allocations, they are struggling tremendously. They even showed VET & RAI driving for Williams and Massa driving for McLaren at one point.

[NYGIANTS]

No, please define "pure speed", or do you just like saying it cause it sounds "cool".

to me "pure speed" was what max was showing yesterday not at the start but how he was able to get pass the cars. his corner entry and corner exit speed i haven't seen since lewis rookie season. the debate will be is it the car or max, and my reasoning of why its max, me and wife are huge ricciardo fans and dani's entry and exit speeds is not the same which you can clearly see.

the thing is we hardly see it with the redbulls because of their power deficit just like we don't see it with lewis except in qualies or if he's relegated at the back of the grid, but people nowadays attribute his passing because of the car. but when there's variables like a wet race or a cool weather race with the redbulls i see the "pure speed" from max.

VER was fast yes, but RIC was clearly saving his tires and came back at VER at the end of the race. There is more going on than we all see or recognize .

don't disagree completely but even towards the end dani couldn't pass max with slightly newer tires.

the way max bleeds the brakes on entry and his touch on the throttle on exit is a sight to behold.

[Sieper]

Oh come on, "there is more going on then we can see" sure there is but we all know how the game is being played. On a damp track Max is just faster then Ricci. On a dry track they are very close. Max said his set-up wasn't great. I'm inclined to believe him, he had very little tracktime, especially after he made set up changes between fp3 and q1.

[henra]

As far as the red bull resurgence? There is no red bull resurgence,they were flattered by the weather and the VSC and SC.. look for them to be a cool 1.4 seconds behind Ferrari and Mercedes this coming weekend.

Exactly.
I have no idea where the idea that RB has caught up is coming from. 40s behind Seb and this with SC and VSC means almost 1s per Lap behind. That is huge.
The picture from AUS gets confirmed Ferrari with Seb and Merc with Lewis very closely matched. Kimi and Valtteri >0,3 - 0,5s behind. The rest >(>)1s behind.
The tyres were a significant leveller in the past since they didn't survive pushing. Now that the tyres allow for sustained pushing the performance delta of the drivers gets much clearer again.

[AnotherAlex]

To be honest the people running the dry tyres were still losing quite a lot of time in the last sector, the SC happened too soon for us to know if it was a great move by Ferrari or not.

The picture is muddied by the relative positions on the lap when the VSC was called but, from the gaps to the leader in the race chart on http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2017/04/09/2 ... ap-charts/ showing that between the second and third laps the two drivers on slicks, Sainz and Hulkenberg, were so much faster than the rest of the field, I think Vettel definitely made what was the right call at that time. (With hindsight, etc.)

What I'd like to know is why Raikkonen didn't close up to the guys in front when the actual safety car was on track, which would have moved him (and probably a few others) ahead of Ricciardo after the latter's late stop. I assume they are given a target speed but would have expected it to be fast enough to allow the field to close up.

[Shrieker]

On a serious topic, why haven't we had the timing ticker in either of the two races this year? Is it gone for good? The race is muuuuuch harder to follow without it

The timing screens and FOM graphics have been terrible the first two races, missing timing screens, false infographics, incorrect tire allocations, they are struggling tremendously. They even showed VET & RAI driving for Williams and Massa driving for McLaren at one point.

To add to that, being an audiophile, I've recognized many times that the onboard video and audio from the cars aren't in sync. Which is very frustrating to say the least. I've seen this both on live tv feed and the onboard laps from the official F1 site.

[Juzh]

On a serious topic, why haven't we had the timing ticker in either of the two races this year? Is it gone for good? The race is muuuuuch harder to follow without it

The timing screens and FOM graphics have been terrible the first two races, missing timing screens, false infographics, incorrect tire allocations, they are struggling tremendously. They even showed VET & RAI driving for Williams and Massa driving for McLaren at one point.

To add to that, being an audiophile, I've recognized many times that the onboard video and audio from the cars aren't in sync. Which is very frustrating to say the least. I've seen this both on live tv feed and the onboard laps from the official F1 site.

Audio/telemetry desync coincided with the camera technology upgrade for the 2016 season. Ever since then onboard sound and speedos are out of sync with the actual cars. For whatever reason everything was perfectly in sync for spanish GP last year, but then again was not for all subsequent events to this day.

[Fifty]

Russian hacking for certain

[Fulcrum]

Unfortunately, Kimi isn't going to perform very well within these regulations. I'm not trying to make an excuse for him, there isn't one, but let me explain my perspective.

1) Passing is clearly far more difficult this year.
2) Kimi isn't an assertive driver.
3) He usually qualifies 'out-of position', i.e. lower than the innate speed he is capable of extracting in race conditions.

#3 means Kimi frequently gets into positions we saw this weekend - stuck behind cars he should already be in front of. This immediately compromises his race performance.

#2 means he rarely, if ever, tries speculative or on the edge passing moves. As this is not a component of his style, he lacks familiarity when doing so. When he does try, his success rate isn't high - think Russia and his move on Bottas, Hungary last year as well.

I can think of many occasions where Kimi has resorted to going round the outside rather than the inside, sometimes successfully I might add. He does so with what appears to be higher regularity than other drivers, which to me is an indication of his relative timidity. He's overly 'fair', doesn't drive with his 'arms out' enough imo.

Combining all of the above with #1 means China could become a frequently repeated exercise this year. Ferrari are going to have to consider their options carefully. Given the relative structural integrity of the tyres, the only thing I can suggest is trying to achieve a significant tyre delta for Kimi during late race conditions. That, or simply giving him an overt mandate to be more aggressive. He would still be required to pass cars though.

[Moose]

I've been saying it for a few years now. Kimi just isn't that fast.

He's a WDC because in 2007 the two fastest drivers on the grid stole points off each other repeatedly, no other reason.

[Fulcrum]

The thing I noticed this weekend was the difference between Vettel and Raikkonen under braking, especially into the hairpin at the end of the long straight. The difference wasn't massive, but every lap Raikkonen would be:

• Slightly out of line.

• Slightly too late on the brakes

• Slightly too early on the brakes

The penalty is small, and difficult to spot when you don't have a direct reference point but, with Vettel being immediately behind him, you could see the net effect. Every lap he was probably losing 0.10 through that corner alone.

I suspect age is definitely playing its part, but it should be mentioned Raikkonen is pretty poor in the wet, or changeable conditions. Only China 2007 springs to mind as an exception, and Hamilton was miles up the road before his tyre issues, so Raikkonen almost won that race by default.

[F1NAC]

Here is another angle of Sainz making contact with barrier
https://twitter.com/FiftyBuckss/status/ ... 0118337536

[ferkan]

So if it were only 2 cars on the track, whoever in the sauber followed by VET in his ferrari, do you think that would have affected their decision to put on slicks on a semi wet track?

VET took a gamble and lost out, pure and simple. Only the people who don't realize it was a gamble would have called it a brilliant strategy if it had worked out. It was a gamble either way and they lost out.


No, it is you that is struggling to understand it.

The variables are totally different, so you might have to consider different opportunities.

Exactly, the Ferrari has enough pure speed to beat the sauber on track without having to resort to gambles like changing onto slicks on semi wet track, where someone(SAI) on slicks just went off track and someone else on slicks(GIO) crashes a lap later.

But VET did not have the pure speed to catch and pass HAM so he resorted to a gamble, gamble that he lost out on.

Gamble? Is it a gamble if you put 100$ and you are guaranteed to get back at least same amount? They went for strategy that might have turned out handsomely, they didn't have speed to pass Hamilton because you have to have much more then Ferrari had in race (if it even had anything!).

They knew he will be lowest 2nd, and 1st was in play until Gio crashed, that is it.