Post by larkim Post by Mark Jackson Post by larkim
That was what my living room perspective was, that both Vettel and
Bottas had to build a gap more than a pit stop over Kimi to prevent
Kimi from holding track position when they both made their second
stops for tyres.
Neither the Mercedes (nor the Ferraris) were on a two-stop strategy -
their plans were soft/medium for the distance. This was clear to
many, including the Sky commentators, at the time.
Really? I know they had to dice a fair bit due to the bunched up SC outcome
but given Vettel's pursuit of Bottas and Bottas hunting down Raikkonen, that
looked to me very much like they weren't expecting to have to use those
tyres for full race distance.
According to Wolff Mercedes expected the mediums to go the distance
(although the fact that track temperatures were higher during the race
than earlier in the weekend must have given them pause.) Nobody
expected the new softs the Red Bulls later took on to be as much faster
as they turned out to be.
Post by larkim
Clearly my sensors are off if I've misintepreted that. I watched Ch4 so
perhaps their commentators were out of step too but I was fairly sure they
were talking about Vet and Bot being 2 stop candidates, otherwise what they
did to Kimi was blatant sacrificing of a #2 driver, and this weekend he'd
not looked like a #2 driver for large chunks of his activities.
As soon as Bottas jumped Vettel on the exchange of pit stops one of the
Sky commentators remarked that Ferrari had Räikkönen in position to back
Bottas up. Neither expressed approval of such a move as it developed -
e.g. "This is not why Kimi gets up every morning to work out" or
something very similar.
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
This quote is often falsely attributed to Mark Twain.
- Randall Munroe