4298 replies to this topic

[nookie]

As expected its the same arguments from both sides going back and forth.. Over and over.. Personal bias is an inevitable confounder in any analysis, even one that is made on "objective" grounds eg actual scientific research so you can forget about opinions on an internet forum being completely neutral.

My opinion remains the same.. To me only the most devoted of Ferrari/Vettel followers would be able to say this wasnt planned and keep a straight face at the same time.. It very clearly was.
We saw hamilton and rosberg in the exact same position every weekend for the past two years.. Many a times the one behind was apparently putting in faster laps than the one in front.. No matter how many things one can accuse Toto of, this is where he never budged.. Never once did we see the one behind getting a priority pit strategy in order to make him pass the guy in front.

2. The "Vettel was faster all weekend" claim doesnt hold up.. The same claim is instantly rubbished when KR does the same in practice but is superceeded in qualifying... FPs dont mean anything... The times dont mean anything.. In the end at Monaco, its the Q3 time that matters.

3 "Vettel screwed up quali" claim.. Again completely wrong. He kept mentioning that oh i went to deep in turn 5, was too greedy... But the fact of the matter is that even his 3 best sectors dont add up to beat Kimis final run.. If anything, KRs three best sectors assembled,wouldve beaten SVs best hypothetical attempt by 2 tenths.

4. "Vettel wae faster all race" argument... No he wasnt faster "all throughout" . Kimi maintained a 2 plus sec gap after the first 10 laps..it came down below one sec only when Kimi had to make his way through backmarkers and then went back to 1.7sec range once he was clear. The assumption that he was so much faster but was unable to show it because of being stuck behind KR is all pure conjecture.. For all we know this was the maximum he had as well..
Now yes, he was faster once kimi pitted and then for 3 more laps.. Yet again yer comparing those times with Kimi on a different compound, one which takes longer to heat up and the fact that he made his way right into the back of Jenson Button and other backmarkers ahead.
Even if that low 15s lap is considered to be faster than what KR couldve done all race, how does that possibly validate a pitstop shuffle leading to the two drivers exchanging positions?...as in just because he was faster for 4 odd laps at one point in the race qualifies him to be preferred over the guy that got pole on saturday and had lead the race till then?

4.for all this supposed superior speed, Vettel got the lead by less than a second and that second he made up only during the pitstop.. 0.6 sec faster coming in to his spot and then stop being 0.4 sec quicker.... So inspite of this "scorching speed" and kimi getting stuck behind backmarkers, he only barely got out ahead.without the sec he made up in the pits, he wouldve come out behind KR.

5."ferrari had to pit Kimi to protect him from Bottas".. Wrong again... Vetter came out almost sode by side to Kimi.. If anyone was at risk of being undercut by Bottas, it was Vettel not Kimi.... And anyone and his mother could see Bottas stuck behind backmarkers after his stop and that there was no way he was going to make ground there anyway..
Vettel himself said post race that Kimi was told to pit to cover for Bottas... So basically the driver leading the race was sacrificed to cover the threat behind while the in 2nd went on to get the optimal strategy.

6. "Vettel wouldve come out ahead, had he even pitted eerlier"... Again pure conjecture..had he been pitted in kimis place, he wouldnt have shown that" unbelievable" speed in the next four laps that he did and wouldve come back right behind Button on the slower, lazier SS compound.. Meanwhile Kimi wouldve been told to go crazy on the next 2 laps before he comes in and there in no way Vettel wouldve made his way thru the traffic fast enough to come out ahead.
Fact is stopping late was the priority strategy today. It was clear to Ferrari, it was clear to RB.

what's the summary of these 6 points? ferrari screwed kimi and... that's it?

[Tomerell]

L23 1:16.968 (US) 
24 1:17.269 (US) 
25 1:17.236 (US) 
26 1:17.938 (US) 
27 1:17.801 (US) 
28 1:17.028 (US) 
29 1:16.876 (US) 
30 1:17.105 (US) 
31 1:17.074 (US) 
32 1:17.663 (US) 
33 1:17.034 (US) 
 

 

 

There you go....ten laps doing mid/highs 1:17s

 

I asked lap times in clean air

[LiJu914]

I asked lap times in clean air

 They were in clean air again after around lap 27.

[Hellenic tifosi]

Exactly. Traffic was present only around laps 25-27, when Bottas closed the gap considerably. It took Kimi ages to pass the lapped cars.

[Ricardo F1]

Verstappen <> Bottas, so saying because Verstappen wasn't as fast doesn't mean that Bottas was too. The question is, why should Ferrari risk to get undercuted if they can react like they did? No one was expecting that Seb (and Dan) could pull out such incredible times. So I guess Seb was planned to pit right after Kimi and the Fin would have maintained his 1st position. But as Vettel was setting this times there was no reason to pit him and because both sides of the garage are racing each other, there was no need for a 1:1 strategy like Mercedes used to give it to there drivers the last couple of seasons.

[SCUDmissile]

I miss Alonso now. Hope he comes back next year now, his fans were much less crazy.

[Jovanotti]

Exactly. Traffic was present only around laps 25-27, when Bottas closed the gap considerably. It took Kimi ages to pass the lapped cars.

There were no blue flags, or way to late respectively. Our commentator wondered like a whole lap about this.

Edited by Jovanotti, 28 May 2017 - 20:50.

[Tomerell]

I miss Alonso now. Hope he comes back next year now, his fans were much less crazy.

 

He might be back as Kimi is on final season, and Seb is in Mercedes next year...

[LiJu914]

There were no blue flags, or way to late respecrively. Our commemtator wondered like a whole lap about this.

 Blue flags weren´t shown, because RAI wasn´t close enough (at least that´s what his engineer told him).

 

But the laps in traffic (before the stop) didn´t really matter anyway. 

Edited by LiJu914, 28 May 2017 - 20:53.

[Marklar]

Seb is most likely future of Mercedes...

He might be back as Kimi is on final season, and Seb is in Mercedes next year...

Huh?

[EthanM]

He might be back as Kimi is on final season, and Seb is in Mercedes next year...

 

vettel's not going anywhere, but the renewal is probably gonna cost Ferrari a metric **** ton of money cause it's gonna happen pretty late

[Mandzipop]

There were no blue flags, or way to late respectively. Our commentator wondered like a whole lap about this.

 

The rule is that you have to be within a certain time period before they are flown. Normally it is around a second but it appears to be less in Monaco.

[Hellenic tifosi]

Kimi stayed way to long at a distance of 1-2 seconds behind Button, bumping Vettel very close to Bottas.

[BlackGold]

LoL. I just read Lewis comment about the alleged TO by ferrari:
 

But when Hamilton was asked if his observation about Ferrari favouring Vettel meant he would be asking Mercedes for similar treatment, he dismissed the idea.

"I haven't spoken to the team, and I don't really plan to," Hamilton added. "Valtteri's doing a great job, I don't currently feel that we have to favour one over the other.

 

 

Yeah, no feel to favour one over the other, right. We just ignoring at least 3 races this year where Bottas got a call from pit command, to no attack Lewis, to let Lewis by and to block Seb so Lewis can close the gap

[MikeV1987]

Watching the replay on TSN now. The faster driver won, no conspiracy theory here.

[DeKnyff]

Having read through all the quotes and the stories, I'm now a bit skeptical about the "there were no team orders" narrative and whether Kimi lost the race purely because of slower pace. 

 

That or Kimi and his side of the garage are a severe case of paranoia. One thing is for sure, this team will do anything to retain Vettel, so it's ignorant not to at least consider he is getting preferential treatment. It's been apparent on facial reactions since last year - whenever Kimi did better, there were modest smiles, whenever Seb was doing better, the Italian passion was rupturing during the slightest occasion (podium, intense fight on track, etc.).

 

This is understandable, Seb is their future, Kimi is their support in the ultimate goal. However, the way they handled it today (if they actually did) is not gonna fly with Kimi for long. Pitting him intentionally into traffic is in bad taste, pitting him a lap later and in clear air, thus giving him the chance to counter Vettel's overcut would have been the right thing to do. Bottas and Verstappen were not gaining enough to jump him if he stayed out an extra lap.

 

Don't know what to believe but Kimi's reactions are damning. In the long run, it won't matter. With the race pace he is displaying recently, we won't get the chance to debate the team order stories for the rest of the season. 

 

How did Ferrari pit Kimi "intentionally" into traffic? Kimi was correctly released ahead of Sáinz, but encountered two lapped cars right after his pitstop, Button and Wehrlein. I'm not sure if lapped cars count as "traffic", but even if they do, Button let Kimi by without any noticeable loss of time. Wehrlein was a bit harder, but Seb was in exactly the same situation with relationship to the other Sauber (Ericsson). Only that Seb was lucky enough that Ericsson pitted just in the moment that he was catching him and it probably saved Seb's win. However, by no means it was something that could have been "intentionally" staged by Ferrari.

[Quickshifter]

When the degradation is very very  low staying longer is the best strategy. Ferrari chose to give the superior strategy to Vettel as simple as that. Had Vettel and Kimi been on same strategy Kimi would have won because no matter how fast you are you cannot overtake in Monaco especially when you have two teammates with similar equipment. In a nutshell Vettel won because of strategy and not because of his pace cos on this track, track position is king.

 

Ferrari had so much buffer on others that they could easily have afforded to pit both drivers on consecutive laps but they chose to give the favorable strategy to Vettel. Now there is nothing wrong in it but Vettel coming out and claiming he won only because of his pure pace and nothing to do with strategy is laughable. F1 fans are not fools to lap that BS. Fact of the matter is not what we think. Kimi thinks he was shafted by Ferrari and all the evidences point to that. Ferrari are backing Vettel as their number one driver  and there is nothing wrong in that but to make it appear like Vettel beat Kimi today because of pure pace, nothing to do with strategy and pinning the blame on Kimi is not palatable to anyone who follows f1 and is an insult to the intelligence of the fans in general.

Edited by Quickshifter, 28 May 2017 - 21:11.

[Hellenic tifosi]

Pitting them on consecutive laps would have been the equivalent of ensuring a Kimi victory. Why should the team do it? They left 4-5 laps of both drivers in clean air, and the best one won.

[BlackGold]

Ferrari had so much buffer on others that they could easily have afforded to pit both drivers on consecutive laps but they chose to give the favorable strategy to Vettel.

The buffer was under 4s, wouldn't count that as much.

 

Again, they needed to pit Kimi because Bottas made the undercut and Kimi was slow on his used US. So there your "track position is king" blows into dust.

Edited by BlackGold, 28 May 2017 - 21:16.

[xtremeclock]

The rule is that you have to be within a certain time period before they are flown. Normally it is around a second but it appears to be less in Monaco.

 

He wasn't close enough, even Sky F1 commentators were surprised by Kimi's lack of race pace. 

 

Video: https://streamable.com/kalzu

[josepatches]

How did Ferrari pit Kimi "intentionally" into traffic? Kimi was correctly released ahead of Sáinz, but encountered two lapped cars right after his pitstop, Button and Wehrlein. I'm not sure if lapped cars count as "traffic", but even if they do, Button let Kimi by without any noticeable loss of time. Wehrlein was a bit harder, but Seb was in exactly the same situation with relationship to the other Sauber (Ericsson). Only that Seb was lucky enough that Ericsson pitted just in the moment that he was catching him and it probably saved Seb's win. However, by no means it was something that could have been "intentionally" staged by Ferrari.

Of course it was not intentionally. Vettel had better pace in hand. He was 1s per lap faster thsn kimi after the pit stop....1s!
People can make whatever excuse they want but today kimi's pace was nowhere close to Vettel.

[LiJu914]

When the degradation is very very  low staying longer is the best strategy. Ferrari chose to give the superior strategy to Vettel as simple as that.

 

If Vettel would have pitted and Kimi had to stay out 4 laps longer, RAI would´ve been undercutted. Simple as that. "Very low degradation" doesn´t apply for everyone. Kimi´s tyres were gone. The same happened in Russia e.g.

 

Of course they could have easily pitted both drivers on consecutive laps, but the reason teams did that the years before, was because fresh rubber was always the superior choice, nowadays sometimes it isn´t - there is no clear pattern anymore.

Edited by LiJu914, 28 May 2017 - 21:19.

[Hellenic tifosi]

Kimi on used US was barely able to lap under 1:17, while he was able to deliver two laps of 1:16 and two under 1:16 on the fresh Supersofts. So Kimi WAS actually faster with the fresh tyres - it's just that Seb was even faster on the worn ultrasofts.

[abc]

I have said this a few times already, so this will be my last post about the matter, but I have a problem with the argument that Bottas was an immediate threat. Kimi was 5s clear of him when Valtteri made the stop. Verstappens first lap after switching to SS was slower than almost any of his laps before, so the tyres clearly took some time to get up to speed - which Ferrari could see. This wasn't a situation where an undercut gives you 3 seconds. Yes, Kimi was quite slow before the stop, but not as slow that he would have dropped behind Bottas by staying out longer. I really think you can't dispute that if you look at the timing.

I was looking and what you wrote is not true. MV was very quick in outlap, S2 green, S3 purple, which wasnt beaten by Seb even on his 15's laps.

They had to pit their first car in that lap to be able to pit another one in next lap, too. It wasnt needed as Seb had a lot of speed.

[xmoonrakerx]

I miss Alonso now. Hope he comes back next year now, his fans were much less crazy.

 

its most of his fans that comment here, nothing has changed

[grunge]

what's the summary of these 6 points? ferrari screwed kimi and... that's it?

Yes, if you had read them, youd realize they are counter arguments to the points raised by posters who claim Ferrari had nothing to do with the driver swap.

I was going to post my "conclusions" after the rather tediously long post, here they are. All lf the below are my opinions ofcourse.

1.ferrari had clearly decided they were going to back their young gun and would make sure he comes out in front of his teammate.

2.Kimi didnt help his cause in the first stint. He couldnt open up a big enough gap to Vettel in the first stint, 2.5 secs being the max around lap 10. This brought the overcut into play. Vettel now only needed to be within 1 sec of kimi, pound a couple of fast laps once KR had pit and was stuck with backmarkers and come out in front.. As mentioned above, he gained a whole sec as a bonus in the pit lane, one which proved decisive.

Had Vettel stopped first the situation wouldve been reversed and KR wouldve come out ahead of him.

THAT now is pretty much the objective reality of what happened today, ofcourse with the unavoidable tinge of my personal bias.

The story afterwards is ofcourse of a very different theme.. Did Ferrari do the right thing by enforcing team orders or did they shoot themselves in the foot.
1.ferrari loyalists will say that they did the right thing because Vettel is the main contender this yrar and with the neck n neck battled expected with Hamilton ahewd, they need to make sure he finishes with the maximum points possible everytime.

2.the argument from a non ferrari loyalist or a driver fan would be that deciding on yer main candidate and relegating the other to the wingman role as early as the 5th GP is quite controversial...youre letting one side of the garage step all over the other side... How do u suppose youll have any kind of team harmony left there... (weve already had media reports of Green having a hewted argument inside the garage about his driver not being given equal rights.)
As ive said before if Ferrari thought this was the way to go,then someone like a young barrichello or young massa should have been in that seat, not Kimi Raikkonen. Hes not going to play that role throughout the season specially when its also likely to be his last year in F1.

[BlackGold]

Yes, if you had read them, youd realize they are counter arguments to the points raised by posters who claim Ferrari had nothing to do with the driver swap.

I was going to post my "conclusions" after the rather tediously long post, here they are. All lf the below are my opinions ofcourse.

1.ferrari had clearly decided they were going to back their young gun and would make sure he comes out in front of his teammate.

2.Kimi didnt help his cause in the first stint. He couldnt open up a big enough gap to Vettel in the first stint, 2.5 secs being the max around lap 10. This brought the overcut into play. Vettel now only needed to be within 1 sec of kimi, pound a couple of fast laps once KR had pit and was stuck with backmarkers and come out in front.. As mentioned above, he gained a whole sec as a bonus in the pit lane, one which proved decisive.

Had Vettel stopped first the situation wouldve been reversed and KR wouldve come out ahead of him.

THAT now is pretty much the objective reality of what happened today, ofcourse with the unavoidable tinge of my personal bias.

Not so objective to reality, if u ask me. Point 1 is pure speculation and what u say at point 2 about Kimi being ahead of Seb if they would have switched strategy is also doubtable - Kimi was lacking on speed and could nearly to 16s, so its more likely that Seb would have managed quicker times on new SS do make a undercut work to his favour.

Edited by BlackGold, 28 May 2017 - 21:49.

[LiJu914]

....

Had Vettel stopped first the situation wouldve been reversed and KR wouldve come out ahead of him.
....

 

If RAI would´ve stayed out 4 laps longer than VET, he would´ve been undercutted, as he had not remotely the same pace left on used rubber than VET did.

[Hellenic tifosi]

The backmarkers which Kimi encountered were just two, and, generally speaking he hasn't shown to be as ruthless as Vettel when lapping traffic. At the same time, he was FASTER with the fresh supersofts than he was with the used Ultrasofts.

 

What else should Ferrari have done? They gave him a strategy which DID produce a faster laptime for him. The bad news for Kimi is that Vettel was actually faster

[EthanM]

Yes, if you had read them, youd realize they are counter arguments to the points raised by posters who claim Ferrari had nothing to do with the driver swap.

I was going to post my "conclusions" after the rather tediously long post, here they are. All lf the below are my opinions ofcourse.

1.ferrari had clearly decided they were going to back their young gun and would make sure he comes out in front of his teammate.

2.Kimi didnt help his cause in the first stint. He couldnt open up a big enough gap to Vettel in the first stint, 2.5 secs being the max around lap 10. This brought the overcut into play. Vettel now only needed to be within 1 sec of kimi, pound a couple of fast laps once KR had pit and was stuck with backmarkers and come out in front.. As mentioned above, he gained a whole sec as a bonus in the pit lane, one which proved decisive.

Had Vettel stopped first the situation wouldve been reversed and KR wouldve come out ahead of him.

THAT now is pretty much the objective reality of what happened today, ofcourse with the unavoidable tinge of my personal bias.

The story afterwards is ofcourse of a very different theme.. Did Ferrari do the right thing by enforcing team orders or did they shoot themselves in the foot.
1.ferrari loyalists will say that they did the right thing because Vettel is the main contender this yrar and with the neck n neck battled expected with Hamilton ahewd, they need to make sure he finishes with the maximum points possible everytime.

2.the argument from a non ferrari loyalist or a driver fan would be that deciding on yer main candidate and relegating the other to the wingman role as early as the 5th GP is quite controversial...youre letting one side of the garage step all over the other side... How do u suppose youll have any kind of team harmony left there... (weve already had media reports of Green having a hewted argument inside the garage about his driver not being given equal rights.)
As ive said before if Ferrari thought this was the way to go,then someone like a young barrichello or young massa should have been in that seat, not Kimi Raikkonen. Hes not going to play that role throughout the season specially when its also likely to be his last year in F1.

 

 

massive amount of exaggeration and inventive storytelling to be honest.

 

You don't want to be under/over cut you open a gap. Verstappen gapped Bottas by 1.4 seconds in one lap. If it wasn't for a slightly worse pitstop, he 'd be ahead.

 

With the pace Kimi was showing pre pitstop Ferrari had two options

 

a) cover Bottas/Verstappen with Vettel. Which obviously could easily lead to kimi p4 from p1. Cause he literally had no pace. None whatsoever. Your "assumption" that had Kimi stayed out longer he would have won is ... completely ad odds with reality.

 

b) cover Bottas/Verstappen with Kimi. Which is what they did.

 

The problem here is that whatever Ferrari did, a or b, it can be spun as Ferrari 'disadvantaging' Kimi. Which is BS. Kimi disadvantaged Kimi, nobody else. He lost 5 freaking seconds laping Button and Whowasit? Cause he wasn't aggressive enough to roll up on their gearbox and get a blue flag. Then he had no pace. At that point Kimi should be opening a 5 second gap to Vettel to secure P1, not loitering around doing 17s. That's what lost him the race.

[Hellenic tifosi]

Amen to that!

[abc]

Had Vettel stopped first the situation wouldve been reversed and KR wouldve come out ahead of him.

 

I very, very, very doubt that.

[wrcva]

swap the names, keep the numbers, and the rest (strategy so on) the same.  Seb starts P1 and Kimi P2...   It probably would not have looked good for Kimi to finish ahead. 

 

looking ahead, Ferrari has the car to win many races.  Kimi is #2.  He needs to focus * 2 and not make these decisions easy for the team to make... 

[ISLI]

I dislike Ferrari action. Far too early for teamoders. After maybe 10 or more races it can for myopinion be ok. I fear potentially nice season is now over and its one more 2 horse race this time diffrent teams thought. Poor thing for sports (some Hamilton / Vettel fan may be diffrent story). I haven't seen Kimi so Angry. Well only small part of F1 is sport and bigger part business. Bottas and Kimi would still have had fair change to WDC. Now it has been taken for sports fans. Sad day for sports. They never learn in Ferrari. Kimi changes in end of 2007 was in theory far lesser. We know outcome. Lets see how motivated Kimi is in future. I hope still bit.

[Hellenic tifosi]

I very, very, very doubt that.

 

Exactly.

 

Well, the data proves that Kimi was barely able to lap under 1:17 on used ultrasofts, while the same Kimi was able to go under 1:16 on the fresh supersofts. If the strategies were reversed it is safe to assume that Vettel would have been even further in front.

[grunge]

Not so objective to reality, if u ask me. Point 1 is pure speculation and what u say at point 2 about Kimi being ahead of Seb if they would have switched strategy is also doubtable - Kimi was lacking on speed and could nearly to 16s, so its more likely that Seb would have managed quicker times on new SS do make a undercut work to his favour.

I already stated my opinion on this in the long post before this. Your claim that Vettel wouldve made the undercut work as well is just imagination really. Had Vettel done that, he wouldve come behind Wehrlein and Button and would not have been able to out in any fast times until he got passed them, which means atleast 1 lap ruined... Kimi when given the information on the possible undercut threat, couldve possibly put in a mid 16s as his inlap and come in straight away..
Vettel even after all this stonking fast laps, a sec gained in oitlane and with kimi stuck behind Wer and But, only just edged past Kimi on his way out of the pits... Had he stopped forst, there is no possible way he wouldve come out in front..
My guess is he wouldve been around 3 secs behind KR when the latter rejoined the track. And i dont think its difficult to calculate.. He came out less than 1 sec ahead this way.. The time gained in pitlane alone explains that. Not take away the advantage he gained by putting in those fast laps once KR had pitted and add in the time lost behind But and Wer when hed come out and ud come to 3-4 sec defecit.

[BlackGold]

I already stated my opinion on this in the long post before this. Your claim that Vettel wouldve made the undercut work as well is just imagination really. Had Vettel done that, he wouldve come behind Wehrlein and Button and would not have been able to out in any fast times until he got passed them, which means atleast 1 lap ruined... Kimi when given the information on the possible undercut threat, couldve possibly put in a mid 16s as his inlap and come in straight away..
Vettel even after all this stonking fast laps, a sec gained in oitlane and with kimi stuck behind Wer and But, only just edged past Kimi on his way out of the pits... Had he stopped forst, there is no possible way he wouldve come out in front..
My guess is he wouldve been around 3 secs behind KR when the latter rejoined the track. And i dont think its difficult to calculate.. He came out less than 1 sec ahead this way.. The time gained in pitlane alone explains that. Not take away the advantage he gained by putting in those fast laps once KR had pitted and add in the time lost behind But and Wer when hed come out and ud come to 3-4 sec defecit.

Imagination? Its quite more likely than your point of view. You are now saying Kimi could have done mid 16s laps, pure speculation again. Also that Seb would have been stuck in traffic and couldn't do fast laps - pure speculation. Button waved Kimi over so would he with Seb, and that Seb is more aggressive in traffic than Kimi is nothing new. So like I said, its more likely that Seb would have made the undercut work for his favour - and than u guys would have come up with the next conspiracy that Ferrari gave Seb with the undercut the clear better strategy - its every race the same with these excuses.

Edited by BlackGold, 28 May 2017 - 22:11.

[grunge]

massive amount of exaggeration and inventive storytelling to be honest.

You don't want to be under/over cut you open a gap. Verstappen gapped Bottas by 1.4 seconds in one lap. If it wasn't for a slightly worse pitstop, he 'd be ahead.

With the pace Kimi was showing pre pitstop Ferrari had two options

a) cover Bottas/Verstappen with Vettel. Which obviously could easily lead to kimi p4 from p1. Cause he literally had no pace. None whatsoever. Your "assumption" that had Kimi stayed out longer he would have won is ... completely ad odds with reality.

b) cover Bottas/Verstappen with Kimi. Which is what they did.

The problem here is that whatever Ferrari did, a or b, it can be spun as Ferrari 'disadvantaging' Kimi. Which is BS. Kimi disadvantaged Kimi, nobody else. He lost 5 freaking seconds laping Button and Whowasit? Cause he wasn't aggressive enough to roll up on their gearbox and get a blue flag. Then he had no pace. At that point Kimi should be opening a 5 second gap to Vettel to secure P1, not loitering around doing 17s. That's what lost him the race.

One, i actually said the same thing about kimi not helping himself by opening up a bigger gap.
Secondly yer assumption about Vettel pitting first would lead to kimi being p4 is totally wrong.. Ferrari wouldve pitted Vettel in the lap that kimi did and then done the same for kimi on the very next lap.. KR had 5 plus secs over Bottas and co at that point... He wouldve churned out a 1,17 at worst and theyre no way bottas wouldve been able to claw away 5 secs of time in that one lap.

[Ricardo F1]

Always odd being on the West Coast of USA to read people drinking so early. 😂

Awkward podiums always bring the whole celebratory part of the day down too. You're spot on grunge.

Edited by Ricardo F1, 28 May 2017 - 22:14.

[grunge]

Imagination? Its quite more likely than your point of view. You are now saying Kimi could have done mid 16s laps, pure speculation again. Also that Seb would have been stuck in traffic and couldn't do fast laps - pure speculation. Button waved Kimi over so would he with Seb, and that Seb is more aggressive in traffic than Kimi is nothing new. So like I said, its more likely that Seb would have made the undercut work for his favour - and than u guys would have come up with the next conspiracy that Ferrari gave Seb with the undercut the clear better strategy - its every race the same with these excuses.

No, you clearly have nothing concrete to base yer counter argument on..
Fact no 1. Vettel wouldnt have had the advantage he gained by putting in quick laps after kimi pitted had he been pitted first. Simple

Fact no.2 Vettel wuldve come behind But and Wer... And there is no way he waz going to put in personal best sectors there no matter how easy theyd make it for him to pass.. he wouldve lost the first outlap navigating thru these guys.

Fact no. 3 KR couldve been brought in the very next lap after another 1,17s. He wouldve been in no danger of any undercut from bottas and co who were 5 secs behind when he pitted.

Fact no. 4 now remove the advantage of the laps he did after kimi pitted, add in the time lost behind backmarkers and anyone would be able to see that he was going to be behind kimi once the Finn rejoined after his stop

[Hellenic tifosi]

How can you be so sure that the back markers would have cost Vettel as much as they cost Kimi? Kimi was plain SLOW in dealing with traffic.

[BlackGold]

No, you clearly have nothing concrete to base yer counter argument on..
Fact no 1. Vettel wouldnt have had the advantage he gained by putting in quick laps after kimi pitted had he been pitted first. Simple

Fact no.2 Vettel wuldve come behind But and Wer... And there is no way he waz going to put in personal best sectors there no matter how easy theyd make it for him to pass.. he wouldve lost the first outlap navigating thru these guys.

Fact no. 3 KR couldve been brought in the very next lap after another 1,17s. He wouldve been in no danger of any undercut from bottas and co who were 5 secs behind when he pitted.

Fact no. 4 now remove the advantage of the laps he did after kimi pitted, add in the time lost behind backmarkers and anyone would be able to see that he was going to be behind kimi once the Finn rejoined after his stop

I would guess my arguments are very concrete. Its u who grasp one speculation to make the overcut work in Kimis favour.

 

1. that has nothing to do with your switched strategy

2. speculation that he would have lost that much time, as I said Button waved Kimo over and Seb is quite more aggressive in traffic than Kimi

3. u dont know if a 17s would have been enough to clear Seb - again pure speculation

4. again that has nothing to do with your switch strategy

 

So, that is not really impressive, to make a point

[Ricardo F1]

I don't get how people are denying this, it was so blatantly obvious!  I turned to my wife the minute they pulled Kimi in and said they were about to screw him.  It didn't take a soothsayer, and I have no magic crystal ball.

 

 

 

MONTE CARLO, Monaco -- Kimi Raikkonen was unable to explain the thinking behind his pit stop strategy at the Monaco Grand Prix, saying he had to trust in the Ferrari strategists' decision to change tyres when he did.

Kimi sure as hell has no idea why he was called in any more than people watching.

 

http://indianexpress...h-team-4678250/

Edited by Ricardo F1, 28 May 2017 - 22:35.

[Hellenic tifosi]

I don't get how people are denying this, it was so blatantly obvious! I turned to my wife the minute they pulled Kimi in and said they were about to screw him. It didn't take a soothsayer, and I have no magic crystal ball.

Kimi sure as hell has no idea why he was called in any more than people watching.

A look at the timing data and Kimi's inability to deal with traffic efficiently might help you change your mind.

[Ricardo F1]

A look at the timing data and Kimi's inability to deal with traffic efficiently might help you change your mind.

If someone can explain why he was called in then it might.  Maybe tomorrow after they've flummoxed him with charts and graphs he'll come out and say why. 

[LiJu914]

I don´t even see the whole point of that argument.

Was there a strategy, that might have secured Kimi´s P1 and VET´s P2? Most likely (but not that many scenarios)

But 1. It not Ferrari´s task to choose strategies in a way, that ultimately lead to giving one driver no chance at all to win the race (which is basically, what some in here are demanding). 2. Kimi´s strategy was decent. He was secured from any potential threat from other teams and given the opportunity to put in faster lap times than before. It just turned out that VET could go even faster in the meantime and that one guy had luck with traffic (Ericsson pitting just as VET closed in), while the other had not.

Edited by LiJu914, 28 May 2017 - 22:39.

[grunge]

Always odd being on the West Coast of USA to read people drinking so early. 😂
Awkward podiums always bring the whole celebratory part of the day down too. You're spot on grunge.

  

Beautifully put grunge ; thank you.

Thumbs up.

[BlackGold]

I don't get how people are denying this, it was so blatantly obvious!  I turned to my wife the minute they pulled Kimi in and said they were about to screw him.  It didn't take a soothsayer, and I have no magic crystal ball.

 

 

 

Kimi sure as hell has no idea why he was called in any more than people watching.

 

http://indianexpress...h-team-4678250/

Its obvious for anyone who likes to believe in these conspiracies - and we all know that especially Kimi fans and Seb haters like to do it

 

A lot of people explained very well in this thread, that there wasn't any TO. Its up to anyone to deal with reality or fantasy.  

[BlackGold]

If someone can explain why he was called in then it might.  Maybe tomorrow after they've flummoxed him with charts and graphs he'll come out and say why. 

Someone? You got the answer multiple times by different people. You don't like it? No problem, but there was a good reason to pit him.