Jump to content


Photo
* * - - - 8 votes

Webber: Did he need to stop three times?


  • Please log in to reply
276 replies to this topic

#251 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 15 October 2013 - 13:16

Actually Webber may not have complained as such but was clearly not convinced by the strategy based on his comments after the race.

 

I'm not sure there was anything in this but RBR got the result they wanted (1-2 with Vettel as the lead car) Whether they purposefully attempted to make sure it was Vettel who won and not Webber is something we'll never know.

 

So basically, you have no evidence and are not sure of anything but still profess to a) know what Webber thinks b) Know what RBR "wanted".

 

OK, got it.



Advertisement

#252 Module

Module
  • Member

  • 673 posts
  • Joined: May 13

Posted 15 October 2013 - 13:20

So basically, you have no evidence and are not sure of anything but still profess to a) know what Webber thinks b) Know what RBR "wanted".

 

OK, got it.

:up:

It's like arguing with your wife, you can bring all the proof in the world but in the end your wrong and she's right, just because she is. :wave:


Edited by Module, 15 October 2013 - 13:21.


#253 bazil

bazil
  • New Member

  • 7 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 13:24

If Webber hadn't switched to a 3 stop strategy and remained on a 2 stop, this topic would be all about discussing why RBR, given their knowledge of Webber's tyre wear issues, didn't switch Webber to a 3 stopper as it would have won him the race, because he "would have had fresher tyres to attack Grosjean and Vettel, passing them easily".  As it happens, it's a topic about them switching Webber to a 3 stop and then Webber completely failing to make it work for himself (spending far too many laps behind a slower car on a different strategy).  Webber didn't win the race because he doesn't have the pace and race craft to challenge Vettel.

 

Why did Webber, on 12 laps newer tyres with the faster of the two compounds spend 6 laps behind Grosjean (later in the race with more rubber on the track and lower fuel), while Vettel, with older tyres and the same compound take just a single lap?



#254 KateLM

KateLM
  • Member

  • 2,342 posts
  • Joined: December 09

Posted 15 October 2013 - 13:36

In fairness, Webber can't win either way - if he speaks out he's a whinger, if he doesn't then he must be OK with it. Brundle's post-race column, incidentally, says he was less OK with it than the press releases suggest.

 

I see Autosport are playing their favourite 'conspiracy theorists' card again and to that there's only one thing I can say. There isn't a single sport on this planet where team managers are completely truthful and everything the audience sees is completely above board. There is an increasing pig-headedness from some who seem to believe F1 is the exception. Some theories are ridiculous, but wasn't having a car crash to help a teammate also supposedly ridiculous? And there were those who called that the minute it happened too. Wasn't taken seriously though.

 

At the end of the day, suggesting Red Bull deliberately pressured Grosjean into pitting too early by running a three-stop which (contrary to Horner's claims) was not planned after the first stop is not that ridiculous in the grand scheme of things. And many would say it was a good strategy that got them the result they wanted and probably in the order they wanted it. I haven't seen one decent explanation why they told Vettel he wasn't racing Webber on Lap 27 if they didn't know that Webber's victory hopes were effectively over at that point. Autosport's argument seems to be 'it would have worked if Vettel's strategy hadn't worked or if Vettel had DNF'd at the first corner'. Which is hardly convincing argument for it looking like the best strategy for the win.

 

I haven't seen anyone criticize Seb himself or the way he drove either. There's a difference between saying he got the better strategy and insulting his race.

 

There's also a difference between 'Red Bull are evil' and suggesting that they may have sacrificed one driver's chance for a better overall team result as well.



#255 mnmracer

mnmracer
  • Member

  • 1,972 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 15 October 2013 - 13:41

...

The problem comes from those suggestions having ZERO factual basis.

If at the very least Webber had shown to be able to make his tires last, that would be a factual basis, but all the numbers point towards him being unable to.

It is a matter of discussing facts with fiction. It is a complete waste of time.



#256 EthanM

EthanM
  • Member

  • 2,362 posts
  • Joined: April 09

Posted 15 October 2013 - 13:41

. I haven't seen one decent explanation why they told Vettel he wasn't racing Webber on Lap 27 if they didn't know that Webber's victory hopes were effectively over at that point. Autosport's argument seems to be 'it would have worked if Vettel's strategy hadn't worked or if Vettel had DNF'd at the first corner'. Which is hardly convincing argument for it looking like the best strategy for the win.

 

 

because he wasn't racing Webber, after a pit stop on 11 and second pitstop on 25 Webber was clearly on a different stategy on lap 27... doncha think?



#257 Jon83

Jon83
  • Member

  • 1,925 posts
  • Joined: November 11

Posted 15 October 2013 - 13:48

So basically, you have no evidence and are not sure of anything but still profess to a) know what Webber thinks b) Know what RBR "wanted".

 

OK, got it.

 

No need take that attitude.

 

I was replying after reading Mark Webber's comments on James Allen's site.

 

My opinion is that RBR got the result they wanted. I'm entitled to that just as you are entitled to believe otherwise.



#258 David1976

David1976
  • Member

  • 915 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 15 October 2013 - 13:54

Make this thread a pole. It would be interesting.



#259 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 15 October 2013 - 13:54

No need take that attitude.

 

I was replying after reading Mark Webber's comments on James Allen's site.

 

My opinion is that RBR got the result they wanted. I'm entitled to that just as you are entitled to believe otherwise.

 

I really don't mean to show any "attitude" but it's really hard sometimes.

 

You are also perfectly entitled to your opinion, I am simply pointing out that your opinion is not based on any facts.

 

PS: In regards to Webber not being perfectly happy with his strategy that shouldn't be surprising. It was not the optimal one. But he was forced into it by the situation not because the team decided so. Just as he should not be too happy about failing to pass Grosjean, doing a crap start etc.



Advertisement

#260 EvanRainer

EvanRainer
  • Member

  • 1,364 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 15 October 2013 - 13:55

Make this thread a pole. It would be interesting.

 

Polls are rarely interesting and often entirely predictable.



#261 Tenmantaylor

Tenmantaylor
  • Member

  • 8,350 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 15 October 2013 - 14:49

 Webber didn't win the race because he doesn't have the pace and race craft to challenge Vettel.

 

Why did Webber, on 12 laps newer tyres with the faster of the two compounds spend 6 laps behind Grosjean (later in the race with more rubber on the track and lower fuel), while Vettel, with older tyres and the same compound take just a single lap?

 

I love Aussiegrit but this pretty much sums it up.

 

Had Webber stayed on a 2 stop strategy he would have had to pass Grosjean on the track to win and he struggled to do just that with a tyre advantage. Had he and Vettel raced the same strategy I'm sure Vettel would have overtaken Mark or Mark taken them both out Senna/Prost style as payback for earlier in the year. 

 

Either way Vettel was much faster in clear air, Webber's only chance to win was to hold the lead at the start on the 3 stop or pass Gro and hold Vettel up all race on the 2 stop.



#262 abc

abc
  • Member

  • 1,967 posts
  • Joined: July 05

Posted 15 October 2013 - 15:38

 I haven't seen one decent explanation why they told Vettel he wasn't racing Webber on Lap 27 if they didn't know that Webber's victory hopes were effectively over at that point. 

because RBR would be damned by clueless fans, who would turn evidence of free racing into exact opposite, for ages to come, reffering to we are racing Alonso in 2007.



#263 RockyRaccoon68

RockyRaccoon68
  • Member

  • 1,456 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 15:45

The reason Webber didn't win is because he didn't do enough 'damage' on his new tyres v Grosjean and Vettel on older tyres earlier in the race.  Vettel was only about 0.5 slower than Webber on tyres that were about 20 laps older at some stages.  He was just plain faster.  If Red Bull had kept Webber on a 2 stop he just would have held Vettel up, allowing Grosjean to go and win on his two stop.



#264 bazil

bazil
  • New Member

  • 7 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 17:39

The cold hard facts that Webber fans should accept in this piece from James Allen:

 

http://www.jamesalle...strategy-calls/

 

Webber seems like a REALLY nice guy; I've nothing against him as the person he comes across as, but on track, Webber simply isn't a match for Vettel.  He's actually in a worse position than Massa; his deficit to Vettel is much larger than that of Massa to Alonso (yes I know Vettel is winning races and the points margin for the win is largest), and Massa has the excuse of driving what is generally accepted to be an undriveable car, but Webber is driving hands down the best car on the grid.

 

Never mind eh.



#265 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 15 October 2013 - 19:08

:up:

It's like arguing with your wife, you can bring all the proof in the world but in the end your wrong and she's right, just because she is. :wave:

LOL!!  Ain't that the truth! :clap: :clap: :clap:   (BTW, don't mention I said this to the wife!)


Edited by Winter98, 15 October 2013 - 19:14.


#266 Winter98

Winter98
  • Member

  • 638 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 15 October 2013 - 19:11

Make this thread a pole. It would be interesting.

We already know the rough percentage of the various fan bases involved, so search for a "Favourite Driver" poll, and that will give you a pretty good idea of the results of a poll on this subject.  Not that everyone will vote that way, but a lot will.


Edited by Winter98, 15 October 2013 - 19:13.


#267 icecream

icecream
  • Member

  • 444 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 15 October 2013 - 21:15

i don't believe in the conspiracy theories.  however, i do believe that rbr was forced to split their strategies because of the lotus, and therefore they had to put one driver on a two stop, and the other on a three stop.  

 

given that, it makes more sense to put webber on the 3 stop as he's historically not as easy on the tyres. so vettel then gets the 2 stop, which is also accepted as the superior strategy, and so you should give it to your best driver. 

 

had they not been forced to split strategies, they would have kept webber on the 2 stop i believe.  

 

once they made the split, they knew that vettel was the likely winner.  hence the radio message telling him he's racing grosjean.  yes, he knew he was on the same strategy as GRO, but he didn't know what the situation would be at the end of the race, hence the message.

 

as for webber being unable to pass, he was on used mediums (i believe?), but also given his lower downforce, he was unable to get close enough to the lotus at the start of the straight after the chicanes, and hence even with his higher top speed was unable to pass.   vettel on the other hand was right on grosjean's ass at the start of the straight and was hence able to get past.  interesting, as i thought webber's lower df setup should have made life easier for him, but perhaps not.



#268 DarthWillie

DarthWillie
  • Member

  • 1,743 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 15 October 2013 - 22:07

 

 

as for webber being unable to pass, he was on used mediums (i believe?), but also given his lower downforce, he was unable to get close enough to the lotus at the start of the straight after the chicanes, and hence even with his higher top speed was unable to pass.   vettel on the other hand was right on grosjean's ass at the start of the straight and was hence able to get past.  interesting, as i thought webber's lower df setup should have made life easier for him, but perhaps not.

I think Spoon was the key factor there, Vettel was already closer in spoon and able to follow Grosjean, closing up in the chicane.Webber was alway further away in spoon



#269 Ian G

Ian G
  • Member

  • 1,062 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 15 October 2013 - 22:29

The thing most Journo's have missed in all this was that Seb. made no attempt,for whatever reason, to catch or pass Mark in the first stint and was encouraged to stay back at one stage by Rocky to "preserve tyres".I'm sure,even at that early stage they were planning to jump Mark via pit stops,Mark's fast pace all weekend and his statement to the press after Quali. he would not be letting Seb. thru meant Horner was always going to keep them apart on the track if at all possible.After Mark's second stop Rocky said "ÿou are racing Grosjean",i think that statement said it all. My 2c take on it all.



#270 LoudHoward

LoudHoward
  • Member

  • 1,318 posts
  • Joined: April 06

Posted 15 October 2013 - 23:37

I don't really buy the "we're not racing Webber" comment as being evidence either way. Firstly, we haven't heard what Seb asked to prompt that message (ie, Sebs just seen Mark pull into the pitlane, he could've asked if he needed to drop the hammer, or pit that lap, or he asked who's pace he needed to reference himself to). If that's the case, a response like Rockys makes sense and isn't nefarious imo. It makes sense within the laps that they were talking, we're racing Grosjean now, Mark at the end.

 

Additionally, later on he's counseling Seb on what he'll need tyre wise for the time when he'll be...racing Webber. So why listen to one comment and not the other? Especially when one doesn't line up with reality that well.

 

If they both cleared Grosjean in similar timeframes (either both quickly, or both slowly, or both not at all), as all options for that were on the table at the time of the message, then Mark and Seb were certainly racing each other, all the teams seemed to think the strategies came out within a few seconds and Mark was a couple of seconds ahead when he switched, so the "we're not racing Webber" comment doesn't make any sense in the context of the end of the race (when they would've come together). 



#271 Ian G

Ian G
  • Member

  • 1,062 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 15 October 2013 - 23:49

Yeah,its a PO on how you view the facts,mine is a decision was made in the first few laps by Horner & Rocky to jump Mark via pit stops and for Seb. to stay away until that happened. I may be wrong,i may be right, but that's my take and i realise other have a different view on it all.



#272 metz

metz
  • Member

  • 9,790 posts
  • Joined: July 01

Posted 16 October 2013 - 00:30

You are correct. The decision was obvious after Webbers poor start. From pole or behind RG was a completely different situation. It called for a strategy change.

Vettel had nothing to do with this decision. They were trying to get passed the Lotus.

Autosport did a great article on why this is NOT suitable for the conspiracy theorists.



#273 repete

repete
  • Member

  • 189 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 16 October 2013 - 04:31

"We're racing so and so" is a very common radio message.  Rocky probably gave it to him so Seb wouldn't worry about what Mark is doing. To keep his focus solely on the car infront of him.



#274 mangeliiito

mangeliiito
  • Member

  • 201 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 16 October 2013 - 07:03

I think Spoon was the key factor there, Vettel was already closer in spoon and able to follow Grosjean, closing up in the chicane.Webber was alway further away in spoon


This. And this happend beacuse he always tried to overtake/pressure Grosjean into a mistake at the hairpin and into Spoon.

#275 Longtimefan

Longtimefan
  • Member

  • 3,170 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 19 October 2013 - 20:36

I didn't know where to put this and didn't want to start a new thread and get my knuckles rapped by the mods. 

 

but.. I just saw what is for me the tweet of the year!  (yes its on topic.. just)

 

The Living legend that is Alex Zanardi, just tweeted this!

@AussieGrit I'd had loved to see you win a F1 race before it's over, after this I'll be crossing all fingers for you! Sorry can't use feet..

 

:lol: What a guy!


Edited by Longtimefan, 19 October 2013 - 20:37.


#276 RosannaG

RosannaG
  • Member

  • 820 posts
  • Joined: December 12

Posted 19 October 2013 - 20:38

I didn't know where to put this and didn't want to start a new thread and get my knuckles rapped by the mods. 

 

but.. I just saw what is for the the tweet of the year!  (yes its on topic.. just)

 

The Living legend that is Alex Zanardi, just tweeted this!

@AussieGrit I'd had loved to see you win a F1 race before it's over, after this I'll be crossing all fingers for you! Sorry can't use feet..

 

:lol: What a guy!

 

Alex is the best!  :kiss:



#277 Kelateboy

Kelateboy
  • Member

  • 5,797 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 20 October 2013 - 12:53

The thing most Journo's have missed in all this was that Seb. made no attempt,for whatever reason, to catch or pass Mark in the first stint and was encouraged to stay back at one stage by Rocky to "preserve tyres".I'm sure,even at that early stage they were planning to jump Mark via pit stops,Mark's fast pace all weekend and his statement to the press after Quali. he would not be letting Seb. thru meant Horner was always going to keep them apart on the track if at all possible.After Mark's second stop Rocky said "ÿou are racing Grosjean",i think that statement said it all. My 2c take on it all.

 

I don't think you could use "Close the gap progressively. We’re not racing Mark, we’re racing Grosjean - Lap 27" remark by Rocky to Vettel as a proof of any conspiracy by the team to keep them apart. This is probably Rocky's way of telling Vettel to just get the 2nd stint as far as possible, and not to worry about potential threat from Webber at that point in time. 

 

Bear in mind that 2 laps before that, Rocky also informed Vettel - "This is good pace, don’t go bananas, Mark is right behind Grosjean now so his pace will calm down. Watch out for Pic. - Lap 25". I think it was quite clear from this remark that Vettel could have gone bananas (in Rocky's words) after Webber pitted, and that could have compromised the length of his middle stint when Rocky was bent on making that stint as long as possible.

 

Rocky was expecting Webber to pose a challenge to Vettel at the end of the race, and this could be seen from three (3) radio transmissions from Rocky to Vettel after Vettel's 2nd pit stop :-

 

Lap 40 - "Towards the end of the race you’ll come under pressure from Mark. So make sure you’ve got some tyres left." 

Lap 41 - "Good job Sebastian. It’s all about having enough tyres until the end." 

Lap 41 - "Mark has to stop again and he’ll close up the gap after that. Save your tyres." 

 

It is clear from the radio transmissions between Rocky and Vettel that they were expecting Webber to make a dash to finish line (on quicker and fresher tyres) and to challenge Vettel at the end of the race. The problem was Webber could not get past Grosjean in time to mount that challenge.