Page 10 of 14 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 132
  1. #91
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Greenwich, London UK
    Posts
    3,438
    Like
    14
    Liked 789 Times in 651 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Tazio View Post
    That this "fix" attempt resulted in an abortion fiasco is proof enough to me that such arrangements are really bad for all concerned parties! I'm not a big fan of Seb. He obviously violated a pre-arranged (poorly advised) deal. Where is the place for such nonsense in F1 in this situation? I put the blame squarely at the feet of Ferrari strategists (and anyone else associated with the team that was in on the decision making) Strategy in this scenario should start after the first corner, not before it! JMHO.
    I totally agree!
    Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
    William Shakespeare

  2. #92
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Greenwich, London UK
    Posts
    3,438
    Like
    14
    Liked 789 Times in 651 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Bagwan View Post
    From Chuck's point of view , he was a sitting duck , so he arranged an agreement for the tow .
    From Ferrari's point of view , it was a way to secure the one-two , but the drivers should know this is a priority anyway , so the logic of meddling was flimsy to begin with .

    But from Seb's point of view , as Chuck was sad , and Ferrari had reacted , he couldn't not agree to the arrangement .

    However , he could try to find a way out of it .
    If he was to get far enough ahead out of the starting sequence , perhaps it wouldn't make sense to drop him back . If he could make him chase hard , Chuck would lose pace , being behind in the dirty air . If Seb could then argue about the logic of the swap for a lap or two more , then maybe that logic would over-ride the agreement .
    He was making his argument that the agreement didn't make sense to implement .
    You are right, the situation quickly became awkward and hanging Vettel out to dry looked bad and Leclerc whining constantly on the radio was pathetic.
    Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
    William Shakespeare

  3. Likes: truefan72 (2nd October 2019)
  4. #93
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Greenwich, London UK
    Posts
    3,438
    Like
    14
    Liked 789 Times in 651 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by airshifter View Post
    I managed to delete my post yesterday trying to fix a typo.



    Having now read several online sources with Ferrari quotes, as well as having watched the start several times, I think Seb backed out on the agreement that did benefit him.

    In hindsight, it wasn't really a bad idea from Ferrari. If the third car gets the tow and the second car doesn't then the chances that they arrive at turn two 1-2 rather than 1-3 increase. And though in this case Seb got a better start than Lewis anyway, I think the plan as it was made was sound. The tow is what got Sainz to the second corner alongside Lewis, and I don't think any of us thinks that the Mclaren has the power that Merc does.

    But the actions of Leclerc are what makes up my mind. Not a single driver on the grid would have let another car pass them without any defense attempt, but Leclerc did. Rather than move inside on turn one, he stayed towards the middle of the track. And he made no attempt at all to ever move right and cover the inside line going into turn two either. Instead, he let Seb move inside after getting the tow. At that point Seb had the ability to easily cover the racing line, just at Lewis easily covered it from Sainz.

    I think Seb did gain obvious advantage through the actions of Leclerc. Though he cleared Lewis fairly quickly anyway, Leclerc just held his position to the lesser desired line to give it all a chance to play out. If Leclerc had moved right at any point from the start it would have made life harder for Seb. At a bare minimum he would have had to try to make the turn two move on the outside, and that would have required more advantage than he had at that point.
    If you have Sky, please watch Davidson's analysis of the start. Leclerc gets of the line and tried to close down Hamilton, Vettel behind used the racing line grip and some of the tow to get alongside Hamilton who had a bad start anyway. As Leclerc approached the corner with Hamilton and Vettel side by side at this point, but with Vettel half a cars length ahead, Leclerc had two choices; go tight round the corner closing any doors open, but that would hand the slipstream to Hamilton who was on the inside of Vettel. Or take a wider line round the bend and hope that Vettel get just enough tow to get ahead of Hamilton.

    As it turned out, Leclerc position in the corner was all he could do whether there was an agreement or not. He either tow his team mate who would slingshot into the lead or tow Hamilton who would hound him for the rest of the race and possibly steal the race with tyre strategy.

    From Ferrari's perspective, all they ought to care about is getting a one-two coming out of that corner whichever way it shakes out. If they did, then one Ferrari car is guaranteed to win the race, with the other potentially 2nd.

    The Ferrari pitwall lost the plot. They stopped thinking in the best interest of the team and wasted so much energy on the irrelevant issue of driver positions. I suppose this is why they are not ready to be world champions again.
    Last edited by Nitrodaze; 1st October 2019 at 20:53.
    Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
    William Shakespeare

  5. Likes: truefan72 (2nd October 2019)
  6. #94
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Greenwich, London UK
    Posts
    3,438
    Like
    14
    Liked 789 Times in 651 Posts
    If you watch the start again, you will see that Leclerc got off the line thinking of number one; himself only. He was not concerned about giving the tow to Vettel but was more concern about closing down Hamilton. By so doing, Vettel only had the advantage of the grippy racing line, a powerfull Ferrari engine and a partial tow to fight Hamilton who also had bad start. Hence, Vettel did not need the tow to pass Hamilton anyway.

    At the corner, it was everyman for himself, Leclerc thinking he had done enough to put Vettel in Hamilton's hair to allow himself to get out of the corner in the lead with at least a cars length while those two squabbled. As they came out of the corner, Vettel had used the superior power of the Ferrari engine to nose ahead of Hamilton and took the slipstream of Leclerc. Please note that at this point, both Ferrari cars are outside the zone of the agreement.

    From this point on, it was racing as usual. Vettel with a better race pace than Leclerc was always going to slipstream into the lead at the straight after the corner. The agreement was not to finish 2nd at this race. It was to get Vettel ahead of Hamilton from the start. The agreement was stupendous for a start and l think it was reasonable to expect Vettel to fight Leclerc after the first corner. It was all racing, but unfortunately with meddling Ferrari pitwall.

    Before this crap, there was half a chance in the constructors championship for Ferrari, if they can manage a consistent one-two for every race to the end of the season. It would have been up to Mercedes to equally maintain a flawless operation to ensure they can maintain some sort of advantage by the time we reach Abu Dhabi. And Ferrari had a real chance, especially with Redbull getting in the hair of Mercedes regularly and bleeding points from them at some races.

    This fiasco at Sochi is very costly to Ferrari. Not because of anything that Vettel has done. But because the Ferrari pitwall lost sight of their responsibility [the long game] to the team. That said, the MGUK failure would not have helped matters whichever way things had turned out anyway.
    Last edited by Nitrodaze; 1st October 2019 at 17:38.
    Better a witty fool than a foolish wit.
    William Shakespeare

  7. Likes: Tazio (1st October 2019)
  8. #95
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,450
    Like
    4
    Liked 311 Times in 168 Posts
    Best comment was from Alan mcNish who said that all the while Ferrari were trying to get Vettel to yield to LeClerc he could hear Webber's voice saying "multi 21 Seb"

  9. #96
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,858
    Like
    62
    Liked 478 Times in 371 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    Wolff was talking about the slipstream once they got going. The slipstream off the start is a different matter. And it was strong enough to bring Hamilton alongside Leclerc if he was able to harness the slipstream. If there was no agreement and Leclerc were to try to prevent anyone getting into his slipstream, he may have created a situation where both Vettel and Hamilton have a 50/50 chance of using the slipstream. One thing is certain, Hamilton may have maintained 2nd place and Leclerc would not have a rear gunner to protect him during the rest of the race.

    Due to their respective grid position at the start, the slipstream would have been immediately available to Vettel anyway regardless of what Leclerc did or don't do. So the agreement was only good to prevent Vettel from leapfrogging Leclerc into the lead but to stay ahead of Hamilton and play the rear gunner for Leclerc to help him win the race. You can try to spin it which ever way you want, this here is the fact.

    The real option available to Ferrari was to allow the race to shape out in a situation where they had both cars in 1st and 2nd positions regardless of the who was where. They are not in a title fight, so what should have really mattered to the Ferarri pitwall was constructors points and not which driver whines the loudest.
    No this is what you’re failing to get. The agreement was that LeClerc would be left by if Vettel towed past him, that’s why Ferrari pitted him early.

    By the way, if you have some highfalutin idea that pole position in Russia means you’re de facto second after turn 2, watch what Bottas did last year. The initial slipstream he gave to Vettel and then cut over to Hamilton. Last years start is what this years probably would have equated to had LeClerc not provided Seb the tow. Bottas showed how to do it while keeping the lead last year and he did it exceptionally well.

  10. #97
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,858
    Like
    62
    Liked 478 Times in 371 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Tazio View Post
    That this "fix" attempt resulted in an abortion fiasco is proof enough to me that such arrangements are really bad for all concerned parties! I'm not a big fan of Seb. He obviously violated a pre-arranged (poorly advised) deal. Where is the place for such nonsense in F1 in this situation? I put the blame squarely at the feet of Ferrari strategists (and anyone else associated with the team that was in on the decision making) Strategy in this scenario should start after the first corner, not before it! JMHO.
    I agree but anyone blaming LeClerc for wanting his Vettel to stick to the pre-race agreement is off their rocker.

  11. #98
    Senior Member Tazio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    San Diego, Ca
    Posts
    15,361
    Like
    1,116
    Liked 642 Times in 508 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by The Black Knight View Post
    I agree but anyone blaming LeClerc for wanting his Vettel to stick to the pre-race agreement is off their rocker.
    I blame Ferrari, not "The Kid" I'd be pissed off too if I was him!
    May the forza be with you

  12. #99
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    6,121
    Like
    630
    Liked 666 Times in 464 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitrodaze View Post
    If you have Sky, please watch Davidson's analysis of the start. Leclerc gets of the line and tried to close down Hamilton, Vettel behind used the racing line grip and some of the tow to get alongside Hamilton who had a bad start anyway. As Leclerc approached the corner with Hamilton and Vettel side by side at this point, but with Vettel half a cars length ahead, Leclerc had two choices; go tight round the corner closing any doors open, but that would hand the slipstream to Hamilton who was on the inside of Vettel. Or take a wider line round the bend and hope that Vettel get just enough tow to get ahead of Hamilton.

    As it turned out, Leclerc position in the corner was all he could do whether there was an agreement or not. He either tow his team mate who would slingshot into the lead or tow Hamilton who would hound him for the rest of the race and possibly steal the race with tyre strategy.

    From Ferrari's perspective, all they ought to care about is getting a one-two coming out of that corner whichever way it shakes out. If they did, then one Ferrari car is guaranteed to win the race, with the other potentially 2nd.

    The Ferrari pitwall lost the plot. They stopped thinking in the best interest of the team and wasted so much energy on the irrelevant issue of driver positions. I suppose this is why they are not ready to be world champions again.

    I've watched the start several times from several angles, including the overhead shots. Lewis moved far more left, Leclerc barely budged right. As for trying to close down Hamilton, not even close. At any point after the cars started moving, Leclerc had several car widths to the right. He could have shot across the nose of the Merc as soon as they moved.

    It's my opinion that his position in the corner was only to ensure that Seb stayed in the tow, and he maintained that position with no attempts to cover the inside line at any point. Had me moved to the right through turn one, Lewis might have gained a tow, but Seb was alongside and so the chances of making an outside move were down the tubes. Had me moved inside it would have had a similar impact to when Seb moved inside and Sainz lost the tow. Sainz was fully ahead of Lewis, but when Seb moved he lost the tow and he lost advantage to Lewis almost immediately. Lewis finished him off by outbraking him into turn two, but Lewis got a good view of the back of the Mclaren before it happened.



    And my point remains the same. Leclerc didn't move to cover, when anyone racing for themselves would have. It's really that simple in my opinion. Though I don't like such agreements, I don't think Ferrari screwed it up. I think Seb did.

    As for race pace, all of the front runners had enough to keep the cars behind them behind them. I don't think it's any shock to see that the leading car can't be caught up easily, as it's often the case these days.

  13. #100
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    6,121
    Like
    630
    Liked 666 Times in 464 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Boyd View Post
    Best comment was from Alan mcNish who said that all the while Ferrari were trying to get Vettel to yield to LeClerc he could hear Webber's voice saying "multi 21 Seb"
    In all fairness, I was thinking it before it was stated on air. The worst thing for Seb is that he acknowledged the swap and just "postponed" it until he ignored it. He would have looked better if he just played dumb the first time they mentioned it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •