2016 Canadian Grand Prix - Montreal, Fri 10 – Sun 12 Jun

[ringo]

Vettels strategy could have worked. He carried to gap down to a little over 4 seconds with about 20 laps to go. He was chipping away pretty nicely until he gad those offs on the final corner.
If he had been a little more conservative and kept the gap coming down he woyld have eventually caught Lewis.
Seb had some part to blame in the plan not working as planned. It definitely seemed like the fastest strategy. The biggest challenge would have been overtaking Lewis.

[Just_a_fan]

The problem is that the guy chasing will use up more of the tyres than the guy running at a controlled pace in clean air. That is unless his car has a big inherent pace advantage - which the Ferrari does not. He might have caught Hamilton but then running close and trying to pass would kill the tyres even further. He'd have needed a big pace advantage or a Hamilton lapse to get by, I think.

[LionKing]

Sorry, but that is a bit nonsense. Even Bottas beat faster cars with one stop.

These are the laps before Seb missed the last chicane in lap 56.

Lap Lewis Vettel Gap
46 1:17.281[1] 1:16.727[2] +0.554 -5.900 26
47 1:16.855[1] 1:16.824[2] +0.031 -5.869 27
48 1:16.885[1] 1:16.636[2] +0.249 -5.620 28
49 1:16.765[1] 1:16.429[2] +0.336 -5.284 29
50 1:16.827[1] 1:16.398[2] +0.429 -4.855 30
51 1:16.518[1] 1:16.478[2] +0.040 -4.815 31
52 1:16.666[1] 1:16.504[2] +0.162 -4.653 32
53 1:16.889[1] 1:16.757[2] +0.132 -4.521 33
54 1:16.859[1] 1:16.776[2] +0.083 -4.438 34
55 1:16.668[1] 1:16.534[2] +0.134 -4.304 35

56 1:16.730[1] 1:18.191[2] -1.461 -5.765 21

In those ten laps Vettel gained 1.6 seconds. There were 15 laps to go at that point, he was never going to catch Lewis unless Lewis's tires went off.

Also, Lewis did a 1.15.981 in lap 68. So there was definitely more than enough pace in the Mercedes, even in the end.

[giantfan10]

Sorry, but that is a bit nonsense. Even Bottas beat faster cars with one stop.

These are the laps before Seb missed the last chicane in lap 56.

Lap Lewis Vettel Gap
46 1:17.281[1] 1:16.727[2] +0.554 -5.900 26
47 1:16.855[1] 1:16.824[2] +0.031 -5.869 27
48 1:16.885[1] 1:16.636[2] +0.249 -5.620 28
49 1:16.765[1] 1:16.429[2] +0.336 -5.284 29
50 1:16.827[1] 1:16.398[2] +0.429 -4.855 30
51 1:16.518[1] 1:16.478[2] +0.040 -4.815 31
52 1:16.666[1] 1:16.504[2] +0.162 -4.653 32
53 1:16.889[1] 1:16.757[2] +0.132 -4.521 33
54 1:16.859[1] 1:16.776[2] +0.083 -4.438 34
55 1:16.668[1] 1:16.534[2] +0.134 -4.304 35

56 1:16.730[1] 1:18.191[2] -1.461 -5.765 21

In those ten laps Vettel gained 1.6 seconds. There were 15 laps to go at that point, he was never going to catch Lewis unless Lewis's tires went off.

Also, Lewis did a 1.15.981 in lap 68. So there was definitely more than enough pace was in the Mercedes, even in the end.

I suspect there was more pace in the Ferrari too but its a game of pushing and conserving at the same time which never works out....

[Jolle]

I don't think it's all in the numbers, it looked like as soon as Vettel made his first pit stop and they went to "Plan B", it was a very calculated pace. Winning the GP as slow as possible. Lewis was doing laps 2 seconds slower then Rosberg at one point of the GP on the same kind of tires. If Vettel hadn't outbraked himself in the closing laps, the difference at the line would have been about 2 seconds.

[Restomaniac]

Considering this is Montreal, Ferrari did well to pit Vettel under the VSC. They earned more than half a pit stop free right there, Vettel was only 11 seconds behind Hamilton after that stop. The probability of a SC here is high, so I think it was a good risk to take (the only being giving up track position). The point is, they weren't really quick enough to challenge the Merc. so nobody fooked anybody.

Could they have remained on the track and emulate the same strategy Merc. did with Hamilton ? I think not. When you look at the race, Vettel was pushing much harder with newer tyres, and they were barely making an impression on the gap with Hamilton. Vettel in fact was pushing so hard he overshot the final chicane I don't know how many times. Meanwhile, Lewis was driving much more comfortably.

I think this alongside Rosberg gives the game away.
Vettel struggled to catch Hamilton on fresh rubber, Rosberg pretty much ate Ricciardo and Vettel's team mate on fresh rubber.
I think Hamilton had more than enough on those tyres.

Why does there always have to be some nonsensical analysis claiming mercedes had something on hand?
Ferrari assumed the softs which were graining heavily in those low temperatures would not last.... they were wrong in the case of Hamilton who made them last...Hamilton could modify his pace to stay ahead of vettel who was pushing his newer softs to catch Hamilton. At a certain point after a couple lockups by vettel along with fighting the 2 red bulls his tires could no longer support him attacking Hamilton... race over....Hamilton in clean air at the front could and was looking after his tires. This race was all about track position and tire preservation and Ferrari gave up track position and lost the degradation battle too...

I'm sorry but as I pointed out we had clear evidence that a Ferrari on fresher soft tyres struggled to catch a Merc on older soft tyres. We also had clear evidence that a Merc on fresher soft tyres was able to catch and breeze past a Ferrari on older soft tyres.

That isn't a guess as it happened today clear as day. That's the point I'm making Hamilton was able to manage the situation to Vettel fine even with tyres that were 13 (?) laps older.
If they were on a level playing field all logic would say that Vettel would have caught Hamilton, he didn't hense why Vettel needed to push so hard whilst Hamilton just set the cruise control.
Rosberg was however like a hot knife through the butter for a while today , that included a Ferrari that was at as much of a disadvantage as Hamilton was against Vettel.

[George-Jung]

I'm sorry but as I pointed out we had clear evidence that a Ferarri on fresher soft tyres struggled to catch a Merc on older soft tyres. We also had clear evidence that a Merc on fresher soft tyres was able to catch and breeze past a Ferarri on older soft tyres.

That isn't a guess as it happened today clear as day.

Just asking, but who are 'we'..? Because for sure, it isn't you and me..

[Restomaniac]

I'm sorry but as I pointed out we had clear evidence that a Ferarri on fresher soft tyres struggled to catch a Merc on older soft tyres. We also had clear evidence that a Merc on fresher soft tyres was able to catch and breeze past a Ferarri on older soft tyres.

That isn't a guess as it happened today clear as day.

Just asking, but who are 'we'..? Because for sure, it isn't you and me..

It was a royal we.

[iotar__]

I'm sorry but as I pointed out we had clear evidence that a Ferarri on fresher soft tyres struggled to catch a Merc on older soft tyres. We also had clear evidence that a Merc on fresher soft tyres was able to catch and breeze past a Ferarri on older soft tyres.
That isn't a guess as it happened today clear as day.

Cars don't drive themselves. Do you think Bahrain '14 was the evidence that Williams was quicker there, China Q that Red Bull was quicker, Spain start that TR was quicker and Monaco that Force India is a better car? Raikkonen was lucky he only lost to two slower cars, does it tell you that Williams and RB were quicker? Strategies are only good with drivers that can make them work. Having said that, even if the logic is that Merc is quicker on harder tyres (how much is debatable) and that's why using VSC to create some (measurable) advantage was needed - in hindsight it looked like defending the lead on the same strategy could have been easier, not certain.

- Hamilton's excuses:"Sebastian and Nico got quite a good run down to Turn One and then the tyres were cold, big understeer," The same kind of understeer happened in USA and Suzuka. He did it on purpose and lies now. Where is good cop - bad cop Merc gentlemen duo? Planning TOs, counting car sales with Zetsche or writing letters to fanatics?-

Rosberg:"It was difficult with fuel – I nearly ran out of fuel," he said. "So that's why I couldn't really attack Max properly, and he did a very good job to defend."I had to drop back again to save fuel and attack again, and in the end it went completely pear-shaped and spun around, but managed to carry it home still."

Wonderful world of F1 if they don't talk about it doesn't exist. Where are pushing 100% fans?

[ringo]

For me you just will never know, had vettel been pushing without the errors Hamilton would have to be pushing back. His tyres never had to last the whole race, and may have well had a drop off in performance if Vettel continued to pile on pressure.
For sure, Vettel's offs made the 2 stop even worse, but it was workable. We will never know what would have happened as from Vettel went off a second time, Mercedes eased of when the gap went back up to 6 seconds.
Rosberg had to save fuel today, so it was quite possible if Hamilton was pushed he would also have to save fuel.

[PlatinumZealot]

Iotar, so Hamilton should give up his place to Rosberg around turn 1, when he rightfully could squeeze him off onto the grass? ha! Did you see the Montreal 2014 race?

[ringo]

I'm sorry but as I pointed out we had clear evidence that a Ferarri on fresher soft tyres struggled to catch a Merc on older soft tyres. We also had clear evidence that a Merc on fresher soft tyres was able to catch and breeze past a Ferarri on older soft tyres.
That isn't a guess as it happened today clear as day.

Cars don't drive themselves. Do you think Bahrain '14 was the evidence that Williams was quicker there, China Q that Red Bull was quicker, Spain start that TR was quicker and Monaco that Force India is a better car? Raikkonen was lucky he only lost to two slower cars, does it tell you that Williams and RB were quicker? Strategies are only good with drivers that can make them work. Having said that, even if the logic is that Merc is quicker on harder tyres (how much is debatable) and that's why using VSC to create some (measurable) advantage was needed - in hindsight it looked like defending the lead on the same strategy could have been easier, not certain.

- Hamilton's excuses:"Sebastian and Nico got quite a good run down to Turn One and then the tyres were cold, big understeer," The same kind of understeer happened in USA and Suzuka. He did it on purpose and lies now. Where is good cop - bad cop Merc gentlemen duo? Planning TOs, counting car sales with Zetsche or writing letters to fanatics?-

Rosberg:"It was difficult with fuel – I nearly ran out of fuel," he said. "So that's why I couldn't really attack Max properly, and he did a very good job to defend."I had to drop back again to save fuel and attack again, and in the end it went completely pear-shaped and spun around, but managed to carry it home still."

Wonderful world of F1 if they don't talk about it doesn't exist. Where are pushing 100% fans?

You know this is rich coming from you. You are the same guy supporting Rosberg's blatantly nasty move at barcelona that wiped out both cars, and now you are here playing the saint when Rosberg put his nose in closing gap in the middle of a corner he would have never made even if Lewis wasn't there.
This was mild compared to Nico's nasty moves. In fact this wasn't even a move by Lewis, Lewis just drove the racing line and Nico was dumb enough to shove himself in a dead end.

[Moose]

Vettels strategy could have worked. He carried to gap down to a little over 4 seconds with about 20 laps to go. He was chipping away pretty nicely until he gad those offs on the final corner.
If he had been a little more conservative and kept the gap coming down he woyld have eventually caught Lewis.
Seb had some part to blame in the plan not working as planned. It definitely seemed like the fastest strategy. The biggest challenge would have been overtaking Lewis.

I think you're half right.

Sure, if he could keep the gap coming down at half a second a lap, as it was at the beginning of the stint, he would have caught Hamilton with 10 laps to go. It's unlikely he would have passed though, as even at Canada, half a second a lap is not really enough to pass.

On the other hand, it was clear that his tyres were rapidly catching Hamilton's in terms of wear - the gap had stopped coming down at 0.5 a lap, and started coming down at 0.2 to 0.3 a lap. I think the mistakes were simply a symptom of Vettel having to push super hard to try and get the gap to come down at the rate required.

Ultimately, I don't think it was Vettel that really caused any issue, it was the strategy. Even without the mistakes, he'd not have been able to get the gap down. If they'd simply maintained track position over Merc, they would have won. He would have been under a lot of pressure towards the end, but I think he'd have hung on.

[tomas6791]

Nico Rosberg Spins Twice At 2016 Canadian Grand Prix

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-gg3hWT69o

[giantfan10]

"It's unlikely he would have passed though, as even at Canada, half a second a lap is not really enough to pass."
I beg to differ ... its not that difficult to pass in Canada.