Post here all non technical related topics about Formula One. This includes race results, discussions, testing analysis etc. TV coverage and other personal questions should be in Off topic chat.
Somehow Sauber seems to play the odd card in terms of strategies quite often and at least for Perez this has paid off at least two times with a haul of big points.
Compare this to Mercedes GP and they seem to be reluctant to even try a bit more adventureous things apart from starting the race on primes when already stuck in the back of the grid.
Or Marussia who not even consider starting Glock from the pitlane after completely messing up his setup ....what are they thinking?
What is your take on all this ..I for once would at least try !!!! as hard as possible and take care of them creating breathing
air around them and not look too much on tyre condition as the only means of decision when to pit...
I have yet to see someone trying a ultra short first stint on primes for example....
It's all risk versus reward. If you're generally a strong runner it doesn't make sense to try as many "adventurous" things... whereas if you're down on the grid or points, the only way of winning may be to roll the dice.
Just a difference in the opinion and approach of the shot callers I'd suppose. Really neither of those teams are in any shot to compete for a championship, so it's all about how they want to compete among their "block" (mid field) of the competition. Points wise is not like one organization is head and shoulders above the other between those two, so both approaches seem viable.
Grip is a four letter word. All opinions are my own and not those of current or previous employers.
The Sauber team certainly has a good car and two inspired drivers to make a unusual strategy work ...so I don´t think it really is desperation that drives them to do those things.
I´m going mental about people right at the back of the field behaving like they need to consider things like optimum tyre usage when 70%of your race will be determined by the speed of the car in front of you.
So doing the same thing as if you were on pole is just rediculous .
There is only two real options for someone who is quick but has to start from the back:
ultra short first stint or ultra long -both strategies will enable you to use the speed of the car for some time and gaining positions without having too big a fight (using up tyre and slowing you down )
I fail to understand how some teams manage their drivers exactly into any traffic that could possibly happen...
Well I said before the Hungarian GP Schumacher should start on hard ones. Instead he started at soft's and stopped in first lap for hards. In Malaysia they could also have gambled. Towards the end of the race both Mercedes where out of the points. The track was drying but the complete field was waiting for the pitstop because more rain could come. For me that is a nice situation where you can go on slicks and set some fast laps. You then gain massive time on the other teams on old wet tires which means they have to react. If they stop and there is rain coming it is equal for both which means everybody has to do another stop but you already got your time by running a few more laps on slicks. If no rain comes it is also fine for the same reason. Only if the other teams stay out and there is in fact rain coming before you where able to catch up with them you lose. As you can be 2 seconds faster rain actually has to come within a few laps to make you lose. I think that is rather unlikely and therefore absolutely worth the risk. Especially as they were running outside of the points anyways with no chance to make any progress. I have the feeling that the teams sometimes don't take into account what effect it has on the opponents when you stop at a certain time. If you just look on your own car it is better to stay out long and wait if there is rain coming to react. But if you take into account that other teams will have to follow you when you change tires situations can look better.
yep..alonso who is considered master of all still feels the itch of losing that championship to vettel ,because they covered for webber and totally forgot about the outside bet of the second RedBull ....i think it is always worth a gamble to not wait but act ...even if your own speed might be a little bit compromised ..it will destabilise the others and that´s most certainly creating opportunities.
To drop back because of your half baked strategy ...is just a waste .
True, very good example. I know another one. It is the Monza GP 2010 which was supposed to be a fight between the two McLarens and Alonso. With the new rules of banned refueling race strategy became much simpler down to a point where you actually don't have many choices. The name of the game there was to run as long as possible on a tire but as soon as one went to pits everybody has to react immediately as a single lap on fresh tires can be enough to take the lead. Unfortunately Hamilton crashed out in the first lap which meant that he not just destroyed his own chances of a win he also drastically reduced the chances of his teammate. Otherwise it could have become the prime example of going for a split strategy in order to put a massive pressure on Alonso. One of the two McLaren had won the race without the crash.
I dislike the lack of gambling in race strategy for long time now. Also sometimes you notice lack of ability to react quickly to sudden changes in the race. Usually when a safety car comes out. It feels like the guys on the pitwall fall asleep and then suddenly wake up and don't overlook the situation anymore. However to be fair if you are in such a situation you carry a massive responsibility. Doing a mistake can cost points, reputation, money or your job. Faced to that I can imagine that nobody really wants to step out and do something without being sure to have justification for it after the race. Which means they person in charge relies on the preset strategy, the simulations they run during the race and the staff in the background overlooking the race. Crosschecking that of course takes longer than taking a decision based on a single persons estimation of the current situation and brings conservative approaches. However they person can justify that later.
The other thing is the human itself. If you look at the people in your environment you wonder who of them is actually able to overlook a situation, do a good decision within seconds and be confident enough to stay with it and carrying its consequences? Most of the people in society are scared of anything and nobody wants to take any responsibility for their actions.
Last edited by mep on 06 Aug 2012, 17:01, edited 1 time in total.
mep wrote:True, very good example. I know another one. It is the Monza GP 2009 which was supposed to be a fight between the two McLarens and Alonso.
Alonso didn't feature in the 2009 Italian GP. Perhaps you have the wrong year in mind?
I remember that race well, it was a straight fight between the Brawns who ran three stop's with their Kers-less cars and Hamilton who did a fantastic job of chasing down button for second, with old tyres. Only to dump it on the astro at the first lesmo on the penultimate lap and become too acquainted with the wall on the inside. Lifting Raikkonen to third place.
I'll never forget the rapturous noise the italians made when Lewis crashed....
mekanikal_grip wrote:I remember that race well, it was a straight fight between the Brawns who ran three stop's with their Kers-less cars and Hamilton who did a fantastic job of chasing down button for second, with old tyres. Only to dump it on the astro at the first lesmo on the penultimate lap and become too acquainted with the wall on the inside. Lifting Raikkonen to third place.
I'll never forget the rapturous noise the italians made when Lewis crashed....
mekanikal_grip wrote:I remember that race well, it was a straight fight between the Brawns who ran three stop's with their Kers-less cars and Hamilton who did a fantastic job of chasing down button for second, with old tyres. Only to dump it on the astro at the first lesmo on the penultimate lap and become too acquainted with the wall on the inside. Lifting Raikkonen to third place.
I'll never forget the rapturous noise the italians made when Lewis crashed....
I ´m still amused about a piece printed in Racetech mag about Marussias -Strategy-hoohoo where they claim they could not do sophisticated planning because they had no Computer programme for doing it...Holy crap ..is there nobody in the team who is able to calculate 40 something seconds to a lap time and have an idea where your guy will reenter the queue? I certainly never worked anywhere near formula 1 but I spent quite some time calculating pitstops and strategies in my racing ...but it was the same there .Some people just don´t realise track position and time spent in pits is very important and you need very good reasons to make more stops than others....but then ...who i am ..when all those have studied long years and still don´t have an idea what options they have in hand but stare on those things they don´t have .
Actually what I have seen so far I can imagine that they don't have that. Marcush just go and apply there. If you know Matlab you have a good chance that they take you but you must be willing to work for little money.
