I couldn't believe the decision - especially as the set of soft tyres he put on were 6 laps old. He would have won the race IMO without stopping again.
Edited by harrys, 07 July 2013 - 13:49.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 13:48
Edited by harrys, 07 July 2013 - 13:49.
Advertisement
Posted 07 July 2013 - 13:54
Posted 07 July 2013 - 13:54
Posted 07 July 2013 - 13:55
Posted 07 July 2013 - 13:55
Posted 07 July 2013 - 13:56
Edited by Disgrace, 07 July 2013 - 13:56.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 13:56
Posted 07 July 2013 - 13:56
Losing a second a lap when your tires are 10 laps old doesn't mean you're still only losing a second when they're 20 laps old. There was a very small window to pit him and get him out with a fighting chance and Lotus just slightly missed it, and seemingly only by a lap or two.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 13:56
Posted 07 July 2013 - 13:58
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:16
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:16
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:17
They lost the race when they pitted Grosjean prematurely to get him out of Kimi's way (which didn't work).
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:18
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:20
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:20
Edited by Shiroo, 07 July 2013 - 14:21.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:21
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:22
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:27
Advertisement
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:33
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:33
hehe Lotus fans whining with P2 and P3. Imagine that in 2011Pitting was probably the way to go. I´m happy with 2 & 3.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:37
I now think that they did that for Redbull to react which they did but after that I have no clue what Lotus plan was..They lost the race when they pitted Grosjean prematurely to get him out of Kimi's way (which didn't work).
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:45
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:45
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:49
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:49
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:52
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:53
The pitted him early to challenge Vettel, not to get him out of Kimi's way. That's like saying the they pitted Kimi first in the first stint to get him out of Grosjean's way.They lost the race when they pitted Grosjean prematurely to get him out of Kimi's way (which didn't work).
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:54
Posted 07 July 2013 - 14:57
Consequently the real mistake was made on Saturday, when they used on set softs too much.Pitting was fine. But it should have been for fresh tyres, not old softs.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 15:36
Edited by Cyanide, 07 July 2013 - 15:37.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 16:57
OK, so why did they put old softs on? Is that all they had? Did they really have 6 laps on them as Hobbs & matchett said? How do they know?Pitting was fine. But it should have been for fresh tyres, not old softs.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 16:58
Posted 07 July 2013 - 17:06
Edited by 2ms, 07 July 2013 - 17:13.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 17:08
This.Kimi Raikkonen:
"I could run longer and we had to think about if we should try to run until the end. But I had massive problem with the radio. I could hear the team but they couldn't hear me, apart from at two corners. I wonder if we should have gone to the end as the tyres were OK."
I think they were afraid that a Silverstone repeat would happen with Kimi falling behind even Alonso if they don't pit.
Edited by Boxerevo, 07 July 2013 - 17:09.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 17:15
Posted 07 July 2013 - 17:39
Posted 07 July 2013 - 17:41
Edited by ardbeg, 07 July 2013 - 17:41.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 17:49
They had a decent lead over Alonso and it would have been pretty easy to cover him if the tires suddenly degraded. They could have kept him out for a pretty good chance at victory and still been safe enough to keep the position they had in a worst case scenario. So yes, wrong decision. Or maybe bad radio.
Advertisement
Posted 07 July 2013 - 18:09
Hadn´t thought about that There was no other risk than losing to Vettel, which happened anyway.
Edited by Torsion, 07 July 2013 - 18:10.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 18:15
When tyres go over the cliff, most of the times it is all over by the time you come back to the pits. Just look at China 2012. Also, it may have been too late anyway if it happened in the last few laps. Let's say Alonso was running 7-8 s behind Vettel like he did today. It would be too enticing to play the cat-and-mouse game with Vettel that it would have cost with Vettel. Let's say Vettel was within 6-7 s with 7-8 laps to go (Alonso 5-6 s behind at this point). It would be too late to pit even to guard against Alonso. So the tyres didn't even need to go off the cliff. Alonso was just 4 s behind when he pitted and he would have made up those 4 s in 3-4 laps and Kimi would not have had enough time to come in front of Alonso.Hadn´t thought about that There was no other risk than losing to Vettel, which happened anyway.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 18:20
The first mistake was when they pitted Kimi for 1st time and let Gro longer.After the SC they should immediately swap positions with RoGro as Kimi was much more agressive than Romain.Romain had so many laps spent behind Vettel and didnt try even once.A poor strategy for Kimi .
The good thing is I am glad Romain is back to his old
Do you guys think because he had so many accident last year that's why he is not that aggressive ?
Posted 07 July 2013 - 18:24
When tyres go over the cliff, most of the times it is all over by the time you come back to the pits. Just look at China 2012. Also, it may have been too late anyway if it happened in the last few laps. Let's say Alonso was running 7-8 s behind Vettel like he did today. It would be too enticing to play the cat-and-mouse game with Vettel that it would have cost with Vettel. Let's say Vettel was within 6-7 s with 7-8 laps to go (Alonso 5-6 s behind at this point). It would be too late to pit even to guard against Alonso. So the tyres didn't even need to go off the cliff. Alonso was just 4 s behind when he pitted and he would have made up those 4 s in 3-4 laps and Kimi would not have had enough time to come in front of Alonso.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 18:27
Posted 07 July 2013 - 18:28
Edited by fabr68, 07 July 2013 - 18:28.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 18:29
If they don't pit him and he ends up 4th say because his tyres hit the cliff early into a lap, they'd have been slaughtered.
It was the right call IMO. Vettel always looked like he had just enough to keep them behind.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 19:59
That was all considered in the calculation. He could have come out ahead of Alonso only if he had pitted within 2 of the lap he pitted. He almost had a pit-stop on Vettel as well. The difference between worn out tyres and normal tyres can be 2-3 s per lap. So, Alonso would have needed only 1 or 2 laps at max to get past Kimi after Vettel gets past him. Just like in Silverstone. It could be much worse.You forget no pitting means Alonso has an extra pitstop over Räikkönen. And There´s no way he´d have lost a full pitstop + the 4-5 second gap he had in the remaining 10 laps. Other than a puncture.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 20:02
I agree it was the correct call, but there was no way to end up 4th today.
Posted 07 July 2013 - 22:16
Posted 07 July 2013 - 22:23