On spanish tv, the speaker said that going for a three stop was Vettel´s idea after Q2.
(don´t trust too much on this journalist)

I think Silverstone could still put them on equal footing with the Brawns, if not Silverstone maybe Spa. We'll just have to wait and see i suppose. Some of Buttons comments after Turkey have only reinforced my opinion Brawn have been running with pace to spare all year, and still often a few tenths ahead whilst doing it easy.

As in most cases It would have been SV and his race engineer with input form Horner and probably several other key people.
I think the team have been trying to protect SVs tyers for quite some time now.
From one shot qualifying runs to the unusual strategy at Monaco, it all looks to me like he has a tyer wear problem and the strategies are about minimising that.

MW is having trouble getting them warm.
SV is having trouble ripping them apart.

I presume the engineers would tell the likely placings, and the likely placings of the Brawn cars too. From that they'd work out their scenarios. We know that with a two stop strategy, beating Brawn was not going to be successful. Perhaps RBR already knew that? But with a short strategy, it might have been chance. And we should remember, that since Rubens went short on fuel, he was also on a three stopper. If Seb had of been 1 second a lap faster than Jenson (as he was something like that in his soft tyre stint), then at his first pitstop, he'd have been 14 seconds in front. Using the phenominal wisdom of retrospect, if they'd have risked the soft compound, Seb would certainly not have spun off on the first lap too. Was a three stopper on? Maybe it was. And of course, perhaps Jenson could have made a mistake. Unfortunately for RBR fans, he just isn't making any mistakes so far this season. 

I get the feeling RBR isn't able to change stategy's during the race. They think of a plan and stick to it. When vettel was behind they should have fuelled him heavy. He probably wouldn't have beaten jenson, but atleast he would have had a shot.

After having read the previous posts, maybe you could enlighten us (with more than just an idea) as to how he would have been faster with a heavy 2 stopper

No, it is not fact. Its simply an armchair critic's opinion.

In China, the Red Bull's were quick in qualifying, but the BrawnGP drivers fueled heavy, so it wasn't a direct fight for pole. Either way, BrawnGP's biggest advantage is in race pace, not qualifying pace. Thats where they are unbeatable. So I dont think we learned anything about the Red Bull vs. BrawnGP scrap except for that Red Bull was faster in the wet(likely due to better over-body aero).

I still expect BrawnGP to be favorites for the win at Silverstone, unfortunately. I dont see this massive disadvantage through fast corners that you see. I simply dont see any weaknesses in the BrawnGP car at all, really.

I just want to see mark at silverstone go for a front row grid slot in qualifying, rather than the usual safe p3-p6 fuel load.

does anyone actually have any stats on turn 8? i saw a graphic during the race on apex speed and JB was fastest with vettel and webber behind.
That can be a indication how redbull perform to brawn at silverstone.

I personally thought JB and brawn did there homework and took redbulls advantage away from them (or minimised it) in turn 8/fast corners.
JB before the race said he and his engineers were studying the track/car and they dnt see what all the press etc are seeing in saying turkey is a fast circuit and will suit redbull and brawn be on their backfoot. He was spot on saying he only sees 1 corner where he believes the brawn cannot POSSIBLY make up lost time -that was turn 8. All the way around the circuit he said he can match/beat redbull.
I thought that was a good analysis by JB even though all others were saying "its a fast circuit with fast corners redbull will be to strong for brawn"

After the race Mark and Jenson were talking about turn 8 prior to climbing the podium. Mark told Jenson, that he had to lift slightly in this turn. Jenson answered, that he went around it flat out and the car felt like from another planet.

edit: although on another note I believe there was talk that both Brawns had a shorter 7th gear than they would have liked. So maybe this could also be a factor. Who knows...

Don't think the RBRs can catch the Brawn,now.Too damn quick,double diffuser or not...

Has anyone found a link or something of mark's move on jarno. broadcast missed it.
i have an incling jarno simply outbraked himself somewhere (he seemed to lose 2 positions very quickly), but still interested.

red bull (mostly webber) needs to start focusing on locking out the front row on saturdays. only way to beat the brawns. Give them clear air and they're goooone im afraid.

I saw it replayed on the broadcast. Trulli locked his fronts and went straight on and off the circuit at turn 9 at the end of the straight. Webber went past him but it wasn't what others have thought of as an overtaking manouvre.

Whilst I do agree with you in this case (just as JB didnt do an overtaking maneuver on SV)
Its interesting that after years of MW being accused of not having good race craft or race pace and not being able to overtake (I am guilty of the latter)
We now find people on the forums redefining what a passing maneuver is, so they can still claim there is no over taking in F1 and MW is doing no more than anyone else.

For the FIRST time MW finds himself in a car that is faster than people in front of him on the track.
He has in my opinion done what has been needed, he has not held back and has made the "passes" he has had to.

Its a shame the BF1 still has such a large advantage over the RB5 (JB pulled away from SV very easily after he gained the lead)
But then the RB5 has a similar advantage over the other teams (with the exception of a few tracks).

I think if they can close just a little and poor RB continues to wear his black number 13 jocks they may just get the WCC

+1

Its great to see Mark also showing some balls into T1 on lap 1 now too.

Webber used a two stop to pass vettel, where is the proof the tree stop benefited vettel? (remember I am talking about the situation after button passed vettel)

Button never had an extra 0.5 on tap, this is a complete fallacy. When Button was put under pressure for the first time by a charging Vettel, when he was eventually caught his times slowed by 4 tenths due to him having to drive more defensive. If Button had this aledged 0.5 seconds on tap, after a few laps of Vettel being on Buttons tail, Button would have begun to stretch his legs, but this did not happen. What separated the Brawn and the Red Bull was Button just had superior race pace. The Red Bull could get down to the same low 1.27's as the Brawn, Vettel & Webber could not do the low 1.28's consistant enough. This was where the race was won and lost.

But all the passes MW has made this season have been due to him losing the position to the guy he passed to begin with.

cf. Button @ Shanghai
cf. Alonso @ Barcelona
cf. Trulli @ Istanbul

Which brings us back to my original point in the other thread about your theory having holes in it. The simple problem with Button was that he did not enjoy the BF1 on those sets of tyres, with that fuel weight, under that track condition, at that point in time.

All the variables above (ie. car, tyre, weight, track condition) do not maintain a linear correlation to one another throughout the course of a race.

You see it all the time. Driver A puts on fresh set of tyres and goes slower in stint 2 than he does with same fresh set of tyres in stint 1.

It happens to all of them, therefore this notion that Button has superior race pace than Vettel or Webber is nonsense. You have counter argued your own point - Button was slower in that middle stint, with those tyres, with that fuel, with that track condition.

The bottom line though is that overall he's just got a better combination of style, car, confidence, circumstance ie. package, and when it works he has 0.5s which he turns on at will.

He hasn't exactly been bottled up behind anyone else Jez... only a KERS car in Bahrain, and seemingly no one gets by KERS cars not even a Brawn.

No - you are wrong.

How exactly am I wrong?

Button @ Shanghai - Mark gets passed by Button having run off the road, then Mark repassed Button

Alonso @ Barcelona - Mark gets passed by a NON-KERS Alonso on the SC restart, Mark then repassed Alonso with up-and-under move

Trulli @ Instanbul - Mark gets passed by Trulli into T1, Mark then repasses Trulli (I wouldn't even call it a pass since Trulli just ran wide somewhere)

Its not all his passes - that is just 3 of them. For instance, Webber over Hamilton/KERS at Malaysia and Webber over quite a few cars at Bahrain...

Thanks for adding another one:

Hamilton @ Sepang: Mark gets passed by Hamilton, Mark then repasses after several attempts.

Webber overtook quite a few at Sepang, I suggest you check the lap chart.



What about his original move on Button then? You seem to be looking at this rather subjectively i.e. that he loses then gains, rather than the whole picture of gain - lose - gain, which is common in overtaking (i.e. he makes it stick eventually whether he loses it in the middle - it's an overtake).

On what lap did Hamilton pass Webber?

I've just looked through the lap charts and aside from when Mark had pitted, I can't find it.

Can you point it out for me please Jiz?

Hadn't Webber pitted, and had come out behind Hamilton?

Malaysia Lap Chart

He overtook Alonso towards the start too.

OMFG
While you are technically correct with those 3 overtakes (or re-overtakes ffs ), this is one of in THE most moronic points I've ever seen anyone try to sell on these boards.

Seriously lol...he had to overtake someone back so therefore he cannot overtake/it's his fault/he sucks?

ugh

This thread is getting Pathetic.. Some of the SV supporters just seem unable to accept the fact that Mark can be faster than SV!

It happens, get over it!

Both guys are quick and on their day will beat the other.

Maybe Seb has shaded Mark in the first part of the year, but it certainly hasn't been one way traffic!

It is Jiz33...

He's kinda right, most of the memorable passes have been re-passes after being passed.

In Webbers defence, two of them were KERS cars so you can pass them then they pass you back and so on.

More excuses while ignoring some important facts. What was the relative speed of the Buttons Brawn, compared to the Red Bulls? Button fastest lap was 1:27.579 and Vettels was a 1:27.622. Button did 11 laps in the high-mid to high 1.27's and Vettel did 10. "Now here's the science bit so concentrate" The race was won and lost in Buttons ability to get down to the low 1.28's and hold it there. Vettel and Webber could not do the same. Think of it the same way we used to see Flavio hold his head in frustration, when he asked Fisichella to pull off the possible and do what Alonso did on a regular basis, but Fisichella 9 times out of 10 failed to do. Turkey was all about ultimate race pace and the Red Bull drivers failed. This is the difference between a top driver and a very good driver.

There is no science. It is merely your view.



Or more to the point the difference between a top package and a very good package.

Just Hamilton.

Alonso did not have KERS in Barcelona.

Firstly I think you are wrong.

Secondly (and more importantly), why do you find it so necessary to be rude and aggressive to other board members?

lol, conveniently left out webber passing button in the wet i guess?

seriously dude get a grip.

So looking forward, what can be done about our starts? We seem to get swamped pretty easily.

If it was merely a case of Button having the superior package, I would openly admit so, because I am not a Button/Brawn fan, or a fan or Webber/Vettel/Red Bull. So the angle I am coming from IMO is purely neutral. Button did 11 laps in the high 1 minute 27's, Vettel did 10. This tells any reasonable analyist that the cars in ultimate pace were comparable. Also any reasonable analyist could tell from the lap times, that they were achieved mid stint and crucially when the tyres were also worn. This being the case, what are you left with? IMO it was the abilty to drive super fast and consistant who was going to win the race. It was Buttons ability to drive consistant and many low 1.28's which won him the race. Did the Red Bulls have the pace? Yes because the amount of 1.27's compared to Button said they did. If Vettel could just pull off 1, 2 or 3 laps in the 1.27's and only at the end of a stint, or only when the tyre were super fresh, you would have a valid point. But this is not the case.

What are you still blabbering on? Vetel did so many 27s laps only because he was on 3 stopper. Even so his quickest lap was slower than Butons and set much later in better track conditions while Button was just cruising.

Brawns car had clear edge this time. Just look at the first stint, where neither Vetel (with lighter car) nor Weber could break once into 27s lap while Jenson did it with ease.

Yeah errrr Vettel was lighter chief ... LIGHTER and so he stopped more often. That's how he did so many 27's.

Jesus what don't you understand?

OK we'll see what excuse you guys will hide behind in the next race. Qualifying pace is good, tyre degredation is also good, yet excuses will continue saying the Brawn is quicker without a shred of reasonable logic. Bring on Silverstone.

3 stop vs 2 stop: An explanation for those less fortunate

When a driver uses a 3 stop strategy instead of a conventional 2 stop, he gambles by on average always running much lighter on fuel. The hope is that the tenths saved every lap will add up to more time than what it takes to perform the extra 20-30 second pit stop required. Each set of tyres is used less also, adding to the improved pace.

The average lap time of the 3 stopper will be much quicker over the race, but this is balanced by the time needed for the additional fuel stop.

If the driver gets caught in traffic they will be unable to make up the extra pit stop penalty time, and fall behind those with good pace on a conventional 2 stopper. (Vettel in Turkey).

You need to compare Button's times to Webber's (2 stopping). Not Vettel's (3 stopping).
Especially Webber's middle stint was 'very good' according to his own team. If you compare those times with Button's, you have to conclude that in Turkey, Brawn had around 0.4 seconds a lap on the RedBull.

Was going to say much the same myself, but kept my keyboard unused so far as I think the guy knows he's peddling a flawed argument. It's the way he's been so aggressively pushing it from the start, and when he gets countered he just repeats the same argument again without properly addressing the counter-arguments put forward. He seems to think that if he repeats it enough we'll be forced to agree with him.

Another important advantage of 3-stopping is shorter pit stops.

There's mountains of reasonable logic involved. First off, BrawnGP's long stint pace has looked ominous the day they started testing pre-season. And the last 7 race weekends have pretty much confirmed that it was no fluke.

They've had 3 one-two finishes with two drivers who have never been considered top-tier.

I dont think we have enough info on 'tire degradation' to assume that they are equal in this regard. From everything I've seen and read, it seems that BrawnGP still have the monopoly on this area, so while Red Bull might not have tire wear 'issues', they still might not be up to par with the BrawnGP cars, ya know?

And we've seen in the past that cars can be better in qualifying than they are in the race, so its not completely unreasonable to assume that Red Bull could simply be another case of that. Or maybe that the BrawnGP cars are simply not at their prime in qualifying, but shine in the race.

Either way, the evidence is plastered all over the place. You just have to open your eyes to see it.

Qualifying shows a lot too. When the car is setup for heavier race weights, the car is slower in qualifying. When you setup a car for lighter weights, the tyre wear issue is not as critical, and such a car is quicker in qualifying. Taht the Brawn is quick in qualifying on heavier strategies, shows how fast the car actually is. Also it might be (I don't know though, because Ross Brawn keeps things secret) that the Brawn car gets comparatively better when more rubber is layed down in qualifying. Although I suspect that Ross Brawn has been simply winning by as little as he can. I've thought so for a long time too!

I don't agree about the drivers. I presume though that those who say the RBR is the fastest car are pro Jenson people, or negative SV & MW people. But the Party boy Jenson stopped that type of behavior some years ago. A family member met the drivers after last year's Melbourne GP, at a disco. While Hamilton and the young drivers were the party animals, they hung it on Jenson who moved away and he did not party on. Things have changed quite a lot for him. He was the fastest Michelin driver a few years ago, when David Richards was running the team. He's fast, and he's shown that he avoids errors. Rubnes is old, and IMO prhaps he is not as good as he was, despite deserving to beat Jenson a few races back. Although his bad luck is as strong as its ever been.

On a more positive note about the RBR5, which is on but its first generation DD, hence it is lower on the learning curve than the Brawn. The Brawn had four wind tunels last year, all devoted to this new generation of car. And they introduced a new wing for Turkey, which allowed the whole flap to be moved, rather than just the central triangular section as was previously the case. The RBR had just a minor addition to its DD for Turkey. There is a bigger upgrade for the RBR5 at Silverstone too - we'll find out if it works, it should because their upgrades have so far.

Also the front wing of the RBR does seem to be traffic sensitive. I also presume the Brawn's is too, although I am not sure if we've seen that issue revealed? Anyhow if what was said to be another important step arrives at Silverstone works, then the RBR might close the gap. I presume the front wing for a DD car has a different function to do as well, so I guess the whole front wing design had to be started again when the DD route was confirmed.

I love the not-so subtle wording here. Mark got passed by a car that didn't have KERS! The nerve! He must suck.

Or, I suppose I could just point out that his seamless shift didn't work on the restart, but nah, lets abuse Mark!

Mark pulled a similarly awesome move on Alonso in Malaysia. Alonso had KERS that day.