2015 Singapore Grand Prix - 18-20 September

[SectorOne]

Hamilton possibly could have had a go at Vettel had their strategy all panned out without the second safety car.

[Phil]

I think not... the second safety car was too early, which is why they put Rosberg on primes and not on options...

(but yes, I would have loved to see that offset work out and see them on the option tires in the last stint vs. Vettel/Ric on primes )

[Tom145145]

I don't think a teams form can be judged from one race (especially a street race) in addition Merc. would have lost ground on almost all the field which is not just unlikely it's almost impossible. I can't see how an increase in tire pressure would be an issue for one team in the region of 1.5 seconds a lap but be a performance advantage to others with the same tire construction. Surely other teams would have reduced pressures in the past and found the advantage to.
I believe it is far more likely other teams have focuses on this race and done a better job on setup, my opinion Ferrari and Red Bull have found a sweet spot in the engine maps for better traction. Also Vettel has always show ecellent throttle control over the years, mainly put down to the car in the past but may have been the reason Kimi was not in the same league.

[SectorOne]

I think not... the second safety car was too early, which is why they put Rosberg on primes and not on options...

(but yes, I would have loved to see that offset work out and see them on the option tires in the last stint vs. Vettel/Ric on primes )

Read it again, i said without the second safety car. It was the second SC that blew their strategy.


Edit: just realised i said Vettel, ment Raikkonen obviously.

[Phil]

Oops, sorry. Yeah, you're right. I think the Vettel comment threw me off a bit...

But yeah, I think Kimi could have been doable. At the very least, it would have been great to see how their deltas compare on offset tires... We'll never know now.

[basti313]

Hamilton possibly could have had a go at Vettel had their strategy all panned out without the second safety car.

No way...even with keeping the gap tight until Rai stops for primes he would have had much too much gap after his much later pit stop. And the Merc just did not have the pace on options to close the gap and fight for position against the Ferrari.

[bhall II]

Sure you can. With only ~46% of the lap spent at full-throttle - second-lowest of the season - it's nearly impossible for PU performance to mask setup deficiencies. Combine that with a revised circuit layout and Ferrari's anomalous improvement* since last year, and you end up with a Mercedes deficit that looks really weird.

Excellent numbers Ben. One question though; Didn't the track layout change for Singapore slightly? If we ignore Mercedes baffling performance, perhaps that could explain the rather unusual large jump we saw from the Ferrari and RedBull?

[Phil]

second fail today. That's the punishment for typing on a 5 inch smartphone and trying to do multiple things at the same time.

[Edax]

Monaco was a larger difference between Mercedes and their next competitor compared to Singapore. Maybe Singapore just doesn't suit the Mercedes that well, but it was masked last year due to the bigger difference between cars and PU. This year, it has been generally closer and adding to that, Mercedes stuffed up either set-up that exaggerated the difference. That's my guess anyway.

I don't know whether the comparison between Monaco and Singapore is justified. They are both street circuits, and relatively slow. But Monaco is much more varied in corners, elevation, road surfaces etc.

Singapore basically only has two types of corners. In principle easier to setup for, but if you get one type wrong you suffer half the lap (and visa versa for a good setup). I can imagine how this circuit would help to amplify the differences between a good and bad setup.

[Slife]

I am of the opinion that if Verstappen and Sainz's positions were reversed, Sainz would have let Verstappen through to try and pass Checo, but if Verstappen failed he would not give the position back to Sainz. Hence why Verstappen didn't want to let Sainz through because he was afraid that Sainz was gonna be ruthless (like Verstappen) and not give the position back to Verstappen.

Actually, I think in these scenarios this thought process is the correct one because you have no idea if your teammate will actually yield the position back to you.

[iotar__]

I am of the opinion that if Verstappen and Sainz's positions were reversed, Sainz would have let Verstappen through to try and pass Checo, but if Verstappen failed he would not give the position back to Sainz. Hence why Verstappen didn't want to let Sainz through because he was afraid that Sainz was gonna be ruthless (like Verstappen) and not give the position back to Verstappen.

Actually, I think in these scenarios this thought process is the correct one because you have no idea if your teammate will actually yield the position back to you.

I don't see the point of dissecting what the other would have done, that's up to a team to police in normal situations. Red Bull teams are not normal but even they did it plenty of times: Vett-Ricc, Ricc-Kvy. MV is a special case, they told him to move over he ignored them and then they bakctracked with "backing" his decision afterwards, that's pathetic but expected.

I would have more respect for Verstappen jr if he said "I did it because I'm a hypocrite and I can get away with it, team is for me not the other way round, TR doesn't need results but hype RB chosen ones" but he or RB writers had to drag his "tough and cool" daddy into it. So his uncompromising father didn't mind him benefiting from undeserved team orders in Hungary or Sainz letting him past in Monaco and on some other occasions instead of achieving something on his own? [In Monaco a bad pitstop and a penalty equalised itself.]

[Godius]

I am of the opinion that if Verstappen and Sainz's positions were reversed, Sainz would have let Verstappen through to try and pass Checo, but if Verstappen failed he would not give the position back to Sainz. Hence why Verstappen didn't want to let Sainz through because he was afraid that Sainz was gonna be ruthless (like Verstappen) and not give the position back to Verstappen.

Actually, I think in these scenarios this thought process is the correct one because you have no idea if your teammate will actually yield the position back to you.

The team order in this race didn't make any sense to me.

Both cars were on the same strategy, albeit Sainz had new SS and Verstappen a few laps old SS fitted after the second safety car. Also the bad timing (last laps: reminding us to Schumacher - Barrichello) and the no explanation why they gave the order contributed to this big farce of the team.

I can understand Verstappen's emotions well, he was almost 2 laps down after his start and drove a wonderful race and fought his way back to 8th position battling for 7th.

You generally speaking give team orders when the other car is clearly faster and is on a different strategy which can make up a lot of places in the race.

[Phil]

The team order in this race didn't make any sense to me.

http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2015/09/w ... singapore/

“I saw what Red Bull did in Monaco and said ‘this is the best thing you can do’ – play the team game and let the guy on a newer tyre, that was me, try, at least have one shot,” said Sainz after the race.

“If I can’t [get past Perez], Max finishes P8 and me P9. I just wanted one shot, [but] he never gave it to me. It’s not an issue for me, but sometimes you have to think about the team and not just yourself.”

[Andres125sx]

^ also

I don’t need to tell him [anything], I’m sure the team is the one who needs to talk with him. I had three times this year that they asked me to let him by [and] I did it three times. The team asked him three times this year to let me by [and] he has never done it yet.

Unfortunately for Carlos, STR is defending Verstappen even when he´s ignored the team repeteadly. We know how RBR and STR works, their #1 can do whatever he want, and he will never receive any reprimand, while first similar scenario for the other driver will end up with his career in RBR drivers program...

[Andres125sx]

I have no problem with team orders; what I really dislike though are team orders that are so flimsy that the team then lauds the driver for ignoring them!

If the team isn't sure the order is right it shouldn't give it; if the driver doesn't follow the order he should face severe consequences - otherwise future orders hold no value. It doesn't matter to me who's right in this instance (although why they couldn't have done a red bull in Monaco switchback if Sainz couldn't get past is beyond me) but in a team sport the players have to follow the manager's orders or it's anarchy.

+1

The excuse they used (he was too far, 3-4 tenths) is so ridicule... now you have to chase your team mate with your wing touching his gearbox and destroying your tyres meanwhile? Utter BS. That would have neutralized his tyre advantage, he was taking care of the tyres so he could attack at the end of the race.


BTW, spansih tv asked STR before the race finished and they said they were asking Max to let pass Sainz for 15 laps, even when we only hear it a few laps before the end, so the team was repeateadly asking Max to let him pass. If now they say it was ok and they agreed with Max is simply false or they would have stopped repeating the request. An excuse to avoid media bashing Max because of his disobedience