2018 Russian Grand Prix - Sochi Autodrom, 28 - 30 September

[justmoi]

I know you want him to get penalized.. but no.. he didn't. His left front tyre touched the white line on entry to the pit lane, but that is not illegal. Keep searching.

He did crossed. Here is the official video (at 3:00).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnRCF08PwIU&t=3m0s

http://s1131.photobucket.com/user/timec ... 1.jpg.html

I knew it, oh well cant change it now though the result has been signed off and now set in stone

Its the middle line you can't cut across coming out of the pit. Like Lewis would have been penalised if he cut across and blocked Vettel for example.

Shows how much logic or fact is actually out there when people spit their bile.

[justmoi]

^From that position he was already in of course

[justmoi]

Um... Looking at that picture would you expect him not to cross that line and drive into the wall?

lmao

[nevill3]

I thought the rules allowed them to cross the line on pit exit but drivers already on the track are not permitted to cross that line, or is it the other way round

[SiLo]

I thought the rules allowed them to cross the line on pit exit but drivers already on the track are not permitted to cross that line, or is it the other way round

It's the other way around

[f1316]

One thing I’d add is that Ferrari also made a mistake in not anticipating Bottas’ stop and pitting first.

It was clear that Bottas in particular was struggling a couple of laps before he pitted and Vettel had closed the gap to both Mercedes - I think it was something like 3.9 secs to Bottas.

If they’d pitted at that point, Mercedes would have to have made the choice: pit Lewis to try and maintain championship position - which is probably what they would have done but we now know wouldn’t have worked (albeit Seb might still have messed up and let him back through...) - or pit Bottas to ensure they protected the lead but equally ensure Lewis was doomed to be passed.

Given I think they would have prioritised Lewis and that strategy would have failed, it’s very likely Seb would have jumped both cars - and at the very least it would have been maximum pressure on Mercedes. They were most likely haunted by Singapore and worried about being held up by Max, but they needn’t have been given his pace on softs was better than the leaders’ on US’s at that point.

Easy to say now (and obviously totally academic) of course, but I swear I was screaming at the tv at the time saying the same thing

[Just_a_fan]

I thought the rules allowed them to cross the line on pit exit but drivers already on the track are not permitted to cross that line, or is it the other way round

No, pit exiting cars must stay inside the pitlane exit lane until they cross the end line ( the second safety car line).

[Restomaniac]

He did crossed. Here is the official video (at 3:00).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnRCF08PwIU&t=3m0s

http://s1131.photobucket.com/user/timec ... 1.jpg.html

I knew it, oh well cant change it now though the result has been signed off and now set in stone

Its the middle line you can't cut across coming out of the pit. Like Lewis would have been penalised if he cut across and blocked Vettel for example.

Shows how much logic or fact is actually out there when people spit their bile.

True but some on here were actually hoping for a driver to get a DNF to cover off another 4 time champion’s failings.

[Restomaniac]

Um... Looking at that picture would you expect him not to cross that line and drive into the wall?

It's incredible isn't it?

Certainly made me LOL. My wife now thinks I’m nuts (more than normal ).

[ringo]

[GrandAxe]

One thing I’d add is that Ferrari also made a mistake in not anticipating Bottas’ stop and pitting first.

It was clear that Bottas in particular was struggling a couple of laps before he pitted and Vettel had closed the gap to both Mercedes - I think it was something like 3.9 secs to Bottas.

If they’d pitted at that point, Mercedes would have to have made the choice: pit Lewis to try and maintain championship position - which is probably what they would have done but we now know wouldn’t have worked (albeit Seb might still have messed up and let him back through...) - or pit Bottas to ensure they protected the lead but equally ensure Lewis was doomed to be passed.

Given I think they would have prioritised Lewis and that strategy would have failed, it’s very likely Seb would have jumped both cars - and at the very least it would have been maximum pressure on Mercedes. They were most likely haunted by Singapore and worried about being held up by Max, but they needn’t have been given his pace on softs was better than the leaders’ on US’s at that point.

Easy to say now (and obviously totally academic) of course, but I swear I was screaming at the tv at the time saying the same thing

Its more like Seb's tyre allocation wrecked his race and gave him poor strategy choices. He couldn't even have defended against Lewis overtaking moves for long, because he had the softer, quicker wearing tyre. He was most likely doomed whichever way he went, because he had no data on the optimum tyre set (softs) having not run them at all during FP.

[f1316]

One thing I’d add is that Ferrari also made a mistake in not anticipating Bottas’ stop and pitting first.

It was clear that Bottas in particular was struggling a couple of laps before he pitted and Vettel had closed the gap to both Mercedes - I think it was something like 3.9 secs to Bottas.

If they’d pitted at that point, Mercedes would have to have made the choice: pit Lewis to try and maintain championship position - which is probably what they would have done but we now know wouldn’t have worked (albeit Seb might still have messed up and let him back through...) - or pit Bottas to ensure they protected the lead but equally ensure Lewis was doomed to be passed.

Given I think they would have prioritised Lewis and that strategy would have failed, it’s very likely Seb would have jumped both cars - and at the very least it would have been maximum pressure on Mercedes. They were most likely haunted by Singapore and worried about being held up by Max, but they needn’t have been given his pace on softs was better than the leaders’ on US’s at that point.

Easy to say now (and obviously totally academic) of course, but I swear I was screaming at the tv at the time saying the same thing

Its more like Seb's tyre allocation wrecked his race and gave him poor strategy choices. He couldn't even have defended against Lewis overtaking moves for long, because he had the softer, quicker wearing tyre. He was most likely doomed whichever way he went, because he had no data on the optimum tyre set (softs) having not run them at all during FP.

You’re talking about Singapore, I presume? Wouldn’t make sense for Russia.

You may be right in Singapore - in that he wouldn’t have been able to defend on US - but I don’t think that had anything to do with their allocation; they had a set of softs that they could have used and didn’t need to run on it to know it was the optimum tyre to get to the end. But they went aggressive to try and get an undercut - miscalculating Perez - and meaning he also lost out to Max.

It was a mistake but not one that having more soft tyres would have prevented.

[GrandAxe]

One thing I’d add is that Ferrari also made a mistake in not anticipating Bottas’ stop and pitting first.

It was clear that Bottas in particular was struggling a couple of laps before he pitted and Vettel had closed the gap to both Mercedes - I think it was something like 3.9 secs to Bottas.

If they’d pitted at that point, Mercedes would have to have made the choice: pit Lewis to try and maintain championship position - which is probably what they would have done but we now know wouldn’t have worked (albeit Seb might still have messed up and let him back through...) - or pit Bottas to ensure they protected the lead but equally ensure Lewis was doomed to be passed.

Given I think they would have prioritised Lewis and that strategy would have failed, it’s very likely Seb would have jumped both cars - and at the very least it would have been maximum pressure on Mercedes. They were most likely haunted by Singapore and worried about being held up by Max, but they needn’t have been given his pace on softs was better than the leaders’ on US’s at that point.

Easy to say now (and obviously totally academic) of course, but I swear I was screaming at the tv at the time saying the same thing

Its more like Seb's tyre allocation wrecked his race and gave him poor strategy choices. He couldn't even have defended against Lewis overtaking moves for long, because he had the softer, quicker wearing tyre. He was most likely doomed whichever way he went, because he had no data on the optimum tyre set (softs) having not run them at all during FP.

You’re talking about Singapore, I presume? Wouldn’t make sense for Russia.

You may be right in Singapore - in that he wouldn’t have been able to defend on US - but I don’t think that had anything to do with their allocation; they had a set of softs that they could have used and didn’t need to run on it to know it was the optimum tyre to get to the end. But they went aggressive to try and get an undercut - miscalculating Perez - and meaning he also lost out to Max.

It was a mistake but not one that having more soft tyres would have prevented.

Vettel didn't have any data on the softs, having not run them at all through the weekend (in Russia). Only Kimi did, indeed I was convinced before the race that Vettel had little choice outside a two-stopper.
Trying to stretch out the ultra's in a long stint to the finish was strange and really compromised Vettel's chances. Any aggressive driving such as continuous attacking or defending would have quickly killed them.

[tranquility2k4]

Something that I think hasn't got discussed much was Merc's tactics in relation to the possibility of letting Hamilton past Bottas prior to the first stop. To me, the only risk to them losing the race was if Vettel kept up with them both and it appeared prior to the first stop that Hamilton had much more pace than Bottas, he was regularly under a second behind him for multiple laps, which means he must have been much faster at the time. Bottas' tyres did seem to be going off a bit more quickly, which has happened in the past when he's leading a race. I thought in such circumstances it would be a no brainer for Mercedes to tell him to either up the pace or let Lewis past otherwise he risks a team 1-2 and also puts Ham at risk during the pit stops. To me, this would have been much more logical and even if he let Lewis by they could have swapped them back later if need be and allowed them to race again if they had a comfortable buffer over Vettel.

Also whilst I feel sympathy for Bottas to an extent the fact of the matter is more often than not when Lewis is leading Bottas cannot keep up with him, let alone keep within a second or two. If Bottas had of driven off into the distance then there would have been no possible way for Merc to order him to allow Lewis by, or well it would have been a little farcical if they did. Ultimately he can win races if he puts in a superb performance, but if he's going to hold up Lewis and back him into his main championship rival then I don't see why anyone would be surprised if they deployed team orders. The whole thing was just badly handled by Merc and I hope they decide before Suzuka exactly what the rules are prior to the race instead of making it up as they go along resulting in a massive anti-climax.

[nevill3]

Its more like Seb's tyre allocation wrecked his race and gave him poor strategy choices. He couldn't even have defended against Lewis overtaking moves for long, because he had the softer, quicker wearing tyre. He was most likely doomed whichever way he went, because he had no data on the optimum tyre set (softs) having not run them at all during FP.

You’re talking about Singapore, I presume? Wouldn’t make sense for Russia.

You may be right in Singapore - in that he wouldn’t have been able to defend on US - but I don’t think that had anything to do with their allocation; they had a set of softs that they could have used and didn’t need to run on it to know it was the optimum tyre to get to the end. But they went aggressive to try and get an undercut - miscalculating Perez - and meaning he also lost out to Max.

It was a mistake but not one that having more soft tyres would have prevented.

Vettel didn't have any data on the softs, having not run them at all through the weekend (in Russia). Only Kimi did, indeed I was convinced before the race that Vettel had little choice outside a two-stopper.
Trying to stretch out the ultra's in a long stint to the finish was strange and really compromised Vettel's chances. Any aggressive driving such as continuous attacking or defending would have quickly killed them.

Vettel was not on Ultras in Russia after his pit stop, he was on softs