Well, it seems Q2 is not meaningless, at least for Ferrari drivers.

Actually BMW F1 said that Heidfeld did not have the best race pace in Germany despite scoring the fastest lap, and of course he was right: It was Hamilton who had the best race pace in Germany.

Seems to be some confusion about what an optimum strategy is.

There can only be one "optimum" strategy mathematically per race.

This is worked out by a computer simulation program that takes into account the number of laps (distance), the amount of fuel required and the degradation/performance rate of the tyres for that particular track based on data already collected by the team, and the smallest amount of time lost depending on how many stops you do. Obviously the optimum strategy is the one that cost the least amount of time to complete in terms of pitstops and refuelling. For some tracks that could be a one stopper, two stopper or three stopper, or even in some cases a four stopper.

Obviously you can't have both drivers stop on the same lap in case anything untoward happens, such as a safety car period, or an error with equipment in the pitstop etc etc. Also if both drivers are within a few seconds of each other on track they cannot both be pitted on the same lap without one of them being disadvantaged time wise.

So what the strategist will do is taking into account the nuances of the particular track, tyre degradation/performance rates and expected laptimes of the driver (given the equipment) look to provide a sample of strategies (based on the simulation data) that cost the least amount of time to the drivers but hopefully that will give them track advantage. This is a rather simplistic explanation at best because they also do calculations about where they think traffic will be, when other teams are likely to pit, and what likelihood there is of a safety car period etc etc.

So its not a case of one driver getting the "optimum" strategy so to speak, and the other getting shafted. The Strategist looks to maximise the potential on track of both drivers by proposing different variations of an optimum strategy (shorter or longer stints at different times, different tyres, higher or lower fuel loads) to both drivers or as close as they can possibly get.

What Ferrari do is to make it completely equal in terms of who gets first choice of which strategy they would prefer. They do not automatically say "oh right Massa your going lighter and stopping earlier" even if that is his individual preference or "Kimi your going heavier and stopping later" because that is his preference. They let the drivers duel it out in Q2 for first pick of a variety of strategies available to them both at each and every race.

You tried to make a point that it was nothing, when in fact he started from 11:th place and ended up as 4:th.
Although be benefitted from the SC he was faster than Massa in the closing stages. The only man that was faster was Hamilton as I see it now without looking into everyone.
When Ham was ahead, he didn´t get that much air between him and Nick.


Impossible to say in Malaysia, Heidfeld spent most of the race behind others, in fact he was held up by Hamilton/webber for many laps. His race pace in the last 10 laps were as quick as anybody. He wasn´t directly dead slow..

he wasn't slow but just because Kimi and Massa who were ahead of him did not post a fastest race lap than Nick does not mean that Nick was the fastest driver of the race.. If you do not understand this then someone needs to draw you a picture.



If Ham was faster than Nick but Nick posted the fastest lap of the race, doesn't this prove that the fastest race lap does not necessarily mean that you are the fastest driver?

If we try to analyse a little we can see that Heidfeld is held up for most of the race. From lap 39 he has
Hamilton infront of him, he´s 2 seconds behind. Massa is trailing 3,7 seconds behind.
On lap 50 Heidfeld is still 2 seconds behind Hamilton. Now Massa is 14 seconds behind.
On lap 52 when Nick sets his fastest lap, Massa is 15 seconds behind.
On lap 54 when he has pitted he´s 7 seconds from the lead and 3,7 behind Massa.
On lap 57 he has catched Massa, now he´s 5,6 seconds from the lead.
After that he has to settle behind Massas slower pace, he can´t overtake.

Was he slower than Hamilton? Yes, maybe a fraction, but not by much.

IMO, BMW F1. The two examples of Heidfeld FL were maybe not the best picked ones if you´re trying to prove
that setting a FL of the race means usually nothing. In these two examples Heidfeld was fast.

In this case, when Nick drives a much slower BMW compaired to the McLaren or the Ferrari maybe that proves exactly that.

you are also picking a race where Massa had tire issues in the last stint.. I can also pick a race like Valencia or Moanco if I want and come back and tell you that Kimi's pace is slow compared to Massa. You are also being completely evasive about the argument which I presented earlier which is that when a driver is in the mid-pack with slower cars in front he would push a lot harder in the last stint of the race then a driver who is at the front. The driver at the front after second pit stops is most of the time conserving the engine knowing the difficulty of overtaking an equally fast car.

So far about all the mentioned conspiracies concerning Ferrari working out their race strategy.

So, Kimi has to gamble with one stop tomorrow. But I guess that not being in parc feme will be a huge advantage in regards to waiting for race day to decide the set up with this weather.