Reply With QuoteLaugh my arse off
amazingly it seems that Seb didn't know what happened. Bet Kimi and Max do
cant wait for Cilla contribution.
What an exciting start, then stop!
Laugh my arse off
amazingly it seems that Seb didn't know what happened. Bet Kimi and Max do
cant wait for Cilla contribution.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
It will have been Hamilton's faultOriginally Posted by Andyg
And he might be right because Hamilton did not qualify better yesterday and alaso caused it to rain.
As for Bottas, I can think of about 6 drivers who would make a better #2.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
If being a good #2 includes offering little threat to #1, I think he's doing a fine job.
It reminds me of why i have little interest in F1 these days, something daft happens in the first few seconds, a restart/safety car occurs and it's just a precession.
Makes it easy for Mercedes to impose team orders for the rest of the year!
Seb was a little to eager with his block on Max at the start.
Fantastic race by Lewis. Opened up two nice leads only to lose them again due to safety cars, but kept a cool head and did what he had to do in a car that has clearly been off the pace this weekend.
Very odd strategy call by his engineer to close the pack up given Red Bulls pace all weekend. I'm glad he didn't listen.
i had to laugh when Lewis came back with "I am not happy running off race pace" which to me meant going slowly so that Bottas could catch up. You are right he did the correct thing and ignored the team's "suggestion".
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Not really, simply because he is not getting all the points (for the team) that are on offer. Team's want 1 and 2. Not 1 and 3.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
No team achieved 1-2 in 10 years of Singapore. And considering they were far behind RB in dry conditions and both Ferraris were out, 1-3 is quite an excellent result.
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
To give Mercedes credit they then did say that Hamilton could race at whatever pace he was happy with.
Excellent result, but no better than should be expected given the others were out. I was surprised how early on in the race in intermediate tyres, he couldn't catch and pass a few much slower cars that were in full wets (it wasn't that wet then either)
In 2014 Mercedes achieved 11 1st and 2nds (5 DNF)
In 2015 they achieved 12 (1 DNF)
In 2016 they achieved 8. (3 DNFs)
This year it's only 3 - with 5 races to go. Not great considering they have only had one DNF.
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
It just shows that they have a fight on their hands with Ferrari, that has finally caught up (or almost).
'Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain' - Schiller.
Poor Alonso - if he didn't have bad-luck he'd have none at all.
Just law of averages, really...........
You missed a good race with plenty of drama and overtakes.
Thought it was a great result for Hamilton but also a shame the 1st 3 went out in the first corner as I think, with the wet track, we would have seen more exiting stuff between all of them with Lewis & even Alonso in the mix
Let's face it Vettel had that coming after Bacu. Shame we didn't get to see what Verstappen could do in the wet though.
I have mixed feelings after the race, I want to see a close championship but also want a British winner at the end of it. Vettel probably needs Hamilton to have some kind of problem now to win it.
I am sure the FIA are working on it as we speak
Whoever does not know how to hit the nail on the head should be asked not to hit it at all.
Friedrich Nietzsche
The reason for the call was to avoid the risk of Lewis and Daniel Ricciardo getting a reasonable lead then having the safety car coming out again. Lewis wouldn't be able to pit for fear of giving up the lead but Ricciardo might have enough space on the track to pit for new tyres and still come out in second. Lewis tried it for a lap, found his tyres didn't like it and voiced his opinion. The team's suggestion was a good one, it just didn't work in practice because of the track conditions.
Exactly, & Hamilton has had no problem backing up the field in previous races - most notably last year when he tried to back Rosberg into Vettel in the last race. I suspect he was quite happy to have Bottas finish third rather than second as it reduces any chance of Bottas becoming a rival for the Championship.
Watched the race on catch up yesterday after finishing work, was really looking forward to it,
a little miffed by the start to be honest, Seb too defensive? Kimi too good? Alonso too unlucky? Verstappen unfortunate? Hamilton... Adieos amigos!
I was hoping for a great race with a little strategy throw into the mix regarding tyre changes to mix it up, regardless some great results in the end especially for Hamilton, Sainz and Palmer.
Was carnage a given at the start given the conditions? EJ suggested a safety car start would have been better?
I'm sure Vettel is rueing his start at the moment as the points difference could be hard to turn around in the next 6 races.
For me the next Grand Prix is the one I have been looking forward to most this year, will rain come into play again? roll on October 1st
SC start would have been a nonsense idea, especially yesterday given people were on inters not full wets and once udnerway the full wets weren't quicker.
- - - Updated - - -
SC start would have been a nonsense idea, especially yesterday given people were on inters not full wets and once udnerway the full wets weren't quicker.
A nonsense idea that would have probably kept 2 Ferraris, a red bull and a Mclaren in the race, of which 3 were innocent parties?
I'm not sure what dictates a Safety start but assume the unknown quantity of Marina Bay circuit in the wet could have been one?
I think the starting tyres were a 50/50 wet vs inter option, I'm sure there was a lot of guess work/hoping going on
You can say that about most first corner accidents, does that mean every race has to be started under the safety car because otherwise they might hit each other?
The start is part of the race, the Safety Car, as it's name implies is to be used when its unsafe for the cars to be going at racing speeds not to stop someone making a mistake.
The conditions may have produced a bigger difference in starts than usual but they all knew that was likely to happen, but don't think it directly caused it, we aren't talking
inexperienced drivers here.
An SC start is for safety not to preserve the quality of the race, this isn't Indycar.
I got the impression that those at the back of the grid had a kind of "Hail Mary" mindset - where they thought their only chance to get in the points, was to go for different tyres than the front of the grid.
Well, all 3 have been found "not guilty" of causing the first lap incident, not that it'll stop many of the armchair enthusiasts from passing comment. Someone responded to motorsports.com's reporting of the FIA's verdict by stating that Seb "must have been on full retard mode" - a little harsh I think. It's a fair outcome, not that Seb will be consoled by not having his collar felt by the FIA. Given the championship standings, has there ever been a greater contrast between a qualifying high and racing low? Reverse that for Lewis, he asked for divine intervention on Sunday and got it.
Both Max and Fernando appeared to take the incident in their stride, considering that both had great race potential they took what could be considered to be a very stoic standpoint. A stunning start from the Spaniard threw him into the clutches of the stricken RB driver with McLaren's woes tempered by Stoffel's race result, a brilliant placing by the young Belgian. Another team that came close to having two drivers well into the top 10 was Renault, sadly Nico's pneumatic related retirement put paid to one of them and Jolyon's finish won't keep him with the French outfit for next season. If he keeps it up though it may work out for him for 2018, strong emphasis on the word "may" though.
I can believe that it was the first wet night race however I find it hard to get my head around it being the 10th Singapore GP. Considering that there are 23 designated corners it's not a circuit that promotes overtaking, however the night-race novelty hasn't worn off on me and it certainly appears to be a firm fixture for years to come.
Last edited by CardShark; 18th September 2017 at 16:20.
Indeed. The correct call was made - no need for a SC start.
Had a bit of a chuckle to myself when Hulkenburg pitted with this problem first time, with all the super high tech in F1 I'm sure there was a guy pumping the hydraulics back up with some kind
of a hand pump, cant be sure as was a bit obscured.
Yup, looked like a hand operated device to me as well. Air pressure (pneumatics) is required for a few things, most notably gearbox operation IIRC. Air is the only substance that is allowed to be topped up during a race, given that a lunched gearbox = 5 place grid penalty it's no wonder Renault saw it wise to sacrifice time in the pits in order to preserve results both there and in the upcoming race.
Edit - gearboxes are hydraulically operated, not pneumatically...
Last edited by CardShark; 18th September 2017 at 18:06.
Torro Rosso like a delicious stew, apparently.
So Honda have finally broken cover, interesting use of analogies though. Perhaps something was lost in translation.
Appreciate that, was just questioning the conditions, in the same line of thinking why the Safety car rather than the VSC?... preserving the race?
Is safety only to be considered if everybody has decided to start on full wets regardless of all other considerations/track conditions?
He's talking utter drivel though. The fact is Honda F1 engines are underpowered and unreliable. The last three seasons have proved that.
As a huge Hamilton fan - I think it's a shame that British sports fans don't give enough credit to just what an extraordinary record in F1 Hamilton has (and he's an exciting driver with it) - I'm trying to not be too happy about yesterday; F1 is a mechanical sport so it can happen to anyone, and it's about the championship. Of course, 28 points ahead is better than behind (Bottas is now closer to Vettel than Vettel is to Hamilton!) but Championship have recently been lost from similar positions.
Instead one thing worth commenting about was how fast Hamilton was, and I hope it's doesn't take a 'supporter' to appreciate that. His pace on the inters was superb; around .5 faster than Ricciardo, and often more than 1sec faster than Bottas.
What i would say is I would expect Vettel to bounce back hard. I'm not sure it makes him 'likeable' to me - I think his smiley chummyness lets him off for a lot of petulance - but one has to admin the fact he does not let setbacks knock him off; he was not adversely affected by the fallout from Baku (or, "multi-21") and I don't think he will be this time. If Hamilton wins the championship I would nonetheless expect it to get very close before the end.
On and one other thing, I can't find the quote but yesterday somewhere there was a quote from Toto Wolff in response to the question whether Bottas now supports Hamilton that is was now "obvious" that it should happen. Interesting.
Gary Anderson has some interesting views about working with Honda (he was the man responsible for designing and developing the Jordan cars when they used Mugen engines). He's quite good to listen to, and has a great deal to say on the cultural and logistical differences and the problems in actually getting things done.
Toro Rosso have taken a long time to evolve into the team they are now from the Minardi days. They have had Red Bull money for many years now, but were never in danger of becoming a front-running team, as they were purely there to develop future star drivers for the principal Red Bull team.
It's a reflection of how desperate the situation had become for Honda that they have engaged the services of Mario Ilien to help to sort out their power unit problems, which flies in the face of their historic ethic of sorting issues out within the Company, and not resorting to outside assistance.
None of the stakeholders in Formula 1 want Honda to leave, and it's in the interests of the sport that they find their way, but it won't happen quickly, as they currently have neither power nor reliability. But at the same time, all of the other engine manufacturers must be worried what might happen if they get it right.
Now the music has stopped and Torro Rosso have been left holding the parcel will they peel the wrapping off to find a shiny exquisite piece of engineering or will they find yet another layer to rip through? Of course both Honda and TR are talking their relationship up however there must be some concerns behind the scenes, you've got to wonder if there was any face-palming going on in the TR camp from those not involved in that decision making process.
With Renault, Ferrari and Merc all supplying three teams each it must feel like pushing water up hill for Honda. As you say, they have neither power or reliability, and that's not a great base to build from.
I cannot see any reason whatsoever of starting any GP with Safety Car.
Given the number of tracks where overtaking is so difficult the start is one of the best chances for drivers to make up places.
Thses are are professional drivers and if it is deemed unsafe to start the race normally then I believe the race should be postponed until it is safe to do a standing start, tv rights, etc. notwithstanding.
Completely agree his mastery of tricky conditions is truly amazing. Fuji in his rookie year where he made a lot of people look like amateurs, Silverstone the following year. To be a second a lap quicker than the guy in the same car is a huge gap.
I've also warmed to him as a person, seeing his emotion when he broke the pole record, the Senna helmet presentation. He loves and respects the history of F1 and it means a lot to him.
As it's the most dangerous part of the race a SC start might reduce the risk to an acceptable level, if there weren't TV rights etc. the race wouldn't be taking place.
It could be argued that the race shouldn't be decided (or so dependant) on 30 seconds driving at the start after a day spent qualifying and however many laps ahead.
Up to the drivers though; Vettel knows that he's fighting for a Championship and Verstappen's just fighting for pride and was never going to back off. Seb could have prevented the accident by ensuring he gave sufficient space - everyone else seemed to manage it, after all - but chose to go in full-attack mode.
The weather, the grip levels and the general danger level at the start are just as much tests of a driver as ultimate grip levels and ability to precision-brake from 200mph.
So in football we shouldn't allow the possibility that a player can give away a penalty and be sent off in the first minute?
A standing start is far more exciting than a rolling start and it adds an element of unpredictability.
Any views on whether that accident could have happened on a dry track?
Once the collisions started cars probably slid further than they would have on a dry track but I'm not convinced that Vettel's aggressive line, Kimi's good start and the resulting 'boxing in' of Max were directly attributable to the damp track.
The weather/track conditions had nothing to do with it, there's a slight possibility that Fernando wouldn't have been hit if the track was dry but that's about it. Racing incident IMO, and even Lewis has gone on record stating that Max may have been in Seb's blind spot.
I don't think the conditions really played a major part in this. "Squeezing" another driver to gain advantage has been around since the Schumacher days (and probably before that too).
If Vettel had stayed on his line then he would have probably been third out of the first corner.
Whilst forcing your opponent off line and often off track is allowed we will always have incidents like Sunday; if at least the front two drivers have to hold their line from the start then it's less likely to occur.
+1 what Vettel did is a legitimate but borderline tactic, though anything like that comes with risk. Risk and reward doesn't always work, but that's why we watch sport, right? I would have way more of a problem with Vettel's hilarious and pathetic lashing out in Baku, than the start in Singapore.
Rubbish, if Vettel hadn't been driving a Fiat he would be facing a one race ban, just like the stunt where he drove into Hamilton, he's the Gordon Sheddon of F1, moans about everyone else xnd denies ever doing anything wrong.
He could just as easily said SV might have seen him, it's the same thing
Posting Permissions
