2020 Austrian Grand Prix - Spielberg, 3-5 July

[Mchamilton]

If I would have 30+ people behind screens with real time data and projections on all the drivers and strategies, the driver, even a six time world champion, can suggest what he want but stil gets the best set determined by science.

Hamilton requested the opposite tyre from Bottas's at the pitstop. He wanted to roll the dice and see if he could win. The team elected to stick him on the same tyre. That would have been a political call, not a scientific one. Hamilton would have figured he could pass Bottas and then hold him off, which he might have been able to do, but the team chose not to let him. Even if Hamilton hadn't been able to hold off Bottas, he'd have been in no worse a position than he was sat behind him on the same tyre. At that point, they were cruising away from the rest so he'd have been confident of a second place anyway.

It's these differences that make the best drivers, the best. He's always looking for the advantage - Bottas is quick on his day but seems much happier to defer to the team.

With the big possibility throwing away an easy one two (at the time) of Hamilton’s tires would degrade so much at the end he would have to take another pitstop.

the opposite tyre strategy almost always ends up being faster over a race, the only reason the top teams dont always do it is because of the risk of not getting into q3. Harder tyres at the start with a heavier car and then softer tyres later on with a lighter car is clearly the better option with even the slightest bit of knowledge of tyre deg.

[Jolle]

Hamilton requested the opposite tyre from Bottas's at the pitstop. He wanted to roll the dice and see if he could win. The team elected to stick him on the same tyre. That would have been a political call, not a scientific one. Hamilton would have figured he could pass Bottas and then hold him off, which he might have been able to do, but the team chose not to let him. Even if Hamilton hadn't been able to hold off Bottas, he'd have been in no worse a position than he was sat behind him on the same tyre. At that point, they were cruising away from the rest so he'd have been confident of a second place anyway.

It's these differences that make the best drivers, the best. He's always looking for the advantage - Bottas is quick on his day but seems much happier to defer to the team.

With the big possibility throwing away an easy one two (at the time) of Hamilton’s tires would degrade so much at the end he would have to take another pitstop.

the opposite tyre strategy almost always ends up being faster over a race, the only reason the top teams dont always do it is because of the risk of not getting into q3. Harder tyres at the start with a heavier car and then softer tyres later on with a lighter car is clearly the better option with even the slightest bit of knowledge of tyre deg.

At the start yes, but not always... Monaco is a good example, where track position is everything. But, this was about a pitstop during the race. And yes, I love the idea of rolling the dice but with a whole team calculating the roll, it’s quite possible that going to mediums instead of hard would give a “you can’t win” solution, so the team put on hards.

The few times drivers can make the difference in tire choice is in changeable conditions, but, with the lack of intel for the driver (he can’t see the gaps or the times of other drivers on those tires), they are rare.

[Wynters]

I never was that impressed with Norris, except for the likeable character he is, but man was i happy for him and his reaction to be on the podium. Count me in as a fan in the making.

Leclerc also continues to impress. To get on the podium was a very strong result. Sure, benefitted from many circumstances etc, but he kept calm and focused the entire race, head down. Very very mature. The mark of a very talented driver. I said it while he was driving for Sauber, but if Ferrari hadnt snatched him for the number 1 team, I would have wanted Mercedes to. Next to Verstappen, one of the very strong WDC contenders in the future. Easy decision for Ferrari for investing in him. As much as i like Vettel, i cant blame them for axing him.

Agreed.

I'd add Albon to the list. His reaction after finding out about Hamilton's penalty was anger for under two seconds then he cut himself off with a reproving "Ok. Fine.", put if behind him and put his head down. For a young driver, in only his second season, who feels that he's lost both his first podium and first race win (at his manufacturer's home GP) to the same driver, that is a sign of a great deal of maturity.

[SiLo]

Thoughts on the idea that Mercedes should have asked Bottas to let Hamilton through to build the gap to keep the 1-2 or 1-3? Ive seen people saying Bottas wouldn't let it happen because of the WDC, which I understand, but also that in the first race of the season the team is going to want to maximise points as much as possible.

[Just_a_fan]

At the start yes, but not always... Monaco is a good example, where track position is everything. But, this was about a pitstop during the race. And yes, I love the idea of rolling the dice but with a whole team calculating the roll, it’s quite possible that going to mediums instead of hard would give a “you can’t win” solution, so the team put on hards.

In Austria, it wasn't about the team having better info, it was about the team managing the race to give a 1-2 and not wanting the drivers to do anything silly to risk that outcome. They know that on the same tyres, the car behind almost always never gets by, especially if they're telling the drivers to protect the cars. So by putting them on the same tyres, they give themselves the best chance of a safe 1-2. Hamilton wanted a chance to win. The team don't care who wins so long as it's one of their drivers. Austria was a reminder to Hamilton that he needs to have the car in front in order to request the better strategy. So he needs to get pole and/or be leading after the first lap.

[Just_a_fan]

Thoughts on the idea that Mercedes should have asked Bottas to let Hamilton through to build the gap to keep the 1-2 or 1-3? Ive seen people saying Bottas wouldn't let it happen because of the WDC, which I understand, but also that in the first race of the season the team is going to want to maximise points as much as possible.

I bet they just didn't think it through, or they didn't expect Lando to put in a blinder of a final lap. Or they thought they were far enough ahead before Bottas had his mysterious 2 seconds slower lap.

[Big Tea]

What did occur to me, and to be honest felt a little conspiracy theory -ish was the teams know that the powers that be can use this excuse to do some draconian re-shuffling if they feel it is for the survival of F1 and do not want to be the tall stalk that gets knocked down.

If it seems one team or even one driver is a dead cert and spoiling the show they could find new rules being implemented.
It even occurred to me that Ferrari's duff engine was rather sudden, as was some of the reliability issues. Could this be a case of not standing out from the crowd while new rules are being generated as you may be tied down for 3 years?

I admit the way I have stated it above is extreme , but could there be a grain in there?

[matt_b]

Thoughts on the idea that Mercedes should have asked Bottas to let Hamilton through to build the gap to keep the 1-2 or 1-3? Ive seen people saying Bottas wouldn't let it happen because of the WDC, which I understand, but also that in the first race of the season the team is going to want to maximise points as much as possible.

I wondered why they didn't let Lewis past then it occurred to me what if Lewis opened up a 5 second gap to Bottas, how awkward would that be or what if LeClerc caught Bottas and they made contact, I think Mercedes just couldn't decide on what to do in time and just wanted to secure the win with the leading car in the race. Ultimately they were caught napping not pitting when everyone else did which seems to be a common pattern with their strategy team.

[NathanOlder]

Ultimately they were caught napping not pitting when everyone else did which seems to be a common pattern with their strategy team.

That'll be because Bottas was already in turn 9 when the safety car was put out, the pitlane also starts before turn 9. So no napping at all.

[Restomaniac]

Thoughts on the idea that Mercedes should have asked Bottas to let Hamilton through to build the gap to keep the 1-2 or 1-3? Ive seen people saying Bottas wouldn't let it happen because of the WDC, which I understand, but also that in the first race of the season the team is going to want to maximise points as much as possible.

I bet they just didn't think it through, or they didn't expect Lando to put in a blinder of a final lap. Or they thought they were far enough ahead before Bottas had his mysterious 2 seconds slower lap.

Erm.......What?

It was obvious their 1-2 was going to go up in smoke due to LeClerc’s pace it had nothing to do with Norris’ last lap.

Mercedes by not allowing Hamilton to go cost themselves a 1-2 end of.

[basti313]

At the start yes, but not always... Monaco is a good example, where track position is everything. But, this was about a pitstop during the race. And yes, I love the idea of rolling the dice but with a whole team calculating the roll, it’s quite possible that going to mediums instead of hard would give a “you can’t win” solution, so the team put on hards.

In Austria, it wasn't about the team having better info, it was about the team managing the race to give a 1-2 and not wanting the drivers to do anything silly to risk that outcome. They know that on the same tyres, the car behind almost always never gets by, especially if they're telling the drivers to protect the cars. So by putting them on the same tyres, they give themselves the best chance of a safe 1-2. Hamilton wanted a chance to win. The team don't care who wins so long as it's one of their drivers. Austria was a reminder to Hamilton that he needs to have the car in front in order to request the better strategy. So he needs to get pole and/or be leading after the first lap.

It did not look like any of them was "protecting" the car.
The simple point in all of this is: Softer tire would have made sense to push like hell and do an additional stop. We saw with Perez that the tire was not lasting. The issue with the gearbox was visible and Merc was driving to a target already from lap 2, so no way to do a "push like hell" tactics. Bottas would have simply used more kerb...

[matt_b]

Ultimately they were caught napping not pitting when everyone else did which seems to be a common pattern with their strategy team.

That'll be because Bottas was already in turn 9 when the safety car was put out, the pitlane also starts before turn 9. So no napping at all.

Couldn't they box the next lap or were the cars behind that pitted already too close?

[PlatinumZealot]

Thoughts on the idea that Mercedes should have asked Bottas to let Hamilton through to build the gap to keep the 1-2 or 1-3? Ive seen people saying Bottas wouldn't let it happen because of the WDC, which I understand, but also that in the first race of the season the team is going to want to maximise points as much as possible.

I wondered why they didn't let Lewis past then it occurred to me what if Lewis opened up a 5 second gap to Bottas, how awkward would that be or what if LeClerc caught Bottas and they made contact, I think Mercedes just couldn't decide on what to do in time and just wanted to secure the win with the leading car in the race. Ultimately they were caught napping not pitting when everyone else did which seems to be a common pattern with their strategy team.

This is the exact reason i think. Also they were worried about tyres. So yes agreed they didnt have the quick thinking like what RedBull or Ferrari typically have. They like a steady ship.

[NathanOlder]

Ultimately they were caught napping not pitting when everyone else did which seems to be a common pattern with their strategy team.

That'll be because Bottas was already in turn 9 when the safety car was put out, the pitlane also starts before turn 9. So no napping at all.

Couldn't they box the next lap or were the cars behind that pitted already too close?

They were picked up by the safety car before turn 2, so did a whole lap behind the SC. During that lap behind the safety car, (at safety car speed Perez was 22 sec behind Bottas) by the end of 1 lap behind the SC Perez closed the gap to under 5 seconds, so they lost a huge amount of time on that lap.

[mkay]

Ultimately they were caught napping not pitting when everyone else did which seems to be a common pattern with their strategy team.

That'll be because Bottas was already in turn 9 when the safety car was put out, the pitlane also starts before turn 9. So no napping at all.

Couldn't they box the next lap or were the cars behind that pitted already too close?

The pack was closing in quick. When BOT/HAM crossed the pit entry on L52 (end of the first lap behind the SC), BOT had 16s gap on ALB (4th), 21s gap on SAI (5th) and 27s gap on NOR (6th). Meaning it's likely that the order would have been:

1. PER (old M)
2. ALB (new S)
3. BOT (new S)

HAM either 4th or 5th depending on how quick they double stack the cars. HAM was 1.2s behind BOT then.

Given ALB's relative poor pace vs. Merc during the race (on similar tyres), I think the 1-2 could have still been achieved despite pitting 1 lap later than ALB/NOR/LEC.