Analysis: Did Hamilton back Rosberg up in Hungary and other stories from the race
Lewis Hamilton
Strategy Report
Posted By: James Allen  |  26 Jul 2016   |  7:57 am GMT  |  144 comments

Not the thriller that last year’s Hungarian Grand Prix proved to be, this year’s event was nevertheless tense in the battle between the Red Bull and Ferrari cars and strategy was pivotal to the outcome for a number of drivers.

Ferrari has not had the best time of it lately when it comes to strategy decision-making, but in Hungary they were on good form with two very different strategies for Sebastian Vettel and Kimi Raikkonen that saw both finish the race ahead of where they started.

Max Verstappen

Sebastian Vettel
Pre-race considerations
It was extremely hot in Budapest; the track temperature was up to 56 degrees at the start of the race, but qualifying had been interrupted by torrential rain, which meant that all drivers had plenty of new tyres to plan their strategy around and the track was pretty green on race day, having been washed clean on Saturday.

The Pirelli tyre choice of supersoft, soft and medium suggested a two stop strategy would be the fastest, with supersoft the starting tyre and then two stints on softs. To make a reverse strategy work, (soft-supersoft-supersoft) would require a driver to be able to do 20 laps on supersoft, which was pushing it. Meanwhile any strategy that involved the medium compound looked uncompetitive, but should anyone take the chance, hoping to keep track position, the key was to stick with it.

Sebastian Vettel

Ferrari hit the sweet spot – on strategy at least
Although a result of fourth and sixth may look quite a disappointment after winning this Grand Prix last season, Ferrari can be pleased with the strategy decisions at least. The car pace remains a problem relative to the Mercedes, but also now the Red Bull cars.

However the Scuderia took the right decisions in Hungary on race day and it meant that Vettel finished fourth from fifth on the grid, while Raikkonen finished sixth from 14th on the grid. So what did they do right?

The first move was with Vettel, whose stop at the end of Lap 14 triggered the first round of stops for Mercedes and Red Bull.

Ferrari were in a great position with Vettel as he was able to stay close behind the two Red Bull cars ahead and Max Verstappen began to struggle with his rear tyres after around 8 laps. This pulled him back towards Vettel and within range of an undercut, which Ferrari gladly took.

Daniel Ricciardo

Some pundits have questioned why Red Bull did not pre-empt that undercut from Vettel by stopping first. The answer is because they didn’t have enough of a gap back to Hulkenberg, Bottas and especially Raikkonen, who was running a long first stint on soft tyres so would not be stopping until around Lap 30. Red Bull were trying to pull a gap, when Vettel pitted. They had to react with the lead car, which was Ricciardo and the Verstappen a lap later. This condemned the Dutchman not only to losing a position to Vettel, but also falling behind Raikkonen.

This separated him from Ricciardo and from then on his race was not for the podium but for fifth place with Raikkonen. But while he was on the wrong end of a strategy call for once, the real reason he was in that position was because he had not managed the tyres well in the opening eight laps, unlike Ricciardo.

A tiny detail, but worth mentioning is that Vettel also had a small stroke of luck; immediately prior to his first stop, he didn’t have a gap back to Raikkonen and would have come out behind his team mate, requiring some team orders to get him past the Finn. But Raikkonen lost time behind Hulkenberg, meaning that Vettel emerged just ahead as he exited the pits. Drama avoided.

Max Verstappen Kimi Raikkonen

Raikkonen earns driver of the day plaudits
Kimi Raikkonen may have ended the race frustrated by the way Verstappen blocked him as he tried to overtake, but he had a very strong drive to come through from 14th place and make the reverse strategy work. The key to it was his ability to make the supersoft tyres in the second stint last 21 laps. No one else in the top ten managed it, although Daniil Kvyat did something similar in the minor placings.

Raikkonen should have been able to clear Verstappen, given the difference in tyre pace, but the Dutchman blocked him, using double moves that the Finn felt were unacceptable. At one point they even made contact, damaging Raikkonen’s front wing.
It was a really good strategy from Ferrari and had Raikkonen cleared Verstappen he would have caught the Vettel & Ricciardo battle, which would have been very interesting.

Lewis Hamilton

Hamilton’s ‘management’ endangers result, Ricciardo loses sight of Vettel
One of the more noteworthy cameos at the front of the race was the warning given to race leader Lewis Hamilton from his Mercedes team that he needed to pick up the pace around half distance, as he was backing himself and team mate Nico Rosberg into the cars behind, namely Ricciardo and Vettel and putting the team’s 1-2 finish at risk.

Hamilton said afterwards that on a hot day such as this, there was no need to push the car to build a ten second gap, but he was ‘managing’ the race too severely. While he would have been aware of the gaps back to Rosberg and Ricciardo, what he might not have been aware of was the general picture and what is known as the Safety Car window, whereby a badly timed Safety Car could have meant that Vettel gained track position over all of them, had it fallen favourably for him.

Red Bull sought to exploit this situation by pitting Ricciardo on Lap 35, which was very early in terms of reaching the chequered flag on a set of soft tyres. But he was trying to push them onto a reaction.

Instead the Mercedes picked up the pace dramatically (see Race History chart below) and cleared the danger, stopping six laps later. Whilst understandable by Red Bull on one level, this early second stop was also a risky move as it showed they had lost sight of Vettel as a threat from behind and he almost got Ricciardo at the end when the Red Bull struggled on its tyres in the closing stages.

The UBS Race Strategy Briefing is written by James Allen with input and data from several F1 team strategists and from Pirelli

Report Sm Rect bann

Race History and Tyre Usage Charts – Kindly Supplied by Williams Martini Racing – Click to Enlarge

Illustrating the relative pace of each car and showing the gaps between them in seconds. An upward curve shows strong pace.

Note the pace of Raikkonen in second stint and transpose that onto third stint; if he had been able to clear Verstappen he would have been right in the battle for the podium with Ricciardo and Vettel at the end.

Contrast Hamilton’s pace in the early part of the middle stint with his pace after lap 33 when he was warned that the team would reverse the drivers if he did not speed up, as Ricciardo was threatening them. It’s clear the degree to which he was ‘managing’ the race, but also there is no question it put not only Rosberg at threat from Ricciardo, but also both of them at threat from Vettel if a Safety Car had fallen at the wrong moment.

Williams Martini Racing

Williams Martini Racing

Strategy Insights
Strategy Briefings
Share This:
Posted by:

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the Login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry that something went wrong, repeat again!

Unless the following car is under team orders to not pass the lead car there is no such thing as “backing up” a car. The solution is simple, pass the car that is holding you up!


So Hamilton was managing his pace. Too much being made that was endangering a 1-2 for the team.
If Prost was doing this, people would have been waxing lyrical at what a genius he was. Conversely, if Hamilton had pulled out a 15 second lead, killed his tyres or suffered a mechanical failure, James would have been all over him for not winning at the slowest possible speed.

Supreme race-craft by Hamilton if you ask me. Managing the tyres, car and reacting when he needed to, when the pit told him to.

No one can blame him for looking after his car and trying to outscore Rosberg given what has happened this season.


I didn’t think the race was that bad. It was a series of tense battles that could have had a very different outcome if new tyres weren’t in such plentiful supply. I wasn’t plussed with ROS getting the pole like he did. I thought it was poor form. He seems to have a penchant for that sort of activity. I thought VES was a bit aggressive in defending at turn 2. I thought RIC had the better of VES on Sunday particularly in the first stint where VES ran out of tyres and was all over the place like a dogs dinner before the stop. VES will be a WDC in the future IMO. Particularly when he develops some patience and maturity.

What really frustrated me though was that bloody camera shot at turn 12 and 13 where the cameraman was using the peep hole through the fence and then panning back. If they director didn’t use the shot 30 times through the race, I’ll be very surprised. It may have been arty but it gave no feel for the speed or grip level of the car.


James, theoretically would the optimum strategy have been supersoft supersoft soft? Tyre deg looked v low.


Clearly it did not help Kimi to be sent out at totally the wrong time by his engineer for Q2. On a fast drying track he was the first to make p1, and seconds later was out.
p14 on a track you can’t overtake on left him a mountain to climb [although he managed about half a dozen overtakes actually]
I’m not sure that Dave Greenwood [a lovely chap by all accounts] is the best for Kimi…….. Can Dyer be enticed back?? or even Stella who followed Alonso to total oblivion at McLaren?!


the other side to the coin, also seeming a bit … strange, Max going out too late to get his last timed lap.


@ Dean
I hope sincerely that Max has better luck in his career than Kimi had throughout his!


Ham is beating ros while running lower power settings to save his engine, and ros still cant win…he done well to win this race at a grannies pace… if roles were reversed you think ham wouldnt have overtaken and won…ros is shaken bad!!!

I wish ham had new engines left as i think it would be hammer time and he would win well over 10 seconds etc


This is an interesting installment of this typically superb serial, much fudging going on in it [no good]. Nonetheless…

At the front:
1. Can we (all of us paying attention) admit that we have another MMC (Mercedes Managed Championship) for 2016; boo-hoo, but true.
2. That being outed, the only driver who Lewis is really competing with, is Nico.
3. Lewis will face a grid penalty, due to no fault of his own, for equipment failure, which will severly disadvantage him against his only rival for the championship.
4. Also, by backing Nico up, there is the chance that another driver will pass him, or even better, result in Nico being taken out of the race
5. If your team mate isn’t as good as you, you can count on not being passed by him, as long as you don’t make a mistake.
Lewis did the right thing, totally within he rules, and if Mercedes doesn’t like it, they should fire him!
MMC (Mercedes Managed Championship):
a. winning at the Hungaroring confirms the untouchability of the Mercedes machinery, compared to everybody else, for yet another year.
I normally applaud success like this, but I’m extremely tired of it, now.
Red Bull v Ferrari:
It doesn’t look good for Ferrari, and while ther may be the odd track that they have superior potential to Red Bull, in the remaining races of the season, the previous races (for the most part) had this comparative the other way around.
We had several high-profile examples of the inconsistent application of the rules and there seems to be trends, favouring drivers/teams over other. The Max double-swerve is a weighty addition to the evidence supporting the likelihood that Max is geeting systemic benefit from this inequitable enforcement of the rules, but we’ve seen this kind of favouritism for REd Bull already this season, even before Max made the step up the the senior team.
I predict a noticeable drop off in viewership, as fans become disillusioned with the corruption of the ‘sport’, and the inescapable fact that we are (and have been all year) in a MMC (Mercedes Managed Championship), notwithstanding the fact that this is their home race.
If there is a big drop-off of viewership for the German GP, home race for Mercedes, then we can expect the same humming and hawing, about the problems in F1, by the FIA and Commercial rights people, aboiut ‘what to do?’; while we all know that they are the real issue.


Dean, I’m relatively new here but I like the cut of your jib.

Not in full agreement with the rules bending (I just think they’re terrible at doing everything and as a result are rubbish at writing clear unarguable rules) but the rest of it is pretty much bang on to me.

The ONLY thing getting me through this period of F1 (even as a Lewis fan) is that I had to sit through four years of Red Bull. Ok, I’ll admit current domination is heavier but I can remember sitting through PLENTY of GPs where Seb was two seconds ahead at the end of lap one. I guess at least Lewis has a more talented team mate who is allowed to race him. But yeah, even this is wearing thin now.

That said, I still find the sport, the racing, the politics, the tech and everything hugely entertaining.


Dean Cassidy, can we all admit to watching a managed championship? In the complete absence of any evidence whatsoever to support that theory and with no real reason to even suspect it might be true, the answer is a resounding no.


throw it open to the crowd TimW.
The only races in 2016 that have NOT been Mercedes 1-2s, are the ones where they took each other out.
They play up this team rivalry, as if it is the championship… well, because it is the essence of the championship.
Whenever anybody gets a bit closer with developments, they pull just enough out of the grab-bag of ready tricks (not already put on the car, so as to preserve the illusion of ‘competition’), to stay ahead, but … not too far ahead.
Got to keep some fans watching, or the massive amounts of money invested will not yield the forecast return on investment.
The evidence is so abundant, it seems way over your head, or gross naivite?!


Dean, so what exactly are you saying? That Mercedes are managing the championship by sandbagging? Or that they are telling the drivers before hand who is going to win which races. You say that the evidence is abundant, well help a “grossly naive” fella out and share some of it with the crowd, because I haven’t seen anything that might suggest your claims might be true.


Hi James, a thorough, interesting and thought provoking analysis as always.

In answer to your headline, yes I do think Lewis was managing his pace massively. And yes, that probably had an effect of that backing Nico up towards Daniel, hence the radio call telling him to speed up. I think Lewis knew exactly what he was doing when he said “struggling for pace here” and good on him. Seeing as he’s had to drive around a couple of lemons early in the season, it’s fair enough that he babies his engines as much as he can at this stage. Especially if what he says is true and he’s probably going to need to take two engine penalties before the season is over. If Nico doesn’t like it, he could always barge him out of the way. Sorry, pass him, I mean pass him!


Other thoughts on the race:

1. What a masterclass by our world champion hey James? A champion’s drive in an Alain Prost style, winning at the slowest pace possible. He swatted Nico off like an annoying fly every time he came near. Perfect.

2. Fair play to Daniel, he had a better performance in Hungary. However, without the Alonso spin, it could have been different and the strategy did not help Max at all. But yeah, Daniel had a better race no doubt. I hold my hands up to all his fans on here and will accept all the grief they feel like giving me. It’s ok, I’ll get there in the end! 🙂

3. To temper all the hype from the DR is the greatest thing ever brigade, let’s just remember that in Q2 Max was pretty much SIX tenths faster on a track showing massive evo and DR crossed the line after him therefore getting better evo. That doesn’t happen by chance, it’s about feel and skill. Max is still learning the car but on a level playing field I still think Max has the measure of him, both in the car and out.

4. Highlight of the weekend for me was Seb’s amazing save from a tankslapper that would have seen many people heading into a huge accident. I’m not a fan of the guy by a long shot but that was amazing reactions and car control and I watched the replays over and over. Credit where it’s due.

5. I actually found the race way more entertaining than most posters here it seems. Lots of interesting tussles, plenty of talking points and obviously I was happy with the winner.

6. Radio ban, yep, we all agree on that one, utterly ridiculous implication of something that the sport needed. Good old FIA, ask for overtaking and we get DRS, ask for bans on in car driver coaching and we get Jenson getting a penalty after serving a penalty for the same thing. Amazing, couldn’t make it up.

7. Pole lap being set while passing through a waved yellow zone is simply unacceptable. Yes I’m taking track evo into account. The on board of Nico passing the incident shows everything we need to see. I agree with most of the other drivers, it sets and extremely dangerous precedent and needs to be MUCH more clearly defined.

8. Max’s weaving. Yes it looked a bit much, but as much as I’ll be vilified for saying this here, I think Max does an extremely good job of making the second move look like corner turn in. The rules allow it (hence no penalty) and that’s that. Right on the edge I agree but within the rules is within the rules. See Lewis’s pass on Nico at COTA 🙂 🙂 🙂

9. Post race presser was possibly the performance of the season from Lewis. Absolutely on top of his game. I found the deference from Nico and surprisingly Daniel (Max certainly wouldn’t have) really interesting. Lewis is starting to feel like he’s on top again and once he gets his game face on like this, well… the only thing that can beat him are engine penalties.

Mama said knock you out. BOOM.




HI James, Can we have an explanation of the penalty Button received? It does seem strange that a problem with the brakes wasn’t considered a safety issue. Has there been any word from the FIA on this? If this isn’t a safety issue what would they rule that is? Button was obviously very frustrated by this and will this be resolved before the next race?


I think the reason he was penalised was because the indication of a fault was not followed by an irrevocable instruction to return to the pits.

This rule was made very clear before the weekend began. They were OK to tell him about the problem, but the next instruction should have been to pit the car.


The problem with that is that this was an issue with Buttons brakes. If he is told to head back to the pits but loses his brakes completely and takes someone out. This could be very dangerous and I’m sure in the original ruling there was an exception for safety issues.


using double moves that the Finn felt were unacceptable

What is your view on this James? Using these words I get the feeling that you side with Raikkonen in this.

According to the Sporting Regulations this is allowed (imho) because it is one move to defend and then one move to go back to his line (doesn’t matter whether or not this move is also a defending move) before turning in for the corner.


My understanding of the rules are that you can defend one way, then move back to the racing line. I’d you do this, however, you are required to leave at least one car width gap. You can’t crowd someone off the track with a return to the racing line.

The question of whether he broke the rules hinges on whether he left one car width when he jinked back left.


My thoughts exactly and imho he left enough room before turning into the corner.


I thought Mercedes had a bit if a cheek asking him to speed up,if he was managing his engine then it’s because of the reliability issues that they gave him at the start of the season.


I’m quite happy to admit that these strategy reports sometimes make my brain feel like a bowl of spaghetti.
To my simpleton intellect it was a simple case of Lewis winning as slowly as possible which has always been the safest way to win.

Tornillo Amarillo

But that doesn’t explain why ROS showed anything in the race to deseve the crown. He has showed bad sporting behaviour with double yellows in qualy, but he doesn’t beat HAM on track on Sunday in a fair way, in a straight fight, even he doesn’t fight in order to provoke a mistake to the driver ahead!


“but he was ‘managing’ the race too severely” was this a quote from Lewis or your opinion James? Also, Rosberg at the time of the call was lapping slower than Hamilton and not close to the DRS range.


Yes, I clocked that unsubstantiated comment too.
He was managing for sure…..but “severely” to screw his team mate up? Fact is we don’t know. Personally, if he was, good on him. Merc are guaranteed the Constructor’s. The WDC is all to play for. Backing your team mate up (if he did indeed do it) isn’t really in the same league as ramming into him or sabotaging his quali lap.
Brundle commented that he looked Hamilton in the eye and asked him if he was backing Nico up and MB said he was confident Lewis wasn’t.


I wonder where the VES not managing the tires well comment comes from. The way I saw the situation was that VES was (thinking he was) faster than RIC in the first stint, but the team ordered him to stop putting pressure on RIC (team radio: you’re still within DRS range, response: but I’m driving like a grandma). VES then dropped back 2 seconds and stayed there, but fell in the clutches of VET. Was this RIC managing something there or is that too much of a conspiracy…

I wondered why VES didn’t stay out longer than he did to build more of a gap to the runners behind but it seems he missed his marker at the pits therefore losing a little bit of time, maybe enough to drop him behind RAI and really destroying his tires.


I think that if VES was truly that much faster than RIC and being held up, he could have punched out personal best laps once RIC pitted, but instead he pitted next lap, most likely as he had no tyre life left.


Of course Hamilton was back Rosberg into Ricciardo. There’s more than enough evidence to know that Hamilton is a dirty player. The things the media let him get away with because he’s a British driver stagger me.


You added SO much to the wonderful conversation we are having!


aelfwald, “There’s more than enough evidence to know that Hamilton is a dirty player.” I would love to see it…..


It was very discouraging to see that Hamilton got away scott free after showing his middle finger during the race (when lapping Sainz I think it was). Is that how a true champion should act? Is that the image FIA and Mercedes wants younger generations to copy from? I love Hamilton as the racer and when charging hard through. But such arrogant, rude behavior from him leaves me extremely sad.


Cyber, we have seen drivers make that same gesture on numerous occassions before, and nobody ever got a penalty for it. I seem to remember David Coultard doing the same to Michael Schumacher many years ago, surely it’s just the same as swearing on the radio?


About the Vers vs Kimi feud.
I used to like Kimi when he was the “silent killer”, but he turned into “moana man”.
From Ninja to Brawler xD

Kimi was never side-by-side Vers, so he has nothing to complain about.


About RBR:
Since Vers was behind Ricci and Vettel right behind, RBR could risk a non-optimal strategy on Vers to protect his and Ricci [later] position from Vettel.
Fact is Ferrari had a 31 lap on Option tires rehearsal in practice, I would consider a stop for Vers from lap 12.
That would be a RBR INITIATIVE, however RBR opted to REACT to Ferrari’s move, which led to a 2 lap for Vettel undercut.
In this scenario [Reactive] Vettel would surely overtake Vers, at least.

IF RBR had the Initiative, in the worst case Vers would be stranded behind Hulk, Bottas and Kimi, but AHEAD of Vettel.

*sorry for the caps, but there is no bold and underline options.


“he was backing himself and team mate Nico Rosberg into the cars behind”
Alternatively, since Lewis was actually maintaining a 1-2 second gap to Nico. you could argue that Nico was controlling the pace and was backing himself into the following cars. It was clear that when Nico got within a second Lewis responded. If Nico wanted to up the pace then perhaps he should have applied a bit more pressure on Lewis. We got the race we deserved. We give the drivers fast degrading tyres, ludicrous engine penalties on top of that we restrict their fuel and then complain that they are not driving fast enough for our entertainment. There has been no clear strategy for F1 for quite a few years now, just a series of half baked ideas and even more comical rules, and don’t get me started on the complete lack of consistency on race penalties. Oh! and a millisecond lift of the throttle is more than adequate to ensure I am capable of negotiating any hazard and/or marshal I encounter on track during double waved yellow flags.


I don’t think Lewis was backing Nico into the Red Bulls to try and hamper Nico, I think he was just trying not to take too much out of the tyres, and perhaps struggling to get heat into them in the early phases. A risky strategy as it always leaves you open to attack if you make a mistake or perhaps a certain driver forgets what the blue flag means!
I see some people are coming out with the idea that the lack of attack from Nico can be attributed to new “rules of engagement” from Mercedes. what nonsense! Can you imagine either driver ever agreeing to such a plan? I am sure it wont be many races before we see some racing between the pair which will prove that no such rule exists, but at the Hungaroring Lewis simply had Nico in his pocket. Nico spent most of the race just out of DRS range, which is exactly where Lewis wanted him.


I agree, Lewis could have been trying to frustrate Nico into a mistake with this tactic?


Chikano, I don’t think so, I don’t think Lewis was thinking about Nico’s race at all. The Mercedes advantage was sizeable at this track, the only possible thing that could undo them would be high tyre wear due to the high track temps. I think Lewis was simply covering off the only thing that realistically stood between himself and victory.


We all have our own interpretation of F1’s colourful language . . .


Richie J you love your comic bubbles.
But Max was doing more movements than a constipated elephant ?


@Biffa – a *constipated* elephant does very few movements, by definition!


I got it …very cryptic…?
Yes so a constipated elephant would be motionless.
But Max car and steering are not suffering from constipation. Therfore he is the opposite suffering from the squits.
Meaning he is all over the place .
Zig Zagging. Leaving big chunks everywhere. That’s why Kimi ended up in the shunt.
But be aware..
The elephant would on his 12th day approx . .. experience a double yellow flag because
Man will he be doing movements .
We are talking seismic chart shattering. ?


A constipated elephant wouldn’t be doing any movements Biffa. On with the opposite problem would be doing many! Not sure if we’ve strayed from F1 related comments!


You keep posting that hilarious picture. Funny that most comments on here seem to disagree with the point you’re trying to make.


Currently (1.00pm GMT, 26 July) –
54% of those polled say ‘it was acceptable defensive driving’
So the vociferous nay-sayers constitute the minority.


Wouldn’t say it’s a minority in the pole. It’s quite close in terms of votes. Even the vote against Max is high now.


Maxexit is Maxexit. The vote stands!


Yes I saw the poll.. isn’t it strange that the results don’t in any way reflect the overwhelming amount of comments critical of Max’s driving? I guess that’s what happens with a vote system that allows people to vote unlimited times.

Early on the results were about 60/40 in favour of Max getting a penalty, but I guess that was before the vote was hi-jacked by the bandwagon (you included maybe?). Pretty meaningless poll as a result. Thankfully the comments give the true picture.


pretty sure votes are ip locked, just because most votes are made by people who don’t comment doesn’t mean they aren’t accurate

now to cast my own vote in favour of max


Just had a look back there and no, i can’t vote again,so that’s wrong


Albert you are mistaken You just have to turn your phone off and your Internet connection . Wait a few hours (put phone on charge if you fancy a top up) turn your phone on log on from a different search engine and vote. Your IP address then is read by pole site as different and you can vote again. If you’re IT savvy you can do that without turning your phone off and just switch to a fake Web address.
I assume that’s how Max has accumulated so many votes. While the postings suggest the opposite.


You can do the same when voting if you like someone’s posting. Turning your system off the rebooting it you can vote again and again. That’s why you get some posters with 60+ votes which in the new system is either real or something seems to going on in the Twilight Zone.


Really? Who can be bothered to go to that trouble for a few extra votes?


That is supposed to be facetious, isn’t it?


I wouldn’t but i reslised there was a flaw. In the system. I came across it by accident (Camb Uni Staff and yes officially attached to the nerd world in creating safe secure examinations marking )
There are a lot of of people who would James. Can also go through a different VP system which scrambles your WiFi.
It’s a Big Bang Nerd World and you know it’s just something that excites that sort of group.


The idea of a poll is to collate a clear overall response without the necessity of comment.

So what you’re saying is the only legitimate views are the ones contained in negative comments and that a simple Yes/No answer is meritless and constitutes a ‘hijacking’ if it’s contrary to your opinion.

I guess you’d prefer a dictatorship to a democratic vote


Dictatorship? ????
With your captions it’s more of a Banana Republic. All Hail President Ritchie January and his crazy propaganda !! Great explanation regarding steering input by P Kara in a previous article.


No it’s because when I checked the poll last night it was about 900/650 in favour of the penalty, then a few hours the later the total opposite. Suspicious that so many visited Mr Allen’s website in such a surge late on a Monday night. Democracies such as Nigeria and Zimbabwe adopt similar multi vote system during their elections.

Yes comments normally correlate to the rating/vote. Strange to suggest otherwise.

Interestingly Brundle has labelled Max’s defending as ‘junior formula driving’.


Yep have to agree with you NickH.
The Max fans are multi voting .
I think Max is a future champion but as Brundle put it his middle of the road defense and slight sneaky inputs then a bigger move shows a jittery interpretation of the rules. He needs a big penalty in future.


@ nick H …yes, you are so right. i have just read the comments made by brundle and i fully concur with his analysis. brundle is highly qualified to make these observations and i do take his comments seriously.


Welcome to the ‘conspiracy’.
The poll’s holding steady at around 54% in Max’s favour.
Believe what you want to.


Funny that in the JAonF1 poll more than 50% agree it was good racing not double movement.


After seeing the headline, I wonder if Lewis would back Nico up on a USB stick or CD?
Or just upload to the Cloud ??


Only if Toto gives permission to do so….
Of course, that ain’t coaching (a driver).


You fail to mention that Verstappen was stuck behnd Ricciardio and complaining about the low pace of Ric (the grandma quote). In his post race comments Max states he was pulling a gap to de Ferrari’s but than got stuck behind a slower car. ruining his race..Canada reversed for Max but he deals with it a lot better than Ric did i feel. No complain from Max about better pace in clean air and all that jazz.


Hmm, he was complaining a bit afterwards. Thing is, he could have helped himself by 1) out qualifying Ricciardo, or 2) out dragging him at the start. As he did neither he had to tuck in behind Ricciardo, and he’d lose the first stop benefits given to the lead car. So then he needed to show he had better tire management. He couldn’t do that. Lastly he needed to hit his marks for his pit stop, to make sure he didn’t get stuck behind Kimi. He didn’t, so that was his race done. He can’t have too many complaints.


No complain from Max about better pace in clean air and all that jazz.

Errmm… would that be the Max Verstappen who (on fresher tyres) was dropping away from (Ricciardo) by half a second a lap when they were both in clean air?


But Ricciardo was managing his tyres better so Max may have been faster in that part of the race but as his tyres went off it then caused him to lose out to Vettel and nearly Raikonnen. The quickest way to the end of the race isn’t necessarily driving as quick as possible.


Hamilton knew the distance to Ricciardo. He knew the time needed for a stop. So he was trying to stay ahead of Ricciardo at a stop but so close that Rosberg would loose to Ricciardo. This was foul play to the team and Mercedes gave a warning to him.


Pray tell me. How does HAM know the distance to RIC?

Pit boards typically display tyre lap stints (the information preferred by ROS); or track position, lap no and time to driver running behind if you are the front runner. The person on pit board duty only holds the board perpendicular to the wall for his driver and more often the time displayed varies slightly from the timing app information that we access through the F1App on a lap by lap basis.

Does this mean that HAM notes the position of all the driver on track from the big screens and then reads and registers EACH and EVERY pit board as he passes by! Doubtful


That is one way to look at it or you could look at it that Hamilton was just managing his pace out front looking after his tyres and most importantly his engine. When the team warned him of the threat from behind he upped his pace which he probably wouldn’t have done if he was intentionally trying to slow Rosberg down. But I’m sure you’ll see what you want to see


Can someone explain the chart to me again? At the start, Hamilton was 5 seconds behind something-or-other, then he dropped to around 26 seconds behind something-or-other at his first stop, then at the end he was exactly on zero.

So what does zero represent? Average lap pace for the ultimate winner? That doesn’t make sense as the line would have to slope upwards after lap 1 to represent a flying start to the lap.


Torchwood Mobile

I just scroll past the things.

I too belong in the “don’t know what the hell they are on about” club.

The written analysis and comments are great though.


Each line represents how far behind (or in front) of a mythical metronomic average lap time each driver is at any point during the race. Because it’s a standing start they do below average on lap 1. They continue to do below average as they have full tanks, but may start to catch up to the mythical car before a pit stop sends them 20 odd seconds further back. The winner starts and finishes the race at the same time as the mythical car because it’s using his average as the zero line! Safety cars and rain affected races sometimes see the driver lines going ahead of the mythical car, but it is always balanced by them falling behind again.


Yes, I get that but it’s still too confusing for my simple mind. Surely one of the smart people reading this blog can devise a simpler chart?


This format is apparently used by the teams, so perhaps if we all invested some effort in understanding it better we’d all find it useful, too.


I find it really useful as it gives an insight into who put in quick laps when, who pitted when and what their relative pace compared to other drivers was. Far more info than we ever get simply by watching the race!


The zero line is the winners time divided by the number of laps in the race.
The drivers lines represent their times compared to the above line. Remember the following, that for the first half of the race the times will be slower that the zero line average. The second half of the race, the times will be faster that the average. You can tell this by the slope of the lines. If they are going down, then they are slower than the average, and if they are going up, then they are going faster that the average.
One other thing to remember, is that the gaps to the zero line is cumulative. For example, if a driver is 5 seconds slower than the winners average after the first lap, and 5 seconds slower again after the second lap, then the cumulative difference after lap 2 is 10 seconds.


I reckon Lewis was pacing himself. After the shunt on FP2 he was in the dark regarding long pace durability of the Tyres in the long stint phase. So regarding Rosberg no he wasn’t ditching him into the Red Bulls clutches. Both turned up the dial on their engines and they were away “far from the madding crowd.”
Besides Lewis dialled his engine down and tried to limit the stress on his last engine of the season before the penalty engine.
Gutteriz didn’t help much as he failed to let Lewis pass. Most back markers gave way but a certain decided they wanted to slow the front runners down. Gutteriz deserved a few points on his licence and an obligatory eye test [Mod] ? That should programme his brain to observe the blue↪ flags.


Lewis still has two engines (ICE) left to use (i believe) before taking a peanlty it’s the other parts of the Power Unit he has used 5 of, the MGU-H and turbocharger I think.


You’re right. Both Rosberg and he have used 3 ICE’s.

HUN16 PU Elements:


No he hasn’t he is on his last ICE engine.


Nope. See link above.

Top Tags
SEARCH Strategy