2014 Hungarian Grand Prix - Hungaroring

[komninosm]

By the way, I don't like Alonso either. Nor Rosberg.

Do you like Vettel then?

[djos]

Nico Lost the Race when he couldn't stop JEV overtaking him in a Torro Rosso.

Indeed, at least when RedBull have told Seb to move over for Dan it's been when the following driver was on the gearbox of or the leading driver had a mechanical drama and was nursing the car.

In this case Nico had run out of pace by the time he caught Lewis and wasn't able to get even close to him on merit.

I'm not a lewis fan at all (hated his entitled attitude during his first few years at MacLaren) but asking him to slow down and let Nico past was a blunder, Nico wasn't doing enuf to deserve a wave by whereas Lewis was driving the wheels off his car!

[timorous]

Were they? Like sending him into traffic? He was in front and deserved better strategy. I'm not sure about pitting Rosberg so early, what he gained over Vergne he lost against Bottas and had longer later stints. I thought Hamilton couldn't make mediums last and was driving at Alonso's pace + DRS for the last 10 laps anyway (no pace lost), how can you expect him to do it on softs? In advance I won't argue about it as I'm not sure about softs-mediums logic.

In this particular race the Prime and the Option had practically the same degradation profile. They both lasted about the same but the Prime was just slower. Hamilton had already done 31 laps on the Option so doing 30 when the car is lighter, the track is more rubbered in and running in more clean air was easily doable.

The reason they should have switched strategy was because Hamilton got the overtake done on JEV and then put in 4 great laps that were a match for Ricciardo who had 15 lap newer tyres. That gave him the pit stop window over Rosberg and he had earned that entirely on his own merit.

[iotar__]

removed quote context is obvious

In this particular race the Prime and the Option had practically the same degradation profile. They both lasted about the same but the Prime was just slower. Hamilton had already done 31 laps on the Option so doing 30 when the car is lighter, the track is more rubbered in and running in more clean air was easily doable.

The reason they should have switched strategy was because Hamilton got the overtake done on JEV and then put in 4 great laps that were a match for Ricciardo who had 15 lap newer tyres. That gave him the pit stop window over Rosberg and he had earned that entirely on his own merit.

Deg/speed profile of mediums and softs? Similar but certainly not identical and:
- Not in the race based on real life current conditions comparison Rosberg - Hamilton (you can adjust for drivers)
- Maybe not on 31 lap stint based on Alonso, OK, Merc was different I can see you can compare to middle stint but also you can compare to last stint on mediums (real life)
- 4 great laps? Maybe 4 unnecessary great laps that affected his tyres later? How can you be sure that 4 laps like that with softs and it's even worse than it was with mediums, small differences /= no differences, even if you adjust pace of course
- last 10 laps Hamilton was at slower Alonso's pace anyway (slower tyres didn't matter?), better car, better engine and DRS I didn't see him overtaking with better degradation towards the end (where tyre difference should be the highest?), on the contrary he was sliding and lost place to Ricciardo despite DRS from Alonso, now replace mediums with softs and what, everything is different and perfect? He is behind him earlier and faster, maybe a bigger chance.
- Rosberg is leading, deserved better strategy and they are fixed at Merc and are meant to separate them, like in Barcelona or Bahrain, you can't act like it's everything can happen scenario.
- Vergne was pitting anyway (his tyres gone), I don't understand what overtaking him has got to do with anything, what free air? Couple more laps on softs with pace longevity trade-off and shorter last stint? OK but nothing to do with Rosberg later

BTW about other posts: what Rosberg being behind Vergne has got to do with anything? He was behind so tyres, strategy, traffic and team orders don't matter? There's always something like that out of the blue here. You know what, LH span on the first lap, so everything else doesn't matter either, right?

Problem is we can speculate but we won't hear anything from Merc about it, they'd rather pretend none of this happened Unless they come out and say: mediums and softs performed like that it's only theory. Rosberg losing a lot of time before and after last stop is a fact measured in heavy seconds regardless of any tyre speculations.

[ab_f1]

Rosberg being behind JEV was the game changer. Alonso passed him and came second. If Rosberg could have passed him he would've won. Also team had to react to his situation being stuck behind and may have deviated from originally planned one.

[iotar__]

Rosberg being behind JEV was the game changer. Alonso passed him and came second. If Rosberg could have passed him he would've won. Also team had to react to his situation being stuck behind and may have deviated from originally planned one.

How? It cost him obviously but it doesn't affect the rest of race decisions. These were separate. Vergne was pitting, Rosberg lost time behind Bottas.

About this soft-medium being obviously wrong. With tyres it's also about risk/safety and driver's characteristics. Overtaking Bottas in Germany was also a formality and it didn't happen not only because of top speed as "SKY tv pundits" would like you believe. Traction out of the corners and tyres also visibly mattered a lot and Hulkenberg later confirmed it. Something certain (with knowledge of top speeds, times despite wing damage faster 1,5 s per lap) can be turned into impossible.

[timorous]

removed quote context is obvious

In this particular race the Prime and the Option had practically the same degradation profile. They both lasted about the same but the Prime was just slower. Hamilton had already done 31 laps on the Option so doing 30 when the car is lighter, the track is more rubbered in and running in more clean air was easily doable.

The reason they should have switched strategy was because Hamilton got the overtake done on JEV and then put in 4 great laps that were a match for Ricciardo who had 15 lap newer tyres. That gave him the pit stop window over Rosberg and he had earned that entirely on his own merit.

Deg/speed profile of mediums and softs? Similar but certainly not identical and:
- Not in the race based on real life current conditions comparison Rosberg - Hamilton (you can adjust for drivers)
- Maybe not on 31 lap stint based on Alonso, OK, Merc was different I can see you can compare to middle stint but also you can compare to last stint on mediums (real life)
- 4 great laps? Maybe 4 unnecessary great laps that affected his tyres later? How can you be sure that 4 laps like that with softs and it's even worse than it was with mediums, small differences /= no differences, even if you adjust pace of course
- last 10 laps Hamilton was at slower Alonso's pace anyway (slower tyres didn't matter?), better car, better engine and DRS I didn't see him overtaking with better degradation towards the end (where tyre difference should be the highest?), on the contrary he was sliding and lost place to Ricciardo despite DRS from Alonso, now replace mediums with softs and what, everything is different and perfect? He is behind him earlier and faster, maybe a bigger chance.
- Rosberg is leading, deserved better strategy and they are fixed at Merc and are meant to separate them, like in Barcelona or Bahrain, you can't act like it's everything can happen scenario.
- Vergne was pitting anyway (his tyres gone), I don't understand what overtaking him has got to do with anything, what free air? Couple more laps on softs with pace longevity trade-off and shorter last stint? OK but nothing to do with Rosberg later

Lets look at the data Mercedes had available to them on Lap 39 when Hamilton came in for a pit stop.

1) He had completed 31 Laps on the Option tyre, in that stint 8.5 laps were at safety car speed, all but 4 of those laps he was in the dirty air of the driver infront, he made several overtaking moves, the car was obviously heavier in that stint and the track was greener. He was also able to pass JEV with relative ease, something Rosberg was unable to do and on laps 35,36,37,38 was able to match the lap times of Ricciardo who had tyres that were 15 laps newer than Hamilton's.

2) Williams had put both Bottas and Massa on the Prime tyre and they were very slow, suggesting that the lower track temp was not aiding in getting the Prime to work.

3) The data in FP1, FP2 and FP3 showed that the Prime tyre had a very similar degradation profile to the Option but was 1.5s/lap slower, a pit stop costs 20 seconds so in just over 13 laps the soft tyre would put you a pit stop ahead. 20 lap stints were comfortably doable on the soft tyre so even if the 30 lap stint looked a bit of a gamble at the time doing 2x 15 lap stints would have been faster than running the prime for 30 laps.

Given the above 3 facts it is easy to see that the Option tyre was the one to go for, doing 2x 15 lap stints or 1x 30 lap stint would probably have been a joint driver/team decision based on how Hamilton felt the track was at the time and his ability to look after the tyres. 1x 30 lap stint would have been marginally quicker than 2x 15 lap stints provided he did not reach the cliff at the end of the race. I think he would have been fine as he had already done a long stint with a heavier car while stuck in traffic and had a lot of pace when he was in clear air. I said this during the race so its not like this is some strategy with hindsight, I knew at the time that the Prime was the wrong call.

The 4 laps I am talking about were at the end of his 1st stint on slicks. He would have been comfortably in the mid to low 1:27's on new Options and would very likely have maintained that pace until the end.

The last 10 laps Hamilton was defending from Ricciardo and then Rosberg, of course he was slower.

Rosberg was leading, he deserved the better strategy until Hamilton got a pit stop advantage over him by doing the business and overtaking JEV which is something Rosberg failed to do.

If Rosberg had overtaken JEV earlier he would have gaped the cars behind and would not have lost position to Hamilton, which would have won him the race. His failure to do that his is own doing so why penalise Hamilton for actually getting the job done in 1 lap and pulling a gap to Rosberg, He earned his position on merit.

Now I do not think Mercedes penalised Hamilton in any way, it was quite a chaotic race and they were focusing (rightly so) on Rosberg and maximising his strategy, however once Hamilton managed to get a pit stop over Rosberg they should have switched focus as it was then Hamilton who was in the better position to maximise the points of the team, unfortunately in the chaos they missed this opportunity and I think that is unacceptable for a top class F1 team.

On the bright side they have learned a valuable lesson about strategic flexibility and hopefully they can learn from this mistake and make improvements to their in race strategy process to avoid this kind of error in the future. In a closely contested WCC/WDC this kind of error could cost the team or a driver the title so it is in their best interests to get it sorted ASAP.

[tranquility2k4]

timorous - I agree with what you say on Hamilton going Soft or Soft/Soft. The only counter argument I would use is that if he went on Option/Option then he'd of had to overtake Alonso and even if he did RIC could have pitted as soon as Hamilton got within 5 seconds or so of him and then covered him with fresh tyres. Even though HAM would have been faster on the final stint, he would find it hard to get by, as he did with VET.

I think at the time they put him on prime, they thought it would not fall off the cliff, as it did, at the end of the race and that maybe it would perform better. If both of those applied, they would not need to pit again and would also either pass Alonso at the end or he would have pitted. Unfortunately, the prime did not perform, but that was the only way HAM could win, he would not win on Option/Option and on a single Option for 30 laps - I think unlikely.

What annoys me is that Toto, etc, have not even mentioned anything about this or explained how they could have placed him on those different strategies - if they think Nico could have won on his Option/Option strategy, then why couldn't HAM of had that and (hypothetically won) when he was ahead on track after passing JEV, which Rosberg couldn't achieve?

[timorous]

timorous - I agree with what you say on Hamilton going Soft or Soft/Soft. The only counter argument I would use is that if he went on Option/Option then he'd of had to overtake Alonso and even if he did RIC could have pitted as soon as Hamilton got within 5 seconds or so of him and then covered him with fresh tyres. Even though HAM would have been faster on the final stint, he would find it hard to get by, as he did with VET.

I think at the time they put him on prime, they thought it would not fall off the cliff, as it did, at the end of the race and that maybe it would perform better. If both of those applied, they would not need to pit again and would also either pass Alonso at the end or he would have pitted. Unfortunately, the prime did not perform, but that was the only way HAM could win, he would not win on Option/Option and on a single Option for 30 laps - I think unlikely.

What annoys me is that Toto, etc, have not even mentioned anything about this or explained how they could have placed him on those different strategies - if they think Nico could have won on his Option/Option strategy, then why couldn't HAM of had that and (hypothetically won) when he was ahead on track after passing JEV, which Rosberg couldn't achieve?

The Soft/Soft strategy for Lewis would have been a straight fight for the lead, it would have been Alonso, Ricciardo, Hamilton together so it would depend entirely on if Ricciardo got held up by Alonso allowing Hamilton a chance to overtake, it would have been a real sprint to the finish.

The 30 lap soft strategy would have given him the win. low to mid 1:27's would have made him 1s/lap faster than he was on the medium compound. Over 30 laps that is a 30s shorter time to victory, take off 15s of that for overtaking Alonso and Massa and that is still 15s less than his actual finishing time which was only 6s behind Ricciardo. It would probably have been tight at the end but we also know he lost pace in the last 10 laps because he was battling with Ricciardo and Rosberg where as on the 30 lap soft strategy he would not have been doing that meaning the time gained would probably have been greater than the net 15s I am estimating here.

The thing is on laps 35,36,37 he was already in the mid 1:27's and those tyres had done nearly 30 laps by then so doing that pace on new tyres, with a lighter car, a greener track and less traffic would have been quite comfortable I reckon.

[komninosm]

He was in front and deserved better strategy.

Enough with this tripe. The guy in front after turn 1 does not deserve a better strategy, they both deserve the best strategy for them. Only thing they agreed to was who ever is in front after turn one will not get undercut by the second guy pitting first in a "normal" race. That is all. So if it's a normal race and Hamilton is in first place and Rosberg second and they both pit on laps 10-12 then Hamilton has the CHOICE to pit first. If things are not going normal then... all bets are off. Hamilton can't say:
"I want to pit on lap 11 and Rosberg must pit on lap 12 no matter if he has wasted his tires by lap 7 or if he has a slow puncture or whatever"
Do you understand now?

PS: Regarding the stuck behind Ham bit, Ros gained 5 seconds on Ric while he was there. If he wanted to overtake he should go way closer than 0.9-1.3 seconds. He can't expect his teammate to stop like a blue-flagged back-marker. That's ridiculous. Ros lost this race all on his own for not being able to pass other cars and being passed by other cars.
Regarding the Ham strategy the obvious change would be to (if Mercedes was paying any attention to him) burn the medium tires for a few fast laps after Ros pitted and then pit for softs and come out ahead of Ros and the traffic he was stuck in then. It was so obvious that it hurt (watching). Medium tires were terrible in this race. That is why the suggested dry strategies were soft soft soft medium(for as few laps as possible). And remember Ham had UNUSED soft tires unlike the rest! He should have been on inter soft soft soft FROM THE FRACKIN START!

[Emerson.F]

Rosberg being behind JEV was the game changer. Alonso passed him and came second. If Rosberg could have passed him he would've won. Also team had to react to his situation being stuck behind and may have deviated from originally planned one.

Not really the elephant in the room was Nico's mistake in Turn 1(he ran wide) where he was overtaken by Alonso, Magnussen and Vergne. Everybody seems to forget that Nico lost himself the race after going wide. The fact he wasn't able to overtake Jev makes it even more hilarious.

[PlatinumZealot]

removed quote context is obvious

In this particular race the Prime and the Option had practically the same degradation profile. They both lasted about the same but the Prime was just slower. Hamilton had already done 31 laps on the Option so doing 30 when the car is lighter, the track is more rubbered in and running in more clean air was easily doable.

The reason they should have switched strategy was because Hamilton got the overtake done on JEV and then put in 4 great laps that were a match for Ricciardo who had 15 lap newer tyres. That gave him the pit stop window over Rosberg and he had earned that entirely on his own merit.

Deg/speed profile of mediums and softs? Similar but certainly not identical and:
- Not in the race based on real life current conditions comparison Rosberg - Hamilton (you can adjust for drivers)
- Maybe not on 31 lap stint based on Alonso, OK, Merc was different I can see you can compare to middle stint but also you can compare to last stint on mediums (real life)
- 4 great laps? Maybe 4 unnecessary great laps that affected his tyres later? How can you be sure that 4 laps like that with softs and it's even worse than it was with mediums, small differences /= no differences, even if you adjust pace of course
- last 10 laps Hamilton was at slower Alonso's pace anyway (slower tyres didn't matter?), better car, better engine and DRS I didn't see him overtaking with better degradation towards the end (where tyre difference should be the highest?), on the contrary he was sliding and lost place to Ricciardo despite DRS from Alonso, now replace mediums with softs and what, everything is different and perfect? He is behind him earlier and faster, maybe a bigger chance.
- Rosberg is leading, deserved better strategy and they are fixed at Merc and are meant to separate them, like in Barcelona or Bahrain, you can't act like it's everything can happen scenario.
- Vergne was pitting anyway (his tyres gone), I don't understand what overtaking him has got to do with anything, what free air? Couple more laps on softs with pace longevity trade-off and shorter last stint? OK but nothing to do with Rosberg later

BTW about other posts: what Rosberg being behind Vergne has got to do with anything? He was behind so tyres, strategy, traffic and team orders don't matter? There's always something like that out of the blue here. You know what, LH span on the first lap, so everything else doesn't matter either, right?

Problem is we can speculate but we won't hear anything from Merc about it, they'd rather pretend none of this happened Unless they come out and say: mediums and softs performed like that it's only theory. Rosberg losing a lot of time before and after last stop is a fact measured in heavy seconds regardless of any tyre speculations.

Your arguement falls apart because Rosberg was not the Leading driver and the Softs were just as durable as the mediums but 1.5s a lap faster than fresh mediums and 3 seconds a lap faster than old mediums. HAM would have finished 30 seconds ahead of where was had he went soft soft. and Rosberg would have been 16 seconds a drift in third place.

[NathanOlder]

Spot on. But some people just can't see that

[Radley]

Great race.

Pirelli & Renault both did a marvelous job. The tires were good and the Renault engines were up to it.

[iotar__]

Your arguement falls apart because Rosberg was not the Leading driver and the Softs were just as durable as the mediums but 1.5s a lap faster than fresh mediums and 3 seconds a lap faster than old mediums. HAM would have finished 30 seconds ahead of where was had he went soft soft. and Rosberg would have been 16 seconds a drift in third place.

It''s repeating some selected fact with nothing relating to race conditions. How much faster than Bottas was Hamilton in Germany 1,5 s per lap? How much faster was he than Alonso? Again: he was behind him 1/3 of a stint.

Soft soft is irrelevant here, he was second Merc driver and they're separating them, no need to multiply scenarios. Plus as if traffic hadn't existed. 30s ahead? Good luck with that. Enough of repeating obvious: Rosberg lost up to whatever seconds it was behind Hamilton and behind Massa/Raikkonen.