Obviously, as a Merc fan, I'm somewhat disappointed with the result. The Red Bull was just plain faster on the hard tyres. Still, nice to see Hamilton going full tilt on a chase at the end. Bottas did get the short end of the stick on strategy, but it wasn't exactly clear cut. I was genuinely surprised that Hamilton was kept on the first hards for so long when they looked so bad. I'd expected to see the shot of Hamilton limping around on a flat/shredded tyre at any moment.
I still maintain the tyre choices were garbage, as the soft tyre was completely unsuitable for anything beyond a qualifying run. Even then no team went through Q2 using the soft tyre as it was entirely unsuitable for the race. It was made worse by the fact Pirelli gave teams only 3 sets of mediums and 2 sets of hards for the whole weekend - compared to 8 sets of the almost worthless soft tyre. My biggest concern at this point is that to make it 'entertaining', Pirelli/FIA will mandate unsuitably soft tyres for the rest of the season, and we'll be straight back to the days of cars hobbled by a compound that can't take the load - so paced laps managing the tyres the whole way around for everyone.
Credit where it's due, it was a good call by the Red Bull strategists and a good drive by Verstappen to make their strategy work.
A pity Hulkenberg had to pit a second time - officially because he had severe vibrations in the tyres. Would probably have finished ahead of Stroll in P5 or P6 depending on how quickly Albon caught and passed them. Still, a good showing all things considered and one that wil hopefully land him a seat somewhere.
Ferrari - oh boy. Leclerc managed another good result in P4 by simply staying out long enough for a one stop. Vettel on the other hand... things are getting messy. He screwed his race with a spin at T1, that one's on him, but the strategy calls after that are genuinely bizarre. There's Vettel's open criticism of the team on the radio over dropping him into traffic, then there's forcing him to pit after only 11 laps on a new set of hard tyres to put on used mediums for the 18 laps to the end. The only shorter stint on new hards was Danny Ric (who spun and flatspotted them). Leclerc had new hards on for 34 laps. The only explanation is that Leclerc was catching him at that point and they were willing to screw Vettel over to get Leclerc past him. I've yet to see any other explanation for it. It's one hell of an acrimonious breakup for sure.
If you have access, I highly recommend listening to all of the team radios especially pre-race. And you've got to get to them before FIA gets around to deleting them. So far, Ricciardo's and Norris' are good and comical. I've got many more to listen to though.
0
Options
Dhalphirdon't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered Userregular
@altid the choice to go with softer tyres was an artificial one, for sure, but it's no less artificial than the tyres already are inherently, or indeed many other parts of the sport.
I've just about been able to watch every driver's pre-race, formation, and first lap.
Right now I'm watching Carlos Sainz look at track notes on loose pieces of printer paper. It's just kind of funny to me. Norris and Ricciardo are still the best for comedy on the radio. Most are pretty quiet though.
Obviously, as a Merc fan, I'm somewhat disappointed with the result. The Red Bull was just plain faster on the hard tyres. Still, nice to see Hamilton going full tilt on a chase at the end. Bottas did get the short end of the stick on strategy, but it wasn't exactly clear cut. I was genuinely surprised that Hamilton was kept on the first hards for so long when they looked so bad. I'd expected to see the shot of Hamilton limping around on a flat/shredded tyre at any moment.
I still maintain the tyre choices were garbage, as the soft tyre was completely unsuitable for anything beyond a qualifying run. Even then no team went through Q2 using the soft tyre as it was entirely unsuitable for the race. It was made worse by the fact Pirelli gave teams only 3 sets of mediums and 2 sets of hards for the whole weekend - compared to 8 sets of the almost worthless soft tyre. My biggest concern at this point is that to make it 'entertaining', Pirelli/FIA will mandate unsuitably soft tyres for the rest of the season, and we'll be straight back to the days of cars hobbled by a compound that can't take the load - so paced laps managing the tyres the whole way around for everyone.
Credit where it's due, it was a good call by the Red Bull strategists and a good drive by Verstappen to make their strategy work.
A pity Hulkenberg had to pit a second time - officially because he had severe vibrations in the tyres. Would probably have finished ahead of Stroll in P5 or P6 depending on how quickly Albon caught and passed them. Still, a good showing all things considered and one that wil hopefully land him a seat somewhere.
Ferrari - oh boy. Leclerc managed another good result in P4 by simply staying out long enough for a one stop. Vettel on the other hand... things are getting messy. He screwed his race with a spin at T1, that one's on him, but the strategy calls after that are genuinely bizarre. There's Vettel's open criticism of the team on the radio over dropping him into traffic, then there's forcing him to pit after only 11 laps on a new set of hard tyres to put on used mediums for the 18 laps to the end. The only shorter stint on new hards was Danny Ric (who spun and flatspotted them). Leclerc had new hards on for 34 laps. The only explanation is that Leclerc was catching him at that point and they were willing to screw Vettel over to get Leclerc past him. I've yet to see any other explanation for it. It's one hell of an acrimonious breakup for sure.
When do we typically stop using spoiler tags after a race? I'm pretty new to this thread and F1 in general. re this race:
I agree with the above re: the merc strategy. After the race everyone is saying Bottas got the short end, but during the race the commentators were kind of saying the opposite. Namely that Bottas would get short end if Hamilton was doing a 1 stop strat. Since he ended up going 2 stop I don't see the big variance. I'm a little surprised that Hamilton was able to go full tilt those last few laps, but Bottas only seemed to get a couple fast laps right at the start of his last stint. Not sure how much of that is on Merc. Seems to just be the way the car/tires worked out this race. What am I missing? (like I said, this is all pretty new to me!)
Also, Merc thought that Hamilton's tires would be fine after the blisters wore off based on analysis Bottas' tires. I don't think that was really something they could have known ahead of time, though they obviously could have pitted Hamilton 1st to find out. In the end, I don't think Hamilton got much of an advantage by staying out those extra laps before his last stint.
Usually we keep the spoiler tags for a couple of days after the race. Not sure if we really need to, but that was the old habit in case someone needed to catch up with it late. Also, welcome!
Obviously, as a Merc fan, I'm somewhat disappointed with the result. The Red Bull was just plain faster on the hard tyres. Still, nice to see Hamilton going full tilt on a chase at the end. Bottas did get the short end of the stick on strategy, but it wasn't exactly clear cut. I was genuinely surprised that Hamilton was kept on the first hards for so long when they looked so bad. I'd expected to see the shot of Hamilton limping around on a flat/shredded tyre at any moment.
I still maintain the tyre choices were garbage, as the soft tyre was completely unsuitable for anything beyond a qualifying run. Even then no team went through Q2 using the soft tyre as it was entirely unsuitable for the race. It was made worse by the fact Pirelli gave teams only 3 sets of mediums and 2 sets of hards for the whole weekend - compared to 8 sets of the almost worthless soft tyre. My biggest concern at this point is that to make it 'entertaining', Pirelli/FIA will mandate unsuitably soft tyres for the rest of the season, and we'll be straight back to the days of cars hobbled by a compound that can't take the load - so paced laps managing the tyres the whole way around for everyone.
Credit where it's due, it was a good call by the Red Bull strategists and a good drive by Verstappen to make their strategy work.
A pity Hulkenberg had to pit a second time - officially because he had severe vibrations in the tyres. Would probably have finished ahead of Stroll in P5 or P6 depending on how quickly Albon caught and passed them. Still, a good showing all things considered and one that wil hopefully land him a seat somewhere.
Ferrari - oh boy. Leclerc managed another good result in P4 by simply staying out long enough for a one stop. Vettel on the other hand... things are getting messy. He screwed his race with a spin at T1, that one's on him, but the strategy calls after that are genuinely bizarre. There's Vettel's open criticism of the team on the radio over dropping him into traffic, then there's forcing him to pit after only 11 laps on a new set of hard tyres to put on used mediums for the 18 laps to the end. The only shorter stint on new hards was Danny Ric (who spun and flatspotted them). Leclerc had new hards on for 34 laps. The only explanation is that Leclerc was catching him at that point and they were willing to screw Vettel over to get Leclerc past him. I've yet to see any other explanation for it. It's one hell of an acrimonious breakup for sure.
When do we typically stop using spoiler tags after a race? I'm pretty new to this thread and F1 in general. re this race:
I agree with the above re: the merc strategy. After the race everyone is saying Bottas got the short end, but during the race the commentators were kind of saying the opposite. Namely that Bottas would get short end if Hamilton was doing a 1 stop strat. Since he ended up going 2 stop I don't see the big variance. I'm a little surprised that Hamilton was able to go full tilt those last few laps, but Bottas only seemed to get a couple fast laps right at the start of his last stint. Not sure how much of that is on Merc. Seems to just be the way the car/tires worked out this race. What am I missing? (like I said, this is all pretty new to me!)
Also, Merc thought that Hamilton's tires would be fine after the blisters wore off based on analysis Bottas' tires. I don't think that was really something they could have known ahead of time, though they obviously could have pitted Hamilton 1st to find out. In the end, I don't think Hamilton got much of an advantage by staying out those extra laps before his last stint.
The reason for Bottas getting the short end is a bit political in nature.
In Mercedes, the driver ahead has the "preference" with regards to pitting. This means that, unless they're double-stacking, they will pit first and the other driver pits in the next lap. The way this ends up working is that both drivers end up in the same position and with the same tyre strategy, thus the same chance of winning.
The problem here is that Bottas was pitted first (this was indeed the smart move with the information available), but Hamilton hung out outside way longer, which led to him having much fresher tyres at race's end and could overtake Bottas much more easily (unlike in the first laps.)
The "fair" strategy would've been to pit them both, but it transpired that either Hamilton disregarded the option or Mercedes themselves tried to get him to defend the position for much longer. The result for Mercedes is the same, a 2-3 finish. But for Bottas it's much, much different.
The issue is that Bottas plays the "follow team orders nicely" card and ends up shafted even when the position was his.
Obviously, as a Merc fan, I'm somewhat disappointed with the result. The Red Bull was just plain faster on the hard tyres. Still, nice to see Hamilton going full tilt on a chase at the end. Bottas did get the short end of the stick on strategy, but it wasn't exactly clear cut. I was genuinely surprised that Hamilton was kept on the first hards for so long when they looked so bad. I'd expected to see the shot of Hamilton limping around on a flat/shredded tyre at any moment.
I still maintain the tyre choices were garbage, as the soft tyre was completely unsuitable for anything beyond a qualifying run. Even then no team went through Q2 using the soft tyre as it was entirely unsuitable for the race. It was made worse by the fact Pirelli gave teams only 3 sets of mediums and 2 sets of hards for the whole weekend - compared to 8 sets of the almost worthless soft tyre. My biggest concern at this point is that to make it 'entertaining', Pirelli/FIA will mandate unsuitably soft tyres for the rest of the season, and we'll be straight back to the days of cars hobbled by a compound that can't take the load - so paced laps managing the tyres the whole way around for everyone.
Credit where it's due, it was a good call by the Red Bull strategists and a good drive by Verstappen to make their strategy work.
A pity Hulkenberg had to pit a second time - officially because he had severe vibrations in the tyres. Would probably have finished ahead of Stroll in P5 or P6 depending on how quickly Albon caught and passed them. Still, a good showing all things considered and one that wil hopefully land him a seat somewhere.
Ferrari - oh boy. Leclerc managed another good result in P4 by simply staying out long enough for a one stop. Vettel on the other hand... things are getting messy. He screwed his race with a spin at T1, that one's on him, but the strategy calls after that are genuinely bizarre. There's Vettel's open criticism of the team on the radio over dropping him into traffic, then there's forcing him to pit after only 11 laps on a new set of hard tyres to put on used mediums for the 18 laps to the end. The only shorter stint on new hards was Danny Ric (who spun and flatspotted them). Leclerc had new hards on for 34 laps. The only explanation is that Leclerc was catching him at that point and they were willing to screw Vettel over to get Leclerc past him. I've yet to see any other explanation for it. It's one hell of an acrimonious breakup for sure.
When do we typically stop using spoiler tags after a race? I'm pretty new to this thread and F1 in general. re this race:
I agree with the above re: the merc strategy. After the race everyone is saying Bottas got the short end, but during the race the commentators were kind of saying the opposite. Namely that Bottas would get short end if Hamilton was doing a 1 stop strat. Since he ended up going 2 stop I don't see the big variance. I'm a little surprised that Hamilton was able to go full tilt those last few laps, but Bottas only seemed to get a couple fast laps right at the start of his last stint. Not sure how much of that is on Merc. Seems to just be the way the car/tires worked out this race. What am I missing? (like I said, this is all pretty new to me!)
Also, Merc thought that Hamilton's tires would be fine after the blisters wore off based on analysis Bottas' tires. I don't think that was really something they could have known ahead of time, though they obviously could have pitted Hamilton 1st to find out. In the end, I don't think Hamilton got much of an advantage by staying out those extra laps before his last stint.
The reason for Bottas getting the short end is a bit political in nature.
In Mercedes, the driver ahead has the "preference" with regards to pitting. This means that, unless they're double-stacking, they will pit first and the other driver pits in the next lap. The way this ends up working is that both drivers end up in the same position and with the same tyre strategy, thus the same chance of winning.
The problem here is that Bottas was pitted first (this was indeed the smart move with the information available), but Hamilton hung out outside way longer, which led to him having much fresher tyres at race's end and could overtake Bottas much more easily (unlike in the first laps.)
The "fair" strategy would've been to pit them both, but it transpired that either Hamilton disregarded the option or Mercedes themselves tried to get him to defend the position for much longer. The result for Mercedes is the same, a 2-3 finish. But for Bottas it's much, much different.
The issue is that Bottas plays the "follow team orders nicely" card and ends up shafted even when the position was his.
Yeah, I get that Bottas would be annoyed that he got screwed, but at the same time what were they supposed to do? They thought they had to pit both drivers and gave him priority, then once they looked at the tires they realized they didn't have to bring Lewis in. Should they just throw away any chance of a win in order to preserve the qualifying order? I guess they could have given them team orders since it was clear Lewis wasn't going to catch Max.
+1
Options
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
Obviously, as a Merc fan, I'm somewhat disappointed with the result. The Red Bull was just plain faster on the hard tyres. Still, nice to see Hamilton going full tilt on a chase at the end. Bottas did get the short end of the stick on strategy, but it wasn't exactly clear cut. I was genuinely surprised that Hamilton was kept on the first hards for so long when they looked so bad. I'd expected to see the shot of Hamilton limping around on a flat/shredded tyre at any moment.
I still maintain the tyre choices were garbage, as the soft tyre was completely unsuitable for anything beyond a qualifying run. Even then no team went through Q2 using the soft tyre as it was entirely unsuitable for the race. It was made worse by the fact Pirelli gave teams only 3 sets of mediums and 2 sets of hards for the whole weekend - compared to 8 sets of the almost worthless soft tyre. My biggest concern at this point is that to make it 'entertaining', Pirelli/FIA will mandate unsuitably soft tyres for the rest of the season, and we'll be straight back to the days of cars hobbled by a compound that can't take the load - so paced laps managing the tyres the whole way around for everyone.
Credit where it's due, it was a good call by the Red Bull strategists and a good drive by Verstappen to make their strategy work.
A pity Hulkenberg had to pit a second time - officially because he had severe vibrations in the tyres. Would probably have finished ahead of Stroll in P5 or P6 depending on how quickly Albon caught and passed them. Still, a good showing all things considered and one that wil hopefully land him a seat somewhere.
Ferrari - oh boy. Leclerc managed another good result in P4 by simply staying out long enough for a one stop. Vettel on the other hand... things are getting messy. He screwed his race with a spin at T1, that one's on him, but the strategy calls after that are genuinely bizarre. There's Vettel's open criticism of the team on the radio over dropping him into traffic, then there's forcing him to pit after only 11 laps on a new set of hard tyres to put on used mediums for the 18 laps to the end. The only shorter stint on new hards was Danny Ric (who spun and flatspotted them). Leclerc had new hards on for 34 laps. The only explanation is that Leclerc was catching him at that point and they were willing to screw Vettel over to get Leclerc past him. I've yet to see any other explanation for it. It's one hell of an acrimonious breakup for sure.
When do we typically stop using spoiler tags after a race? I'm pretty new to this thread and F1 in general. re this race:
I agree with the above re: the merc strategy. After the race everyone is saying Bottas got the short end, but during the race the commentators were kind of saying the opposite. Namely that Bottas would get short end if Hamilton was doing a 1 stop strat. Since he ended up going 2 stop I don't see the big variance. I'm a little surprised that Hamilton was able to go full tilt those last few laps, but Bottas only seemed to get a couple fast laps right at the start of his last stint. Not sure how much of that is on Merc. Seems to just be the way the car/tires worked out this race. What am I missing? (like I said, this is all pretty new to me!)
Also, Merc thought that Hamilton's tires would be fine after the blisters wore off based on analysis Bottas' tires. I don't think that was really something they could have known ahead of time, though they obviously could have pitted Hamilton 1st to find out. In the end, I don't think Hamilton got much of an advantage by staying out those extra laps before his last stint.
The reason for Bottas getting the short end is a bit political in nature.
In Mercedes, the driver ahead has the "preference" with regards to pitting. This means that, unless they're double-stacking, they will pit first and the other driver pits in the next lap. The way this ends up working is that both drivers end up in the same position and with the same tyre strategy, thus the same chance of winning.
The problem here is that Bottas was pitted first (this was indeed the smart move with the information available), but Hamilton hung out outside way longer, which led to him having much fresher tyres at race's end and could overtake Bottas much more easily (unlike in the first laps.)
The "fair" strategy would've been to pit them both, but it transpired that either Hamilton disregarded the option or Mercedes themselves tried to get him to defend the position for much longer. The result for Mercedes is the same, a 2-3 finish. But for Bottas it's much, much different.
The issue is that Bottas plays the "follow team orders nicely" card and ends up shafted even when the position was his.
Yeah, I get that Bottas would be annoyed that he got screwed, but at the same time what were they supposed to do? They thought they had to pit both drivers and gave him priority, then once they looked at the tires they realized they didn't have to bring Lewis in. Should they just throw away any chance of a win in order to preserve the qualifying order? I guess they could have given them team orders since it was clear Lewis wasn't going to catch Max.
Lets not forget that Lewis has always been better on his tires than Bottas. It's one of the main edges Lewis has over him. It's played out in different ways two weeks in a row.
Anyone want to take a guess on who'll be in the Racing Point at the weekend? Perez first tested positive for COVID on the thursday before silversone 1, and tested positive again this week. By thursday it will have been 2 weeks since the first positive test. Officially he has to be self isolating for 10 days after the most recent positive test, but he is free to leave the country (seriously? You can be potentially infectious but go out and travel?) and it then falls under Spanish rules which I know nothing about. You'd like to think he'll test negative this week (and I sincerely hope he does), but COVID can be pretty stubborn.
I do have to say though, Hulkenberg's luck over his career is absolutely terrible. Ross Brawn said he was their next choice if they didn't sign Hamilton in 2012, and he missed out again when Rosberg retired. He was their first choice that time around, but had just signed a multi-year deal with Renault who refused to allow a buy out. I believe he also lost out to Kimi for the second Ferrari seat at one point.
Usually we keep the spoiler tags for a couple of days after the race. Not sure if we really need to, but that was the old habit in case someone needed to catch up with it late. Also, welcome!
It would be great if spoilers could be used until at least Tuesday afternoon. For those that can only watch the races (legally) on F1 TV and don't have a Pro account (like me), Tuesday is race day
+7
Options
Dhalphirdon't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered Userregular
edited August 2020
my conspiracy theory
max verstappen is actually the greatest driver the world has ever seen, and is worth 7 tenths by himself.
Therefore Red Bull sucks and Verstappen simply makes it look like it doesn't
Red Bull's true pace is what gasly and albon were/are getting from it
While Verstappen is undeniably very good, I'd say there's also a hefty contribution from shoving rookies into the seat long before they're ready and piss poor driver management to go with it. Experience still counts for a lot, and neither Gasly nor Albon had much of it when thrown into the lion's den. The car is still likely pretty unstable as well.
Quali
Not much to say really. Bottas was very very close, but couldn't stick sector 3. Hamilton was slower in S1 and S2, but pulled out enough of an advantage in S3 to take it by a slim margin.
Racing Point looked a bit stronger than expected, but still not quite there in Q3. Kimi turned up for a change this season and put in a few good laps. The rest of the field is more or less as expected.
While Verstappen is undeniably very good, I'd say there's also a hefty contribution from shoving rookies into the seat long before they're ready and piss poor driver management to go with it. Experience still counts for a lot, and neither Gasly nor Albon had much of it when thrown into the lion's den. The car is still likely pretty unstable as well.
Quali
Not much to say really. Bottas was very very close, but couldn't stick sector 3. Hamilton was slower in S1 and S2, but pulled out enough of an advantage in S3 to take it by a slim margin.
Racing Point looked a bit stronger than expected, but still not quite there in Q3. Kimi turned up for a change this season and put in a few good laps. The rest of the field is more or less as expected.
My theory with regards to Verstappen is that maybe he's not quite good enough of a development driver, and the car ends up way too tailored to his style that other more junior drivers just can't handle it.
Pérez back in the seat this week after a negative test. Hulk is on standby.
It’s going to be interesting if/when Sergio doesn’t perform as well as you’d expect Nico.
I'm just curious where this comes from aside from Perez struggling a little this year cause he out performed hulk (granted he never had a chance to drive the 2012 Sauber) but even as team mates
Pérez back in the seat this week after a negative test. Hulk is on standby.
It’s going to be interesting if/when Sergio doesn’t perform as well as you’d expect Nico.
I'm just curious where this comes from aside from Perez struggling a little this year cause he out performed hulk (granted he never had a chance to drive the 2012 Sauber) but even as team mates
I want hulk to get his podium tho
It comes from Formula 1 teams being fickle about their drivers. I like Sergio and Nico both, but Nico was quite impressive in his short moment here. Sergio looks strong so far this weekend though.
The F2 Feature Race was pretty good, if anyone needed to watch an interesting race this weekend.
I've been watching the last couple of F2 rounds this season and bloody hell they've been entertaining. Was amazing to see Zho churn through the field with his alternate tyre strategy at Silverstone. Keen to watch the F2 race at Barcelona a bit later today
The race was ultimately better than I thought it would be.
Hamilton spot on throughout the race. The call to carry on with mediums at the end was the right one. Being so into it that he missed the end of the race was amusing.
Bottas paid dearly for a poor start on a track with not that many overtaking opportunities. And it really was a miserable start with compounding errors throughout. He was always going to get the places lost to the Racing Points back, but once he dropped the place to Verstappen, the only realistic way he was getting it back was a massive speed differential or an undercut . Merc dropped the ball slightly on strategy by relying on soft tyre working for them and it simply didn't. That said, maybe there wasn't a gap in the traffic to do the undercut.
Red Bull is a tale of two entirely different performances again. Verstappen getting about as much out of the car as he could but still ending a pitstop behind Hamilton, while Albon had something of a dire race. To be fair to Albon, the RB strategy with hard tyres and getting caught in traffic was poor and cost him badly, but I'm also surprised he didn't make it past an ailing Vettel at the end.
Speaking of Vettel, the Ferrari shitshow continues. Told to push on soft tyres, then 3 laps later asked if he can go to the end on them. Did a good job to make it work but you really have to ask if Ferrari even have strategists or if they actually remember Vettel exists. Meanwhile their engine shorts out and shuts down in Leclerc's car resulting in a spin and Leclerc undoing the seatbelts before restarting the car and driving around for two laps with it undone. I'm shocked by the second part. Driving two laps, on a live track, with seatbelts undone? There has to be some level of repercussion for that. Unfortunately I get the impression that Leclerc is something of a steward's darling.
Do have to laugh a bit at P4 being investigated for ignoring blue flags.
They didn't show Kvyat's blue flag incident, but those were a couple of weird penalties to hand out.
I could be wrong, but I don't think the replay they are showing along with Checo's radio messages about the penalty are right. I think it was the second time Hamilton lapped him after he stopped for tires, and Checo was a moving chicane for the last third of the lap. I think that was what got him the penalty but various sources aren't showing that replay.
For a somewhat depressing (though also delicious as a Hamilton fan) stat, Lewis likely wins by even more if he isn't slowed down be a couple seconds there.
Checo gets blue flags basically half the lap, starting just after the middle of S2, all the way through S3, and does basically nothing to let Hamilton by. Even going in to turn 1 I don't think he lifted even a touch to let him by. Pretty clear penalty.
Not even a mention from the stewards or FIA that he was driving without seatbelts, so at this point I highly doubt anything will be done. I guess seatbelts are optional now?
The sequence of events makes it very clear that Leclerc is at fault here. By his own admission, he undid his seatbelt after the spin. He then drives past the pit entry to complete that lap, passes it again completing the next lap and only then does he tell the pit wall that his belt is undone. He finally pits the next time around. I can't imagine any racing series at any level allowing a competitor to continue in any way with an unfastened seatbelt. The consequences are far too serious to brush it off. I would have expected at a bare minimum a reprimand, hefty fine and points on his license. Possibly higher because it's a pretty damned fundamental part of the safety equiptment and nobody would even think of racing without it.
Not even a mention from the stewards or FIA that he was driving without seatbelts, so at this point I highly doubt anything will be done. I guess seatbelts are optional now?
The sequence of events makes it very clear that Leclerc is at fault here. By his own admission, he undid his seatbelt after the spin. He then drives past the pit entry to complete that lap, passes it again completing the next lap and only then does he tell the pit wall that his belt is undone. He finally pits the next time around. I can't imagine any racing series at any level allowing a competitor to continue in any way with an unfastened seatbelt. The consequences are far too serious to brush it off. I would have expected at a bare minimum a reprimand, hefty fine and points on his license. Possibly higher because it's a pretty damned fundamental part of the safety equiptment and nobody would even think of racing without it.
Really feeling for Illot in both races. Certainly had the pace but was undone by unlucky safety cars and, following the 2nd last restart on the first race, not enough aggression. My boy Zho had ok showings in both races at least.
F2 continues to impress as a spectacle, I'm starting to get an idea of who the big players and teams are now
took way too long to find the F2 race replay on the espn site. Gonna try to watch it today, never watched an F2 race before, but should be fun.
0
Options
GnomeTankWhat the what?Portland, OregonRegistered Userregular
I have no where else to gush about sim racing stuff, so I'mma gush:
I really, really love Road America. I've always loved it, but my appreciation for it as I've leveled up as a driver has only grown. It's such a drivers track. We're running F3 there in the PA league this week and every lap is just a joy. It doesn't hurt that the F3 is just a monster car around RA.
Williams sold itself to an American company. So if experience tells me anything, we have about ten years max of having Williams as a company that exists in any way at all.
Posts
Steam | XBL
I still maintain the tyre choices were garbage, as the soft tyre was completely unsuitable for anything beyond a qualifying run. Even then no team went through Q2 using the soft tyre as it was entirely unsuitable for the race. It was made worse by the fact Pirelli gave teams only 3 sets of mediums and 2 sets of hards for the whole weekend - compared to 8 sets of the almost worthless soft tyre. My biggest concern at this point is that to make it 'entertaining', Pirelli/FIA will mandate unsuitably soft tyres for the rest of the season, and we'll be straight back to the days of cars hobbled by a compound that can't take the load - so paced laps managing the tyres the whole way around for everyone.
Credit where it's due, it was a good call by the Red Bull strategists and a good drive by Verstappen to make their strategy work.
A pity Hulkenberg had to pit a second time - officially because he had severe vibrations in the tyres. Would probably have finished ahead of Stroll in P5 or P6 depending on how quickly Albon caught and passed them. Still, a good showing all things considered and one that wil hopefully land him a seat somewhere.
Ferrari - oh boy. Leclerc managed another good result in P4 by simply staying out long enough for a one stop. Vettel on the other hand... things are getting messy. He screwed his race with a spin at T1, that one's on him, but the strategy calls after that are genuinely bizarre. There's Vettel's open criticism of the team on the radio over dropping him into traffic, then there's forcing him to pit after only 11 laps on a new set of hard tyres to put on used mediums for the 18 laps to the end. The only shorter stint on new hards was Danny Ric (who spun and flatspotted them). Leclerc had new hards on for 34 laps. The only explanation is that Leclerc was catching him at that point and they were willing to screw Vettel over to get Leclerc past him. I've yet to see any other explanation for it. It's one hell of an acrimonious breakup for sure.
Right now I'm watching Carlos Sainz look at track notes on loose pieces of printer paper. It's just kind of funny to me. Norris and Ricciardo are still the best for comedy on the radio. Most are pretty quiet though.
When do we typically stop using spoiler tags after a race? I'm pretty new to this thread and F1 in general. re this race:
Also, Merc thought that Hamilton's tires would be fine after the blisters wore off based on analysis Bottas' tires. I don't think that was really something they could have known ahead of time, though they obviously could have pitted Hamilton 1st to find out. In the end, I don't think Hamilton got much of an advantage by staying out those extra laps before his last stint.
Steam | XBL
In Mercedes, the driver ahead has the "preference" with regards to pitting. This means that, unless they're double-stacking, they will pit first and the other driver pits in the next lap. The way this ends up working is that both drivers end up in the same position and with the same tyre strategy, thus the same chance of winning.
The problem here is that Bottas was pitted first (this was indeed the smart move with the information available), but Hamilton hung out outside way longer, which led to him having much fresher tyres at race's end and could overtake Bottas much more easily (unlike in the first laps.)
The "fair" strategy would've been to pit them both, but it transpired that either Hamilton disregarded the option or Mercedes themselves tried to get him to defend the position for much longer. The result for Mercedes is the same, a 2-3 finish. But for Bottas it's much, much different.
The issue is that Bottas plays the "follow team orders nicely" card and ends up shafted even when the position was his.
I do have to say though, Hulkenberg's luck over his career is absolutely terrible. Ross Brawn said he was their next choice if they didn't sign Hamilton in 2012, and he missed out again when Rosberg retired. He was their first choice that time around, but had just signed a multi-year deal with Renault who refused to allow a buy out. I believe he also lost out to Kimi for the second Ferrari seat at one point.
It’s going to be interesting if/when Sergio doesn’t perform as well as you’d expect Nico.
It would be great if spoilers could be used until at least Tuesday afternoon. For those that can only watch the races (legally) on F1 TV and don't have a Pro account (like me), Tuesday is race day
max verstappen is actually the greatest driver the world has ever seen, and is worth 7 tenths by himself.
Therefore Red Bull sucks and Verstappen simply makes it look like it doesn't
Red Bull's true pace is what gasly and albon were/are getting from it
Quali
Racing Point looked a bit stronger than expected, but still not quite there in Q3. Kimi turned up for a change this season and put in a few good laps. The rest of the field is more or less as expected.
My theory with regards to Verstappen is that maybe he's not quite good enough of a development driver, and the car ends up way too tailored to his style that other more junior drivers just can't handle it.
Jeeesuuuusssss christ
I'm just curious where this comes from aside from Perez struggling a little this year cause he out performed hulk (granted he never had a chance to drive the 2012 Sauber) but even as team mates
I want hulk to get his podium tho
It comes from Formula 1 teams being fickle about their drivers. I like Sergio and Nico both, but Nico was quite impressive in his short moment here. Sergio looks strong so far this weekend though.
I've been watching the last couple of F2 rounds this season and bloody hell they've been entertaining. Was amazing to see Zho churn through the field with his alternate tyre strategy at Silverstone. Keen to watch the F2 race at Barcelona a bit later today
But that is an interesting start...
Bottas paid dearly for a poor start on a track with not that many overtaking opportunities. And it really was a miserable start with compounding errors throughout. He was always going to get the places lost to the Racing Points back, but once he dropped the place to Verstappen, the only realistic way he was getting it back was a massive speed differential or an undercut . Merc dropped the ball slightly on strategy by relying on soft tyre working for them and it simply didn't. That said, maybe there wasn't a gap in the traffic to do the undercut.
Red Bull is a tale of two entirely different performances again. Verstappen getting about as much out of the car as he could but still ending a pitstop behind Hamilton, while Albon had something of a dire race. To be fair to Albon, the RB strategy with hard tyres and getting caught in traffic was poor and cost him badly, but I'm also surprised he didn't make it past an ailing Vettel at the end.
Speaking of Vettel, the Ferrari shitshow continues. Told to push on soft tyres, then 3 laps later asked if he can go to the end on them. Did a good job to make it work but you really have to ask if Ferrari even have strategists or if they actually remember Vettel exists. Meanwhile their engine shorts out and shuts down in Leclerc's car resulting in a spin and Leclerc undoing the seatbelts before restarting the car and driving around for two laps with it undone. I'm shocked by the second part. Driving two laps, on a live track, with seatbelts undone? There has to be some level of repercussion for that. Unfortunately I get the impression that Leclerc is something of a steward's darling.
"Alright heres the task for you", Its like he's talking to a dumb child.
For a somewhat depressing (though also delicious as a Hamilton fan) stat, Lewis likely wins by even more if he isn't slowed down be a couple seconds there.
Checo gets blue flags basically half the lap, starting just after the middle of S2, all the way through S3, and does basically nothing to let Hamilton by. Even going in to turn 1 I don't think he lifted even a touch to let him by. Pretty clear penalty.
The sequence of events makes it very clear that Leclerc is at fault here. By his own admission, he undid his seatbelt after the spin. He then drives past the pit entry to complete that lap, passes it again completing the next lap and only then does he tell the pit wall that his belt is undone. He finally pits the next time around. I can't imagine any racing series at any level allowing a competitor to continue in any way with an unfastened seatbelt. The consequences are far too serious to brush it off. I would have expected at a bare minimum a reprimand, hefty fine and points on his license. Possibly higher because it's a pretty damned fundamental part of the safety equiptment and nobody would even think of racing without it.
https://www.racefans.net/2020/08/16/leclerc-drove-two-laps-with-seat-belts-off-after-engine-glitch/
F2 continues to impress as a spectacle, I'm starting to get an idea of who the big players and teams are now
I really, really love Road America. I've always loved it, but my appreciation for it as I've leveled up as a driver has only grown. It's such a drivers track. We're running F3 there in the PA league this week and every lap is just a joy. It doesn't hurt that the F3 is just a monster car around RA.
I was hoping something like this would happen so props to him for following through
D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO