A link to that?
How do you know it was Alonso that bought it up?
I'm not doubting you, as yet I haven't seen it reported
Not that I blame them, had the roles been reversed they would all do the same.
Malaysian Grand Prix 2011, Sepang International Circuit - Race 2/19
- Thread starter Glaucus
- Start date
A link to that?
How do you know it was Alonso that bought it up?
I'm not doubting you, as yet I haven't seen it reported
Not that I blame them, had the roles been reversed they would all do the same.
Soldato
that explains it then,
Soldato
Can you imagine the thinking distance at the speeds he goes?
ps3ud0
Schumi, Prost and Senna all managed it.
Caporegime
so he had 2 stints on crap tyres then ?
1 extra set of hard tyres
and
1 set of already scrubbed in prime tyres that he'd battered during qualifying
Which set was he using when his pace suddenly dropped off
Associate
Soldato
Scrubbed hards I believe.
No one knows for sure
but Brundle reported it. Someone posted on the last page.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 45,339
No one knows for sure
Jup.
JB doesnt seem to lock up/Unload nearly as much as LH though - so I cant see how something so similar to both cars can be that responsible
edit - It may be a different type of ruining of the tyre (due to unloading rather than locking) but its going to damage the race stint done on the tyres just as much
It was plain to see on the side by side quali lap that LH used that set of tyres much harder (specifically sector 1 and 3 I seem to recall) - and with so many required stops for the race, every set of tyres counts and grid position starts to count a lot less as well (no reason to believe he would have unloaded one tyre any more or less with different runs after all). He was ultimately faster, but counted for squat really)
Im slowly but surely getting the same feelling. Funny that in the free practice sessions lewis was at the same pace as the redbull's race pace with both tires, but in the race somthing went wrong. But if lewis was at his normal pace (1-2 seconds quicker) he wouldn't have to defend so hard or even defend at all.
I believe this was also down to track temp which was considerably down on race day compared to practice 1, 2 & 3
This also might have helped JB last 19 laps on the hard tyres for his last stint (I know some have suggested its "usage" that counts rather than track temp - but Im not so sure just yet) when no-one else had managed more than 16 in practice
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Yet, Ferarri from what I recall used what, one set of softs in Q1(maybe 2) and did 2 runs in Q2 on softs? While Hamilton ran one set of softs for one lap in Q2 and one set of hards.
Hamilton also did, two stints on softs, 3 stints on hards, and all 3 sets of hards were bad? THe first set were fine on pace, he was marginally slower than Button who was on soft tyres, but those hards also only lasted around 10 laps before he pitted, while everyone elses hard tyres lasted, what, 15-20 laps.
It just doesn't add up, 3 sets of hard tyres, that all failed, either going less than 2/3rds the distance you'd expect, or being incredibly slow + going even less far.
This stuff about him flat spotted and locking them up, other people have done that all weekend aswell, Hamilton did it several times last weekend aswell including in the race yet none of his tyres turned into piles of crap instantly.
From qualifying I'd expect him to have more tyres than almost everyone, he did less soft tyre runs than almost anyone else on the grid(if not everyone) and the Mclaren has previously, last race, practice, in qualifying, been the best car on the hard tyres by a mile.
I still think the only explanation that add's up timing wise is, the first set of hards were great, 0.1seconds a lap down on BUtton in softs is great pace, losing a little time to Vettel but with the plan to go for a fast last stint on softs while everyone else struggles on older hards.
Then after 10 laps something went wrong on the car, he lost speed, and the choice was, slow for 10 laps, line of traffic behind him, pit and lose loads of places. That set of hards wouldn't last right to the end, so pit then, hards till the end of the race, track position before he's lost too much time hope he can hold off a few people behind him then Alonso screwed the rear right so he needed another pit anyway.
IF the tyres were just slow, and the new tyres were slow, why do 3 pits for hard tyres when two sets would easily have got him to the end. The car was simply slow, there was no fast few laps on the 2nd or 3rd set of hard tyres that got slower and slower, they were just slow, start to finish.
We heard other cars complain about tyres going off, yet Hamilton didn't mention it once.
Maybe he screwed up every set of tyres in qualifying, but for someone who ran more hards than anyone else, does it make sense that he then ran more hards in the race than anyone else?
AS for using tyres harder in qualifying, Hamilton was slower in all his outlaps, he was saving tyres more than anyone and they mentioned it more than once about how easy he was being on the tyres. Even if he wrecked tyres, it doesn't explain how he used less than everyone else yet had less available in the race.
I'm not saying he's the bestest driver in the world, it just doesn't add up. I think something broke on the car and they didn't want to talk about it publically. Hamiltons reaction/interview was odd, he didn't just say, my tyres sucked, he's had bad races and bad tyres before and been more willing to talk or talk about his own mistakes in a race.
Hamilton also did, two stints on softs, 3 stints on hards, and all 3 sets of hards were bad? THe first set were fine on pace, he was marginally slower than Button who was on soft tyres, but those hards also only lasted around 10 laps before he pitted, while everyone elses hard tyres lasted, what, 15-20 laps.
It just doesn't add up, 3 sets of hard tyres, that all failed, either going less than 2/3rds the distance you'd expect, or being incredibly slow + going even less far.
This stuff about him flat spotted and locking them up, other people have done that all weekend aswell, Hamilton did it several times last weekend aswell including in the race yet none of his tyres turned into piles of crap instantly.
From qualifying I'd expect him to have more tyres than almost everyone, he did less soft tyre runs than almost anyone else on the grid(if not everyone) and the Mclaren has previously, last race, practice, in qualifying, been the best car on the hard tyres by a mile.
I still think the only explanation that add's up timing wise is, the first set of hards were great, 0.1seconds a lap down on BUtton in softs is great pace, losing a little time to Vettel but with the plan to go for a fast last stint on softs while everyone else struggles on older hards.
Then after 10 laps something went wrong on the car, he lost speed, and the choice was, slow for 10 laps, line of traffic behind him, pit and lose loads of places. That set of hards wouldn't last right to the end, so pit then, hards till the end of the race, track position before he's lost too much time hope he can hold off a few people behind him then Alonso screwed the rear right so he needed another pit anyway.
IF the tyres were just slow, and the new tyres were slow, why do 3 pits for hard tyres when two sets would easily have got him to the end. The car was simply slow, there was no fast few laps on the 2nd or 3rd set of hard tyres that got slower and slower, they were just slow, start to finish.
We heard other cars complain about tyres going off, yet Hamilton didn't mention it once.
Maybe he screwed up every set of tyres in qualifying, but for someone who ran more hards than anyone else, does it make sense that he then ran more hards in the race than anyone else?
AS for using tyres harder in qualifying, Hamilton was slower in all his outlaps, he was saving tyres more than anyone and they mentioned it more than once about how easy he was being on the tyres. Even if he wrecked tyres, it doesn't explain how he used less than everyone else yet had less available in the race.
I'm not saying he's the bestest driver in the world, it just doesn't add up. I think something broke on the car and they didn't want to talk about it publically. Hamiltons reaction/interview was odd, he didn't just say, my tyres sucked, he's had bad races and bad tyres before and been more willing to talk or talk about his own mistakes in a race.
Last edited:
Soldato
I named vettel because it was the start of the race millions of people world wide saw him move 4 times
and yet nothing was done.It takes me back to 1989-1990 races the FIA are a joke.
Associate
Soldato
Can you imagine the thinking distance at the speeds he goes?
ps3ud0
I think you see my point
ps3ud0
Schumi done what the team told him to do and then Brawn took over and told Schumi what to do.
But hold on Schumi did tell ferrari to go to full wet tires for Kimi and we all know what happend there
The cars that Senna and Prost drove is nothing like what they are today.
In my days you saw them drift the cars around the corners if you did that now the tires would not last a lap.
Today you have driver+team+radar+hope when they pick tires.
Last edited:
Schumi done what the team told him to do and then Brawn took over and told Schumi what to do.
But hold on Schumi did tell ferrari to go to full wet tires for Kimi and we all know what happend there
The cars that Senna and Prost drove is nothing like what they are today.
In my days you saw them drift the cars around the corners if you did that now the tires would not last a lap.
Today you have driver+team+radar+hope when they pick tires.
Well I'm far from a schumi fan but plenty of times the call came from Micheal as to what he wanted, not from Brawn. Brawn said this many times.
I never saw Senna Prost of MS drift a car either, certainly not intentionally as it's far from the fastest way even in the cars they drove.
MS was leagues ahead in understanding the tyres. I remember an article years ago in either Autosport or F1 racing where the drivers where asked about friction circle in regards to tyres and how it could help them get the best from the tyre. MS was the only driver who knew what the hell the interviewer was on about.
Soldato
Maybe the interviewer didnt explain it fully - if just going off the name it might not mean anything (if however interviewer described it fully and drivers still didnt understand what he was talking about then fair do's - although I hardly doubt that, unless driver particularly chose back of the grid peddlers)
Soldato
You guys never learn that the top 3 of the stewards that dish it out are picked by the FIA
edit= I forgot to put that they(FIA) also pick the F1 racers for the stewards panel. But don't let facts get in the way.
http://www.formula1.com/inside_f1/rules_and_regulations/sporting_regulations/6836/fia.html
Last edited: