Hungarian GP 2011 - Hungaroring

[richard_leeds]

That's odd n_smikle, because my recollection of Coulthard's commentary is that he usually prefers events to be left as "racing incidents".

Also a snitch is a police informant. So are you saying Coulthard discovers team secrets and then informs the FIA?

What are you on about?

[Ray]

You want to know how I figure out that he is snitching?

Proof would be better, not just opinion and name calling. DC is about middle of the road from what I've seen of BBC coverage.

[Alexgtt]

That's odd n_smikle, because my recollection of Coulthard's commentary is that he usually prefers events to be left as "racing incidents".

Also a snitch is a police informant. So are you saying Coulthard discovers team secrets and then informs the FIA?

What are you on about?

He's talking complete rubbish. DC has absolutely no influence over stewards calls. He simply say's what he thinks, just like everyone else and has nothing to gain from it other than adding what he considers best value to his job as commentator.

Wow, yet another example of people taking things way too seriously. Take a chill pill!

[beelsebob]

He's talking complete rubbish. DC has absolutely no influence over stewards calls. He simply say's what he thinks, just like everyone else and has nothing to gain from it other than adding what he considers best value to his job as commentator.

Wow, yet another example of people taking things way too seriously. Take a chill pill!

Personally, I found it amusing that they suggested they should introduce a new offence – overtaking in a way that displeases DC.

This would be the top move that might incur it's wrath at a guess:

[Diesel]

Anyway - I still haven't gotten over the switch to super softs on Hamilton's Mclaren. Total disgrace. How was he supposed to win the race 30 laps on super softs and the pursuer only 7 seconds away on prime? In the words of Fernando Alonso, THAT IS F'ing RIDICULOUS!

He should have been faster on super softs, a second a lap for 13 laps was all he needed if the next car was 7 seconds down the road after the stop. It's a well known fact the super softs are a second faster than the softs, and fact is he wasn't fast enough chump, sorry.

*awaits a fanboy bashing*

[ajdavison2]

Anyway - I still haven't gotten over the switch to super softs on Hamilton's Mclaren. Total disgrace. How was he supposed to win the race 30 laps on super softs and the pursuer only 7 seconds away on prime? In the words of Fernando Alonso, THAT IS F'ing RIDICULOUS!

He should have been faster on super softs, a second a lap for 13 laps was all he needed if the next car was 7 seconds down the road after the stop. It's a well known fact the super softs are a second faster than the softs, and fact is he wasn't fast enough chump, sorry.

*awaits a fanboy bashing*

Not fanboy bashing, but would the SS even be capable of that kind of pace for that amount of time?

[beelsebob]

Anyway - I still haven't gotten over the switch to super softs on Hamilton's Mclaren. Total disgrace. How was he supposed to win the race 30 laps on super softs and the pursuer only 7 seconds away on prime? In the words of Fernando Alonso, THAT IS F'ing RIDICULOUS!

He should have been faster on super softs, a second a lap for 13 laps was all he needed if the next car was 7 seconds down the road after the stop. It's a well known fact the super softs are a second faster than the softs, and fact is he wasn't fast enough chump, sorry.

*awaits a fanboy bashing*

I was confused by this too – but if you look at the pace of all the drivers an supersofts, they were, for whatever reason, not faster than the softs at that point in the race. Perhaps the track's weird oily/greasy/sticky surface in the rain negated all advantage they had? Perhaps the pirelli supersofts work by getting hotter more easily and sticking down better, and that was being negated by the drizzle.

Whatever the reason, the supersofts were not faster than the softs at that point.

[Diesel]

The super softs were wearing out quicker due the the green track. But equally, it was unknown if it was possible to get the softs up to temp in the damp conditions.

Personally, I feel that had Lewis not spun etc. and continued on his strategy, it might have been possible for him to fight his way back to second, possibly first? Who knows, but he would have been on fresh super softs while the rest of the front runners were on old softs.

[ringo]

It wasn't possible.
SS are only 1s faster in certain conditions. We didn't have those in hungary.

Also for a driver to get that 1s a lap to 20s, he would have to be pushing harder the whole 13 laps to get the pistop gap, not to mention the slow outlap.
I can't see that happening in slippery conditions, just too much risk for a race leader.

It's a silly decision for a leader to pit more than the followers.
Vettel in turkey is the prototype of the perfect strategy. When in the lead, pit less as possible and only do an extra to cover if the gap is more than pit stop.

[ell66]

The super softs were wearing out quicker due the the green track. But equally, it was unknown if it was possible to get the softs up to temp in the damp conditions.

Personally, I feel that had Lewis not spun etc. and continued on his strategy, it might have been possible for him to fight his way back to second, possibly first? Who knows, but he would have been on fresh super softs while the rest of the front runners were on old softs.

no chance, the ss were only god for a couple of laps.
for all of mclarens expertise, time and time again they make basic errors where just a bit of common sense should prevail, the worrying thing is that they dont really do anything about it and just put it down to "motot racing" all the time and thus they'll continue to make these mistakes over and over.

personally i felt the inters were a good gamble, at that point he was allready looking at 4th due to having to stop again shortly anyway, but the decision to put the super softs on again was a shocker that cost lewis the win and the team a valuable 1-2.

[richard_leeds]

Odd that we're not hearing the same criticism of Ferrari who were on the same strategy. Two of the top three teams went for the SS.

[Mr Alcatraz]

Odd that we're not hearing the same criticism of Ferrari who were on the same strategy. Two of the top three teams went for the SS.

If I'm not mistaken you are actually correct, but the advantage Ferrari (Alonso) had was he ran his last set of SS for only something like 8 laps came in for the primes and cruised to a podium!

[myurr]

The super softs were wearing out quicker due the the green track. But equally, it was unknown if it was possible to get the softs up to temp in the damp conditions.

Personally, I feel that had Lewis not spun etc. and continued on his strategy, it might have been possible for him to fight his way back to second, possibly first? Who knows, but he would have been on fresh super softs while the rest of the front runners were on old softs.

no chance, the ss were only god for a couple of laps.
for all of mclarens expertise, time and time again they make basic errors where just a bit of common sense should prevail, the worrying thing is that they dont really do anything about it and just put it down to "motot racing" all the time and thus they'll continue to make these mistakes over and over.

personally i felt the inters were a good gamble, at that point he was allready looking at 4th due to having to stop again shortly anyway, but the decision to put the super softs on again was a shocker that cost lewis the win and the team a valuable 1-2.

Well the practice times said that the SS would be a second a lap faster, but within a lap or two those on the softs were actually quicker. I guess the combination of compound and construction was just more suitable for those conditions as well as being more durable - or Lewis was overly trying to conserve the tyres, although Alonso was also slower.

No doubt the team will learn from it, but the data that was available for them was actually suggesting the SS was the right way to go. They wouldn't have done it otherwise.

Where I think they ultimately failed was in trying to then adapt and get Lewis to drive slowly to conserve the tyres and try to get them to the end. They should have unleashed him, let him burn through the tyres in five to ten laps but open up a bigger lead, switched to the softs and then try to overtake Vettel and Button to recover. With the fresher tyres, McLaren's pace, and Lewis's ability to overtake it would have been his best shot at regaining the upper hand.

I was initially quick to lash out at the team but they didn't do this deliberately or on a whim, it would have been carefully calculated and considered, and hindsight's a wonderful thing.

[marcush.]

again it proves how teams really fail on the strategy side.In those conditions the supersofts were simply worse and still most teams did take two stints on them to realise .
I´d say at half season everyone should know what each compound is capable of and what it is not.

[beelsebob]

Odd that we're not hearing the same criticism of Ferrari who were on the same strategy. Two of the top three teams went for the SS.

If I'm not mistaken you are actually correct, but the advantage Ferrari (Alonso) had was he ran his last set of SS for only something like 8 laps came in for the primes and cruised to a podium!

Yes... and in 8 laps he certainly didn't make up the 17 odd seconds needed for a pit stop, did he... it would have been better simply to go onto the softs... then he would have finished ahead of vettel.