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

[Hannah.]

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

haha, for sure! But I'm sure that once Hamilton has driven in a more races, seasons and maybe even teams, he will have both in bucket loads!!!

Oh and just looking again, Hamilton's fastest lap was inface over 8 10ths quicker than Button's, not the 6 10ths I said before

[Just_a_fan]

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.

One important thing to remember is that Button had an "easier" race than Hamilton because he spent a lot of time in the lead in clear air. Hamilton was continually having to set up and execute overtakes etc. That takes life out of the tyres much more quickly than following ideal lines in relatively clean air does.

There wasn't that much difference between the two McLaren drivers' tyres at the end from what we could see on the TV pictures. Both sets looked pretty heavily worn.

I think Paddy Lowe alluded to the fallacy of Button being kind to tyres in a brief interview on BBC after the race. Did anyone else see that (or better yet record it)? I was doing something else at the time and just caught half of the conversation.

[Hannah.]

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

yep, fair point, however, I genuinely believe that Hamilton could've made it work...Button's tyres looked much worse off than Hamilton's at the end, Jenson even went sliding off the track. Plus, Lewis spent his whole race on the ragged edge, overtaking people left, right and centre which naturally contributed massively to tyre degredation. Meanwhile, Jenson was speeding around at the front, which obviously makes tyre saving much easier. Had Hamilton not stopped at the beginning, he would've been at the front and hence not suffered so much with the tyres.

But that's just my opinion of the situation, we shall never know...

[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>

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

Aye, that is my perception too..... although the Mclaren spokesman after the race yesterday said that they 'havent seen much evidence' of a difference in tyre usage between them. Mankes perfect sense though, and Mclaren are kinda known for muddying the water on purpose eh

[komninosm]

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.

One important thing to remember is that Button had an "easier" race than Hamilton because he spent a lot of time in the lead in clear air. Hamilton was continually having to set up and execute overtakes etc. That takes life out of the tyres much more quickly than following ideal lines in relatively clean air does.

There wasn't that much difference between the two McLaren drivers' tyres at the end from what we could see on the TV pictures. Both sets looked pretty heavily worn.

I think Paddy Lowe alluded to the fallacy of Button being kind to tyres in a brief interview on BBC after the race. Did anyone else see that (or better yet record it)? I was doing something else at the time and just caught half of the conversation.

Also Button only had to go 20 laps on the first set of tyres, Hamilton would probably match that. It would have been pretty bad though if Hamilton pitted on like lap 15-17 and got new slicks and had to pit again on lap 20 for intermediates. I doubt they would have made that mistake though. No one did of the 2 stoppers.

[Belatti]

Would the race been raced if the volcano exploded in China?

Would have Senna beated Schumacher in 1994 if he had not died?

Would you think for a while before creating threads like these?

[segedunum]

Ifs, buts, maybes. We didn't see the Red Bull in clear air enough to judge their speed relative to others, but they would have had track position which is the most important thing. Subjectively, they weren't quick enough in those conditions. They were quick initially, but their tyres went in no time.

It's a loaded question to ask given the conditions. Button and McLaren got it right in Australia and they won. Red Bull were right to go out early in qualifying at Malaysia and they got a 1-2. McLaren and Button were right to stay on slicks and got track position as a result and a fine victory.

These decisions are important but you can't get them right all the time, and I can't see them being representative of the whole season.

[Mr Alcatraz]

Would the race been raced if the volcano exploded in China?

Would have Senna beated Schumacher in 1994 if he had not died?

Would you think for a while before creating threads like these?

I know!
Would Fred have won if he hadn't jumped the start?

[komninosm]

Ifs, buts, maybes. We didn't see the Red Bull in clear air enough to judge their speed relative to others, but they would have had track position which is the most important thing. Subjectively, they weren't quick enough in those conditions. They were quick initially, but their tyres went in no time.

It's a loaded question to ask given the conditions. Button and McLaren got it right in Australia and they won. Red Bull were right to go out early in qualifying at Malaysia and they got a 1-2. McLaren and Button were right to stay on slicks and got track position as a result and a fine victory.

These decisions are important but you can't get them right all the time, and I can't see them being representative of the whole season.

I'm pretty sure we saw the Red Bulls in clear air enough because when Hamilton passed them he gave em 1 second a lap and they had no one in front of em (since Ham was gone fast)
Hamilton got it just as wrong as Vettel/Webber, yet he finished 2nd.

[segedunum]

I'm pretty sure we saw the Red Bulls in clear air enough because when Hamilton passed them he gave em 1 second a lap and they had no one in front of em (since Ham was gone fast) Hamilton got it just as wrong as Vettel/Webber, yet he finished 2nd.

Alas, we're not going to have the same conditions we had in China for every race for the rest of the season, which is what I pointed out and why these questions are ultimately a bit pointless. We're hardly going to get the same race replicated in Barcelona where shear dornforce is a hard requirement, and I rather suspect the McLaren fanboys will go silent unless McLaren can improve that in the next three weeks.

[komninosm]

I'm pretty sure we saw the Red Bulls in clear air enough because when Hamilton passed them he gave em 1 second a lap and they had no one in front of em (since Ham was gone fast) Hamilton got it just as wrong as Vettel/Webber, yet he finished 2nd.

Alas, we're not going to have the same conditions we had in China for every race for the rest of the season, which is what I pointed out and why these questions are ultimately a bit pointless. We're hardly going to get the same race replicated in Barcelona where shear dornforce is a hard requirement, and I rather suspect the McLaren fanboys will go silent unless McLaren can improve that in the next three weeks.

It's just so fun how can keep misrepresenting facts all the time and always include an insult in there too.
I can't say for sure that McLaren had some wet setup that caused them to do poorly on qualifications but better on the race, but it is my guess. I sort of feel the RBRs are faster on dry, but we'll see. Personally I have started to despise Vettel cause he has turned from rookie/new guy to a big ass. I don't know what infuriated me more. His murderous driving in the pits or his statements after the race that Lewis pushed him (LOL). He has joined my list of drivers I hate like those that crash into other cars to win championships (you know who I mean). Hamilton was in that list too for lying stupidly, but his excellent driving has slowly moved him out. I guess it's good that I can curse a driver in every race again (Vettel) to lose badly (or have engine failure) because Schumacher just wasn't doing it for me this year being so pathetic and all.

[mortigitempo]

One important thing to remember is that Button had an "easier" race than Hamilton because he spent a lot of time in the lead in clear air. Hamilton was continually having to set up and execute overtakes etc. That takes life out of the tyres much more quickly than following ideal lines in relatively clean air does.

But Hamilton didn't need to fight his way through the field on that set of tires. He stopped around 1 lap before Button and came out in clear air in front of Rosberg. So any differences on that tire were simply due to the way they treated them in clear air on that stint.

[Hannah.]

One important thing to remember is that Button had an "easier" race than Hamilton because he spent a lot of time in the lead in clear air. Hamilton was continually having to set up and execute overtakes etc. That takes life out of the tyres much more quickly than following ideal lines in relatively clean air does.

But Hamilton didn't need to fight his way through the field on that set of tires. He stopped around 1 lap before Button and came out in clear air in front of Rosberg. So any differences on that tire were simply due to the way they treated them in clear air on that stint.

But the difference was that Button's tyres were worse off, he was the one afterall that had the off, not Hamilton...

[ringo]

Not only that, Hamilton's tyres were in better condition. The problem was the front left was gone which messed up his balance and compromise his sector 3 times by as much as a second.
The other 3 tyres were shown to be better once the tack dried a little and the worn left front was not an issue on the dry line, so the balance was back.
Button finished all 4 tyres, when Lewis only finished 1 tyre.

Lewis was probably playing possum until the last laps so he could jump button by surprise too.

[Hannah.]

Lewis was probably playing possum until the last laps so he could jump button by surprise too.

Oh that would have been good , does anyone know if McLaren told him to just make it to the end of the race when Lewis was 10 odd seconds behind Jenson? If so, damn!