2018 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[Big Tea]

What championships do you mean? Constructors and drivers?

Constructors: you win this one by having the two best drivers you can find and then forbid them to race eachother.

Drivers: you win this one by having the two best drivers, forbid them to race eachother until one starts to come out on top. (mostly due to reliability, some bad luck...) and then prioritize this driver as much as possible.

The thing we forget about this is how this optimum strategy is often against the character of the drivers. (cfr Vettel and Webber Multi 21)

Looking at how Kimi acts in the team, he's a perfect fit and does his job. Same goes for Bottas at Mercedes.

For this race: Kimi did his best, Vettel should have yielded to Hamilton and get the spot back on strategy. Or accept his P3 with Hamilton P2.

(And to be honnest, I don't think Vettel would be such a good teamplayer if he were the driver struck by bad luck this season and the one being .050 behind in some qualifying sessions earlier this season)

Drivers specifically, Constructor points is all on Vettel, who as you say should have slotted behind Hamilton and kept the fight going.

But how exactly "perfect fit" defending against Vettel helps the drivers championship?

And you are right Vettel would probably be just as selfish if not more, but when you perform like a doormat your attitude should match it, the worst possible thing is an underperforming driver with an ego, and that's what Kimi is right now.

With 2 cars up front they get many more options. Pitting one car makes the opposition have to cover off.
Had there been 2 Ferrari in front there would have been no 'hammer time' when one pitted as the lead car would still be plugging the bottle. In fact, it would probably be the reverse and the lead car (say Kimi) would back off a fraction to reduce the gap of the second car regaining the track. This car (say Seb) then gives it beanz so that when Hamilton pits later, he will probably come out behind.

Alternately if Ferrari were 1&2, one could 'run off' the other look after tyres etc. Although Bottas was close, he was not close enough to properly tail gun, so (long shot) Ferrari may have won, or even has 1&2.

[AnthonyG]

What championships do you mean? Constructors and drivers?

Constructors: you win this one by having the two best drivers you can find and then forbid them to race eachother.

Drivers: you win this one by having the two best drivers, forbid them to race eachother until one starts to come out on top. (mostly due to reliability, some bad luck...) and then prioritize this driver as much as possible.

The thing we forget about this is how this optimum strategy is often against the character of the drivers. (cfr Vettel and Webber Multi 21)

Looking at how Kimi acts in the team, he's a perfect fit and does his job. Same goes for Bottas at Mercedes.

For this race: Kimi did his best, Vettel should have yielded to Hamilton and get the spot back on strategy. Or accept his P3 with Hamilton P2.

(And to be honnest, I don't think Vettel would be such a good teamplayer if he were the driver struck by bad luck this season and the one being .050 behind in some qualifying sessions earlier this season)

Drivers specifically, Constructor points is all on Vettel, who as you say should have slotted behind Hamilton and kept the fight going.

But how exactly "perfect fit" defending against Vettel helps the drivers championship?

And you are right Vettel would probably be just as selfish if not more, but when you perform like a doormat your attitude should match it, the worst possible thing is an underperforming driver with an ego, and that's what Kimi is right now.

So far in 2018
Kimi: 3 DNF 164 points
Vettel: 1 DNF 225 points

Raikkonen is not underperforming. And the constructor's points are not all om Vettel. That's just a lie you make up here.

[Sevach]

So far in 2018
Kimi: 3 DNF 164 points
Vettel: 1 DNF 225 points

Raikkonen is not underperforming. And the constructor's points are not all om Vettel. That's just a lie you make up here.

Jeez, we have an understanding problem... Constructor points LOST at Monza were on Vettel.

Kimi hasn't won a single race, and that was his first pole with what many consider the best car on the grid, and has been beaten in just about every race where Sebastian didn't make a bad miastake.
That's not great performance no matter how you want to slice it.

He's too slow to be a lead driver, he performs like a lapdog he should act like a good compliant lapdog.

[diffuser]

What championships do you mean? Constructors and drivers?

Constructors: you win this one by having the two best drivers you can find and then forbid them to race eachother.

Drivers: you win this one by having the two best drivers, forbid them to race eachother until one starts to come out on top. (mostly due to reliability, some bad luck...) and then prioritize this driver as much as possible.

The thing we forget about this is how this optimum strategy is often against the character of the drivers. (cfr Vettel and Webber Multi 21)

Looking at how Kimi acts in the team, he's a perfect fit and does his job. Same goes for Bottas at Mercedes.

For this race: Kimi did his best, Vettel should have yielded to Hamilton and get the spot back on strategy. Or accept his P3 with Hamilton P2.

(And to be honnest, I don't think Vettel would be such a good teamplayer if he were the driver struck by bad luck this season and the one being .050 behind in some qualifying sessions earlier this season)

Drivers specifically, Constructor points is all on Vettel, who as you say should have slotted behind Hamilton and kept the fight going.

But how exactly "perfect fit" defending against Vettel helps the drivers championship?

And you are right Vettel would probably be just as selfish if not more, but when you perform like a doormat your attitude should match it, the worst possible thing is an underperforming driver with an ego, and that's what Kimi is right now.

So far in 2018
Kimi: 3 DNF 164 points
Vettel: 1 DNF 225 points

Raikkonen is not underperforming. And the constructor's points are not all om Vettel. That's just a lie you make up here.

Ferrari have two above average drivers that why he doesn't look like he's under performing. Put an ace in there and then you'd see.

[LM10]

Drivers specifically, Constructor points is all on Vettel, who as you say should have slotted behind Hamilton and kept the fight going.

But how exactly "perfect fit" defending against Vettel helps the drivers championship?

And you are right Vettel would probably be just as selfish if not more, but when you perform like a doormat your attitude should match it, the worst possible thing is an underperforming driver with an ego, and that's what Kimi is right now.

So far in 2018
Kimi: 3 DNF 164 points
Vettel: 1 DNF 225 points

Raikkonen is not underperforming. And the constructor's points are not all om Vettel. That's just a lie you make up here.

Ferrari have two above average drivers that why he doesn't look like he's under performing. Put an ace in there and then you'd see.

Are you joking?

[Zynerji]

So far in 2018
Kimi: 3 DNF 164 points
Vettel: 1 DNF 225 points

Raikkonen is not underperforming. And the constructor's points are not all om Vettel. That's just a lie you make up here.

Ferrari have two above average drivers that why he doesn't look like he's under performing. Put an ace in there and then you'd see.

Are you joking?

Just more hate... 5 WDC's don't seem to overcome his opinion, so what can you do but ignore?

[PhillipM]

I think many are forgetting here that Kimi hasn't always been in equal machinary this year either. And the last two races where he has he's been very, very fast indeed.

[diffuser]

Ferrari have two above average drivers that why he doesn't look like he's under performing. Put an ace in there and then you'd see.

Are you joking?

Just more hate... 5 WDC's don't seem to overcome his opinion, so what can you do but ignore?

He never had any pressure when he won and when an ACE (Ricardo) was placed next to him at RBR ... he faltered.

[alexx_88]

Mark Hughes' race report clarifies what happened I think. So he's saying that Kimi's pole lap triggered a "no team orders" clause in his contract. Vettel, was described by a lot of people as a "planner" and that, when things don't go as his plans, tends to lose focus and make mistakes. Given these pieces of information, I offer you this theory: Vettel knew that he wasn't going to get any help from the team or Kimi, so he probably set his mind to do it at the start or at least in the first lap, thinking that Kimi will get one of his trademark starts. But he didn't and this is where it began to fall apart for Seb. Instead of re-assessing the situation, he got desperate and tried to force his way past with two very clumsy moves. As per his plan of doing it all in the first lap

[Fulcrum]

So far in 2018
Kimi: 3 DNF 164 points
Vettel: 1 DNF 225 points

Raikkonen is not underperforming. And the constructor's points are not all om Vettel. That's just a lie you make up here.

Jeez, we have an understanding problem... Constructor points LOST at Monza were on Vettel.

Kimi hasn't won a single race, and that was his first pole with what many consider the best car on the grid, and has been beaten in just about every race where Sebastian didn't make a bad miastake.
That's not great performance no matter how you want to slice it.

He's too slow to be a lead driver, he performs like a lapdog he should act like a good compliant lapdog.

In the absence of overt team orders and well choreographed directives at the start, what exactly should Kimi have done differently? Are you suggesting that he should make the decision within himself to move over before he is asked to?

What racing driver with a pulse is going to do that? Even Massa wouldn't have done that for Alonso.

You state, repeatedly, that Raikkonen crowded out Vettel. Where did he do this?

Into the first chicane Raikkonen held the inside line, never moved off it, and left 30-50cm of space between himself and Vettel at all times. Into the Roggia chicane, Raikkonen was in front by some car lengths, assumed his line for the corner several hundred metres from the apex, and again never moved off that line. Vettel screwed himself by being in two minds - dive bomb his teammate or pay attention to Hamilton.

You are also vastly overstating Vettel's superiority.

Correcting for retirements, Raikkonen would have 195 points, 31 adrift of Vettel. Vettel is behind Hamilton by 30 points. Does that make Vettel Hamilton's lapdog then?

Given the limitations within which he operates - this is practically the first weekend where he has received overtly preferential treatment - he's doing as much as the team could hope for: he's beating Bottas, and scoring podiums consistently; more consistently than Vettel.

[Sevach]

So far in 2018
Kimi: 3 DNF 164 points
Vettel: 1 DNF 225 points

Raikkonen is not underperforming. And the constructor's points are not all om Vettel. That's just a lie you make up here.

Jeez, we have an understanding problem... Constructor points LOST at Monza were on Vettel.

Kimi hasn't won a single race, and that was his first pole with what many consider the best car on the grid, and has been beaten in just about every race where Sebastian didn't make a bad miastake.
That's not great performance no matter how you want to slice it.

He's too slow to be a lead driver, he performs like a lapdog he should act like a good compliant lapdog.

In the absence of overt team orders and well choreographed directives at the start, what exactly should Kimi have done differently? Are you suggesting that he should make the decision within himself to move over before he is asked to?

What racing driver with a pulse is going to do that? Even Massa wouldn't have done that for Alonso.

You state, repeatedly, that Raikkonen crowded out Vettel. Where did he do this?

Into the first chicane Raikkonen held the inside line, never moved off it, and left 30-50cm of space between himself and Vettel at all times. Into the Roggia chicane, Raikkonen was in front by some car lengths, assumed his line for the corner several hundred metres from the apex, and again never moved off that line. Vettel screwed himself by being in two minds - dive bomb his teammate or pay attention to Hamilton.

You are also vastly overstating Vettel's superiority.

Correcting for retirements, Raikkonen would have 195 points, 31 adrift of Vettel. Vettel is behind Hamilton by 30 points. Does that make Vettel Hamilton's lapdog then?

Given the limitations within which he operates - this is practically the first weekend where he has received overtly preferential treatment - he's doing as much as the team could hope for: he's beating Bottas, and scoring podiums consistently; more consistently than Vettel.

What i wanted is for him to leave the door wide open for Vettel, a Vettel win would've been better for Ferrari than a Kimi win, and that's exactly what i expected.

In terms of fair driving, ignoring championship concerns and the fact they work for the same team Kimi was fair, but both in the run to T1 and T3 he defended and made Vettel's life more difficult, which i thought was selfish and i'm gonna call him out on it.

The performance difference between Kimi and Vettel can't be overstated, the only races where Kimi finished infront where races where Vettel ran into some kind of problem, either self inflicted or by other means, Kimi is not championship winning material anymore that's the reality.

And yes Hamilton is taking Vettel to school, and proving to be the better more consistent performer, just like Vettel is compared to Kimi.

[diffuser]

Generally, the first couple of laps you're fighting tooth and nail. Think he was doing all he could to stay in front of Hamilton himself. Don't blaim Rai for Vettel's failure.

[marvin78]

Generally, the first couple of laps you're fighting tooth and nail. Think he was doing all he could to stay in front of Hamilton himself. Don't blaim Rai for Vettel's failure.

According to your own post: Wat was Vettels fault then? He fought tooth and nail as well. Yes, he lost the fight but is that an error? Because if you fight tooth and nails, you might as well loose some of them.

[Fulcrum]

Generally, the first couple of laps you're fighting tooth and nail. Think he was doing all he could to stay in front of Hamilton himself. Don't blaim Rai for Vettel's failure.

According to your own post: Wat was Vettels fault then? He fought tooth and nail as well. Yes, he lost the fight but is that an error? Because if you fight tooth and nails, you might as well loose some of them.

But he wasn't fighting smart considering the car advantage he had. Lewis knew he needed to pass Vettel to have any chance of winning.

Vettel didn't need to pass either Raikkonen or Hamilton, he could have trundled around quite securely in 3rd through the initial laps

[marvin78]

That applies for all the others. Hamilton also could have had more damage to the car so his fight was not so smart, too. The outcome does not reflect the smartness of the move. Tooth and nail is tooth and nail. Whoever does it.