[Official] Singapore Grand Prix 2015: Weekend Thread

[FIRE]

According Dutch journalist:
Franz Tost said they thought Sainz would be quicker than Verstappen because the latter was on older tires. He admitted Verstappen made right decision to not let Sainz by.

[stripedcat]

Fingerman got a well deserved victory today. Apparently, the Ferrari's engine now has the same power output as the Mercedes - it's just not got the aero of the Mercs - yet. If that's the case - it could make the next few races interesting. Could Ferrari be challenging at Suzuka? We'll have to wait and see. I know Vettel has hinted at going for the WDC - but, the Mercs seem very strong - except for Singapore track.

[chunterer]

Bernie Bernie Bernie!!!

It's so obvious it's laughable!

[gert]

They really really need to look at the safety car procedures

* They took far longer than necessary - especially the second one
* Why send out a safety car if you fix things with a local yellow or a full course yellow?
* letting Verstappen get his lap back after he started a lap behind the field was ridiculous

[mikuni]

The stuff up with letting the Manors get up through the field but then decide they were taking too long pulling the car in was bazaar. I think it is time to get rid of that rule and instead drop the lap cars to the back of the group, hard luck if you are a fast car but a lap down, as Max was today.

[TrapezeArtist]

I also am at a loss to understand why they apply the virtual safety car (which avoids depriving a leading driver of the lead he has built) and then bring out the safety car anyway. I can't help feeling there is someone in a position of power who likes safety cars, and wants to undermine the VSC.

Then we get another safety car for a plonker who has managed to walk onto the track. He's off the track again before the safety car even gets going and then we have to wait several laps (not sure how many due to watching BBC highlights programme) while they shuffle the cars around. They fail to shuffle them into the "correct" order but re-start the race anyway.

The virtual safety car (there has to be a better name) was a sensible concept which should avoid all the unfairness and lottery of the safety car. As usual with the FIA though, the application falls well short of the concept. It should slow car down sufficiently that marshals can work on the track. How about going round on the pitlane speed limiter? If that's too fast, it wouldn't be difficult to build a second lower speed limit into the software. As a further refinement, perhaps the speed limiter could be applied just to the part of the track where it's needed, leaving cars to race on the rest of the lap. Thereby giving as many of the paying customers the thing they have paid for: cars racing.

[TrapezeArtist]

Toro Rosso opened up the team orders can-of-worms again. On the whole, I'm glad Verstappen held on because it stuck two fingers up to the odious practice (though I have to admit I would be somewhat displeased if an employee of mine publicly flouted an instruction like that).

I thought the interview with Eddie Jordan was amusing. EJ comes in with a pretty agressive line of questioning about the team orders. Verstappen stands there like a naughty boy facing the headmaster, and for a moment I thought he was going to burst into tears. His well-reasoned defence of his position came as something of a disappointment.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

I also am at a loss to understand why they apply the virtual safety car (which avoids depriving a leading driver of the lead he has built) and then bring out the safety car anyway. I can't help feeling there is someone in a position of power who likes safety cars, and wants to undermine the VSC.

Then we get another safety car for a plonker who has managed to walk onto the track. He's off the track again before the safety car even gets going and then we have to wait several laps (not sure how many due to watching BBC highlights programme) while they shuffle the cars around. They fail to shuffle them into the "correct" order but re-start the race anyway.

The virtual safety car (there has to be a better name) was a sensible concept which should avoid all the unfairness and lottery of the safety car. As usual with the FIA though, the application falls well short of the concept. It should slow car down sufficiently that marshals can work on the track. How about going round on the pitlane speed limiter? If that's too fast, it wouldn't be difficult to build a second lower speed limit into the software. As a further refinement, perhaps the speed limiter could be applied just to the part of the track where it's needed, leaving cars to race on the rest of the lap. Thereby giving as many of the paying customers the thing they have paid for: cars racing.

I watched the race live and the SC was out for a long time. I went off to do something, came back and the SC was still out. Initially I thought it another caution period but it was the same one.

I don't know what it is about F1, whether it's the SC, restarts or the plethora of tyre compounds but they manage to really over complicate everything.

[S griffin]

What about Hulkenberg being given a grid penalty without even interviewing him first? Odd

[Trev Campbell]

For the supposed pinnacle of motor sport Formula 1's implementation of the Safety Car is a joke. For both incidents on the weekend the Safety Car should have been out for a Maximum of about 3 laps each. Hulkenburg's car was within 10 - 20 meters of a recovery vehicle. Once the field was under control pick up the car job done. For the idiot spectator. The vision showed him leaving the circuit, Once he was under arrest the cars should have been release. This letting the car a lap down get a lap back is a time consuming joke. These are the best drivers in the world. I'm sure they can overtake a back marker.

[johnh875]

Originally Posted by Trev Campbell

This letting the car a lap down get a lap back is a time consuming joke. These are the best drivers in the world. I'm sure they can overtake a back marker.

Agreed. Leave the effect of the SC (closing up gaps etc) as a lottery, or implement a virtual SC. The 100km/h pit lane limiter might not be appropriate for some corners where race speed isn't much faster, but I'm sure they can work something out.

When Vettel said "tell them to make the SC go faster", did it have any effect?

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by mikuni

The stuff up with letting the Manors get up through the field but then decide they were taking too long pulling the car in was bazaar. I think it is time to get rid of that rule and instead drop the lap cars to the back of the group, hard luck if you are a fast car but a lap down, as Max was today.

What I've been saying for a long time, it's hardly earned gaining the lap back like that

Initially I was thinking Lewis couldn't have picked a better race to have his first DNF with Rosberg only fourth, but seeing the gap to Vettel probably not now.

[chillibowl]

so have heard the guy was drunk and looking to take a picture...any official story of what his deal was?

[S griffin]

Maybe it was Nelson Piquet trying to help someone again!

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Maybe it was Nelson Piquet trying to help someone again!

nice one!

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by S griffin

What about Hulkenberg being given a grid penalty without even interviewing him first? Odd

IMO it was a racing indicent. No need to punish someone.

[gert]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

Toro Rosso opened up the team orders can-of-worms again. On the whole, I'm glad Verstappen held on because it stuck two fingers up to the odious practice (though I have to admit I would be somewhat displeased if an employee of mine publicly flouted an instruction like that).

Not sure, I think the reasoning from the team was that
* Verstappen had had a few laps to try and pass Perez but couldn't get it done.
* Sainz has newer tires (Verstappen had a used set, Sainz a new)
* let's try and see if Sainz can get by
* if not, we expect him to give the position back to Verstappen

I think it was more about maximizing the team's result rather than handing an advantage to one of their drivers
After all, if your ambition is to finish 5th in the constructors championship, then it's important to take points from the current 5th placed team (= Force India)

Red Bull has also done it (at least twice) before and ordered the driver that was let by to give the position back later on if they couldn't pass either.

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by gert

Not sure, I think the reasoning from the team was that
* Verstappen had had a few laps to try and pass Perez but couldn't get it done.
* Sainz has newer tires (Verstappen had a used set, Sainz a new)
* let's try and see if Sainz can get by
* if not, we expect him to give the position back to Verstappen

I think it was more about maximizing the team's result rather than handing an advantage to one of their drivers
After all, if your ambition is to finish 5th in the constructors championship, then it's important to take points from the current 5th placed team (= Force India)

Red Bull has also done it (at least twice) before and ordered the driver that was let by to give the position back later on if they couldn't pass either.

It's all a bit contrived though, isn't it? Such things are a hanging offence in most other top-line sports.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

It's all a bit contrived though, isn't it? Such things are a hanging offence in most other top-line sports.

In what top line sport do you get "let the other bloke win"?

I thought that was called match fixing!

[chillibowl]

arguably this is a common phenomenon in every form of team racing.

on a seperate point, as Ferrari focus their efforts behind one driver, a team oriented strategy is the only hope we have to see a championship go down to the wire.

im totally ok with team orders.

[mikuni]

Originally Posted by wnut

In what top line sport do you get "let the other bloke win"?

I thought that was called match fixing!

THEY ARE A TEAM.

All great sports teams play as a team. All poor ones don't.

[steve nielsen]

Tost explains the teamorder situation:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/120918

[steve nielsen]

Originally Posted by gert

Not sure, I think the reasoning from the team was that
* Verstappen had had a few laps to try and pass Perez but couldn't get it done.
* Sainz has newer tires (Verstappen had a used set, Sainz a new)
* let's try and see if Sainz can get by
* if not, we expect him to give the position back to Verstappen

I think it was more about maximizing the team's result rather than handing an advantage to one of their drivers
After all, if your ambition is to finish 5th in the constructors championship, then it's important to take points from the current 5th placed team (= Force India)

Red Bull has also done it (at least twice) before and ordered the driver that was let by to give the position back later on if they couldn't pass either.

Sainz was never close enough to Max to even try to overtake and was not fast enough on his newer tires.

and as we all could see very clearly Max had less difficulty getting past other cars than Sainz(as Sainz had to force both Lotus drivers off track to pass them and was lucky not to get a penalty for that)

[chunterer]

Originally Posted by steve nielsen

Sainz was never close enough to Max to even try to overtake and was not fast enough on his newer tires.

and as we all could see very clearly Max had less difficulty getting past other cars than Sainz(as Sainz had to force both Lotus drivers off track to pass them and was lucky not to get a penalty for that)

That's not really what happened though is it. Max passed a car and pulled a gap when Carlos was stuck, then when Carlos passed, he caught up again. It was just a typical see-saw or yo-yo effect.

Sainz did seem to be a bit quicker in clean air even if it was only due to having newer rubber.

No doubt you'll supply endless reams of data about fastest laps and overtaking ability to counter that though.

[steve nielsen]

Originally Posted by chunterer

That's not really what happened though is it. Max passed a car and pulled a gap when Carlos was stuck, then when Carlos passed, he caught up again. It was just a typical see-saw or yo-yo effect.

Sainz did seem to be a bit quicker in clean air even if it was only due to having newer rubber.

No doubt you'll supply endless reams of data about fastest laps and overtaking ability to counter that though.

I don't have to, the simple fact is that Carlos was 1.4 seconds behind Max at the finish(and Max was 6 tenths behind Perez)

if Sainz can not get within 1 second of Max, how could he have ever overtaken Perez?