planetf1.com

Siao7 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:The main issue this year's Ferrari seems to have is getting the tires to work properly. I think Vettel struggled on the hard tires in the second stint of the race in Montreal and the Mercedes was faster on the hards. In the first stint; Hamilton never looked even close to challenging for position.

This seems to tie up with what Helmut Marko suggested, in a very Helmut way of course! That the new reduced thread is working so much better with Mercedes this year compared to the other teams.

https://www.planetf1.com/news/ferrari-n ... -mercedes/

Mattia Binotto concurs with the tire struggles. He claims Ferrari developed the car down the wrong path following testing and that they do not produce enough downforce to heat the tires properly.

sandman1347 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:The main issue this year's Ferrari seems to have is getting the tires to work properly. I think Vettel struggled on the hard tires in the second stint of the race in Montreal and the Mercedes was faster on the hards. In the first stint; Hamilton never looked even close to challenging for position.

This seems to tie up with what Helmut Marko suggested, in a very Helmut way of course! That the new reduced thread is working so much better with Mercedes this year compared to the other teams.

Which also goes along with both Ferrari and Red Bull trying to get the tyres changed to last year's tyres but unlike 2013 there are no grounds to say that the tyres are unsafe. Red Bull campaigned to get the tyres changed in 2013 which happened on safety grounds and lo and behold Vettel won the last 9 races of the season.

I would be guessing that the best they can hope for is getting the tyres changed for next season?

My expectation is for super-thick tire compounds next year. While this year seems to be a slam dunk for Mercedes, it has arguably provided the FIA with the silver bullet it has been looking for to shake things up. It's all about the tires. Probably should have been obvious from last year where we saw Mercedes suddenly surge ahead during those three races where they ran the thinner tread tires.

I think all the whinging and complaining about Mercedes dominance will crystallize in the form of tires designed to stop them next year. Somewhat similar to how Ferrari were finally stopped in 2005 by the ban on tire changes during the race.

What makes you think the FIA are going to change the tyres for next year? They have shown very little interest in slowing down Mercedes from 2014-2019, so why change in 2020?

KingVoid wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:The main issue this year's Ferrari seems to have is getting the tires to work properly. I think Vettel struggled on the hard tires in the second stint of the race in Montreal and the Mercedes was faster on the hards. In the first stint; Hamilton never looked even close to challenging for position.

This seems to tie up with what Helmut Marko suggested, in a very Helmut way of course! That the new reduced thread is working so much better with Mercedes this year compared to the other teams.

Which also goes along with both Ferrari and Red Bull trying to get the tyres changed to last year's tyres but unlike 2013 there are no grounds to say that the tyres are unsafe. Red Bull campaigned to get the tyres changed in 2013 which happened on safety grounds and lo and behold Vettel won the last 9 races of the season.

I would be guessing that the best they can hope for is getting the tyres changed for next season?

My expectation is for super-thick tire compounds next year. While this year seems to be a slam dunk for Mercedes, it has arguably provided the FIA with the silver bullet it has been looking for to shake things up. It's all about the tires. Probably should have been obvious from last year where we saw Mercedes suddenly surge ahead during those three races where they ran the thinner tread tires.

I think all the whinging and complaining about Mercedes dominance will crystallize in the form of tires designed to stop them next year. Somewhat similar to how Ferrari were finally stopped in 2005 by the ban on tire changes during the race.

What makes you think the FIA are going to change the tyres for next year? They have shown very little interest in slowing down Mercedes from 2014-2019, so why change in 2020?

They've introduced two major regulations changes since Mercedes started winning in 2014. The 2017 rules were a total shake-up and this year's rules are a significant change as well. Because it hasn't worked, that doesn't mean they haven't tried.

The rule changes in 2019 did nothing but increase Mercedes’ advantage. The aero changes helped their low rake car philosophy, and the thinner tyres suit them much better than last season.

If 2019 was an attempt to slow down Mercedes, it must be the worst attempt in history, as basically every change suited them and did not suit RBR/Ferrari.

KingVoid wrote:The rule changes in 2019 did nothing but increase Mercedes’ advantage. The aero changes helped their low rake car philosophy, and the thinner tyres suit them much better than last season.

If 2019 was an attempt to slow down Mercedes, it must be the worst attempt in history, as basically every change suited them and did not suit RBR/Ferrari.

You're only basing that on the outcome. 2017 certainly did NOT help Mercedes relative to the field. Both Red Bull and especially Ferrari closed right up to them that year. In 2019, people were convinced that Mercedes had gotten it wrong after preseason testing. You can't take the fact that Mercedes have consistently done the best job of adapting to whatever rules changes are implemented and use it to suggest that the rules changes were designed to help them. They've just done a better job.

In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

Ferrari won at Silverstone so Mercedes won 2 out of 3 races on those tyres.

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

The point is that changing the regulations creates the opportunity for other teams to leapfrog Mercedes. The fact that they haven't been able to do it is a testament to how well Mercedes have done.

sandman1347 wrote:

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

The point is that changing the regulations creates the opportunity for other teams to leapfrog Mercedes. The fact that they haven't been able to do it is a testament to how well Mercedes have done.

Also like has been said Ferrari caught up after the rule change in 2017 but I guess any rule change has to specifically stop Mercedes from winning races?

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

Ferrari won at Silverstone so Mercedes won 2 out of 3 races on those tyres.

Hamilton had significantly better race pace than Vettel in Silverstone too. In fact, Bottas was also quicker than Vettel in Silverstone and definitely could have won without SC.

pokerman wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

The point is that changing the regulations creates the opportunity for other teams to leapfrog Mercedes. The fact that they haven't been able to do it is a testament to how well Mercedes have done.

Also like has been said Ferrari caught up after the rule change in 2017 but I guess any rule change has to specifically stop Mercedes from winning races?

I don’t believe that the 2017 aero regulation changes were that important to Ferrari closing the gap. What was far more important was the removal of the token system. That rule was idiotic and basically allowed Mercedes to dominate unopposed for 3 years.

KingVoid wrote:

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

Ferrari won at Silverstone so Mercedes won 2 out of 3 races on those tyres.

Hamilton had significantly better race pace than Vettel in Silverstone too. In fact, Bottas was also quicker than Vettel in Silverstone and definitely could have won without SC.

Bottas qualified 4th over 2 tenths slower than the Ferrari's whilst Hamilton got pole from Vettel by a mere 0.044s on a track were Hamilton is known to be a good qualifier, then Vettel won the race, Bottas finished 4th behind Kimi, hardly an endorsement for Mercedes being dominant?

KingVoid wrote:

pokerman wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

The point is that changing the regulations creates the opportunity for other teams to leapfrog Mercedes. The fact that they haven't been able to do it is a testament to how well Mercedes have done.

Also like has been said Ferrari caught up after the rule change in 2017 but I guess any rule change has to specifically stop Mercedes from winning races?

I don’t believe that the 2017 aero regulation changes were that important to Ferrari closing the gap. What was far more important was the removal of the token system. That rule was idiotic and basically allowed Mercedes to dominate unopposed for 3 years.

So removal of the token system wasn't a change in the rules which helped Ferrari to be competitive?

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

Ferrari won at Silverstone so Mercedes won 2 out of 3 races on those tyres.

Hamilton had significantly better race pace than Vettel in Silverstone too. In fact, Bottas was also quicker than Vettel in Silverstone and definitely could have won without SC.

Bottas qualified 4th over 2 tenths slower than the Ferrari's whilst Hamilton got pole from Vettel by a mere 0.044s on a track were Hamilton is known to be a good qualifier, then Vettel won the race, Bottas finished 4th behind Kimi, hardly an endorsement for Mercedes being dominant?

To be fair KingVoid did not say dominant, just stronger (relative to the use of thicker tyres at around the same period).

tootsie323 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

Ferrari won at Silverstone so Mercedes won 2 out of 3 races on those tyres.

Hamilton had significantly better race pace than Vettel in Silverstone too. In fact, Bottas was also quicker than Vettel in Silverstone and definitely could have won without SC.

Bottas qualified 4th over 2 tenths slower than the Ferrari's whilst Hamilton got pole from Vettel by a mere 0.044s on a track were Hamilton is known to be a good qualifier, then Vettel won the race, Bottas finished 4th behind Kimi, hardly an endorsement for Mercedes being dominant?

To be fair KingVoid did not say dominant, just stronger (relative to the use of thicker tyres at around the same period).

Indeed but that's the implication as he lumped it together with Spain and France, it has to be seen that Mercedes were better than Ferrari at Silverstone.

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:

pokerman wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

The point is that changing the regulations creates the opportunity for other teams to leapfrog Mercedes. The fact that they haven't been able to do it is a testament to how well Mercedes have done.

Also like has been said Ferrari caught up after the rule change in 2017 but I guess any rule change has to specifically stop Mercedes from winning races?

I don’t believe that the 2017 aero regulation changes were that important to Ferrari closing the gap. What was far more important was the removal of the token system. That rule was idiotic and basically allowed Mercedes to dominate unopposed for 3 years.

So removal of the token system wasn't a change in the rules which helped Ferrari to be competitive?

I think you should read it again

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:

pokerman wrote:

sandman1347 wrote: The point is that changing the regulations creates the opportunity for other teams to leapfrog Mercedes. The fact that they haven't been able to do it is a testament to how well Mercedes have done.

Also like has been said Ferrari caught up after the rule change in 2017 but I guess any rule change has to specifically stop Mercedes from winning races?

I don’t believe that the 2017 aero regulation changes were that important to Ferrari closing the gap. What was far more important was the removal of the token system. That rule was idiotic and basically allowed Mercedes to dominate unopposed for 3 years.

So removal of the token system wasn't a change in the rules which helped Ferrari to be competitive?

I think you should read it again

What I was reading was that nothing has been done to slow Mercedes down?

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:

pokerman wrote: Also like has been said Ferrari caught up after the rule change in 2017 but I guess any rule change has to specifically stop Mercedes from winning races?

I don’t believe that the 2017 aero regulation changes were that important to Ferrari closing the gap. What was far more important was the removal of the token system. That rule was idiotic and basically allowed Mercedes to dominate unopposed for 3 years.

So removal of the token system wasn't a change in the rules which helped Ferrari to be competitive?

I think you should read it again

What I was reading was that nothing has been done to slow Mercedes down?

I think it reads that - by far - the most important thing that helped Ferrari to close the gap wasn't the aero rules, but the removal of the silly token system.

From that, how did you make the leap that the removal of the token system wasn't a change that helped Ferrari? God knows

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:

pokerman wrote:

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

Ferrari won at Silverstone so Mercedes won 2 out of 3 races on those tyres.

Hamilton had significantly better race pace than Vettel in Silverstone too. In fact, Bottas was also quicker than Vettel in Silverstone and definitely could have won without SC.

Bottas qualified 4th over 2 tenths slower than the Ferrari's whilst Hamilton got pole from Vettel by a mere 0.044s on a track were Hamilton is known to be a good qualifier, then Vettel won the race, Bottas finished 4th behind Kimi, hardly an endorsement for Mercedes being dominant?

Qualifying pace was equal. Race pace however (where tyre wear comes into account), Mercedes had the advantage in Silverstone too.

According to Mattia Binotto the Paul Ricard circuit doesn't suit their car, seems though that Vettel doesn't actually agree.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/48678324

KingVoid wrote:

pokerman wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

The point is that changing the regulations creates the opportunity for other teams to leapfrog Mercedes. The fact that they haven't been able to do it is a testament to how well Mercedes have done.

Also like has been said Ferrari caught up after the rule change in 2017 but I guess any rule change has to specifically stop Mercedes from winning races?

I don’t believe that the 2017 aero regulation changes were that important to Ferrari closing the gap. What was far more important was the removal of the token system. That rule was idiotic and basically allowed Mercedes to dominate unopposed for 3 years.

I think too much has been made of the impact of the token system. It did not restrict development in any way, it only restricted how often those updates could be introduced at races; this effectively forced the teams into making larger, less frequent improvements rather than incremental changes. Behind the scenes they could have spent whatever they wanted on developing their engines. It's not too far different to what we have now, where the 3 engine limit basically limits the teams to 3 engine upgrades per year.

Mercedes dominated unopposed for 3 years because it took Ferrari's engine department 3 years to catch up with Mercedes, regardless of tokens.

j man wrote:Behind the scenes they could have spent whatever they wanted on developing their engines.

IIRC they were limited in how much they could run the engines in a relevant car. At least I recall this being one excuse mentioned for Honda's reliability issues.

Lord Crc wrote:

j man wrote:Behind the scenes they could have spent whatever they wanted on developing their engines.

IIRC they were limited in how much they could run the engines in a relevant car. At least I recall this being one excuse mentioned for Honda's reliability issues.

True, though that has not changed with the removal of the token system. I don't recall there being any limit on dyno testing though, Honda's problems were that issues arose that they didn't see on the dyno.

j man wrote:

KingVoid wrote:

pokerman wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:

KingVoid wrote:In 2018, Mercedes were stronger on thinner tyres (Spain, France, Britain) than on thicker tyres around the same time. In 2019, the thinner tyres were introduced for every race. How is that not a rule change that helped Mercedes?

Pre-season gossip is meaningless as most pundits and journalists are as clueless as the member on this forum.

The point is that changing the regulations creates the opportunity for other teams to leapfrog Mercedes. The fact that they haven't been able to do it is a testament to how well Mercedes have done.

Also like has been said Ferrari caught up after the rule change in 2017 but I guess any rule change has to specifically stop Mercedes from winning races?

I don’t believe that the 2017 aero regulation changes were that important to Ferrari closing the gap. What was far more important was the removal of the token system. That rule was idiotic and basically allowed Mercedes to dominate unopposed for 3 years.

I think too much has been made of the impact of the token system. It did not restrict development in any way, it only restricted how often those updates could be introduced at races; this effectively forced the teams into making larger, less frequent improvements rather than incremental changes. Behind the scenes they could have spent whatever they wanted on developing their engines. It's not too far different to what we have now, where the 3 engine limit basically limits the teams to 3 engine upgrades per year.

Mercedes dominated unopposed for 3 years because it took Ferrari's engine department 3 years to catch up with Mercedes, regardless of tokens.

Wasn't it that under the token system the in-season development was banned altogether? And teams could bring updates but only by using tokens, the number of which decreased each season on top of everything else?

Ferrari found a loophole in 2015 and the teams could develop throughout the season. From 2016 they relaxes the rules to allow in season development, but still under the token system. I can't remember what happened after that, but to say that the development was not restricted in any way is wrong.

So Red Bull will be geting an upgraded Honda engine in France. Seems that collaboration with their aeroplane jet engine department has improved reliability, you have to think they can catch up with Mercedes and Ferrari, but when?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/48687428

Sadly for RBR their car is quite inferior to Mercedes. But they can challenge Ferrari and Max can fight for podium.

Johnson wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:The main issue this year's Ferrari seems to have is getting the tires to work properly. I think Vettel struggled on the hard tires in the second stint of the race in Montreal and the Mercedes was faster on the hards. In the first stint; Hamilton never looked even close to challenging for position.

I think Vettel was tyre/fuel saving, he allowed Hamilton to close him done it seems, knowing catching is one thing but passing another.

http://en.mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page ... 20Hamilton

During the 8 lap phase where Hamilton closes Vettel down, Vettel is consistently doing 15.9's whilst Hamilton on average is doing 15.5's but once Hamilton catches Vettel, Vettel starts to do 15.1-15.2 even setting a 15.0.

Mercedes was definitely quicker but I don't think it was as high as the 0.5 Hamilton reeled him in at, Ferrari seemed to be managing something during that phase, likely fuel.

I am pretty sure Mercedes had a big advantage in the race but as often is the case once you are stuck there is not much you can do. Bottas and RBR race was heavily compromised due to traffic. I also think Ferrari engine is more thirsty. I read some article that Charles was not going to win in Bahrain even if he did not have the engine problem because of fuel issue.

Mercedes-Benz wrote:Sadly for RBR their car is quite inferior to Mercedes. But they can challenge Ferrari and Max can fight for podium.

Johnson wrote:

sandman1347 wrote:The main issue this year's Ferrari seems to have is getting the tires to work properly. I think Vettel struggled on the hard tires in the second stint of the race in Montreal and the Mercedes was faster on the hards. In the first stint; Hamilton never looked even close to challenging for position.

I think Vettel was tyre/fuel saving, he allowed Hamilton to close him done it seems, knowing catching is one thing but passing another.

http://en.mclarenf-1.com/index.php?page ... 20Hamilton

During the 8 lap phase where Hamilton closes Vettel down, Vettel is consistently doing 15.9's whilst Hamilton on average is doing 15.5's but once Hamilton catches Vettel, Vettel starts to do 15.1-15.2 even setting a 15.0.

Mercedes was definitely quicker but I don't think it was as high as the 0.5 Hamilton reeled him in at, Ferrari seemed to be managing something during that phase, likely fuel.

I am pretty sure Mercedes had a big advantage in the race but as often is the case once you are stuck there is not much you can do. Bottas and RBR race was heavily compromised due to traffic. I also think Ferrari engine is more thirsty. I read some article that Charles was not going to win in Bahrain even if he did not have the engine problem because of fuel issue.

BIB: interesting. You got a link?

Option or Prime wrote:So Red Bull will be geting an upgraded Honda engine in France. Seems that collaboration with their aeroplane jet engine department has improved reliability, you have to think they can catch up with Mercedes and Ferrari, but when?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/48687428

Only upgrades the ICE and Turbo. Still lagging in energy recovery.

Will Austria be a bit closer with the straights that should play to Ferrari's strengths? Perhaps the performance between Merc and Ferrari could similar to Canada?

JN23 wrote:Will Austria be a bit closer with the straights that should play to Ferrari's strengths? Perhaps the performance between Merc and Ferrari could similar to Canada?

Yeah I think Leclerc is going to pole and win in Austria unless it rains. That track is pretty much 3 long acceleration zones and a couple of high speed corners. Very suitable for Ferrari.

kleefton wrote:

JN23 wrote:Will Austria be a bit closer with the straights that should play to Ferrari's strengths? Perhaps the performance between Merc and Ferrari could similar to Canada?

Yeah I think Leclerc is going to pole and win in Austria unless it rains. That track is pretty much 3 long acceleration zones and a couple of high speed corners. Very suitable for Ferrari.

Well he did seem confident that he had sorted out how to manage a weekend. So hopefully no self-enforced hiccups pre-race.

shoot999 wrote:

kleefton wrote:

JN23 wrote:Will Austria be a bit closer with the straights that should play to Ferrari's strengths? Perhaps the performance between Merc and Ferrari could similar to Canada?

Yeah I think Leclerc is going to pole and win in Austria unless it rains. That track is pretty much 3 long acceleration zones and a couple of high speed corners. Very suitable for Ferrari.

Well he did seem confident that he had sorted out how to manage a weekend. So hopefully no self-enforced hiccups pre-race.

I'll be watching the Leclerc vs. Vettel matchup closely moving forward. Ferrari have given up on beating Mercedes and France was the first race where they just let Charles have his own race without any regard to Vettel's strategy. I do wonder whether Charles (and his side of the garage) might take the upper hand in the matchup.

I do expect Austria to be a much more exciting race than France was. I don't know that I'd go as far as to predict a Ferrari win because Ferrari haven't managed to win the other two races where they were strongest. At this point it would be folly to bet on anyone other than Hamilton but Austria will be the best opportunity for another team to win until the Spa/Monza stretch.

Ferrari had the fastest car in France but the drivers made the difference.



Just kiddin'. Dominance from Mercedes, and I expect it to take a few races for Ferrari to bridge the gap with their upgrade package plans.

For France I go with Mercedes being the quickest followed by Ferrari then Red Bull so:-

1. Mercedes 168
2. Ferrari 134
3. Red Bull 114

kleefton wrote:

JN23 wrote:Will Austria be a bit closer with the straights that should play to Ferrari's strengths? Perhaps the performance between Merc and Ferrari could similar to Canada?

Yeah I think Leclerc is going to pole and win in Austria unless it rains. That track is pretty much 3 long acceleration zones and a couple of high speed corners. Very suitable for Ferrari.

So a guaranteed 9/9 for Mercedes then!!!

Siao7 wrote:

kleefton wrote:

JN23 wrote:Will Austria be a bit closer with the straights that should play to Ferrari's strengths? Perhaps the performance between Merc and Ferrari could similar to Canada?

Yeah I think Leclerc is going to pole and win in Austria unless it rains. That track is pretty much 3 long acceleration zones and a couple of high speed corners. Very suitable for Ferrari.

So a guaranteed 9/9 for Mercedes then!!!

You think that Ferrari or the drivers are destined to mess up again?

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

kleefton wrote:

JN23 wrote:Will Austria be a bit closer with the straights that should play to Ferrari's strengths? Perhaps the performance between Merc and Ferrari could similar to Canada?

Yeah I think Leclerc is going to pole and win in Austria unless it rains. That track is pretty much 3 long acceleration zones and a couple of high speed corners. Very suitable for Ferrari.

So a guaranteed 9/9 for Mercedes then!!!

You think that Ferrari or the drivers are destined to mess up again?

No, just that Mercedes is much better than they make it sound

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

kleefton wrote:

JN23 wrote:Will Austria be a bit closer with the straights that should play to Ferrari's strengths? Perhaps the performance between Merc and Ferrari could similar to Canada?

Yeah I think Leclerc is going to pole and win in Austria unless it rains. That track is pretty much 3 long acceleration zones and a couple of high speed corners. Very suitable for Ferrari.

So a guaranteed 9/9 for Mercedes then!!!

You think that Ferrari or the drivers are destined to mess up again?

No, just that Mercedes is much better than they make it sound

Well you could have said that about Canada but really Ferrari should have had that race in the bag.

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

kleefton wrote:
Yeah I think Leclerc is going to pole and win in Austria unless it rains. That track is pretty much 3 long acceleration zones and a couple of high speed corners. Very suitable for Ferrari.

So a guaranteed 9/9 for Mercedes then!!!

You think that Ferrari or the drivers are destined to mess up again?

No, just that Mercedes is much better than they make it sound

Well you could have said that about Canada but really Ferrari should have had that race in the bag.

Did they? Hamilton was catching Vettel in an alarming rate, if the whole incident didn't happen he would have had a great chance of overtaking and winning it. Not in the bag at all, I think that overall Mercedes had a superior race pace

pokerman wrote:Well you could have said that about Canada but really Ferrari should have had that race in the bag.

Siao7 wrote:Did they? Hamilton was catching Vettel in an alarming rate, if the whole incident didn't happen he would have had a great chance of overtaking and winning it. Not in the bag at all, I think that overall Mercedes had a superior race pace

Yeah, I don't think Canada was in the bag at all. Looking at the whole weekend and his gap to his teammate, I think Vettel pulled out a special lap in qualifying and Mercedes had the quicker car.