32 replies to this topic

[Mrv]

Ferrrari are contemplating running a 3 stop strategy for the race tomorrow. Nothing has been decided and they are going to discuss the strategy this evening. They might opt to put 1 driver on a 3 and the other on a 2 stopper with an option for a 3 stopper. Michael has won two races in Hungary in the past on a 3 Stopper.

[Williams]

That would explain the +0.8 sec. gap to the pole time. I just hope Ferrari isn't making another silly strategy error like in Germany.

On the other hand that's what's needed to keep the WDC alive for another race or two

[schumigal]

I think it's too risky to do 3 stopper. 2 stopper is the answer.

[cygnus]

It would be silly for Ferrari to try anything like that w/ Michael, especially since the tyres didn't appear to look blistered during Friday sessions (pre-race setups).

Perhaps they'll do that for Rubens, hoping he can get around David .. perhaps MS will let RB lead the race, and then hand it over to him, ensuring a Ferrari 1-2 and WDC/WCC championship. Even that is a stretch ..

not a bad bet tho, any takers??

[LMG]

Williams going for a one-stopper? Both JPM and RS used harder compound today, didn't they?

Ferrari: well, MS on 2 stop and RB on three makes sense.

[mono-posto]

Originally posted by Williams
That would explain the +0.8 sec. gap to the pole time.

What does race strategy have to do with qualifying differentials?

[Williams]

Originally posted by mono-posto


What does race strategy have to do with qualifying differentials?

The huge gap could be explained by Michael running a soft compound in anticipation of running a three-stopper, while others run a harder compound in anticipation of running two-stoppers. I should have been clearer in my original post.

[Mrv]

Originally posted by Williams


The huge gap could be explained by Michael running a soft compound in anticipation of running a three-stopper, while others run a harder compound in anticipation of running two-stoppers. I should have been clearer in my original post.

Mclaren is on the same tires according to Murray Walker.

[Mrv]

Originally posted by LMG
Williams going for a one-stopper? Both JPM and RS used harder compound today, didn't they?

Ferrari: well, MS on 2 stop and RB on three makes sense.

A one stopper for Williams would be a complete disaster, as the car is not very quick around Hungary. They would be very far behind to have any benefit of it. Two stopper would make more sense.

[LMG]

Originally posted by Mrv


A one stopper for Williams would be a complete disaster, as the car is not very quick around Hungary. They would be very far behind to have any benefit of it. Two stopper would make more sense.

Agree. But why were they using the harder tyres. Maybe I'm just misinformed?

[Smooth]

Ferrari will run a two-stop. Trying any risky strategy would be stupid at this point.

Sorry, Mrv, I know you claim to have 'inside' info, but even the 'insiders' wouldn't let that one out.

[LeTurc]

Yes MS won with 3 stopper but dont forget that this was because David was blocked by backmarkers.

[Indian Chief]

Originally posted by Mrv


A one stopper for Williams would be a complete disaster, as the car is not very quick around Hungary. They would be very far behind to have any benefit of it. Two stopper would make more sense.

If they are on a 1 stopper and get past Barrichello at the start, they could finish on the podium. They have nothing to lose. This is just just their building year for 2002 and the championship, so why not try something radical?

[Williams]

Originally posted by Mrv


Mclaren is on the same tires according to Murray Walker.

Hmmm then do you have any ideas as to why there would be such a big gap ? It's unbelievable that McLaren have fallen that far behind.

[miniman]

The wide margin today was due to Ferrari's qualifying engine and Schummi's genius. I bet Ferrari will use the tried and proven old mill for the race tomorow.

[Boston Killer]

Nevermind the genuis, the eingine and the chassis did the job awesome

[Williams]

Originally posted by Captain Cook
[B]When somebody is driving the best car in the field, using a very good set-up and then makes no mistakes on their run, such gaps can be explained very easily.

All those slides and hesitations on the throttle add-up.

I am not saying you are wrong about the tyres. Michael could have simply been telling the truth in the post-race conference.

Did he say "to be honest" ? (just kidding)

Perhaps Michael could pull out such a gap on DC or Rubens performance alone. It would interesting to know what the problem is with Mika (other than the contract-negotiation blues), because I have no doubt that he could have pulled out such a lap, or something comparable, if he were on-form.

8/10ths of a second. Still very hard to believe, but if it is down to performance, it leads me to think that perhaps Hungary is a driver's track after all, contrary to thoughts expressed in another thread.

[LeTurc]

I am sure MS would make it 1 sec if he tried more.

For all those bashers claiming it was the car i would remember you that when Hakkinen want to work he is much faster than DC. So Mclaren with a not lazy Hakkinen should do better than DC for sure.

[WDC]

Originally posted by Williams
That would explain the +0.8 sec. gap to the pole time. I just hope Ferrari isn't making another silly strategy error like in Germany.

Maybe Ross was right when he said MS always goes faster after a good holiday. Sepang '99

[tifoso]

Originally posted by Williams
Did he say "to be honest" ? (just kidding)

Does, honestly count?;)

Q: Are you surprised how quickly you've gone in qualifying today?

Michael Schumacher: Yes, though we predicted certain lap times and we went much further than we thought, honestly. It was down to having a perfect lap, the car was sorted out in the morning just fantastically, 100 per cent and it couldn't have been better, honestly.

And again...

Q: You only did two runs, six laps, how important is it to save tyres for the race?

MS: It was not so much about saving tyres, honestly. It's simply that when you feel you have done the maximum and there's nothing you can do on the car and nothing you can do yourself, then you simply sit and wait, there's no point in wasting effort. That's what we did, just saved our energy.

Yet again...

Q: Michael, all the advantage seemed to come in the first two sectors - why should that be?

MS: I don't know any reason for it. It has been pretty much all weekend like that, honestly. We did actually struggle in the first and third sector yesterday, we were fast in the mid sector all the time, and today we got it together for all sectors.

And a 4th time...

Q: Can you maintain that advantage in race trim?

MS: I would be surprised honestly because I didn't come here and expect to have, whatever is the gap. We have seen often this year that when you get everything perfectly right you can do it and if, the other side, doesn't get everything perfectly right you can be quite a distance off. That's certainly bigger, this effect, than we have seen in the past sometimes. So I think that's where we are, we got everything perfectly together, I got a perfect lap in and that's what makes the difference and tomorrow over a long run distance it will be for sure tighter.

[RedFever]

"I just hope Ferrari isn't making another silly strategy error like in Germany."

I am still wondering when people will realize there was no silly strategy mistake in Germany.

Rubens was racing against McLaren, not Williams. There was no way he (or Schumi, for that matter) could beat JPM or Ralf in Hockenheim. The only real problem is that Ferrari experienced the same technical problem of JPM when Rubens pitted. He lost an enormity during his 2nd pit stop, otherwise the race strategy was right on. He passed DC and was flying away. Considering Rubens was light on fuel the entire race and that he would have had new tires at the end, most likely he would have finished ahead of Mika and DC, which was Ferrari's strategy.

It is laughable how people forget the pits incident and pretend to know better than Brawn, who, contrary to any AtlasF1 poster, mmmhhhh, has access to something called telemetry!!!!

[30ft penguin]

Originally posted by Williams
The huge gap could be explained by Michael running a soft compound in anticipation of running a three-stopper, while others run a harder compound in anticipation of running two-stoppers. I should have been clearer in my original post.

From what I heard in several races so far, the differences regarding life span between the various Bridgestone compounds are not that big this year. That is, there is no "soft" (as in "lasts ten laps") or "hard" (as in "lasts fifty laps") compound, there are only slight differences between them. The teams do not decide on a compound according to their strategy, they only look which compound suits their car the best, and then they stick with that compound.

Yesterday, the digital TV commentators talked about the Bridgestone compounds available for this race, and they mentioned that several teams explained to them that one compound is less prone to causing oversteer, i.e. it makes the car go smoothly through the twisty sections of the track and makes the car easier to drive, while the other compound offers the maximum grip and thus makes the car go real fast - if you can keep it on the track. But both compounds are supposed to last for the same amount of laps, more or less. So the teams will decide on the compound based on the general problems they have with their car. Car suffers from understeer ? Maybe try the "grip" compound. Car is a bitch to drive ? Try the "smooth gliding" compound. Maybe a bit exaggerated, but you get the point: in most cases, the tyre choice is a no-brainer for the teams, since one compound works much better on their car.

[Williams]

Thanks for the excellent explanation of the current tyre compounds 30ft. If tyres are not really the explanation for MS's speed, I am still a bit puzzled as to the explanation for the .8 second gap. If it is all down to perfect laps for MS and mistakes by all of the other top drivers in F1, then I am sorely disappointed at the current quality of drivers in F1, and MS surely deserves his title right now.

[skylark68]

Would a 3 stopper be plausibe for Rubens who could take off from the line like a rocket - He could then set up Michael for the win.

Ferrari have been fiddling with Rubens pit stops all year and with DC at the front, Ferrari need a fast start, which I don't think MS can do effectively, as compared with the McLaren's tomorrow.

They need Michael out clearly in front... how they do it, therefore, could be interesting.

Question - lets say Rubens or MS start with a 3 stop strategy in mind - how plausible is it that they could change to a 2 stopper????

[squiggle bob]

Originally posted by skylark68
Would a 3 stopper be plausibe for Rubens who could take off from the line like a rocket - He could then set up Michael for the win.

Ferrari have been fiddling with Rubens pit stops all year and with DC at the front, Ferrari need a fast start, which I don't think MS can do effectively, as compared with the McLaren's tomorrow.

They need Michael out clearly in front... how they do it, therefore, could be interesting.

Question - lets say Rubens or MS start with a 3 stop strategy in mind - how plausible is it that they could change to a 2 stopper????

it would be pretty easy to change to a two stopper.. say MS went out on a really light car, and only managed say 19 laps.. if he had a big enough lead to rejoin the race in the lead, ferrari could fuel him up through to lap 57, skipping the third stop around lap 38.. even if he didn't come out in to the lead, yet 2nd or 3rd.. but i think it would be best if he did rejoin in the lead.. BUT that puts him on 38 laps of fuel you say.. so what, its hungary and it would be hard to overtake him.. plus say DC was chasing him and he was on a two stop, he would need to pit around lap 25 so suddenly MS would have a significant lead again..

yet if DC were one stopping (unlikely i know) it would almost hand MS the WDC no matter how many stops he took..

all in all though, its too risky.. he would need to build up 20 seconds in 19 laps when DC might be able to keep close enough.. if they did start him on a 3 stopper, and it was close i would guess it would stay a 3 stopper all afternoon..

[skylark68]

Originally posted by squiggle bob
it would be pretty easy to change to a two stopper.. say MS went out on a really light car, and only managed say 19 laps.. if he had a big enough lead to rejoin the race in the lead, ferrari could fuel him up through to lap 57, skipping the third stop around lap 38.. even if he didn't come out in to the lead, yet 2nd or 3rd.. but i think it would be best if he did rejoin in the lead.. BUT that puts him on 38 laps of fuel you say.. so what, its hungary and it would be hard to overtake him.. plus say DC was chasing him and he was on a two stop, he would need to pit around lap 25 so suddenly MS would have a significant lead again..

yet if DC were one stopping (unlikely i know) it would almost hand MS the WDC no matter how many stops he took..

all in all though, its too risky.. he would need to build up 20 seconds in 19 laps when DC might be able to keep close enough.. if they did start him on a 3 stopper, and it was close i would guess it would stay a 3 stopper all afternoon..

This gets pretty tricky because I suspect they will put Rubens on an entirely different strategy.

If I had to guess, I would say Rubens would do a 3 stoppper and if possible, equip Michale for a 3 stopper but chnage to a 2 stopper, as per your analysis.

Of course, McLaren could strike back as well.

My feeling is that this start could influence the pit strategy and while pit strategy is one of those chess type thingies, as James Allen like to say, it may be that Ferrari has a different strategu for each driver, and a "fall back" strategy that they can use of needed.

My sense is that Ferrari wants this wrapped up now, as you would expect and as is obvious, but their preparation all weekend is very solid. I don't remember when Michael has been so forceful in practice - we get complaints that he is normally going through the motions, playing head games in practice and banging out the quick laps in qualifying. Not this weekend though.

As an overall impression, I suspect Ferrari is throwing the whole schebang out in order to secure the win.

The problem, of course, is that Rubens should have qualified second the way the cars were running. His third changes the strategies, I think, and it is that that I look forward to, other than heads up racing, if we can get that in Hungary.

[selena]

I am not a technical person but I think that MS should be on a two-stopper and RB on a three-stopper. As RB is starting from third on the grid, with a lighter fuel load, he can zoom off faster. The strategy is to get him in front of DC, hopefully.

[squiggle bob]

Originally posted by skylark68
The problem, of course, is that Rubens should have qualified second the way the cars were running. His third changes the strategies, I think, and it is that that I look forward to, other than heads up racing, if we can get that in Hungary.

i think ferrari have actually gained from having RB in third and not second to the point that perhaps it was even delibrate to keep RB behind DC.. if we as fans know that the track has a clean and dirty side which is significant, the teams know.. ferrari may have gone all out for MS to get pole, yet told rubens to just coast using the logic that the 3rd starting position is better than the 2nd..

and perhaps the reason MS's gap is so big is that no one wanted the 2nd position on the grid and they knew they couldn't come close to MS's time so they were all being gentlemen and saying "no really, you take the 2nd place"..

[Mrv]

Originally posted by Williams


Hmmm then do you have any ideas as to why there would be such a big gap ? It's unbelievable that McLaren have fallen that far behind.

I am not really surprised at the time, because all year the Mclaren has suffered from severe understeer. It just looked so ragged out there. Look how it goes over the kerbs in Hungary. In the past the Mclaren was so smooth, and the best car at riding the kerbs, but not this year. To get a great time in Hungary you have to ride those kerbs perfectly. I feel that Newey's design this year has been a disaster.

[Mrv]

Originally posted by miniman
The wide margin today was due to Ferrari's qualifying engine and Schummi's genius. I bet Ferrari will use the tried and proven old mill for the race tomorow.

Engine has no real importance in laptime in Hungary. You need a well balanced and setup car with very good downforce. Ferrari's qualifying engine didn't matter today.

[Mrv]

Originally posted by skylark68
Ferrari have been fiddling with Rubens pit stops all year and with DC at the front, Ferrari need a fast start, which I don't think MS can do effectively, as compared with the McLaren's tomorrow.

Are you saying that Mclaren's Launch control is better than Ferrari's? Have you been watching the races. Mclaren starts are like flipping a coin, do we get of the line or do we just sit on the grid. Schumacher has gotten away pretty quick in most races.

[klipywitz]

Who always does the 3 stops, experimental strategies at Ferrari?

Let me give you a hint, not Michael.

[Sid]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by skylark68
Ferrari have been fiddling with Rubens pit stops all year and with DC at the front, Ferrari need a fast start, which I don't think MS can do effectively, as compared with the McLaren's tomorrow.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Are you saying that Mclaren's Launch control is better than Ferrari's? Have you been watching the races. Mclaren starts are like flipping a coin, do we get of the line or do we just sit on the grid. Schumacher has gotten away pretty quick in most races.




mrv i think u have this wrong, macs lc might not be reliable but it is definitely second best to the williams

what i am really intrigued by is the dirty side of the track on which DC is going to start, there is obviously going to less grip and lets see what the lc software does and the macs might compensate DC's fuel load, should be interesting .... cant wait