|
Post by Wß on Jul 29, 2018 17:25:55 GMT
I can’t believe how some people think that crash was Bottas’ fault. Seen some hilarious comments. But then there are some very blinkered folk around. Did Vettel think Bottas had just disappeared? Is he that lacking in awareness? I guess he is. Webber said it best, Vettel thinks the car ends at the back of his helmet.
|
|
|
Post by Wß on Jul 29, 2018 17:26:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by racechick on Jul 29, 2018 20:04:06 GMT
So Bottas was penalised for hitting Ricciardo , but Vettel wasn’t for hitting Bottas Hmmmmmm
|
|
|
Post by Wß on Jul 29, 2018 23:35:21 GMT
They were both racing incidents IMO, Vettel should know better by now, but he gets desperate sometimes. Bottas could have yielded the positon to Ricciardo it was lost to begin with, but it wasn't like he hit Ricciardo intentionally or had control of the car at that point.
In the end the 10 second penalty does nothing, but he did get two points on the license.
|
|
|
Post by dogued on Jul 30, 2018 4:38:51 GMT
Vettel v Bottas Racing incident. Bottas could have slowed more, however it would have meant losing 2 places. There was also the factor of old tyres and Seb cut off the air supply to reduce downforce making it harder to stop in time. Seb had the position, but should have left more room rather than cutting across the apex. Totally 50/50 in my mind, and I am NOT a Vettel fan.
Bottas v Ricciardo Horner said it on air just before the incident "My concern with that damage would be understeer." Bottas was aware of the damage, had done 2 laps and knew his car was handling worse. Add to that the old tyres, and he certainly should have had more caution once he saw Ricciardo alongside. In my mind, Mercedes should have pitted him right away as he was always going to lose a spot to Ricciardo and would have had 5 laps to claw back 14s which wasn't out of the realm of possibility. Ricciardo gave plenty of room and was totally innocent. Correct call on a penalty there.
Ferrari Early in the year we were singing the praises of the Ferrari strategy team. What has gone wrong? At the time Bottas pitted, it would have been 100% set in Ferrari's mind that he was going to 2 stop like their plan for Kimi. As soon as Vettel got a 25s lead, they should have pitted him for US and let him run as long as he could. He would have been able to build enough of a gap to have a 2nd stop if required and probably have challenged for the win. They remind me of pretty much any English sports team; once they get the lead they panic and stuff it all up.
Lewis Drove a typical "Lewis" race from the front. Smooth, well though out, never stressed, and able to conserve engine parts. He was told the gap to Seb/Bottas was 2s and replied "that's not enough man" and went out over the next 8 laps and put in laps over 1s faster than Bottas, before controlling his pace to the end.
Others Gasly drove well, Leclerc was unlucky at the start given Ericcson's finishing place. Grosjean couldn't understand why he was behind everyone "here's a hint... the guy holding the wheel isn't as good as he thinks he is!"... Vandorne so unlucky there.
All in all, not a great race, but a decent way to end the first half. This race pretty much summed up the season so far. Ferrari are the quickest, but old habits creaping in. Mercedes remember how to lead from the front. Renault engines are unreliable.
|
|
|
Post by Hammer on Jul 30, 2018 6:05:38 GMT
I still can't believe how Crashtel didn't get a puncture for that one, that was such an impact and his tyre held. Goddamn it. The guy's got nine lives. Still remember the 2012 season when he was turned around with a gash on the side of his car at the start of the Brazilian GP and still finished the race with enough points for the championship. OH hell yeah I was just watching that the afternoon of the Hungarian race!! The best part was when he's already backing up and another car (a Williams or smth) smashes into his rear wheel and DNFs on the spot....and Vettel just spins the car around and carries on at maximum speed. Though that year I was so thankful he was a lucky duck, because I didn't want that other guy winning the title.
|
|
|
Post by Hammer on Jul 30, 2018 6:12:48 GMT
BTW what's up with Bottas being upset about Wolffy calling him an 'excellent wingman'? If you drive like one, isn't it okay to be called one? Or am I missing something.
Whoa...just went over to copy the article and saw this:
1/2 Some out of context news around..
I have not called a meeting with the bosses for Toto saying I was the perfect wingman in this race. There is no need to. I was disapponted with my end result in the race and saw everything in a negative way for a moment. I know what he ment
12:49 AM - Jul 30, 2018 · Pécel, Magyarország 4,205 702 people are talking about this Twitter Ads info and privacy
Valtteri Bottas ✔ @valtteribottas 2/2
And he would have said the same about Lewis if he’d be in same situation and had a similar race. We are on equal terms and I trust the team 100% on that. All good. We’ll keep pushing! It’ll come. #VB77 @mercedesamgf1
12:51 AM - Jul 30, 2018 · _________________________________
I guess there was no need to make this post.
|
|
|
Post by racechick on Jul 30, 2018 7:31:40 GMT
I think it was tactless of Toto to call Bottas ‘a perfect wingman’ even if that’s exactly what he was IN THAT RACE! I can understand Bottas being upset with that. But what was Bottas’ alternative once he’d been pitted to cover off Raikonnen? He was lucky Vettel had the slow stop putting both Ferrari’s behind him. Thereafter it was in Bottas’ OWN INTERESTS as well as Lewis’ interests to keep the Ferrari’s behind. And he almost did it , credit to him, on very old tyres. He was fighting for his own second place as much as Lewis’ first place.
Vettel couldn’t catch and pass Bottas until that clumsy move at the end. Had Bottas not been there do we seriously think he could have caught and passed Hamilton on fresher tyres and pulling out gaps at will?
Let’s look at it from another angle, Bottas got ahead at the start. The positions were reversed. Bottas was finding speed and Hamilton couldn’t match it. Bottas had a 20 Second lead at the end and Hamilton was falling back into the clutches of the Ferraris. The strategy would have been exactly the same Mercedes would have tried to protect a one/two with Bottas first and Hamilton second.
|
|
|
Post by RyRy on Jul 30, 2018 10:26:03 GMT
Vettel v Bottas Racing incident. Bottas could have slowed more, however it would have meant losing 2 places. There was also the factor of old tyres and Seb cut off the air supply to reduce downforce making it harder to stop in time. Seb had the position, but should have left more room rather than cutting across the apex. Totally 50/50 in my mind, and I am NOT a Vettel fan. Agreed, like Mark Webber said, Vettel thinks the back of his car is behind his helmet and just turns in dangerously without giving room. Bottas v Ricciardo Horner said it on air just before the incident "My concern with that damage would be understeer." Bottas was aware of the damage, had done 2 laps and knew his car was handling worse. Add to that the old tyres, and he certainly should have had more caution once he saw Ricciardo alongside. In my mind, Mercedes should have pitted him right away as he was always going to lose a spot to Ricciardo and would have had 5 laps to claw back 14s which wasn't out of the realm of possibility. Ricciardo gave plenty of room and was totally innocent. Correct call on a penalty there.[/quote] The only reason I agree on the penalty is because Bottas didn't hand the place back immediately, if he had given him the spot back after the incident I would have called it a racing incident. Ferrari Early in the year we were singing the praises of the Ferrari strategy team. What has gone wrong? At the time Bottas pitted, it would have been 100% set in Ferrari's mind that he was going to 2 stop like their plan for Kimi. As soon as Vettel got a 25s lead, they should have pitted him for US and let him run as long as he could. He would have been able to build enough of a gap to have a 2nd stop if required and probably have challenged for the win. They remind me of pretty much any English sports team; once they get the lead they panic and stuff it all up. I see it so often in F1 where teams react to others rather than doing their own race, just like when Raikkonen pitted, Bottas didn't need to pit. He could have stayed out longer than Hamilton because Hamilton had to push a little to create a gap at the start yet Bottas was just cruising along. Lewis Drove a typical "Lewis" race from the front. Smooth, well though out, never stressed, and able to conserve engine parts. He was told the gap to Seb/Bottas was 2s and replied "that's not enough man" and went out over the next 8 laps and put in laps over 1s faster than Bottas, before controlling his pace to the end. Yep, we see these type of races quite a lot from Hamilton, just cruising to victory with a flawless drive. Others Gasly drove well, Leclerc was unlucky at the start given Ericcson's finishing place. Grosjean couldn't understand why he was behind everyone "here's a hint... the guy holding the wheel isn't as good as he thinks he is!"... Vandorne so unlucky there. Grosjean was complaining so damn early about his tyres yet they looked fine and all other teams were finding the tyres to be decent and healthy. Feel sorry for Vandoorne and Leclerc, sucks for them
|
|
|
Post by Hammer on Jul 30, 2018 11:50:59 GMT
I still don't get why Bottas had to mirror Kimi's strategy.....that just fucked him at the end. Hamilton wasn't holding him up, so why didn't they just go with the same strategy....or was it just splitting the risk? If it was, they didn't commit to their strategy, Ferrari did as they showed with their respective cars' tyres.
And I still don't get why Hamilton had to pit when he did, I would've pulled him in when the gap was say about 3 seconds. Even if the pitstop was slow, a big outlap with fresh tyres would ensure track position. Since this track is hard to pass, it would be nice to have my car burning the tyres of a car close behind (if it had pit immediately after mine).
|
|
|
Post by dogued on Jul 30, 2018 12:03:57 GMT
The "mirror strategy" is common. Look at it this way... In a worse case scenario, Kimi pits and is fast. With out anyone between himself and Sebastian, he puts in enough hot laps that when Bottas & Lewis pit, he is between them and Seb. Seb can now extend the lead and get back out in front of Kimi before his second stop. Kimi now has fresh tyres and can spend 15 laps hunting down 3rd, while Vettel is assured of the win.
With Bottas copying the strategy, Kimi is limited in that he can only cruise up to the back of Bottas. If they are both going fast enough, they will both be ahead of Seb.
As it played out, they should have pitted Bottas under the VSC and he would have been the one hunting down Vettel, for a worst case 3rd place.
|
|
|
Post by Wß on Jul 30, 2018 13:01:35 GMT
I still don't get why Bottas had to mirror Kimi's strategy.....that just fucked him at the end. Hamilton wasn't holding him up, so why didn't they just go with the same strategy....or was it just splitting the risk? Mercedes threw away the 1-2 when they brought Bottas in. It's impossible to pass in this track unless you're over a second faster. After they pulled from the start with a perfect 1-2 lead, I really thought they would pull it off. The only brilliant strategy call Mercedes has mad all year has been to put Lewis on the US last week before the rain. Every other call has been conservative and questionable. They're still running their strategy as if they had the car advantage.
|
|
|
Post by Wß on Jul 30, 2018 13:04:01 GMT
As it played out, they should have pitted Bottas under the VSC and he would have been the one hunting down Vettel, for a worst case 3rd place. Agreed, again they've been conservative at the wrong time.
|
|
|
Post by Hammer on Jul 30, 2018 13:09:44 GMT
The "mirror strategy" is common. Look at it this way... In a worse case scenario, Kimi pits and is fast. With out anyone between himself and Sebastian, he puts in enough hot laps that when Bottas & Lewis pit, he is between them and Seb. Seb can now extend the lead and get back out in front of Kimi before his second stop. Kimi now has fresh tyres and can spend 15 laps hunting down 3rd, while Vettel is assured of the win. With Bottas copying the strategy, Kimi is limited in that he can only cruise up to the back of Bottas. If they are both going fast enough, they will both be ahead of Seb. As it played out, they should have pitted Bottas under the VSC and he would have been the one hunting down Vettel, for a worst case 3rd place. Yes I follow this logic and think it's line with what Mercedes was thinking. However, my question is if they wanted to do this they could've committed to it from the start, like Ferrari did. Don't these guys compute the fastest route to finish a race with strategy? I think the 1 stop was the fastest for this weekend as Lewis showed, and Kimi's 2 stopper could not have beaten Hamiltons. All in hindsight, but I questioned this in this thread right after the pit stop. Mercedes should've just not fallen for the ruse, and monitored Kimis pace. At worst, they lose 2nd place and are in a real fight for 3rd since Bottas will be the one with the fresher tyres (if Kimi stuck to a 1 stop). Lewis was watching Vettel the whole race. Now let's say Bottas was always within Vettel's pit window, then your logic makes complete sense. But he wasn't....there was a 25 second gap for a few laps which Ferrari stupidly didn't take advantage of, they waited for traffic to screw them over and ensured a screw up with a crap pistop. So this wasn't part of Mercs plan either, it fell in their lap. Bottom line is Bottas got screwed over again and if I were him I really would be pissed. I can't recall a single moment when Rosberg was given these sort of dumb calls.....I think Merc are already playing the 1-2 game, makes sense I guess but they definitely could've secured an easy 1-3 in Hungary. Like WB said, too conservative and playing it like they still have a car advantage. I feel a 24 point lead is almost nothing, when the car isn't as good and they have stupid hydraulic issues creeping in here and there.
|
|
|
Post by Wß on Jul 30, 2018 13:34:10 GMT
It's clear they're asking Bottas to do things they wouldn't have asked Rosberg. I think last year it was because he was new, this year because they know he and they can't challenge otherwise.
In the end, I don't mind it too much. Hamilton got an easy win. IMO he had it from lap 1, but Bottas did get screwed yesterday after what was a perfect race for him.
It's the wavering that killed his race. They didn't commit to a one stop or a two stop, it was played by Ferrari's lead and Ferrari in the end got two guys on the podium when they would have gotten only one if Merc had not dithered.
|
|
|
Post by Hammer on Jul 31, 2018 17:18:21 GMT
Is it just me or can Pierre Gasly pass off as a chick. Even with a beard.
Look at 2:17. Man the guy looks like a chick wearing makeup.
|
|
|
Post by RyRy on Aug 13, 2018 20:34:12 GMT
Pretty much a given isn't it? That he'll be switching to IndyCar?
|
|
|
Post by Hammer on Aug 14, 2018 6:37:39 GMT
Aww goodbye to the best ever driver to grace the sport which no top team wants to hire.
|
|
|
Post by Wß on Aug 14, 2018 12:49:40 GMT
Aww goodbye to the best ever driver to grace the sport which no top team wants to hire. It's a head scratcher isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by RyRy on Aug 15, 2018 2:07:11 GMT
As expected, switching to Indy at the end of this year.
|
|