Poll: Would a Red Bull have won, without his pit stop?

[raymondu999]

Hey all. This is not to discuss the various brushes that Vettel had with Hamilton, Hamilton with Webber etc. It's just a discussion of pure race pace, plain and simple, albeit wet race pace.

If Vettel hadn't made the (with hindsight) idiotic pit stops to change tyres and back on the first (2nd and 4th, was it?) laps of the race, and given that Alonso would've been pulled back by his drivethrough from the jumped start, would he have won, or at least an RB?

[PNSD]

No. Was not quick enough.

[raymondu999]

Interesting. Care to explain? Not doubting you here, just wanna see your reasoning

[PNSD]

Without looking at lap times, and just going by the race performance, it just seemed like the RedBulls did not feature at all.

On slicks Lewis was very easily able to lap as quick, if not quicker than them for the most part.

We knew on Saturday that Mclaren setup their cars with the chance of rain in mind, I just wonder if RedBull focused more on a dry setup, because at no point during the race did the redbulls look to have a winning pace. This comes from only watching the race rather than analysing it, so I could well, and probably wrong in that respect.

[Miguel]

It seems to me that in the last two races McLaren have used their F-duct top-speed advantage to set up the car with wet weather in mind. It was more accused in Malaysia, but the same happened here. If you add the fact that Vettel was running with little wing, there was little the Red Bulls could do one the track got damp. Maybe Webber could have, but then again look how fast he ate his intermediate tyres in the last part of the race.

[raymondu999]

If you add the fact that Vettel was running with little wing, there was little the Red Bulls could do one the track got damp.

Interesting. Care to share where you heard this?

[Miguel]

If you add the fact that Vettel was running with little wing, there was little the Red Bulls could do one the track got damp.

Interesting. Care to share where you heard this?

Martin Brundle repeated it several times during the race broadcast. This is consistent with the speed traps recorded during qualifying: http://www.formula1.com/results/season/ ... _trap.html

EDIT: Little of course in relative terms. I doubt it would be apparent to the naked eye without both cars side to side.

[Pandamasque]

No. Was not quick enough.

I agree. Both Red Bulls looked quite awkward as soon as it started raining harder.

[ringo]

I like webber as a driver but i have lost all faith in him now. Too many off track excursions, and too much uncontrolled anger and mistakes.
He would have messed up somewhere down the line if they were on the Button strategy. This was his perfect chance to pip vettel and he missed it.
Webber is not refined. Vettel is, but lacks webbers fighting and defending ability.

[Paul Oz]

Surely Lewis would have won - didnt he practically match the Red Bull stops anyway, and drive clean past both of them on track?

[roost89]

Hey all. This is not to discuss the various brushes that Vettel had with Hamilton, Hamilton with Webber etc. It's just a discussion of pure race pace, plain and simple, albeit wet race pace.

If Vettel hadn't made the (with hindsight) idiotic pit stops to change tyres and back on the first (2nd and 4th, was it?) laps of the race, and given that Alonso would've been pulled back by his drive-through from the jumped start, would he have won, or at least an RB?

I think it would've been a close fight. Vettel and Hamilton seemed to be closely matched on speed during the race, just traffic(slower and for position) and pit-stops slowing them down.
I'm not so sure about Webber though, I didn't see any lap times.

I didn't see anyones lap-times, sadly, my Java failed me on F1.com so wouldn't load. It was like watching the race blind.

Also with hind-sight one would imagine Lewis wouldn't pit as well, so I'm not sure if The Red Bulls would've opened a lead instead of falling back. Also you'd have to think Jenson would have done what he did as well, so there'd be more fighting for the top than just Lulu and Wunderkint.

ONe would require fairly specific lap times at specific times (i.e. one before the first pit and at other points) to get a rough picture of what could happen.
However, I think the television coverage may have skewed the picture as they tend to not show a full picture of what's happening.

I did watch some Highlights and it didn't shed much light on the situation.

So some data required:
What was the gap and lap difference before the pits for tyres at the start of the race. Lap time difference say in the middle of the race and 3/4 point as well as at the end.
Then you could maybe see a picture. As always more data the better
Unfortunately I know of no way to gather it and have no data to rely on at the moment.

[Belatti]

Oh come on, this deserves a merge to the GP thread.

[Hannah.]

I don't think either would've won, I mean both did exactly what Hamilton did and ended up miles behind him despite 2 safety cars getting involved.
I'm pretty sure that Hamilton would've won if he had not made that first pitstop which resulted in the second and hence gave him a 40 second disadvantage, especially considering that his fastest lap was 3 10ths quicker than everybodyelses and 6 10th faster than his teammate. But that's where Button has the clear advantage over Hamilton...experience - he generally knows from past races what the best strategy will be and uses that knowledge fabulously =D>

[Paul Oz]

I don't think either would've won, I mean both did exactly what Hamilton did and ended up miles behind him despite 2 safety cars getting involved.
I'm pretty sure that Hamilton would've won if he had not made that first pitstop which resulted in the second and hence gave him a 40 second disadvantage, especially considering that his fastest lap was 3 10ths quicker than everybodyelses and 6 10th faster than his teammate. But that's where Button has the clear advantage over Hamilton...experience - he generally knows from past races what the best strategy will be and uses that knowledge fabulously =D>

Agree - and if they figure out how to combine the best of both of them, they'll be untouchable!

[wesley123]

I don't think either would've won, I mean both did exactly what Hamilton did and ended up miles behind him despite 2 safety cars getting involved.
I'm pretty sure that Hamilton would've won if he had not made that first pitstop which resulted in the second and hence gave him a 40 second disadvantage, especially considering that his fastest lap was 3 10ths quicker than everybodyelses and 6 10th faster than his teammate. But that's where Button has the clear advantage over Hamilton...experience - he generally knows from past races what the best strategy will be and uses that knowledge fabulously =D>

disagree, it would change a thing. See how quickly the tires degraded on hamiltons car? He still would of needed one more stop then button. Button drives alot cleaner wich helps the tires, put it together and they are a great combo, they always have one contending for the win. Button because he could drive a longer stint or hamilton because of his pace. That completes each other, if one solution doesnt work, they still have the other. That Button can do very well ith his tires will help him this season more then any other year. last year it was an huge problem for him, the brawn itself was very easy on its tires, add an tire friendly driver to that and you have an car that cant push its tires to the limit. Now with an less tire friendly car it isnt an problem anymore but it is an advantage, and he shows it really well and is probably now the most favourite for the title