"We have certain roles and we all know it," said Kimi enigmatically. "I don't know what happened other than that we had one and two and l got a lesser result than l wanted.
2017 Formula One Monaco Grand Prix
- Thread starter Paul Jeffrey
- Start date
-
- Tags
- formula one grand prix monaco
"We have certain roles and we all know it," said Kimi enigmatically. "I don't know what happened other than that we had one and two and l got a lesser result than l wanted.
Kimi`s tends to display roughly the same emotional spectrum as a block of ice but his expression on the podium was a diagram of rage as some crafty Ferrari tactics propelled Sebastian Vettel to the team’s first Monaco Grand Prix win for 16 years.
There is little doubt that Ferrari’s strategy, which so clearly favored Vettel by giving him five laps of clean air to over-cut his rival after the first round of pit stops, cost Kimi dearly here.
Kimi can be upset if he wants. Fact of the matter is, he wasn't fast enough to cover off a car on older tyres than him, that'd be in dirty air for the entire distance of the race. I love Kimi, but lets get real here, Ferrari gave him the same advantage every other lead car gets - the first pit stop. He got outclassed.
Did you watch the race? and if did you notice those backmarkes in the front of Kimi when Sebastian did hes over-cut in clean air?
I did watch the race. Did you? Did you notice Bottas (almost typed Rosberg there, what a force of habit that is!) pitted and was faster than Kimi once he had some clean air and fresh tyres? If they didn't pit Kimi he'd have lost his position to Bottas (which then ended up being Riccardo).
If they didn't pit Kimi, he'd have lost the spot to the cars behind because the raw fact is that Kimi didn't have the speed at that point. If you'd like some numbers to back it up, that's fine -
Laps 22 to 28, Bottas consistantly took half a second a lap out of Kimi. It then switched round for a couple of laps, but not significantly and the 4 laps before Kimi pitted were downward trending - as you'd expect because the tyres were wearing. The lap before Bottas pitted, Bottas was 4 tenths up and closing on Kimi. The fact is, that gap was coming down. Their in laps were within a tenth of each other, but Bottas outlap was quicker than Kimi. Bottas first flying lap was as fast as the stint before but he also had fresh, so with Bottas still lapping at those times and looking like he'd get faster (which he did, by 6 tenths), and Kimi on worn tyres, the only sensible decision (and the same decision that has been made for the entire time we've ran these tyres) was to pit Kimi to cover the undercut, which they then did.
With fresh tyres, Kimi found a full second straight away and that side of the job was done. Ferrari successfully covered the undercut which the laptimes say was going to happen. This is why they pitted Kimi. If Bottas was fast enough to make the undercut, then Riccardo certainly was as well.
The problem Kimi had was whilst he was going as fast as he could out front, Vettel was holding a gap about 2 seconds back in cleaner air, preserving his tyres. The laptime graphs show Vettel matching Kimi almost identically until Kimi pitted. When Kimi pitted, Vettel immediately found 2 seconds (read that again, 2 seconds) and was doing that on worn tyres (read that again - worn tyres). This meant be only needed a couple of laps to get the time needed to leap Kimi.
The fact of the matter is that just before the pit stops, Kimi was losing time to Bottas and Riccardo. If they didn't pit him, they risked losing a podium for both Kimi and Vettel. They successfully covered the undercut that was looming large. Vettel took the lead not through being given a superior strategy (he had older tyres that Kimi, would someone like to explain why that's an advantage?), but through being faster than Kimi when it counted. In fact Vettel was faster on an old set of tyres than Kimi managed during the entire race. That isn't being given a victory, that's earning it. Sorry to burst the Kimi fan bubble - I love Kimi, but he lost this race himself. If he'd had been faster before the pit stops and gapped Bottas and kept the gap, he'd not have been pitted to keep the lead.
That's backed up by numbers and graphs. And I've never been lied to by a graph.
If they didn't pit Kimi, he'd have lost the spot to the cars behind because the raw fact is that Kimi didn't have the speed at that point. If you'd like some numbers to back it up, that's fine -
Laps 22 to 28, Bottas consistantly took half a second a lap out of Kimi. It then switched round for a couple of laps, but not significantly and the 4 laps before Kimi pitted were downward trending - as you'd expect because the tyres were wearing. The lap before Bottas pitted, Bottas was 4 tenths up and closing on Kimi. The fact is, that gap was coming down. Their in laps were within a tenth of each other, but Bottas outlap was quicker than Kimi. Bottas first flying lap was as fast as the stint before but he also had fresh, so with Bottas still lapping at those times and looking like he'd get faster (which he did, by 6 tenths), and Kimi on worn tyres, the only sensible decision (and the same decision that has been made for the entire time we've ran these tyres) was to pit Kimi to cover the undercut, which they then did.
With fresh tyres, Kimi found a full second straight away and that side of the job was done. Ferrari successfully covered the undercut which the laptimes say was going to happen. This is why they pitted Kimi. If Bottas was fast enough to make the undercut, then Riccardo certainly was as well.
The problem Kimi had was whilst he was going as fast as he could out front, Vettel was holding a gap about 2 seconds back in cleaner air, preserving his tyres. The laptime graphs show Vettel matching Kimi almost identically until Kimi pitted. When Kimi pitted, Vettel immediately found 2 seconds (read that again, 2 seconds) and was doing that on worn tyres (read that again - worn tyres). This meant be only needed a couple of laps to get the time needed to leap Kimi.
The fact of the matter is that just before the pit stops, Kimi was losing time to Bottas and Riccardo. If they didn't pit him, they risked losing a podium for both Kimi and Vettel. They successfully covered the undercut that was looming large. Vettel took the lead not through being given a superior strategy (he had older tyres that Kimi, would someone like to explain why that's an advantage?), but through being faster than Kimi when it counted. In fact Vettel was faster on an old set of tyres than Kimi managed during the entire race. That isn't being given a victory, that's earning it. Sorry to burst the Kimi fan bubble - I love Kimi, but he lost this race himself. If he'd had been faster before the pit stops and gapped Bottas and kept the gap, he'd not have been pitted to keep the lead.
That's backed up by numbers and graphs. And I've never been lied to by a graph.
What you describe is not correct. Kimi loosed time to Bottas and Riccardo because of the back markers and racing in dirty air from lap 25 and when he managed to overtake back markers he was faster then Bottas and Daniel and cap did grow. When kimi made hes pit stop so did also back markers ahead of him which made it possible to Sebastian race in clean air and over cut Kimi.
Vettel didn't earn victory he was given it from the reds or perhaps he just got lucky.
What I described is perfectly correct and backed by numbers. Lap 22 through to lap 27, Bottas was consistently faster than Kimi. This was not one off issues with backmakers. Both drivers were consistent and trended with each other, Kimi was in the low 1:17s, whilst Bottas was in the mid 1:16s. As they got closer to lap 27, Kimi went up to high 1:17s and Bottas went up to low 1:17s. They were both a little slower, but Bottas was still closing on Kimi. If it was traffic it was effecting them the same as they trended with each other. The upward trend in laptimes is expected due to tyre wear.
There is no denying that the backmarkers that Kimi met after his stop were not ideal for him. However, the gap between Bottas and Kimi was dropping (this is a fact, you cannot deny it - the numbers do not lie), Bottas was closing for the lead. With Kimis times trending upward (he went from 1:16.8 down to a 17.6, almost a full second lost in one lap), and Bottas on fresh tyres, the most probably outcome was for Bottas to jump Kimi in the stops. At the same time, Riccardo was down to 1:16.0, 1.6 seconds faster than Kimi. If Kimi had been left out a couple of more laps, he'd have lost the spot to Riccardo. Ricardo showed bursts of speed between lap 23 and 27 and was the fastest car on the circuit. He then picked up the pace again on lap 30 and was miles faster than all the cars in front. It was clear to everyone watching the data that Riccardo was on course to easily jump Bottas, but also take a stab at Kimi.
At this point, Kimis lack of speed was going to cost him the race and he had to be pitted to cover off the faster cars. These cars were significantly faster at this point of the race, this simply cannot be disputed. Those faster cars were also about to be given fresh tyres, so Ferrari did the 100% correct thing to make sure that they kept Kimi ahead of these cars, and it worked.
What did not play into Kimis hands is Vettel immediately dropped his times down into 1:15.2, giving him a massive advantage. This was a laptime on old tyres that Kimi wasn't even able to match on his brand new tyres. That is why Vettel jumped Kimi - because he had speed to spare whilst Kimi did.
Cold hard fact is Kimi wasn't fast when he needed to be, which forced Ferrari to cover the faster cars behind. This left Kimi open to be exploited by the extra speed Vettel had in reserve. If you say Vettel didn't earn the victory, fine - Kimi lost it. If Kimi could do the 1:15s on old tyres like Sebastian could, then they wouldn't have needed to cover off Bottas. They were forced into it because Kimi wasn't fast enough and giving away time which would've cost both of them the race. The numbers don't lie. Graphs are awesome. Data is great.
Edit: Also note that Kimis in lap was 1.6 seconds slower than Vettel. Kimis outlap was 9 tenths slower than Vettel. Kimi lost 2.5 seconds in just the in and out laps. Vettel was within that time of Kimi before the stops anyway.
Last edited:
On the Ferrari controversy:
1.) Kimi asked to pit.
2.) The first car in a team generally always pits first.
3.) Kimi had the better tyres for 5 laps and had traffic in only one of them (which had to happen otherwise Bottas would get him).
4.) Vettel destroyed Kimi on older tyres for 5 laps.
5.) Vettel then proceeded to pull a 12 second gap from Kimi.
6.) If all the above are false, which they aren't, F1 is a team sport. The 2 drivers per team rule is there for a reason. Like when Bottas defended against Vettel in Spain to help Hamilton, that was not cheating, that was legit.
Pretty obvious what happened. Not so obvious to Hamilton, who said that it was obviously team orders... bit salty perhaps.
1.) Kimi asked to pit.
2.) The first car in a team generally always pits first.
3.) Kimi had the better tyres for 5 laps and had traffic in only one of them (which had to happen otherwise Bottas would get him).
4.) Vettel destroyed Kimi on older tyres for 5 laps.
5.) Vettel then proceeded to pull a 12 second gap from Kimi.
6.) If all the above are false, which they aren't, F1 is a team sport. The 2 drivers per team rule is there for a reason. Like when Bottas defended against Vettel in Spain to help Hamilton, that was not cheating, that was legit.
Pretty obvious what happened. Not so obvious to Hamilton, who said that it was obviously team orders... bit salty perhaps.
Completely salty I would say, but nothing that I wouldn't expect from Hamilton.
I'm not stubborn, I'm just right.
That replay shows that Kimi caught traffic at the start of lap 26. However he was losing time from lap 22 onwards. That replay also shows that traffic did not play a part in that. He cleared Jenson on lap 27 and Werheilm on lap 28. He was clear from lap 28 through till his pit stop on lap 34. Your replay even backs me up with the laptimes. It actually said Vettel is flying and sets a fastest lap, 6 tenths quicker than Kimi at the bottom of the screen. Your own video there backs me up. What more information do you want? I guess the problem you're facing here is when you dig deep enough and look at the details, the data doesn't support the idea that Kimi was screwed - it supports that Vettel was ridiculously fast in clean air, something Kimi was unable to replicate at any point in the race.
Are we going to sit and discuss the fact that Kimi was not fast when he was in clear air? Or the fact he was slower on new tyres than Vettel was on old? Or are we just going to ignore the fact that Vettel was miles faster than Kimi as soon as he had clean air? In fact if you pitted Vettel first he'd have had an even bigger advantage on brand new tyres.
We can agree to disagree if you want, but the maths and numbers agree with me, and if you want to argue with maths there's going to be a lot of upset mathematicians, physicists and engineers who'll have to relearn their jobs.
That replay shows that Kimi caught traffic at the start of lap 26. However he was losing time from lap 22 onwards. That replay also shows that traffic did not play a part in that. He cleared Jenson on lap 27 and Werheilm on lap 28. He was clear from lap 28 through till his pit stop on lap 34. Your replay even backs me up with the laptimes. It actually said Vettel is flying and sets a fastest lap, 6 tenths quicker than Kimi at the bottom of the screen. Your own video there backs me up. What more information do you want? I guess the problem you're facing here is when you dig deep enough and look at the details, the data doesn't support the idea that Kimi was screwed - it supports that Vettel was ridiculously fast in clean air, something Kimi was unable to replicate at any point in the race.
Are we going to sit and discuss the fact that Kimi was not fast when he was in clear air? Or the fact he was slower on new tyres than Vettel was on old? Or are we just going to ignore the fact that Vettel was miles faster than Kimi as soon as he had clean air? In fact if you pitted Vettel first he'd have had an even bigger advantage on brand new tyres.
We can agree to disagree if you want, but the maths and numbers agree with me, and if you want to argue with maths there's going to be a lot of upset mathematicians, physicists and engineers who'll have to relearn their jobs.
Fans have been biased against Vettel for so long. I guess because he was rivals with Alonso for so many years, and defeated him a lot of the time. And Alonso has a huge following of fans.
I also don't get this "it was the driver/it was the car" bias. Although sometimes you can't really know, sometimes it's obvious. In this race, it was Hamilton who was struggling in qualifying, yet the commentators said it was the car that had something wrong, while Bottas almost got pole with his car.
I also don't get this "it was the driver/it was the car" bias. Although sometimes you can't really know, sometimes it's obvious. In this race, it was Hamilton who was struggling in qualifying, yet the commentators said it was the car that had something wrong, while Bottas almost got pole with his car.
I'm not stubborn, I'm just right.
That replay shows that Kimi caught traffic at the start of lap 26. However he was losing time from lap 22 onwards. That replay also shows that traffic did not play a part in that. He cleared Jenson on lap 27 and Werheilm on lap 28. He was clear from lap 28 through till his pit stop on lap 34. Your replay even backs me up with the laptimes. It actually said Vettel is flying and sets a fastest lap, 6 tenths quicker than Kimi at the bottom of the screen. Your own video there backs me up. What more information do you want? I guess the problem you're facing here is when you dig deep enough and look at the details, the data doesn't support the idea that Kimi was screwed - it supports that Vettel was ridiculously fast in clean air, something Kimi was unable to replicate at any point in the race.
Are we going to sit and discuss the fact that Kimi was not fast when he was in clear air? Or the fact he was slower on new tyres than Vettel was on old? Or are we just going to ignore the fact that Vettel was miles faster than Kimi as soon as he had clean air? In fact if you pitted Vettel first he'd have had an even bigger advantage on brand new tyres.
We can agree to disagree if you want, but the maths and numbers agree with me, and if you want to argue with maths there's going to be a lot of upset mathematicians, physicists and engineers who'll have to relearn their jobs.
Seems not to help with video. I think pick below clearly shows when and why Kimi is loosing time and it also shows without now doubt that when finally gets rid of backmarkers Kimi is much faster than Bottas.
"I'm not stubborn, I'm just right."
The End
So... was he faster than Vettel after he got rid of the back-markers? Vettel was on old tyres and did some superb laps, Kimi couldn't do 1:15's with new tyres and clear air. Also, as you have been told a lot of times, Kimi had to pit at that time, he even asked to. Not sure what you're trying to prove.
Last edited:
That image isn't displaying here, don't know why. But unless it completely contradicts the graph data from lap 22 through to lap 27, and contradicts the fact that Kimi was not as fast as Sebastian, I don't see what it proves.
Heres some facts:
The gap to the lead from the chasing non-Ferrari cars was dropping.
The cars behind were about to be given new tyres
Kimi requested to be pitted
Kimi was pitted to neutralise the advantage the cars behind were about to get, and it worked
When Kimi pitted, he was unable to match the times set by Vettel
If Kimi had been as fast as Vettel, even in clean air, he'd have won the race. Kimi did not do this. The faster car won.
Sorry to urinate on the Raikkonen ice cream fest, but he lost the race through not being fast enough at any point, even in clean air. If he had gapped the cars more, it wouldn't have been an issue.
Heres some facts:
The gap to the lead from the chasing non-Ferrari cars was dropping.
The cars behind were about to be given new tyres
Kimi requested to be pitted
Kimi was pitted to neutralise the advantage the cars behind were about to get, and it worked
When Kimi pitted, he was unable to match the times set by Vettel
If Kimi had been as fast as Vettel, even in clean air, he'd have won the race. Kimi did not do this. The faster car won.
Sorry to urinate on the Raikkonen ice cream fest, but he lost the race through not being fast enough at any point, even in clean air. If he had gapped the cars more, it wouldn't have been an issue.
Read post # 81 and # 82 and it all comes clear to you what I am saying.
I don`t think your race facts are nothing more then your own fuss.
Kimi got slow because of traffic and he only inquired of pit stop and did ask for it. In the post race and he was asked the same question Question: “So to be clear, were you asking for the stop or did they call it?”
Kimi: "No, I was called in and that’s about it."
He was not told to push or anything by his engineer just called in.
In another question : (Ben Anderson – Autosport) Kimi: "In the first stint, you seemed to have really strong pace in the early part and then from about lap 20 your pace dropped off quite substantially. Was there an explanation for that? Were you struggling with something in the car?"
Kimi: "Not really. I think the worst place was when we had lapped cars and got stuck behind them on quite a few laps but apart from that the car was behaving well. Not really having any issues. I think we had to take it a little bit easier here and there but nothing to complain really. The most lap time we lost behind the lapped traffic but that’s about it."
Yes, Sebastian was fast but Ferrari played really well to Seb`s favor.
Ben Anderson asked Kimi why he was slow from lap 20 onward. Ben Anderson is a smart guy who knows whats up. Kimi said he had traffic, but the very link you posted showed Kimi approaching Jenson on lap 26, clearing him on lap 27. So what about those other 6-7 laps? Where did the time go? It wasn't traffic, unless Minardi are back with a cloaking device. Kimi didn't answer the question. And what about the time that Vettel made up? Should Ferrari have pitted Vettel too, despite him being 2 seconds a lap faster than what Kimi was doing? Because if you're honestly suggesting that then go have a play of Motorsport Manager and tell me how that strategy works out.
I'm going to call it quits now, because all I've done for several pages is present data, facts, laptimes, gaps and trends, and you've ignored it all and posted nothing that gives me any contradictory evidence. All we've got is Kimi is upset he didn't win, and a whole lot of questions that keep getting dodged like a Mexican at a Trump rally.
I'm going to call it quits now, because all I've done for several pages is present data, facts, laptimes, gaps and trends, and you've ignored it all and posted nothing that gives me any contradictory evidence. All we've got is Kimi is upset he didn't win, and a whole lot of questions that keep getting dodged like a Mexican at a Trump rally.
I find it funny that you argue Kimi's words and try and rectify your fuss.
All time that Seb made up was when he was racing in the clean air and he was not the only one who made up time, Daniel did that too racing in clean air.
I was watching Monaco GP from ViaSat Motor and according Rickard Rydell and Eje Elgh has Sebastian Vettel contract which gives him status as first driver in the team, car which is built to him, race strategy which always puts second driver behind him in the race etc, etc.....
I am not upset that Kimi didn`t win, I am upset how contract given by Ferrari are playing to Seb`s favor.
There is an other driver also who has had contract like that in many years:
Last edited:
