Technically speaking, I don't think VET rejoined the track unsafely. The area where VET rejoined the track is not the racing line, not used by the drivers. So, when VET started to squeeze HAM, VET was already on-track and HAM wasn't impeded at all until that moment. On the other side, at Monaco 2016, HAM left the track and rejoined really unsafely because he rejoined the track directly on the racing line!
2019 Formula One Canadian Grand Prix
- Thread starter Paul Jeffrey
- Start date
Technically speaking, I don't think VET rejoined the track unsafely. The area where VET rejoined the track is not the racing line, not used by the drivers. So, when VET started to squeeze HAM, VET was already on-track and HAM wasn't impeded at all until that moment. On the other side, at Monaco 2016, HAM left the track and rejoined really unsafely because he rejoined the track directly on the racing line!
Sasha Jednak
Sasa Jednak
I think Ric's stop was answer to Gasly's, as they saw RB (Gasly) as their rival in this race. They didn't care about Merc, which is good because even on the same tyre life they would got eaten on hard tyres. Merc was on another level on hards compared to everyone else.
So, I think they made very good work from it and managed to beat one RB with both cars. I like this race as they looked closer to RB than to F1.5 cars. I hope they can confirm it in France, that would be great.
It wasn't a personal insult, I said it was an idiotic comment, learn the difference. Watch the incident again in real time. Hamilton could not have gone left, Vettel kept his place he clearly was going to lose if Hamilton stayed on full power, advantage Vettel.
You can say that as much as you like, it won't change my opinion on the incident. At the end of the day it's all down to personal interpretation of the rules and regs, and interpretation of the situation, and only Vettel knows whether he was in control of his car or not, I choose to believe he wasn't. In my opinion Hamilton made the dangerous situation by putting himself between what could be an out of control car and a wall, while Vettel was a bit of a passenger. Hamilton saw Vettel go off, why did he not prepare for a rejoining car.
Yeah it seems they were only worried about "man-marking" Gasly. That could have been a good plan before the race, but after the race started, given the circunstances, it made no sense at all anymore. The lap data (like in this link https://www.racefans.net/2019/06/10...-interactive-data-lap-charts-times-and-tyres/) clearly shows it, as I detail below:
- On lap 6, before any pits, the 5 drivers were doing 1.18 lap times and the positions and gaps were:
4th: Ric
5th: Gasly, +1.5s from Ric
6th: Hulk, +1.5s from Gasly
7th: Bottas, +0.5s from Hulk
9th: Ver, +2.0s from Bottas
5th: Gasly, +1.5s from Ric
6th: Hulk, +1.5s from Gasly
7th: Bottas, +0.5s from Hulk
9th: Ver, +2.0s from Bottas
- Then on lap 7 Gasly killed his own race by going to pits and putting hard tyres too early. His first full lap with hard tyres was 1.20 (2 seconds slower than before pit). Renault should have noticed that (even I, looking at live gaps in TV, noticed), and should have told Ric to stay on track because Gasly wasn't a threat anymore, but they stupidly called Ric to pit in next lap.
- Then, from lap 9 to lap 13, the average lap times and the positions were:
4th: Hulk, 1.17.5 (yes, even with his used softs, he was still faster than bottas and verstappen)
5th: Bottas, 1.18.0
6th: Ver, 1.18.0
7th: Ric, 1.19.0 (Ric also returned slower than before pit, as could have been predicted by watching Gasly, so Ric's pit didn't make any sense. Do never pit if you are going to return slower!).
9th: Gasly, 1.19.0
5th: Bottas, 1.18.0
6th: Ver, 1.18.0
7th: Ric, 1.19.0 (Ric also returned slower than before pit, as could have been predicted by watching Gasly, so Ric's pit didn't make any sense. Do never pit if you are going to return slower!).
9th: Gasly, 1.19.0
- From lap 14 to 15, the average lap times and the positions were:
4th: Hulk, 1.17.5 (yes, his 15 lapped soft tyres were still in great conditions, as crazy as it sounds)
5th: Bottas, 1.17.5 (he was 2 seconds behind Hulk!)
6th: Ver, 1.17.5
7th: Ric, 1.17.0 (only now he suddenly started doing good 1.17.0 lap times)
9th: Gasly, 1.18.0 (still slower than Hulk's 15 lapped soft tyre!)
5th: Bottas, 1.17.5 (he was 2 seconds behind Hulk!)
6th: Ver, 1.17.5
7th: Ric, 1.17.0 (only now he suddenly started doing good 1.17.0 lap times)
9th: Gasly, 1.18.0 (still slower than Hulk's 15 lapped soft tyre!)
- Then Renault called Hulk to pit on lap 16. Why, oh god, tell me why. He was 2 seconds ahead of bottas, even slightly faster than Bottas. Doing great 1.17.5 vs 1.18.0 from Gasly. It was already proven the hard tires didn't work for Riccardo. So why pit Hulk early too?????? Even if Hulk was slower (what wasn't the case) he could stay longer on track to "hold" bottas and Verstappen, allowing Riccardo to drammatically reduce the gap from them...
- Then Hulk returned from pits with new hard tyres, slightly faster than Ric but totally stuck behind Ric. This allowed Bottas and Verstappen, even with their old tyres, to actually do better lap times than both Renaults. Bottas only pitted to put hard tyres in lap 30!!!! Thats why Mercedes hard tyres worked and Renault's hard tyres didn't work: because Renault hard tyres were 20 laps older than Merc's!!
For me, Renault car was even better than Bottas Mercedes in this track but this poor strategy ruined what could be a fantastic top 4-5 for Renault. I bet Bottas wouldn't be able to overtake them if the age of the hard tyres was the same. But I guess the strategists in F1 don't care about race circunstances, only about politics: Why bother doing a great strategy if everyone will congrate you for finishing behind Mercedes and in front of Gasly?
Yeah, lets hope they can confirm this great car in other tracks too, but with a less political and more flexible strategy.
I don't disagree with you except it wasn't for Hamilton to avoid right up until Vettel went on to the racing line, at that point Hamilton braked and Vettel kept his place and his advantage. The 5-sec penalty was harsh, yes, but also is it fair to keep a position when you leave the track and rejoin - out of control - on to the racing line?
I don't think anyone doubt's just how well Vettel did to regain control and if he had a 1 or 2 second more advantage there would be no problem. Perhaps he may have been better to give up the place to Hamilton, I think he had the car to retake 1st?
Sasha Jednak
Sasa Jednak
I personally think it is un-fair when they keep position while they are in full control.
As for car, no he didn't have a car nor the fuel to overtake anyone in second stint. In the end, after thinking about this 5 days later, I would call this normal racing incident no mater who was involved: Vet-Ham, Ham-Lec, Ham-Max, Max-Ham, Ham-Vet, Bot-Ham, etc... Now, let's go on to Le Mans
But that's the crux of the argument. If he was out of control (or even struggling to control), how could he have avoided drifting on to the racing line? If he hadn't tried to correct the drift, he could easily have spun into Hamilton which would probably have taken them both out.
A different take on the subject.
Throttle trace data was interesting.
Throttle trace data was interesting.
