Ferrari vs Ferrari in the Canadian GP

[zorro666]

In-Race Strategy yet proves to be Ferrari's Achilles Heel!
Sometimes it feels that we (Ferrari) ourselves manage to become our biggest threat!
Got very dissapointed with the lack of reaction from Ferrari in the closing laps of the Canadian Gran Prix.
It was obvious even from my sofa that we needed to pit as we were losing 4secs a lap on average with 7 laps to go.
Another half lap and we would be ninth!

Lewis was ab fab yet again for McLaren... if only he got on with Fernando...
Red Bull again did well with regards to their in-race reaction to the tyres going off and bagged more points than Fernando.
Second place was guaranteed and we blew it in spectacular style regardless of what Fernando says.

We seem to have sorted many issues that naturally arose with the parting of the Schumacher era (a massivo thanks to Pat and his genius) but we are weak when it comes down to taking initiative in live racing scenarios.
Instead of us shadowing the Reb Bulls or the McLarens why dont we act first and be shadowed instead?
If Fernado pitted for Supersofts 20 laps before the end (eventhough they were used) he had a chance of winning - and second guaranteed!
If only...

The car is visibly getting better but we still dont have enough raw pace.
Tyre deg is great compared to most teams but still not good enough.

It looks good for us guys but we have a lot of work to do and we need to catch up quickly now.
Lets give Fernado a break and at last a great car!

Forza Ferrari

[Hornet]

Well Red Bull was trying the one stop too. The problem is not trying out a different strategy, but the team's inability to respond to the changing situation.

Red Bull quickly responded when they realize the strategy was failing, Ferrari failed to do that.

[Kingdom Hearts]

Well Red Bull was trying the one stop too. The problem is not trying out a different strategy, but the team's inability to respond to the changing situation.

Red Bull quickly responded when they realize the strategy was failing, Ferrari failed to do that.

Yep that was the problem, nothing wrong with rolling the dice.

[JONNY F.2008]

for sure we chucked a podium.
i agree with the above statements.
maybe ldm will get the pit wall some education so they can see the same thing we all saw.
i also would like to highlight what was said above about being the one making the move and let others respond to what we do.
it was a great race full of what ifs.
i know i was out of my seat after that first stop when fred came out in front.

it is clear we are in better shape than the last few years though.

[Massimo181]

Totally agree with Zorro666 good read from your post.
If we had made our second pit stop Alonso was pumping in some good laps and had a good advantaged to make the stop and still come out to challenge Hamilton.
Then if Redbull had made their one stop they would have been left to suffer not us!
It was obvious from the start a one stop would have left you a sitting duck at the end! Do not need to be a high paid to work this one out it was said at the start!
The pitwall does need some management may be time for Flavio!

[sav_pap]

We wasted 8 nice and easy points (we could comfortably be 2nd) and the championship leading as well.
Good sign is that the car is getting more and more competitive and also easy to drive.
Massa's performance confirms it.
FORZA !!!! I can't wait for next GP.

[JONNY F.2008]

......
The pitwall does need some management may be time for Flavio!

i dont think we need to cheat to win this year.
leave flav and his speedos where they are.

[ferrari4life]

During the second stint.. the gap between Alonso and Ham was opening up.. Was this because of pure speed or the fact that Alonso was trying to conserve his tires.. If they had planned on a 2 stop then maybe Alonso would have pushed harder to be right with Ham and then as soon as Ham pitted and we saw the error we could have pitted and would have easily jumped him and stayed ahead of Grosjean.. Seeing previous races I am not sure why it would have been hard to imagine that we could have easily pased Vet on track even if they never pitted.. Finally After Ham pitted the second time he came out right in front of Grosjean so even if we pitted and came our after Grosjean we would have had fresher tires and been able to push him till the end to get back second place.
I really think this was poor planning on Ferrari's path.. However I guess if I tired had lasted like Grosjeans tires then maybe this would have all just been a wash..
Either way hind sight is 20-20 so its over lets get on with it.. I am not in the mood to bash Ferrari too much after seeing a great turnaround in the car performance this year. They are working hard and I am sure this will be the last we see of stupid decisions. Also lets not blame ferrari for this as I am sure Alonso was not on the horn arguing that he should be pitted right away.

[Red passion]

i dont think we need to cheat to win this year.
leave flav and his speedos where they are.

[Tobes]

I agree to a point, and obviously better to be pro-active in these changing situations than reactive, but I was under the impression that Fernando did a full race simulation on Friday and tires lasted ok, but by the time race day came round the temperatures has risen by a few degrees, this small change in the temperature meant the tires clearly didn't last as well as had been predicted, unfortunately the tires have such a massive part to play now that as long as you have a car that can keep the tires in a very narrow temperature band then you have a very good chance to win a race this year. It's easy in hindsight to say it was a poor call to leave Fernando out on a one-stop, but the only man on the podium that two-stopped was Lewis...

[zakfourie]

Agree with Tobes.

1. The high Sunday track temperature
2. It rained on Friday
3. It is a street circuit
All of this minor details told me that a 1 stop won't last...

We really need to be more aggressive with regards to this.

[FER]

100% disagree with the author:

In-Race Strategy yet proves to be Ferrari's Achilles Heel!

In Canada Ferrari made first In-race strategy mistake. Red Bull, Mercedes, Lotus and Mclaren did many more till now.

Got very dissapointed with the lack of reaction from Ferrari in the closing laps of the Canadian Gran Prix.
It was obvious even from my sofa that we needed to pit as we were losing 4secs a lap on average with 7 laps to go.

We lag behind progressively and you never knew how far would the rubber screw. You made your calculations in a time as it was too late for a pitstop, that would mean additional 20 sec. behind and even more places lost.

Red Bull again did well with regards to their in-race reaction to the tyres going off and bagged more points than Fernando.

Vettel 4th, Alonso 5th, what do you wanna say? You figured 2 points more is the gap between doing well and being the biggest threat. Hilarious.

We seem to have sorted many issues that naturally arose with the parting of the Schumacher era (a massivo thanks to Pat and his genius) but we are weak when it comes down to taking initiative in live racing scenarios.

Would you say this after Malaysia? Furthermore, would you say this even only 1 racing earlier before Canada? Obviously not, because you're posting this thread now and not earlier. You have to make a new definition of your problem.

Instead of us shadowing the Reb Bulls or the McLarens why dont we act first and be shadowed instead?

It's a matter of choice: you act or you react. If you think acting is the better choice, you maybe have forgotten Kimi with Intermediates waiting for rain.

If Fernado pitted for Supersofts 20 laps before the end (eventhough they were used) he had a chance of winning - and second guaranteed!

If Alonso had the degradation of Grosjean or Perez we wouldn't speak about chances, but we surely would get the win. And this was not predictable 20 laps earlier.

The car is visibly getting better but we still dont have enough raw pace.
Tyre deg is great compared to most teams but still not good enough.

We are the only team on the grid having a competitive car regardless conditions.

[sav_pap]

, but I was under the impression that Fernando did a full race simulation on Friday and tires lasted ok,

Perhaps but not 50 consecutive laps... IMO only Bridgestones of 2005 could last so many laps.

[FER]

Perhaps but not 50 consecutive laps... IMO only Bridgestones of 2005 could last so many laps.

Or the Pirellis 2012 on the Lotus of Grosjean and the Sauber of Perez :)

[coolrunnings_99]

I must agree with Fonzo on this one, wheter its the party line, PR stunt or his honest opinion.
I am proud we took the gamble, and it is my honest opinion.
Didnt work though, but its the right racing mindset, and it was the right time in season to do it.
Even if we gambled on second, its still okay.
Gambling and punching above your weight are quite similar, theres glory&rapture when it works, and then there is a serious slump when it fails.
The only crime being is taking it more seriouslly then racing a 600kg 800+ HP lawmower/go kart should be, and there is an example for this in not so recent GP, that finished us behind Petrov, and behind the WDC, against all odds.

And on a more techincal note, for the future with the benefit of hindsight, race simulations on Fridays dont mean didley sqat on Sundays, if yore on Pirelli tyres and cannot predict the future, up to a degree of Celsius, or the exact number of laps under possible pace cars..

[sav_pap]

Or the Pirellis 2012 on the Lotus of Grosjean and the Sauber of Perez :)

Perez pitted in lap 41. So 41 laps with first set and 29 with the second.
Grojean pitted in lap 21 and was cruising (not racing) to the end because he knew it from the beginning that he had no more pit stop. His fastest lap was 1.17.something while fastest lap by vett was 1.15.something.

[FER]

Perez pitted in lap 41. So 41 laps with first set and 29 with the second.
Grojean pitted in lap 21 and was cruising (not racing) to the end because he knew it from the beginning that he had no more pit stop.

Take a look at the 2nd sting times of Grosjean before figuring he was cruising and not racing.

[sav_pap]

Take a look at the 2nd sting times of Grosjean before figuring he was cruising and not racing.

When his fastest lap was 1.17.something that means that all his other laps were slower.
But let's say OK. Grojean did it with Lotus, 49 laps with just one set of tyres.
Can we compare the duration ability of the 2005 Bridgestones with this of the 2012 Pirellis????
Or better, in general and for all years, can we compare duration of Bridgestones with Pirellis ????
Pirelli had a special order to make the port more spectacular and less boring. So they brought the "Quick & Sudden Death Rubber" on their tyres.
This never could be happen in the Bridgestone era.

[FER]

We have another topic here. 49 laps with 1 set Pirellis brought Grosjean 2nd place, and would have brought Alonso a secure win.

[sav_pap]

would have brought Alonso a secure win.

Yes, but it didn't.

[sorcereur]

As much as I like the fact that Ferrari was going for the win, I still think they screwed the pooch on this call. But it's ok as long as they learn from this.
In the second stint, Hamilton maintained a gap or around 3.6secs to 4secs to Alonso. Be it Alonso taking it easy on his tyres or not, I don't know. But with the combination of traffic and Alonso picking up the pace before Hamilton's stop, the gap was down to about 2.5secs when Hamilton dived for the pits. McLaren's stop was 4.1secs. Alonso then proceeded to setting is fastest lap at that point. His lap time was almost 2 full secs faster than Hamilton's out lap because Hamilton took longer to get heat in his tires. Alonso's next lap was again that much quicker than Hamilton's. On his 3rd lap (2nd full lap), Hamilton then set a purple sector.
While watching the race, I was sure Ferrari would've called Alonso in at this point because he had clawed back the 2.5secs Hamilton had on him during Hamilton's out lap alone, and created enough of a gap to come out in front of Hamilton during the 2nd lap... unless they had a slow stop. But Ferrari's stops were in the low 3secs this race consistently, and I believe they would've pulled it off. At worst, Alonso would've come out side by side with Hamilton. Even if Vettel was on a 1 stop strategy, the pace Ferrari would've had on fresh rubber would've allowed them to pass Vettel well before the end.
Frankly I wasn't watching the lotus's pace early on, but to me that was irrelevant because we know how easy they are on their tires. Sauber included. So using them for comparison is ridiculous in my book, unless Ferrari is confident they are now just as kind on their tires. The one stop strategy in my book was the safe strategy and not the winning one. Whereas putting Alonso on brand new tires and allowing him to go all out was the more aggressive one, but surer way of winning. I actually believe he would've had the pace to take the fight to Hamilton in the closing stages because the McLaren is harder on its tires.
Anyway, 13 races to go and despite all this I still applaud Ferrari for their work so far this season. I hope they've learned from this race because the final race of the season may very well be the championship deciding race, and they may be presented with similar choices. Let's hope they make the right ones then, and not repeat Abu Dhabi 2010...

[FER]

Yes, but it didn't.

So what?

[raylinds]

I think it's time to move on to the next race.

[JONNY F.2008]

I think it's time to move on to the next race.

i think so too. and not soon enough.

lazy sods should have to race EVERY weekend..........()(joke)

[zorro666]

100% disagree with the author:



In Canada Ferrari made first In-race strategy mistake. Red Bull, Mercedes, Lotus and Mclaren did many more till now.



We lag behind progressively and you never knew how far would the rubber screw. You made your calculations in a time as it was too late for a pitstop, that would mean additional 20 sec. behind and even more places lost.



Vettel 4th, Alonso 5th, what do you wanna say? You figured 2 points more is the gap between doing well and being the biggest threat. Hilarious.



Would you say this after Malaysia? Furthermore, would you say this even only 1 racing earlier before Canada? Obviously not, because you're posting this thread now and not earlier. You have to make a new definition of your problem.



It's a matter of choice: you act or you react. If you think acting is the better choice, you maybe have forgotten Kimi with Intermediates waiting for rain.



If Alonso had the degradation of Grosjean or Perez we wouldn't speak about chances, but we surely would get the win. And this was not predictable 20 laps earlier.



We are the only team on the grid having a competitive car regardless conditions.

[zorro666]

No matter how people react to this or any other thread, we have to remember that we ALL support Ferrari and want them to do well!
Ferrari did poorly on the Canadian GP bearing on mind that this season will probably be won by a point or two!
However a discussion is a discussion and everybody's opinion is as valid as the next one.

Funny enough though please do read this on BBC F1:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/18427377

Forza scuderia

[raylinds]

i think so too. and not soon enough.

lazy sods should have to race EVERY weekend..........()(joke)

[FER]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/18427377

We all are very smart after the race, no?

[Tifoso]

i think so too. and not soon enough.

lazy sods should have to race EVERY weekend..........()(joke)

Hahahaha

I bet Bernie is working on it. I expect the announcement of the Antarctica GP at any moment.

[REDARMYSOJA]

i think so too. and not soon enough.

lazy sods should have to race EVERY weekend..........()(joke)

I still want my 24/7 F1 series. Make it happen Bernie!