Sure, I wouldn't have blamed him for the incident even if he was simply out or had to start from the back, but still, once it happened, it really felt over for his weekend and that Leclerc would be out there on an island trying to fend off two fast Mclarens with options.
In that case, I suspect Leclerc would have backed them into Russell alone, while Sainz would try cutting through the grid as much as possible. Going at true race pace would have destroyed his tyres, while McLarens would have had room to build the gap to Russell. But honestly, tiny touch and an immediate puncture (not even a slow puncture to reach the pits at least), that's ridiculous for Sainz, haven't seen that happen since front wings were cutting rear tyres over a decade ago...Seanspeed wrote: ↑26 May 2024, 23:45Sure, I wouldn't have blamed him for the incident even if he was simply out or had to start from the back, but still, once it happened, it really felt over for his weekend and that Leclerc would be out there on an island trying to fend off two fast Mclarens with options.
24 points at the WCC is far from imposible to recover, specially if RBR perfomance is similar to this last GPs for the rest of the seasonVanja #66 wrote: ↑26 May 2024, 18:20Both Ferrari and McLaren must push as hard as possible this season no matter what, but RB is absolutely in control of both Championships and those are theirs to lose.
The only thing Ferrari should now do is make a push for Q pace and take every risk to win until the end of the season, they have nothing to lose
Not saying it's impossible to recover, just saying RBR are the favourites until they are mathematically beaten. They should never be underestimated to make a big leap with the car and I think everyone in Ferrari understands this.Andres125sx wrote: ↑27 May 2024, 08:3924 points at the WCC is far from imposible to recover, specially if RBR perfomance is similar to this last GPs for the rest of the season
Also, Sainz is proving to be way more consistent than Perez, so I´d say the championship is quite open
Apart from that, what a BS of a GP Monaco is... Being slower is key, to avoid your chasers to have a free pitstop. Laptimes were 8 seconds slower than possible. When the key is slowing down instead of going as fast as possible, that should not be called racing
1) On the first point we will have to wait to see over the next two races to see the Imola upgrade. Oscar said Mclaren have given up some high speed performance for better low speed. It seems it is a balance thing, when Ferrari were able to to focus on one corner type they were able to extract excellent traction performance. George said much the same of the Merc, that they were only so good in Monaco as they did not need to find a balance between slow and fast.MTL79 wrote: ↑27 May 2024, 02:41I have 2 comments:
1) I'm surprised with Ferrari's race pace given how we'd all said slow speed corners were their weakness. Can it be that the car suffers in slow speed corners only when it needs to be configured to tackle both slow and fast speed corners, indicating some different flaw in the design? Red Bull had their own difficulty with suspension settings this race, but McLaren did not and Ferrari was still faster than them, which to me indicates that it was not simply down to suspension. I'm in no way shape or form knowledgeable on this though; also
2) The pit strategy was a bit strange for me. I don't understand why Sainz decided to pursue Piastri so closely and risk damaging his tyres. I would have thought backing up Norris would have been the best option for both Ferrari and Sainz. For Ferrari, that gap would have meant Piastri could never try to pit and for Sainz it meant he would have had a few more seconds in the event of a safety car that could have worked in his favor. The strategy used by Ferrari only ended up working because Russel decided not to pit. Had he have gone in, Norris would have gone in. We can all agree Verstappen showed us that having a new set of tyres does not guarantee an overtake, but I still think Sainz pushing Norris back into Russel would have been the safest option. Thoughts?
This. There was just a totally different approach to this weekend. No games, no BS, no weak decisions or communication. He went for it right away, and maybe that's the right thing for Charles to do. That way he wouldn't be caught out by any unexpected behaviour once the car is fully turned up.CouncilorIrissa wrote: ↑26 May 2024, 23:06https://www.motorsportweek.com/2024/05/ ... -has-gone/
I can't overstate how important this win could end up being for Charles psychologically. I expect find to find another gear not necessarily in terms of speed, but in terms of confidence in his team and himself. The trials of last two years seem to be finally coming to an end; he was so close to a win multiple times over the last two years, yet something went wrong every time. Coming up repeatedly short couldn't have been healthy.
Yeah, Leclerc has always been in control.dani5549 wrote: ↑27 May 2024, 10:43I think this weekend was very important in terms of car balance aswell. Every time in qualifying we never found time, especially from friday to saturday. This weekend was different, the car was great in quali, and we weren't surprised by how much the others improved either. The tire deg didn't seem worse but it's Monaco so you never know. I think it was a big step forward.
It's the cars, the cheapest and most effective way for F1 to increase overtaking is to reduce car size. A smaller car will increase overtaking on all tracks of the calender. Present day and future.Emag wrote: ↑27 May 2024, 09:54I think its time for them to consider changes to the track. In terms of strategy, I agree, it was like Singapore, but you're not completely hopeless for an overtake in Singapore.
There's not that much room for changes, but something that would make a big difference is to remove the nouvelle chicane and making tabac slower. At least you get one big braking zone following a straight.
1. I think the consensus is that Ferrari is good over the bumps. This is a bumpy track. It also used to be very good in traction.MTL79 wrote: ↑27 May 2024, 02:41I have 2 comments:
1) I'm surprised with Ferrari's race pace given how we'd all said slow speed corners were their weakness. Can it be that the car suffers in slow speed corners only when it needs to be configured to tackle both slow and fast speed corners, indicating some different flaw in the design? Red Bull had their own difficulty with suspension settings this race, but McLaren did not and Ferrari was still faster than them, which to me indicates that it was not simply down to suspension. I'm in no way shape or form knowledgeable on this though; also
2) The pit strategy was a bit strange for me. I don't understand why Sainz decided to pursue Piastri so closely and risk damaging his tyres. I would have thought backing up Norris would have been the best option for both Ferrari and Sainz. For Ferrari, that gap would have meant Piastri could never try to pit and for Sainz it meant he would have had a few more seconds in the event of a safety car that could have worked in his favor. The strategy used by Ferrari only ended up working because Russel decided not to pit. Had he have gone in, Norris would have gone in. We can all agree Verstappen showed us that having a new set of tyres does not guarantee an overtake, but I still think Sainz pushing Norris back into Russel would have been the safest option. Thoughts?
Not sure what others think, when I look at the pole lap, it doesn't look like he's on the edge. One tiny snap was braking into Grand Hotel hairpin (T6) and that's it. Looks just as relaxed as 2022 pole that he was going to improve a lot in second go if Perez didn't crash first.
