Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 45,037
Interesting that Mercedes can now manage their tyres better than Ferrari. I wonder whether that will continue.
Poll: Singapore Grand Prix 2018, Singapore - Race 15/21
- Thread starter Shimmy
- Start date
Soldato
It depends on the tyre compounds. Merc have had issues getting heat in to the harder tyres for most of the season. That'll only be an issue at Suzuka and Interlagos where the Mediums will be used.
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/138773/hamilton-proud-he-avoiding-vettellike-errors
Oh Lewis... That's bait...
He is absolutely correct.
One article i read after the German grand Prix really annoyed me as it said Hamilton was lucky as Vettel crashed : /.
That isn't Hamilton winning because he is lucky, that is just Hamilton not crashing/being better.
If Vettel's car broke down due to a mechanical issue completely out of his control, then yes that would be good fortune for Lewis.
You cant say someone is lucky to win a championship, because his main opponent kept sticking into the wall. He will have won it because he is better at keeping it on the track (which is pretty important).
I do worry that Lewis is setting himself up for a fall though with this sort of thing. He will probably make a mistake and crash in the next race
I do worry that Lewis is setting himself up for a fall though with this sort of thing. He will probably make a mistake and crash in the next race
Doesn't matter, he'd still be 15 points clear, even if Seb won.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 8 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 4,539
Brundle has made article on skysports website basically saying Hamilton is getting lucky and vettel not. Case in point mercedes gamble in Q1 which almost backfired.
Soldato
This article? https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/2...overdrive-as-body-blows-hurt-sebastian-vettel
He's said nothing of the kind. My summary would be:
Mercedes gambled and got lucky using slower tyres in Singapore Q1. But Mercedes have won four of the past five races and Hamilton's been the difference as to how they've done it.
The summary is fairly unambiguous too:
You can't just make **** up and then expect people to believe it is true.
He's said nothing of the kind. My summary would be:
Mercedes gambled and got lucky using slower tyres in Singapore Q1. But Mercedes have won four of the past five races and Hamilton's been the difference as to how they've done it.
The summary is fairly unambiguous too:
You can't just make **** up and then expect people to believe it is true.
You need to take off these those red tinted glasses my friend!
Q1 was a qualified risk given and one that worked well.
Executing a strategy correctly, no matter how marginal it may seem is a win, not a fail.
"The harder I work, the luckier I get" comes to mind!
Yeah, Formula 1 is the embodiment of "making your own luck". If Ferrari are being "unlucky" it's because they keep making mistakes, particularly Vettel when he's under pressure. Ferrari may have the fastest car, but Mercedes are just executing better, and a lot of that is Hamilton not making mistakes and getting the maximum possible out of the car time and time again.
Mercedes did this last year only really getting on top of the tyres from monza onwards and then absolutely crushing it from then on. Next few tracks have all been merc dominated over the last couple of years and Russia bottas might actually be useful as it's a track he has consistently shown pace at.
Associate
Agree with previous comments about Perez clearly took ocon out. Honestly merc need to demote bottas back to Williams and get ocon in the merc seat
Associate
He’s been half a second of the pace of Hamilton for a while now yes this year he’s good number 2 but a better driver would be taking points off vettel and Ferrari
Soldato
Pretty dull apart from Perez driving like an idiot again.
He should have been black flagged for the side-swipe on Sirotkin.
He should have been black flagged for the side-swipe on Sirotkin.
Soldato
After seeing the onboard of Perez during the Ocon incident I'm even more amazed how he got away without a ban.
He clearly had space on the inside of the corner, but that could be forgiven as the Haas had dived across the inside of T1 and Perez may have just wanted to give them space as both Haas drivers are liabilities. On entering T3 he turns in and you can see him glance across to the right to exactly where Ocon is on his outside. Saying he didn't know Ocon was there is a blatant lie. Then, just after that glance, he slightly unwinds the steering to intentionally squeeze Ocon on the outside. From Alonso's onboard just behind all of this you can see he had no oversteer or loss of traction, so that move of Perez's was solely to force Ocon in to the wall.
This is the video I'm referencing, relevant clips start at 0:30: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH6sbDdvtJg
Again the FIA have been far too lenient on drivers intentionally hitting each other, as they were in the Vettel/Hamilton case at Baku. Now they've backed themselves in to a corner with these precedents for weak penalties.
He clearly had space on the inside of the corner, but that could be forgiven as the Haas had dived across the inside of T1 and Perez may have just wanted to give them space as both Haas drivers are liabilities. On entering T3 he turns in and you can see him glance across to the right to exactly where Ocon is on his outside. Saying he didn't know Ocon was there is a blatant lie. Then, just after that glance, he slightly unwinds the steering to intentionally squeeze Ocon on the outside. From Alonso's onboard just behind all of this you can see he had no oversteer or loss of traction, so that move of Perez's was solely to force Ocon in to the wall.
This is the video I'm referencing, relevant clips start at 0:30: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH6sbDdvtJg
Again the FIA have been far too lenient on drivers intentionally hitting each other, as they were in the Vettel/Hamilton case at Baku. Now they've backed themselves in to a corner with these precedents for weak penalties.
Soldato
Hmm, agreed, I looked at that just now, and its not even like he got a swapper on and had to counter-steer. It certainly looks like a straight forward punt!
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 45,037
He would clearly see the car alongside. He can see the front wheel is alongside his own and knows what the outcome will be if he gives the car a gentle tap. The FIA has allowed this to happen several times now and we are seeing similar incidents in other formulas. It is exactly as we predicted.
Soldato
Perez almost certainly had Grosjean on his inside at some point too, and Grosjean might not have known Ocon was on the outside of Perez, as Ocon wouldn't have known Perez was leaving space for Grosjean (who probably wasn't visible in his mirrors). If that much is true then I can see why there was no further action taken. Grosjean had backed out by corner exit, but who knows at what point that was. The stewards will have seen footage from Grosjean's car too and that might have influenced their decision.
As for those saying Hamilton is lucky then I think there's a degree of truth in that he has been somewhat lucky in the past - during the hybrid era he usually had incidents and unreliability in the qualifying sessions and was often able to fight back in the races to still score strong points, or had issues in races where he wasn't leading (Sepang in 2016 is the obvious exception) - but that isn't true of this season - after a slow start he's come back strongly and fully deserves his lead.
Vettel hasn't been unlucky either, he's just made too many errors. Off the top of my head I don't think Vettel has had a single reliability issue this season (in qualifying or races), the only unlucky aspect being Verstappen turning him around in China. How much of that pressure is coming from Hamilton and how much is Vettel putting it on himself I don't know, but I've often said Vettel has looked under immense pressure from the moment he got into the red suit, and was making silly errors before he had a Ferrari capable of winning the championship, so I'm not sure it's Hamilton creating the pressure, but his relentless march towards a fifth title isn't helping of course.
I maintain the Vettel we saw at Red Bull, especially during the blown exhaust era, was a sight to behold and a man truly at one with his machine like seldom others I have seen in person. He could make that thing dance and do some extraordinary things (opening up multi-second leads at the start of most races is a talent no-one else has had in recent times). I remember Webber bluntly and despondently saying one year words along the lines of "wow I can't do that" in response to Vettel's times, and in his Jaguar days Webber was once regarded as one of the best qualifiers in F1.
Vettel's style doesn't work in the hybrid era, but while he's still a very good driver he needs to reflect after the season and change his approach - sometimes it's better to pick up some points and not necessarily win than to blow it by going all in (Baku, Paul Ricard, Hockenheim, Monza). Alonso would have almost certainly won the title in 2018 in that Ferrari.
Ferrari have made a strong statement in signing Leclerc for 2019 and I'm looking forward to seeing how it pans out. While few will expect him to mount an immediate championship challenge, it could be a make or break season for Vettel. Ferrari could have easily kept a still very decent Raikkonen and an effective two tier team while Leclerc continued developing at Sauber or Haas, but instead they've chose to ramp it up. Vettel will either rise further and largely out-perform Leclerc and show he still has it, or Leclerc will show Vettel isn't the driver he once was. Leclerc can't lose as few will expect him to beat Vettel over the season, but Vettel can certainly lose.
As for those saying Hamilton is lucky then I think there's a degree of truth in that he has been somewhat lucky in the past - during the hybrid era he usually had incidents and unreliability in the qualifying sessions and was often able to fight back in the races to still score strong points, or had issues in races where he wasn't leading (Sepang in 2016 is the obvious exception) - but that isn't true of this season - after a slow start he's come back strongly and fully deserves his lead.
Vettel hasn't been unlucky either, he's just made too many errors. Off the top of my head I don't think Vettel has had a single reliability issue this season (in qualifying or races), the only unlucky aspect being Verstappen turning him around in China. How much of that pressure is coming from Hamilton and how much is Vettel putting it on himself I don't know, but I've often said Vettel has looked under immense pressure from the moment he got into the red suit, and was making silly errors before he had a Ferrari capable of winning the championship, so I'm not sure it's Hamilton creating the pressure, but his relentless march towards a fifth title isn't helping of course.
I maintain the Vettel we saw at Red Bull, especially during the blown exhaust era, was a sight to behold and a man truly at one with his machine like seldom others I have seen in person. He could make that thing dance and do some extraordinary things (opening up multi-second leads at the start of most races is a talent no-one else has had in recent times). I remember Webber bluntly and despondently saying one year words along the lines of "wow I can't do that" in response to Vettel's times, and in his Jaguar days Webber was once regarded as one of the best qualifiers in F1.
Vettel's style doesn't work in the hybrid era, but while he's still a very good driver he needs to reflect after the season and change his approach - sometimes it's better to pick up some points and not necessarily win than to blow it by going all in (Baku, Paul Ricard, Hockenheim, Monza). Alonso would have almost certainly won the title in 2018 in that Ferrari.
Ferrari have made a strong statement in signing Leclerc for 2019 and I'm looking forward to seeing how it pans out. While few will expect him to mount an immediate championship challenge, it could be a make or break season for Vettel. Ferrari could have easily kept a still very decent Raikkonen and an effective two tier team while Leclerc continued developing at Sauber or Haas, but instead they've chose to ramp it up. Vettel will either rise further and largely out-perform Leclerc and show he still has it, or Leclerc will show Vettel isn't the driver he once was. Leclerc can't lose as few will expect him to beat Vettel over the season, but Vettel can certainly lose.
Soldato
Regardless of Grosjean's position, Perez was holding a line in the middle of the track to give space both sides. It's only when he notices his teammate on his outside that he unwinds the steering to push Ocon in to the wall. That's why he deserves the harsher penalty IMO. Grosjean had also backed out of it before the turning point for T3 anyway, but like I said above, I'm not blaming Perez for not moving further to the left.
This is also aside from the stupidity of barging in to Sirotkin on a straight.
Soldato
[Edit
I'm not saying Perez wasn't to blame, I'm only trying to put a suggestion across as to why the stewards decided that no further action was warranted.
Edit: I'm not sure if from the angle below whether Perez would be able to see Grosjean, as his car is facing away from the Haas tight on the kerb. He would have known Grosjean was somewhere near, which is why he left a gap.
Last edited: