2021 AMG Mercedes F1 Team

[Tvetovnato]

I don’t think they have hidden radio messages between the driver and engineer when using the onboard camera on F1 TV during the races. I followed Lewis at that part of the race, and sure he questioned them, but they were really not persuasive as to why he should pit, just as El Scorchio mentions above, at least not adamant. Of course Lewis has limited info on what’s happening, so the team needs to be extremely clear of what happens and why. Communication is a two way street, so both driver and team will hopefully learn from this. Could have been much worse considering the circumstances. A win next race brings him back to the top again. And with a much improved PU, it’s not unlikely that it will happen.

[PlatinumZealot]

... FWIW the team should back their best driver or at least put it in his hands in a better car to get past Perez ...

The team DID back their best driver when he said that he could stay out. The only one who dithered was Lewis. If he'd have come in when the team told him to in the first place he would have very possibly have been on the podium, he didn't, he argued with them for several laps.

That's 2 races in a row now where a driver has overruled his team and paid the price. Yet in both circumstances, the team gets blamed by fans...??

He doesn't know the full picture from in the cockpit. He only knows how he is getting on and how he feels with the tyres at that moment, so I'd not say he was dithering- just that he was comfortable with his own pace and the feel of the tyres. Obviously we don't hear everything, but it seemed to me like he was unaware that by doing that he was getting into that position. It's where the team have to fill him in on the bigger picture of the race which (at least from what we hear) they don't always seem to do fully or convincingly. If they'd have said 'we need to mirror Perez or you'll lose places- you WILL be able to overtake him on track on new tyres' then he's obviously going to come in. Or even if it's not strictly true, say 'These tyres won't last until the end of the race'. It probably is difficult for the team to overrule someone like him given his experience and that his instincts are usually correct- and for him then it becomes hard to trust their judgement when they have made bad calls several times in the past and cost him points.

You are probably right that the fault lies a little between them, (we are also talking about 'backing' in slightly different terms) but the team has to make it crystal clear to him what the situation is and what the ramifications are of staying out or going in are. We can't know exactly what was said, but from what we did hear, they hardly put a convincing argument forward to him for coming in, even when it was obvious from the timings that it was the wrong call.

Bingo! Just like the case of Norris the engineers could have done a better job of communicating ths consequences to the driver. I can't blame the driver for working with the information he has. It is the engineer's job to feed more convincing data to the driver. If the driver still ignores it well that driver is a dumbass! Lol

[RZS10]

To see his perspective one has to look at his laptimes, he wasn't losing any pace in the entire second half of that stint until they pitted him, so he probably felt confident that he could keep it up. Ocon was dropping off at that time already. [source]



Just from lap 36 to 50, the trend is ~ 1/100th of a second slower per lap. (faster lap45 excluded)


He was 10.410s ahead of Leclerc and 11.096s ahead of Perez when he pitted, Perez overtook Leclerc on the next lap - so assuming the tyres would not have disintegrated, how big could his loss of pace have been without losing positions?

With the continuing trend of not really losing any pace he would have just lost ~7s to Leclerc but ~12s to Perez who would have been on his tail on lap 56 whilst being 2s/lap faster - so even without a drop in pace he most likely would have lost the position to at least Perez.

[gap in s on (y), laps on (x) ]

This would have been the gaps if Lewis had experienced the same absolute loss of time as Ocon (without that one outlier).


LEC catching him on the last lap whilst being 3s/lap faster.

He could have kept P4 with losing 0.15s relative to the previous lap


In any case Gasly and Norris were too far away, unless the tyres would have completely gone off the cliff.

So it would have been a gamble for P3, which would have been near impossible to defend, with a possible P4 finish instead of the safe P5 or in other words for two points with risking a DNF...

edit:
the Merc computers predicted that he would have dropped behind Gasly and Norris, which would mean their data suggested an even bigger loss of laptime than Ocon had.

[El Scorchio]

To see his perspective one has to look at his laptimes, he wasn't losing any pace in the entire second half of that stint until they pitted him, so he probably felt confident that he could keep it up. Ocon was dropping off at that time already. [source]

https://i.imgur.com/hQ9wRjy.png

Just from lap 36 to 50, the trend is ~ 1/100th of a second slower per lap.
https://i.imgur.com/KW506PV.png

He was 10.410s ahead of Leclerc and 11.096s ahead of Perez when he pitted, Perez overtook Leclerc on the next lap - so assuming the tyres would not have disintegrated, how big could his loss of pace have been without losing positions?

With the continuing trend of not really losing any pace he would have just lost ~7s to Leclerc but ~12s to Perez who would have been on his tail on lap 56 whilst being 2s/lap faster - so even without a drop in pace he most likely would have lost the position to at least Perez.
https://i.imgur.com/2fuSHHf.png
[gap in s on (y), laps on (x) ]

This would have been the gaps if Lewis had experienced the same absolute loss of time as Ocon (without that one outlier).
https://i.imgur.com/4HiBeKh.png

LEC catching him on the last lap whilst being 3s/lap faster.

He could have kept P4 with losing 0.15s relative to the previous lap
https://i.imgur.com/bHItQJl.png

In any case Gasly and Norris were too far away, unless the tyres would have completely gone off the cliff.

So it would have been a gamble for P3, which would have been near impossible to defend, with a possible P4 finish instead of the safe P5 or in other words for two points with risking a DNF...

Great analysis. In hindsight (and to be honest it seemed so during the race as well) the best option must have been to mirror Perez rather than staying out until the end - which probably wasn't ever viable - or doing what they did, which was not commit to anything and presumably praying for a safety car or the track to miraculously dry out enough for another car to try slicks, leaving him in absolute no man's land.

They were either trying to be too clever, or leaving everything to a gamble that never paid off. I'd have thought their data (and common sense going on what was witnessed in the first stint) would have suggested on like for like tyres he'd have got Perez and finished third at worst.

As an aside, anyone noticed they've stopped showing the tyre life graphic? I'd have thought that race was the perfect opportunity for it.

[Just_a_fan]

To see his perspective one has to look at his laptimes, he wasn't losing any pace in the entire second half of that stint until they pitted him, so he probably felt confident that he could keep it up. Ocon was dropping off at that time already. [source]

https://i.imgur.com/hQ9wRjy.png

That is remarkably consistent pace on tyres that were, on the face of it, well past their best. It seems to show how good he is at maintaining pace and tyres at the same time.

[Shrieker]

To see his perspective one has to look at his laptimes, he wasn't losing any pace in the entire second half of that stint until they pitted him, so he probably felt confident that he could keep it up.

Nice work !

I think in hindsight, the best strategy was to pit right after Perez, and take it easy on the new inters on the first few laps while they went thru the graining phase. He could've had another go at Perez towards the end that way.

But both Hamilton and the pitwall were banking on a switch to slicks so they stayed out, but it kept raining ever so slightly, meaning the track was never dry enough for slicks. At the time, I think it was a gamble worth taking, because the track was drying all race long.

[ringo]

... FWIW the team should back their best driver or at least put it in his hands in a better car to get past Perez ...

The team DID back their best driver when he said that he could stay out. The only one who dithered was Lewis. If he'd have come in when the team told him to in the first place he would have very possibly have been on the podium, he didn't, he argued with them for several laps.

That's 2 races in a row now where a driver has overruled his team and paid the price. Yet in both circumstances, the team gets blamed by fans...??

He doesn't know the full picture from in the cockpit. He only knows how he is getting on and how he feels with the tyres at that moment, so I'd not say he was dithering- just that he was comfortable with his own pace and the feel of the tyres. Obviously we don't hear everything, but it seemed to me like he was unaware that by doing that he was getting into that position. It's where the team have to fill him in on the bigger picture of the race which (at least from what we hear) they don't always seem to do fully or convincingly. If they'd have said 'we need to mirror Perez or you'll lose places- you WILL be able to overtake him on track on new tyres' then he's obviously going to come in. Or even if it's not strictly true, say 'These tyres won't last until the end of the race'. It probably is difficult for the team to overrule someone like him given his experience and that his instincts are usually correct- and for him then it becomes hard to trust their judgement when they have made bad calls several times in the past and cost him points.

You are probably right that the fault lies a little between them, (we are also talking about 'backing' in slightly different terms) but the team has to make it crystal clear to him what the situation is and what the ramifications are of staying out or going in are. We can't know exactly what was said, but from what we did hear, they hardly put a convincing argument forward to him for coming in, even when it was obvious from the timings that it was the wrong call.

Right. Im a fan but i blamed Lewis. But can he be blamed for not being able to know a future with 100 variables?
The team is not to blame either. But what is to be blamed is the engineer to driver relationship.
Theyre too nice to each other. Bonna needs to be like Rob Smeddley and tell lewis pit now!!!

[Morteza]

[Big Tea]

One for our tyre experts please. Do 'scrubbed' inters still degrade as badly as fitting new inters?

[NL_Fer]

To see his perspective one has to look at his laptimes, he wasn't losing any pace in the entire second half of that stint until they pitted him, so he probably felt confident that he could keep it up. Ocon was dropping off at that time already. [source]

I watched a replay of the laptiming and there was never a drop in laptime, right until the last sectors, before the his stop. Also the others (VER, BOT, PER) never experienced graining and a dip in performance on the new inters, after they fitted them. Probably, because the track was still wetter than. There was even some light rain after those pitstops, around lap 45. And even LeClerc started to drop after 3 laps on his new inters.

So indeed, there was never any indication for performance drop on old inters, nor did the other drivers experience a dip on the new inters. The team never new, that new inters would grain and dip, if fitted that late in the race, with a drying track. So they never insisted on Hamilton to pit together with the others and he felt the car was drivable and as fast as the others on new inters.

So the idea, that stopping around lap 40-45 was the best strategy, is just with the hindsight knowledge. The nobody --- up, it just didn’t work out as they wanted. Than at last took the save option.

[RZS10]

Well in the debrief they said in retrospect 36/37 would have been ideal, which was when Verstappen or Perez and Bottas pitted - there was graining for the others as well but not as bad.
IIRC the first call came on lap 42 which already wasn't ideal, he had already lost a few seconds to Perez by then, however he was still almost matching those who switched to new inters when the call came - he kept the gap at around 15s for a few laps during Perez' graining phase and the latter just started picking up the pace three laps after the initial call.


[(x) laps - (y) gap in s]

I believe it's fair to assume that Lewis would have been capable of the pace Sainz had towards the end, with a few laps of light graining and being 3-5s behind Perez after the stop he would have caught up by lap 48-50 leaving 8-10 laps in order to try to gain the position.

[adrianjordan]

There's a decent analysis by Palmer on the F1 YouTube channel where he basically says that Fifth was about where Lewis would have finished whether he pitted or not, with an outside chance of finishing higher had he pitted earlier but that Merc were seeing tyre temp data that worried them and so they pitted as much to prevent him losing a place to Gasly as they did because they were worried he might be heading for a tyre failure.

[El Scorchio]

Well in the debrief they said in retrospect 36/37 would have been ideal, which was when Verstappen or Perez and Bottas pitted - there was graining for the others as well but not as bad.
IIRC the first call came on lap 42 which already wasn't ideal, he had already lost a few seconds to Perez by then, however he was still almost matching those who switched to new inters when the call came - he kept the gap at around 15s for a few laps during Perez' graining phase and the latter just started picking up the pace three laps after the initial call.

https://i.imgur.com/V6YZf73.png
[(x) laps - (y) gap in s]

I believe it's fair to assume that Lewis would have been capable of the pace Sainz had towards the end, with a few laps of light graining and being 3-5s behind Perez after the stop he would have caught up by lap 48-50 leaving 8-10 laps in order to try to gain the position.

I agree with that. I think had they mirrored Perez, he'd have got him in the second stint and finished third in the race. Especially if the Mercedes is as 'dominant' as some people seem to keep trying to insist it is.

I haven't watched the Palmer analysis, but on the face of it I can't understand why he thinks there would only be an outside chance of finishing higher than fifth if he mirrored Perez. Race pace, hindsight and common sense suggests otherwise.

[pursue_one's]

Lewis is now on his 4th ICE of the season, and Wolff has not ruled out the possibility of having to use another, though hopes that the current one will be sufficient.

"It [4th ICE] can last until the end of the season but there could be a moment where we say is it worth taking a fresh one(5th ICE) because the other one is still at risk," Wolff said.

https://racingnews365.com/wolff-wary-of ... ampionship

Michael Schmidt:
" There is almost nothing left in Hamilton's engine pool. The first engine broke down at Zandvoort. The second debuted in Baku, where they took the turbo, MGUHand MGU-K to combine them with the fourth (new) ICE. The third engine is no longer considered capable of doing a race distance, despite the fact that it only has done three races. If you look at the recent engine situation at Mercedes, it that can never be enough.The fourth engine has to last for seven races now. None of the Mercedes engines have done that so far this year."

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/for ... on-pannen/

[Gillian]

So Hamilton has a fresh ICE with all other components that have been used since Baku? And one 'friday' PU which can't be used for a race anymore?