Australian Grand Prix 2010, Melbourne - Race 2/19
- Thread starter Duke
- Start date
This was added much later.
Hamilton said his tyres were fine himself. And my other reasoning was provided: he was on Kubica's gearbox for many laps - not something you can do on marginal tyres. Moreover, Kubica himself questioned why Hamilton stopped for tyres when clearly he was having no problems keeping up with himself. Lastly, Kubica, Alonso, Massa had done similar paced races as Hamilton and they didn't need to stop for a 2nd time.
Do you not read any F1 news sites or forums? This stuff I've mentioned has been discussed hundreds of times.
To be fair, Bridgestone are not infallable and said at malaysia this weekend that the maximum their soft tyre would manage was 20 laps there. There were cars on it close to 30 laps with no noticeable drop off in performance. In fact, Massa's were about 20 laps old when he overtook Button.
But it does seem unlikely that Bridgestone would have gotten this wrong seeing as they inspected the tyres. But it also seems unlikely that Hamilton would have been as visibly ****ed off as he was if he knew he had no option but to pit. And if his tyres were as bad as Bridgestone were claiming, both he and his team would have known about it..
But it does seem unlikely that Bridgestone would have gotten this wrong seeing as they inspected the tyres. But it also seems unlikely that Hamilton would have been as visibly ****ed off as he was if he knew he had no option but to pit. And if his tyres were as bad as Bridgestone were claiming, both he and his team would have known about it..
It was added 6 minutes later because you edited the question into your post after I had replied already.
He also said his second set had 'gone' towards the end of the race, so either one set were awesome and would have lasted 45 laps but the next set died after 20 laps or Hamilton perhaps isn't the most accurate judge of his tyres condition whilst he's concentrating on racing.
What other drivers ask their teams during the race is largely irrelevant, they are not Hamilton or Webber, they had not been driving those cars, their tyre wear would have been different. It doesn't matter how many times it has been discussed on forums, more so how many times it had been discussed before Bridgestone commented yesterday when any discussion would have been pure speculation from all involved.
I really don't get why you're trying to argue against Bridgestone. I'm pretty sure they're clever enough to know what they're talking about and i'm fairly sure the guys who analysed the race tyres know a damn sight more about tyre technology than you or I do, so assuming they know what they're talking about, the only other option is Bridgestone are lying about the situation. Why would they do that?
Ultimately, all you have is speculation and why you think the tyres were fine based on what a few people thought at the time.
Bridgestone themselves have stated in no uncertain terms that the tyres were close to being finished on both Hamilton and Webbers car, something I can well believe given the manner in which they were driving.
You'll forgive me if I put my faith in the word of the tyre manufacturer who has analysed the actual tyres rather than the people speculating on the internet.
That's the thing though. They have consistently proven themselves to be useless at estimating tyre wear.
Simply because I'm not willing to accept Bridgestone's "party line" as gospel doesn't make me a crank. The ability to take several conflicting sources of information and coalesce them into a general opinion defines someone that is a realist. And as I first said, I'm not alone in holding this view.
Shock horror - someone on the internet has disagreed with you. Get over it.
Me too.
No doubt, but 20 laps of 'safety'? Not convinced they'd take it that far.
I notice you ignore the rest of my post
At the end of the day, if you're going to flat out say that Bridgestone are wrong and you know better about their own tyre performance than they do, it's pointless me trying to convince you otherwise as you sure as hell won't listen to anything I say either.
surely because by that time Button's tyres were about 40 laps old - so its the comparative difference, not just how old they are
Massa might have been losing a tenth or two per lap on older tyres - Button could have been losing a second or more ( in the last 10 laps Button was up with the leaders on lap time for maybe one or two, but then lost significant time from there on - or rather didnt gain as much as Hamilton / Webber / Vettel who traded fastest laps for a while)