565 replies to this topic

[Trust]

I'm absolutely pissed at Ferrari for screwing Massa in the race. He was in front and should have pitted first. Disgraceful.

[revlec]

I'm absolutely pissed at Ferrari for screwing Massa in the race. He was in front and should have pitted first. Disgraceful.

LOL... That's not the last time it will happen this season...;)

[KnucklesAgain]

I'm absolutely pissed at Ferrari for screwing Massa in the race. He was in front and should have pitted first. Disgraceful.

How anyone can spew this crap after Massa fought Alonso hard soon after the start is beyond me. There's lots of possible reasons for why they pitted Alonso earlier. The simples one being that Alonso might have asked the pits to get him out of traffic, while Massa didn't. We don't know, but we do know that Massa had to ask Smedley for racing advice yet again, and that Alonso knows how to attack a race. Until you have actual proof for shenanigans there's no reason to bash the team for doing what they did.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 17 March 2013 - 08:46.

[Mackey]

LOL... That's not the last time it will happen this season...;)

Do you know for a fact Massa asked to pit and was denied to? It was more an early stop from Alonso to try to get ahead of Vettel and Massa.

[Alolnso]

I'm absolutely pissed at Ferrari for screwing Massa in the race. He was in front and should have pitted first. Disgraceful.

Massa's number two status is also 200 times better this season. Smedley's radio message was depressing. Something along the lines of "Fernando is not faster than you but get out of his way anyway".

[KnucklesAgain]

The proof is in the doing. You guys with the fairy tale are the ones needing to prove.

I hope you just started watching F1, because else it would be very embarrassing that never before you saw something happen in the race that led you to a certain conclusion, but found out later that the impression you got just by seeing what someone did was wrong.

As for the burden of proof, if you are going to engage in online discussions you should know that it is impossible to prove the absence of a given fact (edit: for something that cannot be observed directly, of course; I can obviously prove the absence of rain). I cannot prove that Ferrari didn't do something, just like I can't prove that flying pigs do not exist. All I can say is that no evidence for flying pigs was observed. If you think flying pigs exist, then you need to show me one, or at least evidence of one. If you want to claim Ferrari pulled team orders today, you need to show evidence beyond something that you observed that could be caused by all kinds of reasons.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 17 March 2013 - 09:02.

[BestCarWins]

Massa's number two status is also 200 times better this season. Smedley's radio message was depressing. Something along the lines of "Fernando is not faster than you but get out of his way anyway".

Erm that's not what he said he gave Massa a choice. Pit soon (to react to Alonso & Vettel) or carry on for longer (like what Kimi did) and Massa chose the former.

If the no 2 status was 200 times better this season then Massa would have jumped out of Alonso's way in the 1st stint or Ferrari would have pitted Alonso first at the first round of stops. Neither of those things happened.

For those moaning about the second pit stop, I'm afraid it is you who have to prove that Ferrari stopped Massa from stopping earlier. If he didn't ask for a stop they can't very well FORCE him to pit, just inform him of what others are doing as Smedley appeared to do.

[tarmac]

Or do you think they offered him to pit as he had track position and he declined?

[Disgrace]

Just putting it out there: Massa pitted before Alonso during the first round of stops.

Edited by Disgrace, 17 March 2013 - 09:07.

[fololo]

Or do you think they offered him to pit as he had track position and he declined?

No! He drove freely

Edited by D.M.N., 17 March 2013 - 11:36.
Remove "Close this threads mods" - that's for us to decide, not you.

[fdspd]

I think any team would have pitted the 2nd car in that Vettel-Massa-Alonso train because Massa was DRSing on Vettel and had the opportunity to pass whereas Alonso did not. Also, like others have already mentioned, it could've been the driver's call.

Another point of note was Massa's final stop which triggered a response from Vettel in the next lap and that in turn forced Alonso in a couple of laps letter. Alonso could've stayed out a bit more before his final stop had he not been forced into that situation.

[Alolnso]

It wasn't up to Massa to decide anything. The point of pitting early was to get out of the Vettel train. The right moment for the pit stop depended on how much traffic there was 20 seconds behind him. There was no traffic and thus the best thing to do was to pit.

[V8 Fireworks]

Just putting it out there: Massa pitted before Alonso during the first round of stops.

As he was in front, and the leading driver gets to pit first.

Massa should have been given first choice for the undercut on Vettel, as he was the leading Ferrari driver at the time. If he wasn't, that is VERY poor form for Ferrari. There can not be team orders at first race of season, that is inappropriate.

[Lights]

I guess when Ferrari sees a possibility to win a race, they take it. Strange, I know.

Edited by D.M.N., 17 March 2013 - 11:37.
Remove "Other possible thread ideas: - Was Grosjean screwed by Lotus already? (Gets car updates too late) - Was Webber screwed by Red Bull already? (Software issues)" - O/T

[SpaMaster]

Absolutely.

No, Massa did not decline to pit. He was in fact quite unhappy in the radio questioning Smedley why Alonso was pitted before him.

[sheepgobba]

The proof is in the doing. You guys with the fairy tale are the ones needing to prove.

No, as mentioned earlier Massa was allowed to fight Alonso during the early phrase of the race. It was most likely a call from the drivers to pit early (Alonso) or carry on like Massa..

[V8 Fireworks]

It wasn't up to Massa to decide anything. The point of pitting early was to get out of the Vettel train.

Huh? What are you talking about?

Vettel > Massa > Alonso

THen Alonso pits BEFORE Massa

Massa tries to hang on for two stops, then gives up on that and pits 2-3 laps later. Massa should have pitted before Alonso (if he wanted) as he was ahead. As two stops for Massa did not work and Massa was in fact on a similar strategy, then why would Massa have not wanted to pit before Alonso, it makes no sense!

Ferrari COULD have had both cars ahead of Sutil bloackade IF they pitted them sequentially, first Massa, then immediately Alonso the next lap at the same time as Vettel pitted.

[apexpredator]

As he was in front, and the leading driver gets to pit first.

Massa should have been given first choice for the undercut on Vettel, as he was the leading Ferrari driver at the time. If he wasn't, that is VERY poor form for Ferrari. There can not be team orders at first race of season, that is inappropriate.

Alonso pitted much earlier than expected to jump the 2 of them. The 2nd stint should have been much longer, as Kimi showed. Alonso's early pit sparked off the 3 stop reactions from Vettel and Massa.

Just because Massa was ahead doesn't mean Alonso HAS to wait for Massa to make his pit-stop first. That pit priority only applies when they both want to pit within 2 consecutive laps of each other. When Alonso pitted Massa had no intention to pit. He was told by the engineer and given the choice to either react or stay out, he decided to stay out for another lap, only to then change his mind.

If he was to be 'screwed' by Ferrari they would (and should) have done it in the 1st stint, allow Alonso to jump both him and Vettel and manage to gap to Kimi.

[Vesuvius]

About the massa-alonso, massa should have been taken to pit stop lap after alonso and he would have been at least in front ot Vettel.

Edited by D.M.N., 17 March 2013 - 11:37.
Remove deleted quote

[V8 Fireworks]

No, Massa did not decline to pit. He was in fact quite unhappy in the radio questioning Smedley why Alonso was pitted before him.

Massa should have been pitted first in that case, as he was ahead.

Very poor form from Ferrari.

[Henrik B]

I think Ferrari did the right thing, Massas could not keep up his great pace later in the race, but it was no question that Ferrari favoured Alonso with the undercut. No, there is no equal status even in the first race, they are backing Alonso.

But Massa had a fine race, he will steal lots of points from Red Bull this year.

[e34]

Massa's race was destroyed by strategy, that much is true, but who's to blame is not clear.

If Felipe wanted to pit when Alonso did, and was told to remain on the track, he has every right to be utterly pissed. If, on the other hand, he is now saying I should have been pitted, because now I know how the race unfolded, then tough luck. If, hopefully, Massa is back, they need to solve this kind of problem as soon as possible, and frankly, I cannot see an easy solution. On track racing should be easy to tackle (don't do banzai moves, don't defend as if there is no tomorrow), but pitting priorities are harder to solve: the leading pilot should have priority if they both ask for pitting in the same lap, but what happens if the second driver wants (is ready) to pit, and the leading one doesn't? And what happens if the team realises that the second driver has more pace and would benefit more from an early pit stop?

Button and Hamilton (or at least their fans) had strategy-related problems last year. Vettel and Webber usually don't because somehow Webber always screws up his chances at the start. If Massa keeps his good pace, Massa and Alonso will have strategy related problems too. How should these problems be solved?

[nosecone]

A team tries always to do the optimum. No team will screw a race of its driver. The team also wants a good position not only the driver. Maybe the strategy wasn't the optimum but this wasn't done on purpose.

[GodHimself]

I believe Massa was screwed by Ferrari the day he'd been signed... no he wasn't. They were free to race and race they did. The better of the pair won, that's it.

[stillOrange]

It wouldn't be that bad and I wouldn't have a problem with the whole situation if only they pitted Massa on the next lap rather than waiting another one (or was it two?) and actually making him loose two places.

[V8 Fireworks]

Alonso pitted much earlier than expected to jump the 2 of them.

The driver behind is not normally allowed to do this to his team-mate, if there is a chance of getting ahead.

For instance, Webber is not allowed to pit before Vettel, if this will allow Webber to get ahead of Vettel. Webber is only pitted first when they are racing other people in different parts of the pack.

[Massa]

Massa race was destroy because he was unable to overtake Vettel, while his car was faster full stop.

[kosmos]

Alonso pitted much earlier than expected to jump the 2 of them. The 2nd stint should have been much longer, as Kimi showed. Alonso's early pit sparked off the 3 stop reactions from Vettel and Massa.

Just because Massa was ahead doesn't mean Alonso HAS to wait for Massa to make his pit-stop first. That pit priority only applies when they both want to pit within 2 consecutive laps of each other.

We have a winner.

[SCUDmissile]

to be fair,Massa wasn't able to pass Vettel but was closing, so they thought they could maybe pass him in pitstops with Alonso and then Massa pass Vettel with DRS. but it wasn't to be. It may have been an honest mistake.

[DS27]

Maybe he can feel a little hard done by - but of course Ferrari will do it. It was their best chance at winning the race and that is why they are there.

[ViMaMo]

Massa did just two laps extra before his second stop. This is seen as sabotage from Ferrari. (Please go have a look at who did how many laps in a stint).

So Massa's strategy should always be the same as Fernando's, otherwise its a sign of sabotage.

Poor Massa always screwed by Ferrari. (Hey look Lewis just a risk and flew to Mercedes). Guess nobody wants this baby or its afraid to fly.

Edited by ViMaMo, 17 March 2013 - 09:25.

[KnucklesAgain]

Massa's race was destroyed by strategy, that much is true, but who's to blame is not clear.

If Felipe wanted to pit when Alonso did, and was told to remain on the track, he has every right to be utterly pissed. If, on the other hand, he is now saying I should have been pitted, because now I know how the race unfolded, then tough luck. If, hopefully, Massa is back, they need to solve this kind of problem as soon as possible, and frankly, I cannot see an easy solution. On track racing should be easy to tackle (don't do banzai moves, don't defend as if there is no tomorrow), but pitting priorities are harder to solve: the leading pilot should have priority if they both ask for pitting in the same lap, but what happens if the second driver wants (is ready) to pit, and the leading one doesn't? And what happens if the team realises that the second driver has more pace and would benefit more from an early pit stop?

Button and Hamilton (or at least their fans) had strategy-related problems last year. Vettel and Webber usually don't because somehow Webber always screws up his chances at the start. If Massa keeps his good pace, Massa and Alonso will have strategy related problems too. How should these problems be solved?

I would hope they have agreements and procedures in place for pit priorities of cars running closely and with equal WDC chances, this is not a new problem. On the other hand the perception problem would go away if people stopped those conspiracy theories that lack evidence. If the same low standard of argument was applied to McLaren, it would be easy to claim that Withmarsh screwed Perez's quali in order to big up Button because he had bet the team on Jenson. Same kind of evidence for that.

[sheepgobba]

The driver behind is not normally allowed to do this to his team-mate, if there is a chance of getting ahead.

For instance, Webber is not allowed to pit before Vettel, if this will allow Webber to get ahead of Vettel. Webber is only pitted first when they are racing other people in different parts of the pack.

I don't remember seeing this in the rulebook

[revlec]

In wheel to wheel combat,

WEB will fight VET
HAM will fight ROS (like BUT did with HAM or MSC with ROS last year)
RAI will fight GRO
_

The only team which uses Pit Stop tactics is Ferrari.
I can not recall the last time I saw those two(ALo &MAS) do a fair fight for position on track..

Monaco 2011 we had the situation where ALO was going slower, but MAS was instructed to not overtake him.
Valencia 2011, pit stop tactics to contain MAS.

_

This year Ferrari has the best car, and if they want to win the WCC, they should put MAS in the position to win sme races too.. otherwise I wil not blame him if he performs poorly in the second part of the season.

[XAXIXAX]

We have a winner.

[apexpredator]

The driver behind is not normally allowed to do this to his team-mate, if there is a chance of getting ahead.

For instance, Webber is not allowed to pit before Vettel, if this will allow Webber to get ahead of Vettel. Webber is only pitted first when they are racing other people in different parts of the pack.

You're missing the point my friend. Alonso pitstop was not to undercut Massa, but to undercut Vettel. It's not like Ferrari competed against its own driver. Massa had the opportunity to pass Vettel with the DRS, however for Alonso it was just traffic as his DRS is on with Massa's DRS is on.

Like I said, they could have actually tried to get Massa to come out ahead of Vettel except it was Massa's call to stay out. Turned out to be the wrong call as he reacted but late.

[asmodeo]

Massa race was destroy because he was unable to overtake Vettel, while his car was faster full stop.

Not only Vettel. From lap 24 to 35 he can't pass Sutil. Because this he pits on 36

[sheepgobba]

Massa race was destroy because he was unable to overtake Vettel, while his car was faster full stop.

Not necessarily though

On the radio Massa was asked and was even informed whether to carry on or pit. It was essentially up to him in regards to the pitstop

[Richard T]

I think Ferrari did the right thing, Massas could not keep up his great pace later in the race, but it was no question that Ferrari favoured Alonso with the undercut. No, there is no equal status even in the first race, they are backing Alonso.

But Massa had a fine race, he will steal lots of points from Red Bull this year.

And Alonso is the best choice for the long run to the end of the season

[V8 Fireworks]

I don't remember seeing this in the rulebook

!!!!!???

It's simple ettiqute.

So Alonso pole, Massa second. Lap 10 Alonso leads Massa by 1.1 seconds. Massa has about the same pace, it's very even.

Massa chooses to pit first. Then Alonso pits.
Bam... Massa is in the lead.

When this was Vettel and Webber, Webber was 100% not allowed to pit first and likewise Vettel pit first, if it were Vettel who were behind. It is simple ettiqute.

[Massa]

!!!!!???

It's simple ettiqute.

So Alonso pole, Massa second. Lap 10 Alonso leads Massa by 1.1 seconds. Massa has about the same pace, it's very even.

Massa chooses to pit first. Then Alonso pits.
Bam... Massa is in the lead.

When this was Vettel and Webber, Webber was 100% not allowed to pit first and likewise Vettel pit first, if it were Vettel who were behind. It is simple ettiqute.

It's not the same. Massa have the first call at the FIRST stop.

[mindmill]

!!!!!???

It's simple ettiqute.

So Alonso pole, Massa second. Lap 10 Alonso leads Massa by 1.1 seconds. Massa has about the same pace, it's very even.

Massa chooses to pit first. Then Alonso pits.
Bam... Massa is in the lead.

When this was Vettel and Webber, Webber was 100% not allowed to pit first and likewise Vettel pit first, if it were Vettel who were behind. It is simple ettiqute.

More like team orders.

[Crossmax]

Of course he was, if he would have been pitted first of the two Ferraris in the second pit stop phase, he would have jumped Vettel. There is absolutely no arguing about that. What can be argued is whether the drivers themselves had any input into this, for example Massa not wanting to pit at that time.

Edited by Crossmax, 17 March 2013 - 09:29.

[V8 Fireworks]

Alonso pitstop was not to undercut Massa, but to undercut Vettel.

But Alonso was racing Massa!

For Massa pride I think he cares the*most* about beating Alonso. Certainly Webber does about Vettel, but Webber is a bit of a cynical bitter chap of course...

[Kingshark]

Massa finished 21 seconds behind Alonso. No, he did not deserve to get the first call in strategy. Fernando was simply much quicker in the race.

[Massa]

Yep.. and WEB was the WDC favorite when he fought VET in Brazil, or BUT was leading the standings when he was fighting HAM in the second part of last year season..
Open your eyes..

Oh dear, last year Massa was NOWHERE. You are so biased. You didn't watch the race carefully to say you don't remember when Alonso and Massa fought, and it to mee you say " open your eyes " ?

Rewatch the first 5 laps of the race.

[XAXIXAX]

to be fair,Massa wasn't able to pass Vettel but was closing, so they thought they could maybe pass him in pitstops with Alonso and then Massa pass Vettel with DRS. but it wasn't to be. It may have been an honest mistake.

The way I see it that's the big problem here with Felipe, he seems uncapable of making those moves when needed.
How is Ferrari to blame for maximizing their oportunities?

[Rikhart]

I think the angry/confused rant by massa on the radio was all the answer you need...

[WaterResistant]

Massa should have stick with the winning strategy (same as rai as he was doing the same times) alonso took his oportunity to win stopping with 10 lap only in his medium tyres, masa was first with free air but he did not see the whole picture and took the wrong decision, because he was scared.

[Massa]

But Alonso was racing Massa!

For Massa pride I think he cares the*most* about beating Alonso. Certainly Webber does about Vettel, but Webber is a bit of a cynical bitter chap of course...

Alonso was racing Vettel and Raikkonen.