Balancing risk and reward – how the big decisions were made in F1 British GP
British GP 2016
Strategy Report
Posted By: James Allen  |  12 Jul 2016   |  3:10 pm GMT  |  82 comments

This was a snakes and ladders type of race, where a driver could get a leg up from a timely Virtual Safety Car or lose ground with a badly timed pit stop. We saw both in the British Grand Prix thanks to a downpour minutes before the off, a Safety Car start and then a Virtual Safety Car soon after the restart.

Lewis Hamilton won the British Grand Prix for the fourth time, a result that was never in doubt from the start, but the battle for second and several other races were close and strategy was decisive.

We also saw clearly that the Red Bull is faster than the Mercedes in intermediate wet conditions, which could give them a platform for a win later in the season.

Conversely it showed how much Williams struggle for performance when the track is wet. Neither car finished in the points despite starting sixth and 12th on the grid.

Adrian Newey

Pre Race Expectations

Friday practice running was not interrupted by rain and the teams covered a good mileage, all struggling to make sense of the hard tyre, which wasn’t fast enough relative to the soft and medium and gave a shorter life than the medium.

For some cars it gave more stability in high speed corners, but otherwise it was a tyre to avoid. The likely strategy, had it stayed dry, was to do an opening 10 lap stint on softs, then two stints on medium.

Ferrari had not saved a second new set of medium tyres, so they could have been caught out badly in a dry race, but they got away with it because it poured down with 15 minutes to go before the start.

First transition from wet to intermediate tyres

Although there was some disappointment with the length of time the Safety Car stayed out at the start of the race, we still had a variety of different decisions made by teams and drivers as to when was the moment to move from full wets, to intermediates and then onto slick tyres. And these proved to be critical to race results in some cases.

Everyone followed the same pattern through these transitions, with a few laps of variation. All the cars ran on the medium compound slick tyres once the track was ready for it. Unusually it was Ferrari’s Sebastian Vettel who gambled first on the move to slicks, as he was trying to make up for a five place grid penalty and not having taken advantage of the first switch from wets to intermediates.

Vettel had been running just behind Sergio Perez after the restart on Lap 5 in 10th and 11th places. Vettel went for intermediates as soon as the Safety Car went in, but Perez delayed the move to intermediates by two laps, like the three front-runners, Hamilton, Rosberg and Verstappen.

Sergio Perez

It paid massive dividends. One of the first cars to take intermediates, Pascal Wehrlein in the Manor, went off into the gravel and a Virtual Safety Car was deployed. This offered those who had yet to pit and chance to stop at reduced speeds and saved 10 seconds compared to those who had pitted at racing speeds.

This ‘snakes and ladders’ moment cemented the position of the top three at the front and catapulted Perez from 10th to fourth, ahead of Red Bull’s Daniel Ricciardo.

Teams have very sophisticated tools now for measuring relative performance of all the cars on track at a moment like this and the ‘guinea pigs’, who take the early gamble are monitored closely by two or three strategy engineers in each team looking for improvements in pace sector by sector and areas of the track which are not suitable yet for intermediates.

The teams who delayed their stop for intermediates by one or two laps were the ones closely monitoring this and judging the conditions not to be right yet for that tyre.

At the front there are other factors at play on a wet track. One is the ‘spray effect’, which means that the less spray you are driving into, the less time you lose. Cars in the midfield lose a lot of time.

There is no need to react pre-emptively, which is why both Mercedes and Red Bull, the top four cars, did not pit straight away after the Safety Car.

Sebastian Vettel

The cars that went early got it wrong in this case, but a gamble can work in some situations so it’s deemed worth a try to get that snakes and ladders boost up. What was strange with Ferrari again, was that they pitted both cars on Lap 5, taking the same gamble with both. Most teams avoided that, giving one car the early gamble and bringing the other car in a lap later.

No one could have certainty at the moment when the Safety Car was released, before they had done a lap in anger. So it’s a risk to take intermediates, but Ferrari didn’t split their risk, they went for it and it cost them the upside enjoyed by drivers like Perez, and Massa who gained six and five places respectively. Vettel stayed 11th and Raikkonen lost a place.

Nico Rosberg
Second transition Intermediate to medium tyres

By Lap 15 the track was drying enough to consider switching to slick tyres. Vettel went for it first and over the next three laps everyone else followed. Vettel spun, which indicates that he went a lap too early, while Verstappen tried to use the phenomenal pace of the Red Bull on worn intermediates, to do an extra lap and close on Hamilton, who had pitted on Lap 17. He had passed Rosberg using that pace on Lap 16 around the outside of Becketts, finding grip the Mercedes struggled to find.

Mercedes pitted both drivers on Lap 17 and straight away Hamilton was in the low 1m 40s, while Rosberg took several laps to adjust to the slicks and dropped five seconds behind Verstappen, who was straight onto Hamilton’e pace from the outset.

As the stint went on and the track dried out, Rosberg got more comfortable and the Mercedes reeled in the Red Bull and overtook.

The whole field chose the medium tyre for their stops; with around 34 laps to the finish it was the best compromise between pace and durability. The soft would have grained and another stop would have been needed, while the hard was 0.5s per lap slower than the medium and lasted two laps less, so was unattractive.

It wasn’t certain that the medium tyres would make it to the finish from there, but Verstappen again did well to make it to the chequered flag as the Red Bull had been harder on the tyres than the Mercedes in practice.

The strategists monitor the tyre performance in the stint and with 15 laps to go, the window when they would need to make another stop, the data said that the tyres would be okay to the finish.

Perez’ result in sixth place was built on that early decision to delay the first stop, but credit to Hulkenberg to recover and finish behind him, having dropped from 8th to 10th through that first transition, but he climbed up to seventh through making his second stop a lap later than Kvyat and Massa.

Report Sm Rect bann

The UBS Race Strategy Report is written by James Allen with input and data from several of the leading teams’ strategists, from Pirelli and from JA on F1 technical adviser Dominic Harlow

Race History & Tyre Usage Charts – Click to Enlarge

Illustrating the performance gaps between the cars during the race. The zero line is the winner’s average lap speed. A line which moves steeply upwards shows strong pace. Sharp drops indicate pit stops.

Look at the pace of the Mercedes compared to the Red Bull in the wet phase of the race and then in the dry when the tyres start to go off on Verstappen’s car.

Screen Shot 2016-07-12 at 13.37.11

Screen Shot 2016-07-12 at 13.38.34

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, you must be logged in to post a comment.


by Oldest
by Best by Newest by Oldest

Could Max have come in for a set of softs on lap 38 when Nico got by him? he would only have lost track position to his team mate, and would have been setting much faster lap times than Rosberg. would he have had enough laps to catch him? I know it didn't matter in the end anyway, but I would have liked to see Red Bull go aggressive with the strategy rather than settling for third.


Pitting on lap 38 doesn't really work. The fastest pit stop in the race took just over 28 seconds. However, on lap 38 there were only 14 laps left. If they pitted, Max would have had to have been about 2 seconds a lap faster than Rosberg just to catch Rosberg before the end of the race. That doesn't include the extra lap time Max would need to make a pass. Even in optimal conditions, I doubt the Soft tyre has that much performance advantage over the Medium (and that's before you take into account performance differences between the Mercedes and Red Bull in the dry).

When you look at it, Massa's fastest lap on the Soft tyre was half a second slower than Rosberg's fastest lap on the Medium (which Rosberg did on lap 44 and which was the fastest lap of the race). Ok, the Williams is not as fast as a Red Bull, but it still seems unlikely that Max could have set the lap times he would have needed.

A possible aggressive strategy would have been to do two stints on the Medium tyre, one of 17 laps and one of 16 laps and really push the Medium tyres. That would have meant a pit-stop on lap 34. The difficulty with that is that Max's new Medium tyres would still have to have been about 1.7 seconds a lap faster than Rosberg's old Mediums in order to do the catch and pass. Again, it seems unlikely that the performance of a new set of Mediums would have been good enough to do that.

As it turned out, of course, Max got second place through the penalty. However, even if the penalty hadn't happened, not pitting is still a better strategy for Red Bull than pitting, because not pitting keeps the pressure on Rosberg and there was always the chance that Rosberg would make a mistake and go wide somewhere. If that had happened, Max would have had an opportunity to take an advantage. Red Bull would have lost that potential opportunity by pitting, which would have taken the pressure off of Rosberg and would have made his race easier.


Recent history shows they only try risky strategies with DR, no upsetting the new golden boy of the team. Had the positions been reversed, they would have pitted DR to try for that exact scenario you mention, with the knowledge that MV would now be in front and with any luck lead the RBR team home! Controversial call I know, but the writing is on the wall for DR & RBR...he's the new number 2.


I couldn't work out why RB didn't do exactly that with Ricciardo. He was 40+ secs ahead of Perez, so could have stopped and still held position.
With fresh tyres he could have chased down Max and maybe Rosberg.
Or did team orders come into play?


Axel, yes they could have tried it with both drivers and lost nothing.


If they did it with both drivers surely Merc would have just mirrored them to cover them off? Doing it with one driver might have yielded results (albeit unlikely ones).


Andrew, maybe, but if Max came in immediately after Nico got by him then he might have got him back with the undercut. It might not have worked, but they had nothing to lose.


I thought they should have but not to catch and pass because 23 seconds would have been a lot to ask. If however there was a safety car he would have been very racy behind Rosberg.


Jim, I thought it was worth a punt, the Mercs might have had tyre trouble, or a safety car as you say. Opportunity missed I think.


There's 2 added advantages to a wet start or rain affected race, firstly fuel economy isn't an issue, and secondly on a wet track full throttle on most sections is greatly reduced, and less full throttle loading is much kinder to the engines. And with PU's limited to 4 per driver for this year, a "TLC" part throttle at first Monaco and now Silverstone could be very significant in eking out engine life towards the end of the year, especially for Lewis Hamilton who is a bit marginal on fresh engine availability.

The rain affected races could be critical for the outcome of the drivers world championship, and any more wet races would be very beneficial for Lewis Hamilton with regards to his team-mate on fresh motors.

If you look at the lap times and performances objectively, then Force India was the 3rd quickest car-engine combination at Silverstone in race trim. It was only Kimi Raikkonen's determination and grit that saw him nip past Checo. To be only slower than Mercedes and Red Bull on a track requiring high speed aero stability and clean front to rear downforce is an excellent achievement for a team whose budget is nowhere as big as the front runners, but if Hulk and Checo keep cleaning up good points position they could even overtake Williams for fourth place in the constructors championship. Which would be a magnificent effort.


It's 5 PU's this year, as there are >20 races. If it was <20 races, then it would of been 4 PU's. Hamilton still has 2 ICE's left. It is just 2 components that he has reached the limit on. Additional ones would require penalties, but not necessary starting at the back (maybe 5 or 10 places back for each new component)


Fascinating article again as always, thanks James. I wonder if people who are less confident in the rain don't practice it more often. Or maybe they do of course, hard to say. It just seems that you can make such a difference in these situations and although it doesn't occur too often, it could make a massive difference if you're fighting for a championship. You'd expect on this level everybody's performance is sort of the same, yet the opposite is true!


With the current rules and restrictions on testing it is hard for any of the drivers to practice at all. Ok they could get some practice in on different open wheeled cars. You do raise a point that some drivers that know they are weak in this area may subconsciously avoid driving in the rain but I'd imagine that you do not become an elite level driver/athlete/sportsperson by avoiding working on your weaknesses.


I guess driving in the rain has to do more with "seat of the pants" ability than training or looking at your telemetry

Drivers with more "natural" talent like HAM, VET, VES can do better in the rain because they "feel" the car or "read" the track better

It would also explain why a fast but technical driver like ROS has a hard time figuring out the car's limits in the wet track
Also, since ultimate grip, braking and acceleration are compromised, cars become more level, allowing talented drivers in slower cars to perform better


Lewis did a great job and the virtual safety gave him enough time to put on dry tyres and still come out in front. Those that lost out were the ones that pitted before the virtual safety. But if there were no yellow flags safety moments then they may have been ahead of the lead four drivers at their pit stop phases.


Great analysis James ?


It all happened in the virtual safety phase.
Some gambled prior to it.
Mercedes came out tops as did Red Bull.
Kimi did okay. But Vettel didn't.
Ferrari are now the 3rd team and Red Bull are in Second. Hungary will suit Red Bull a lot more than Ferrari.


Everyone said that last year and, in the end Ferrari walked it, Merc were fastest in qualifying and, arguably RBR got two spots on the podium because the others messed up.


Yes that was last year.
Mercedes will be tops.
But Red Bull now have a car that is showing impressive development and has a young driver who is excelling . Ferrari maybe be hoping the longer straights at Monza may help them. But that track is suited for Mercedes as is Germany and Spa.
The Ferrari Boss has signed Kimi again. From what is being said in the Italian papers . The only person he wants to team Vettel in a Ferrari is Lewis Hamilton so he is hoping for a further breakdown with Lewis and Nico which may give him an option to get Lewis in a Ferrari earlier than his contract with Mercedes.
Been also reported on Autosport SkyF1 Italian SkyF1 and Italian sports papers. The Italian boss does not want or will consider anyone at Haas. The only exception as is Sainz as an interim driver.




You can go on to "Sky F1 gossip,
Checkout time 11.13" and click on blue highlight for full story... Jeez it's explained in the post. "SkyF1" that's the British one if you not on the grand sceptred island ?.

22 could just post the direct link.
And the fact that information is in the 'gossip' section tells me all I need to know, as in don't waste my time.
Thanks BB.


It wasn't just in the gossip section it was a separate news story a week ago which was linked in to gossip regarding Kimi having the extension to his contract. It as a direct quote from Ferrari boss regarding Lewis.
Finger tap it all about shuffle and hustle dip & pick and mix .
I assume you'd prefer the "Moon on a Stick next " ?
Am kidding your choice in the end to read it or not.

Stephen Taylor

James I have two points for you reply to
1 Ferrari seem to make many mistakes in regard to strategy -do you think Ferrari need to shake up in the strategic department personnel wise to improve and start winning or it more about reviewing their procedures?
2 We all agree RBR did pretty well on strategy -in regard to Max especially but Gary Anderson in his Autosport column seemed very disappointed that RB didn't provide more of a dry weather challenge to Merc once they were on the Mediums . To be honest I think that is harsh as Renault don't have as a good an ICE and ERS deployment as Mercedes HPP and you also need you good straight light speed too at Silverstone.


So the wet weather running once again shows that the Red Bull is a well-balanced and strong on aerodynamics.... Bring on 2017, and a tighter WDC fight...


After the highs of the last race Manor had a big crash back to reality with a double retirement.
Rosberg really struggled in the wet again. I can't remember if he has always been so poor in the wet or whether he just doesn't like the way this Mercedes handles in the wet. Hamilton makes it work but growing up in the UK it is a distinct advantage.
Verstappen looked very good again. My early predication that moving him to the senior team was too soon has shown to be completely wrong again.
Perez and Force India have had another brilliant race again. FI have really managed to maximise this car for the amount of resources that they have. I thought that McLaren might catch them before the end of the season but if they still keep putting in races like this then it is looking very unlikely but there is still along way to go and McLaren traditionally are very good at developing their car and they definitely have the drivers to do it. I expect they are already concentrating the majority of their resources on next years car as it potentially is a good chance for them to make a big jump forward.


The Red Bull is quicker than Rosberg on the inters, not Hamilton


I was going to say the same. Rosberg just hasn't got 'it' in wet weather.


We saw the Red Bull was faster than one Mercedes in Tricky conditions.. considering Hamilton was much faster than Rosberg it's probably stretching it to conclude it could win in those conditions.


"...the hard was 0.5s per lap slower than the medium and lasted two laps less".

Was this due to the track conditions? Forgive my ignorance but what use is the hard tyre?



Yes, effectively it's due to track conditions, in particular the track temperature.

The track temperature at Silverstone was about 27 degrees celsius. At that temperature, the hard tyre was never going to make it into its operating window. The conditions were just too cold.

However, if you take the hard tyre to a track like Sepang in Malaysia where the track temperature last year was in the 50 degree celsius range, the hard tyre will work just fine. Now this year the Malaysian gp is at the start of October and not March, but the temperatures will be just as hot. So it's probably no surprise that Pirelli have selected two sets of the hard tyres as the mandatory race tyres for the Malaysian gp.

When the team tyre nominations for Malaysia are released, I would expect most teams will be taking relatively more of the hard and soft tyres and relatively fewer of the medium tyres, which don't work as well in hot conditions.


Considering the rest of the Pirelli range, the actual 'Hard' tyre is made entirely from granite.


"...what use is the hard tyre?"

On this occasion: well precisely!


It's the tyre that other tyres fear ?


We also saw clearly that the Red Bull is faster than the Mercedes in intermediate wet conditions, which could give them a platform for a win later in the season.

That seems quite a strange statement to make. Wasn't Lewis Hamilton by far and away the fastest driver in these conditions? So isn't it more accurate to say that the Red Bull can be faster than the Merc... if we're comparing fast Red Bull drivers with the slower Merc driver.

And, even in this second scenario, is this news? Wasn't the Red Bull in Ricciardo's hands faster than the Merc of Nico (and even Hamilton)?


Comparing the 4 cars is almost irrelevant.
The only relevant comparison was Max vs Nico.
Lewis was out front controlling the pace for pretty much the entire race, confident in the fact he could respond of necessary.
I'm really not sure where James was going with this statement


Also didn't Lewis say he had turned his engine down towards the end to try and preserve life in it. So he likely would have had more speed had he needed it.


Wasn't Verstappen slightly catching Ham though? Like he said in the cool down room. We saw Ricciardo easily pass Lewis at Austin in similar conditions last year.


If we're going by things a driver said, then Lewis said "no you weren't" and laughed. Which is true. Lewis was controlling the pace, so of course Verstappen was "catching" him.


it's clear - both from what we saw and what was said - that Hamilton wasn't pushing to the limit out in front, so the idea of Verstappen or Rosberg 'catching' can't be interpreted as actually clearly being the faster car.

In Austin, I think Hamilton's tyres were shot at that stage, which also resulted in Rosberg passing without too much of a fight.


That's a bit misleading though, Max set that lap on his final full tour on inters when Hamilton and Rosberg had already pitted when the track was drying significantly; the lap-by-lap chart doesn't show any significant difference between Hamilton and Verstappen on inters.


Don't worry about it chaps - anyone who has raced in the wet with a commanding lead will know the reality.

You are 'testing' each and every puddle and bits of track each and every lap. Those behind you have you as a measure and know they can push that touch more or measure the lap times by yours. It's a huge advantage.

You have just read engineers talk. Without racers input. Further, it's a perfectly acceptable statement but without context. However the 'amount' better the car may or may not be? Well that's just not quantifiable because LH was out trying to win a championship on one engine. And cruising much of the time carefully.

Ves - well not so much - yet...


Too little credit to Hamilton there. A master class in tyre preservation and control of the race in very tricky conditions.


It's James job to give a balanced overview ( which he did), not [Mod] to appease you and the other [Mod] that recd your comment.


Ignoring facts in order to take away from an absolutely superb performance (that was measured and restrained due to his engines imploding) in order to make what he did look less impressive is actually not by any stretch of the imagination a "balanced overview".

We get it, you [Mod] Lewis with a passion (I'd love to know the honest reason for that) but lashing out at people (as you so often do) because their opinion differs from yours is simply not a good look.

Maybe you could do with some balance yourself?


Did James ignore facts or just not embellish them.enough for many here?
That's your opinion and I'll agree to disagree as I have every right too.

As for your assumptions about me personally, assume away whilst ignoring the facts if it makes you feel better.


@sarsippious, well, as you're so concerned as to what would make me (and no doubt others) feel better, I can say it would be a lot more agreeable if you could at least be more pleasant to people.

For instance, "could you show me where you got that info from please?" is very different to "link?" and then complaining about the source.


I asked for a simple link so I could read it myself and yet you'd think by the responses I've received I'd asked for Hamilton's kidney instead.
Am I safe to say it's not the act of asking for a link but rather who's asking for it?
Look, either way I just don't care.


But you care enough to respond.

It's simple, look above, your manner is unpleasant. Hence the type of replies you get.


Comments like this make me wish we still had the dislike button ?


An option to ignore certain posters would make this place infinitely better in my opinion. It's absolutely possible but would probably cause James and his team a good deal of work to pull it all together.

However, I agree with you entirely.


Calm down
Sarccipuss ???
Who's appeasing who? Its time for your some kibbles me thinks ?




Thanks James - great article, much appreciated as always.


wow. I think this was the "cleanest" looking race history chart since it was first posted here.
it is what it is...
not saying it is a good thing.
I think it shows what a boring "race" it was for the most part.


Great article.
Red Bull will have the fastest car next year.
Both Adrian (Newey) and Mario (Illien) will be working hard to get Red Bull back on top, and they will do it.
Interesting that Ferrari again failed to split their strategy in the highly variable conditions (and thus mitigate overall team risk); if Vettel had not gone in right away for inters, and waited for (what could have been considered, and forseen, a high probability) safety car/v-safety car he could have fought for fourth (likely).
The strategic calls at Ferrari have been poor, and the downforce levels (deficiency) are embarrassing for a top team.
I agree with one poster, on another article, that we will see (likely litterally) fireworks at Red Bull when they have the top machinery again (it's coming soon...).
I'd enjoy seeing The Max perform 'a Kimi' a la 2007, and take it at the last race; but in a year, many of us will be complaining that Red Bull are dominant.
We'll see.
Hoping to see a revived Red team at Budapest.


From what I've heard the 'extreme wet' tyre is terrible and is only good for running behind the safety car. Why can't they produce a good wet tyre?


They should probably start calling the "Extreme Wet" the "safety car" tyre.


Have the "Extreme Wet" tires ever been used in actual real racing conditions? These days, if it gets "extremely wet", the safety car comes out...


@Steve W.. or perhaps the Safety car comes out BECAUSE race control knows that the Extreme Wets are not good enough for racing and needed only to dry the track of standing water.


My only doubt was if Verstappen should have placed softer tires [yellow band] to close the gap to Lewis. [lap18]
Since Max has shown to be a phenomena in tire savings [Barcelona+Austria], it was a risk worth taken.


I think Verstappen has shown himself to be very good with tyres, but is it so much better compared to rivals?

If we're using Barcelona and Austria as examples:
- Barcelona. He was on the same tyre strategy as the driver immediately behind him and managed to hold him off (which should have been easier than the job of the guy behind as he had no turbulent air to deal with).
- Austria. A one-stopper was a strategy that several teams considered but, after Vettel's 'pop', some (e.g. Hamilton) were pulled out of due to the risk/reward favouring the extra stop (i.e. Hamilton would have finished no lower than second and would have had a safer conclusion). Verstappen and Raikkonen had the most to gain by staying out and the most to lose by coming in (likelihood of dropping off the podium). So yes, Verstappen's perceived ability to look after the tyres enabled Red Bull to take the risk, but it's not necessarily that Verstappen is better able to look after the tyres than those ahead of him in that race (just race circumstances that dictated that the risk would be worth taking).

So, while I do think that Verstappen has shown himself to be good at tyre management, the evidence actually suggests that he's actually no better than Raikkonen (which is still great given the difference in experience but we're not saying the same about Kimi and tyres).


What I meant is Max already has a win and won't be WDC or WCC.
So it's worth the risk - IMO.
1st place or if it goes wrong P3.

"The greater the risk, the biggest the reward"
- Michael Cimino R.I.P.


Agreed. My only questioning was of the "phenomena" suggestion. I don't think it's accurate to suggest that... yet.


James, Nico seems to be very slow compared to Lewis on extreme wets? Monaco/Austria (qualy) Silverstone. Any reason in particular?


Yes, check in this vid how Verstappen closed the gap to Rosberg.


Draw your own conclusions.

Interesting comparison is between Merc and Red Bull in the Intermediate condition. Red Bull is clearly faster (Monaco, Silverstone). Merc can probably live with that as it only happens max 10% of the season


There was a lot of criticism of the start behind the safety car going on too long...whilst i can understand them not just starting as normal on safety grounds, I have a couple of alternate options, and since i don't have Bernie's number I'll just stick them here! 😉

If the primary reason for the safety car start is to give drivers a feel for
the conditions before they race...
Do multiple formation laps...set the drivers off as normal, but just do continuous formation laps without the safety car. drivers tell the teams when they're ready to race, they tell Charlie, once enough teams want to start he tells the drivers and they line up on the grid for a normal start (with total race laps reduced by the amount of extra formation laps).

If the primary reason for the safety car is that they feel a rolling start is safer in these conditions...
Then just start the cars under virtual safety car...that way they're not held up by the safety car, everyone runs to a 'safe' speed, there's no overtaking etc...and again, once the majority of drivers are saying they're ready to start, they can just turn off the virtual safety car.


I still disagree with the assertion that RBR is faster than the Mercs in the wets, especially using Monaco and Silverstone as cases in point. In Monaco, Lewis was held up behind Rosberg initially and after he was allowed to pass him, actually gained on Ric before the RBR pitted. As was observed in posts above Lewis was controlling his pass in front during the wet phase of the race. It is a bit of a stretch to suggest that RBR is faster in the wets.


Thats what im thinking 🙂


Nico is still yet to win a wet or race or even changeable conditions to my knowledge?
I agree, Bulls do seem to have the edge in full wets. However we don't race in the wet now do we. SC untill it's dry enough for inters? #farce


Was Hamilton really pushing?


Whatever happened to the Haas strategist who had an extended bit of leave? Is she destined for Ferrari? They need some of that early season Haas strategy calling!


There's no official statement on her. So far as I'm aware Haas have only said that she's on leave and her twitter and instagram are set to private - so she's not making any public statements either. What seems certain is that she hasn't been to any of the races since China.

The likeliest explanation is that she's been poached by another team and is on gardening leave. If that's the case then it looks like there won't be any official statement until her notice period expires and her new team announces her appointment. Time will tell.

If she is on gardening leave then her notice period will be at least 6 months, if not longer. Therefore, there won't be any news until October at the earliest.


I'd like to see a wet weather specialist in the Williams before we dismiss it as poor in wet.


Williams are nowhere in slow corners. When it rains, most corners become slow corners. it's easy to understand, isn't it?


Massa is terrible in wet conditions, and the fact that Bottas does not stand out from him, says a lot about Bottas skills on wet.


Massa beat Alonso in Brasil 2012, the 2008 Brasilian GP is not a completely dry one, either. Bottas had a top 3 in a wet canada in his debut season with a dog Williams.


I don't understand James how you come to the conclusion that Red Bull are faster than Mercedes in wet conditions, considering that Hamilton was not pushing at all.


That early in the race, Hamilton was definitely pushing.


???, by the end of the first lap after the safety car Ham already pulled almost a 4 sec lead over Rosberg. Then he turned down his engine and controlled his pace and maintained the gap between 4 and 7 seconds the rest of the race.
I didn't see any indication of RB being better than Mercedes(Hamilton) in the wet.
I don't agree with James, as i also didn't see any indication in Monaco either, what i did see is Rosberg looking terrible in wet conditions at Monaco and Silverstone.
I could be wrong but It's seems to me these conclusions are being based of Rosberg performance in wet conditions alone.

Top Tags
SEARCH Strategy
JA ON F1 In association with...
Multi award winning Formula One photographer
Multi award winning Formula One photographer

Sign up to receive the latest F1 News & Updates direct to your inbox

You have Successfully Subscribed!