Formula 1 - 2017

[MIKA27]

INSIDE LINE: FERRARI DO NOT REQUIRE TEAM ORDERS

In the aftermath of an intriguing, albeit processional, Monaco Grand Prix, I am amused at the the accusation of team orders directed at Ferrari which supposedly gifted Sebastian Vettel victory at the expense of Kimi Raikkonen.

Vettel won the race fair and square. Granted Raikkonen was surprisingly quick all weekend and thus resulted in pole position, which despite ending his drought of top spot starts hardly generated a grin from the sullen Finn.

The next day during the race Raikkonen scampered off into the lead with Vettel chasing. It was obvious that Vettel was not going to try a move on the notoriously tight street circuit. Instead he opted to bide his time, conserving everything including his tyres.

When they pitted Raikkonen the German upped the ante and showed his true hand. The flurry of laps in clean air, that undoubtedly resulted in victory, were exceptional. When he dipped into the low 1:15s the writing was on the wall. Clearly Raikkonen had been holding him up.

As it panned out Vettel was comfortably faster in the second stanza of the race, even after the safety car period he simply disappeared into the distance and Raikkonen simply had no answer. The Ferrari pit wall did not need to issue instructions to their drivers.

For the record, I am a firm believer that Raikkonen in his heyday at McLaren was the quickest driver in the world. He was fast-tracked into Formula 1 because he was a prodigious talent. His rise can be likened to that of Max Verstappen today, although when it happened the young Dutchman was still stumbling around in Crocs.

Sauber took him on despite the fact that he only had 23 car races on his resume. He was special. And indeed in his rookie year Raikkonen did enough for McLaren to choose him, at the time, over the highly rated and very capable Nick Heidfeld.

It was a shrewd gamble by Ron Dennis, but it worked because in Kimi he had the real deal. A driver who was blisteringly quick and a charger in race mode. Alas it all coincided with the Michael Schumacher juggernaut at Ferrari and in the end the fruits of the partnership were not fully enjoyed.

In those days Kimi smiled often. Cracked funny jokes and became one of the most loved and respected drivers on the grid. He moved to Ferrari in 2007 and promptly won the title for them, justifying why the Reds unceremoniously dumped Michael Schumacher for the Finn at the time.

But in retrospect Raikkonen peaked that year and has never really hit the heights of a title bid on a consistent basis since then. Then, he decided to quit Formula 1 at the end of 2009.

After two years in the wilderness of World Rally Championship and Nascar truck racing, he returned with Lotus in 2012. But it was a different Raikkonen. Yes he won a couple of races with Lotus, but that hardly set the stage for a future where he could challenge for the title.

And also things were different with him. Most notably his carefree happy chappy demeanour was replaced by a Dirty Harry persona, never smiling, always sullen, angry at the F1 world. Difference is that Harry had punks to make his day, while Kimi has not.

His return to Ferrari in 2014 was fortuitous in a Prodigal Son kind of way, but Alonso owned the team at that stage and the sport’s most successful team were in severe decline.

Raikkonen was also in decline, gone was his clinical efficiency and raw speed which were his trademarks in his early days. Instead we had a vastly experienced driver, too often, involved in rookie style altercations and making silly mistakes on a regular basis.

Nevertheless, the arrival of his ‘mate’ Vettel at Maranello in 2015 galvanised the Italian outfit. But from day one the German was better than Raikkonen and uncertainty surrounding the Finn’s future in the team was constant.

And he just got more miserable. While Vettel won three times that year and scored 13 podium finishes, Raikkonen only made it on to the podium on three occasions.

However Maurizio Arrivabene persevered with him, and together with Vettel they survived a hopeless 2016 season.

However, what has emerged in 2017 is a real prancing horse capable challenging the might of Mercedes. The Reds can sniff the Formula 1 World Championship again.

No doubt this will piece irk supporters of The Iceman, probably have them stomping in their igloos, but it has to be said that Vettel is a far better option for the title than Raikkonen.

The German is arguably at his very best right now, extremely fast and ruthlessly consistent. His teammate is not. Therefore it is not rocket science for Ferrari to choose what horse to back.

For sure Raikkonen may have to cede positions to Vettel in the future as the title battle with Mercedes intensifies, but right now Ferrari do not have to make the call from pitwall because Vettel is doing his talking on the track – as he did at Monaco.

And all Kimi can do is pout and sulk, because when it matters he does not have that extra edge and sustained consistency to warrant his team backing him for another Formula 1 title.

He is the number two and unlikely to change, thus he might as well quit the Dirty Harry act and enjoy his final year or two at the top by cracking a smile on occasions.

[MIKA27]

Marcus Ericsson blames 'overheating brakes and cold tyres' for safety car crash

Sauber driver Marcus Ericsson has blamed “overheating brakes and cold tyres” for his crash behind the safety car during the Monaco Grand Prix.

The Swede was running 16th when the safety car was deployed for an incident involving his team-mate Pascal Wehrlein and Jenson Button at Portier.

He was struggling with overheating brakes and cold tyres during the slow-speed running and after four laps behind the safety car, he crashed out of the race.

Ericsson was un-lapping himself when he slid off track going around the first corner and hit the barrier, bringing his race to an early end.

“It has been a very tough weekend from the start to the end,” he explained after retiring from the Monaco GP.

“With the pace we have had this weekend, the race was decent from my side. Unfortunately, I then had some issues with the brakes overheating behind the safety car.

“I tried to bring the brake temperature down, but at the same time I had to keep the tyres in the right working window.

“The combination of overheating brakes and cold tyres made me struggle a lot to stop the car, so I could not avoid sliding into the barriers.”

[MIKA27]

Stoffel Vandoorne disappointed to miss out on points

Stoffel Vandoorne expressed disappointment at being unable to capture McLaren-Honda's first 2017 points after he crashed out of the Monaco Grand Prix.

Vandoorne had worked his way into the top 10 during the course of the 78-lap race but came under pressure from Force India's Sergio Perez shortly before the Safety Car was deployed when team-mate Jenson Button collided with Pascal Wehrlein.

Perez attacked Vandoorne at the restart and the Belgian slid into the wall at Sainte Devote, bringing his race to an end, and with it his chance of a point.

"It’s a shame we haven’t come away with any points this weekend, I think we’d all hoped to get a little bit more out of the weekend," he said.

“Towards the end of the race, I knew it would be difficult at the restart. It’s always difficult to heat up the Supersofts, and we knew we wouldn’t be able to cover Sergio and Felipe [Massa], who’d switched to the Option behind the Safety Car.

"That wasn’t an option for us – when you’re in the top 10, you’ve got to keep your position. It was hard to get the tyres and brakes up to temperature, and I just had nowhere to go at Turn 1, unfortunately.

“So, this isn’t the result we wanted this weekend, but there are still positives to take away from Monaco: we may still be lacking overall performance, but we’ve made some useful steps forward this weekend.

“There’s still a lot of work to do – but I remain optimistic.”

[MIKA27]

Perez "100 percent" at fault in Kvyat clash - Tost

Franz Tost was frustrated with Sergio Perez's driving after he collided with Daniil Kvyat in the Formula 1 Monaco Grand Prix, forcing the Toro Rosso driver out of the race.

Perez, running on fresh tyres, attempted to pass Kvyat at Rascasse for ninth with six laps to go, but the duo made contact.

Kvyat retired after the impact, while Perez continued and ultimately finished 13th.

The stewards investigated the incident and handed Perez a time penalty, which didn't affect his position, and penalty points on his licence.

Tost was dismayed with Perez's approach as the incident robbed Toro Rosso of a double-points finish, with Carlos Sainz finishing an impressive sixth.

"It was Checo's fault," Tost told Motorsport.com. "You don't just drive in there like that. "Just look at what is destroyed - the middle of the sidepod [on Kvyat’s car], the left-front wheel [on Perez’s].

"You do not need to discuss the fault - it's 100 percent Checo's fault. You don't do this. Until this incident, we were with both cars in the points.

"All weekend, we had a very competitive car and Carlos showed a fantastic race, defending his sixth position, bringing it home. Daniil was there, too, but Perez took him out of the race."

Sainz told reporters that he felt Toro Rosso had the fourth or fifth best car in Monaco.

Tost believes the performance will vary from track to track, but he was pleased his team is currently meeting its target of fifth in the constructors' championship.

"Performance depends on the race tracks," he said. "It will be difficult for us in Canada and Azerbaijan but our engineers are working hard to find a set-up to get us in the points in these races.

"Renault is always coming with some small developments, so we will see. We're fifth in the constructors' championship, nine points ahead of Williams.

"We need to keep fighting for this position, this is our target."

 

[MIKA27]

Hamilton: Monaco car handling "most unusual" in Mercedes career

Lewis Hamilton says his Mercedes had the most "unusual" feel he had ever experienced over the Monaco Grand Prix weekend, as his team chases answers for its weekend tyre mystery.

Mercedes was left on the back foot in Monte Carlo as it failed to fully get on top of managing tyre temperatures on the tricky street circuit.

That opened the way for Ferrari to deliver a 1-2 finish that has helped Sebastian Vettel open up a 25-point advantage in the drivers' championship over Hamilton.

While Mercedes does not yet have an answer for what went wrong, Hamilton said the scale of the team's problem was particularly big because of how strange the weekend had been.

"It was not a happy car, that's for sure," said Hamilton. "It was the most unusual way the car has felt in all the years I've been with the team. Definitely a difficult one.

"But I think that doesn't deter the fact that we have a great car. It's just perhaps we didn't hit the nail on the top of the head this weekend.

"So we'll regroup, get the car back to where we know it's comfortable for the next races, try to understand the ultrasoft tyre a bit better and, yeah, come back stronger."

Mercedes motorsport boss Toto Wolff described the W08 as a bit of a 'diva' - in that it was very particular about its operating window.

Hamilton conceded that rivals Ferrari were making gains because its SF70H seemed well-balanced on all types of tracks and in all conditions.

"Ferrari seems to work everywhere, so we've definitely got a serious... you know, these next 14 races will be very, very difficult," he said.

"They've had probably the strongest car all year, a bit like our car last year where it just worked everywhere. This car currently is not working every single race we go to.

"But the more races we do, the more we learn and the stronger we get. We still came away from here with some points. We know that the Ferraris are not bulletproof, they've got things potentially coming up – all the totals [engine components] they've used or potentially used, so we'll see."

 

[MIKA27]

MONACO GP 2017 DOESN’T THRILL BUT SCALE AND VALUE OF THE EVENT STILL ESSENTIAL TO F1

The Monaco Grand Prix failed to produce much in the way of racing action and some fans have complained that it’s an anachronism in the modern F1 calendar.

Perhaps that is how it comes over on TV in some countries’ coverage, in which case there is work to be done. Another factor, in these days of rising inequality, is that many fans living normal lives don’t get excited by seeing rich people enjoying themselves any more.

But anyone who attended this year’s sun-kissed Monaco GP weekend will tell you it was an amazing event, that it is about far more than just a processional 90 minute race and that it is about far more than conspicuous wealth – even though everything looks expensive and everything builds to that 90 minute burst of energy on a Sunday.

The event is the reason for being there, not purely the race. And the fans can get closer to the cars, the stars and the F1 teams than at any other venue.

In many ways, this is the essence of the challenge around F1 in general for Liberty Media; to create an event with a race at the heart of it.

The fans have to be given a way to appreciate how Monaco is in F1’s DNA, its history, rather than being kept at arm’s length and fed simply a dull TV race.

Because being there, you can be in no doubt that the scale of the event is critical to F1’s appeal, to its image and what it needs to build on for the future.

Monaco still attracts the stars, embodies the glamour, speed and style which are F1’s unique qualities. It embodies the “extreme” which used to be central to the appeal of F1, but which has been lost somewhat in the last decade.

The 2017 cars with their high downforce and grippier tyres were mind-blowingly fast through corners like Casino Square, Tabac and Swimming Pool, far more so than in recent years.

I was out on track on Thursday when the drivers were doing their qualifying simulations during Free Practice 2. Standing a few inches from the barriers as the cars came towards me at 130mph – keeping the left side wheels off the barriers before disappearing in a blur through the second chicane and off to Rascasse – it was extreme.

I was delighted to see Ross Brawn standing a few metres away, wearing the track side tabard that must be worn in higher risk areas of the track. He had a misty-eyed look, not having been able during his racing career to go out to such places to see what F1 cars do and to see what the fans and media can see.

“They really are quick, aren’t they?” he said, like a man who has fallen in love with motor racing all over again.

I’ve been standing out there every year since 1990 when Senna, Prost and Mansell came blasting through and I’ve never seen one of F1’s bosses out there, seeing up close what F1 is about. If you are going to talk the talk on bringing the sport alive and taking it to the fans, as the new bosses of F1 are doing at the moment, you also have to do your research, get close to your product and understand what your fans are seeing and how best to communicate that on TV and digital platforms.

Monaco still matters

Monaco still matters greatly to F1; it is one of only two Grand Prix venues that do more for F1 than F1 does for the venue (along with Singapore). The track layout may not make for great races in overtaking terms, but they have so much more to offer the sport.

I was thinking about this subject a lot over the weekend, partly thanks to a new book came out last week about the Monaco GP, written by one of the best sports journalists of the last 30 years, Malcolm Folley, who has covered the race as part of a wide ranging sports brief since 1981. It’s called Monaco: Inside F1’s greatest race.

It’s a good read, as all Folley’s works are – he did a terrific book on the Senna vs Prost rivalry a few years ago and another on Borg versus McEnroe.

He has spoken to many of the top drivers who have won there over the years as well as plenty of insiders, who characterise the event.

He’s captured the spirit of the event of the Monaco Grand Prix, not just the race but more so the intrigues and deals that go on behind the scenes, such as the way that Ferrari used a luxurious yacht in Monaco harbour in 1995 to hold secret meetings with Michael Schumacher to tempt him to join them.

There are some great lines in the book, such as this one from Ross Brawn, from his days managing Benetton F1 team, when he used to brief the crew before the weekend in these terms,

” ‘I promise you, a lot of the people [rivals] out there hate Monaco. So, if you love Monaco you will have an advantage. It is a race to be relished. Absorb the atmosphere.

Absorb the fact that you are talking to the spectators because they are all around you. Absorb the fact that it will take you an hour to get across town.’

“If you relish all that, it is a very special place. Michael engendered that mental spirit where he understood that, as this is the most difficult track to race on, he was going to enjoy it and be the best. He thought that by saying how much fun he thought it was to drive at Monaco he would intimidate other drivers. When you flip the coin to believe it to be a wonderful opportunity, not a pain in the backside, Monaco really does become an addictive race.”

[MIKA27]

VETTEL VICTORY IN MONACO IS EXTRA SPECIAL FOR FERRARI

Sebastian Vettel has won plenty of races in his career, some more emotional than others, but the German’s one-two victory in Monaco was of special significance for Ferrari fans starved of success in recent years.

The last time the Italian team won in the Mediterranean principality was 16 years ago – in 2001 with Vettel’s compatriot Michael Schumacher leading a one-two.

Schumacher, the eventual seven-times world champion, ended a similar 16-year Ferrari drought in Monaco in 1997 with a victory that followed fan favourite Gilles Villeneuve’s 1981 triumph.

Villeneuve, Schumacher, Vettel. The roll call is spine-tingling but results are what really matter and a quick comparison of Schumacher’s first six races of 2001 and Vettel’s current performance will really get the heart racing at Maranello.

Schumacher – who ended the season with his fourth title – won the opener in Australia that year, as did Vettel this. He then took two more wins and two second places with one retirement.

Vettel is doing better, by comparison, with three wins and three second places, and makes a plausible argument when he says Ferrari could have won every race this year had everything gone to plan.

What happened in Australia, far from being a one-off, has become a sequence of success that has re-arranged the Formula One landscape with champions Mercedes already presenting themselves as underdogs.

The contrast between last season, when the oldest and most successful team in Formula One history failed to win a race and a frustrated Vettel was making headlines with radio rants, is marked.

The German is now 25 points clear of Mercedes driver Lewis Hamilton, the British three-times world champion who has won twice but struggled to get performance into his car’s Pirelli tyres while the Ferrari has seemed good everywhere.

“We are walking on a lovely beach of white sand after having run barefoot over sharp and jagged rocks,” wrote columnist Umberto Zapelloni in Monday’s Gazzetta dello Sport.

“These first six races of the season are worth as much as the arrival of an airplane for someone shipwrecked on a deserted island.”

The front page headline of the national sports daily was “Potere Rosso” (Red Power).

The German’s podium celebrations in Monaco were reminiscent of the glory years of the turn of the century when Schumacher dominated the Italian team and had everyone back at base singing to his tune.

Vettel was the conductor as the Ferrari mechanics and engineers sang the Italian anthem. Kimi Raikkonen, rather like Schumacher’s old team mate Rubens Barrichello, looked a lot less happy.

“We got a lot of hard times last year and this year everything seems to be upside down – but the team is the same, the people are the same,” Vettel told reporters.

“I guess in these small moments you just realise that it’s a special group of people.

“I think you can see when the guys are singing the Italian anthem. I think it’s impossible not to get goosebumps and feel very special standing up there representing them.”

[BrightonCorgi]

Monaco is usually a dull race.  Best pre-race, but unless it's rainy, it's a race I put on fast forward...

[Colt45]

On 5/28/2017 at 9:13 PM, MIKA27 said:

It's why I despise Indy car, cars driving in circles... "Weeeeeeeeeee! Not 

I think they meant the Monaco GP.

Indy cars run ovals, street courses, and closed circuits.

And the outcome isn't determined by qualifying position.

And there's passing!

What I find "funny" is that when Indycar split from CART, it was supposed to be all U.S. ovals only.....

[MIKA27]

7 hours ago, Colt45 said:

I think they meant the Monaco GP.

Indy cars run ovals, street courses, and closed circuits.

And the outcome isn't determined by qualifying position.

And there's passing!

What I find "funny" is that when Indycar split from CART, it was supposed to be all U.S. ovals only.....

Yeah, I read ALONSO so figured the reference was for Indy but I stand by what I said about Indy car, passing or not, IMO I don't see the spectacle of watching a car go round a perfect oval. As for Monaco, I think it would be a great race to actually attend but on TV, agreed, super boring.

[MIKA27]

ALONSO AWARDED INDY 500 ROOKIE OF THE YEAR

McLaren Andretti Autosport driver Fernando Alonso scooped the Rookie of the Year award for the 2017 edition of the Indianapolis 500.

Despite retiring from the race with a smoking Honda engine failure and finishing 24th, Alonso got the nod over the race’s top-finishing rookie Ed Jones who took the chequered flag in third, finishing 0.528 of a second off race winner Takuma Sato.

Alonso-mania dominated the build-up to race day and attracted enormous interest from fans who do not commonly follow the Indycar series, while winning the hearts of die-hard fans with his enthusiasm and impressive pace.

The Indy 500 Rookie of the Year honours were decided by a media vote, based off of four criteria:

• the driver’s skill
• sportsmanship
• accessibility and conduct during the month
• finishing position

Two-time Formula 1 champion Alonso qualified fifth for his Indy 500 debut and led 27 laps and was running in the lead pack in seventh when the Honda engine on his Dallara DW12 failed.

22 year old Jones, the reigning Indy Lights champion, was contesting his first campaign in IndyCar with Dale Coyne Racing-Honda this year. He ran much of his first Indy 500 outside of the top 10, but was in contention for victory late on, following Sato and runner-up Helio Castroneves across the finish line.

He was gracious in accepting that the award had eluded him, “Appreciate the support from everyone. At the end of day Rookie of the Year would have been nice but having fought for the overall win is truly special!”

[MIKA27]

MONACO GRAND PRIX STRATEGY REPORT

The 2017 Monaco Grand Prix was far from a thriller, but with the new breed of Formula 1 cars, was that really much of a surprise?

Kimi Raikkonen lined up on pole position but it was Sebastien Vettel who claimed victory, extending his championship lead over Lewis Hamilton to 25 points.

Hamilton’s recovery to seventh place came after a disappointing qualifying session, where traffic and yellow flags saw him eliminated in Q2.

Despite high temperatures, the low-grip track surface and durable nature of the Pirelli tyres limited strategy. Nevertheless, there was still some scope to do something different and plenty of strategic headlines to delve into:

How Raikkonen lost the race

He was starting from the best place on the grid after a stunning qualifying lap, but Raikkonen wasn’t quite so happy (let’s be honest, when’s he ever that smiley?) after the Monaco GP. Qualifying is even more crucial around the streets of Monte Carlo and with a strong start, the battle for the win came down to the pitstops.

Some have suggested Ferrari directly favoured Vettel by giving him a stronger strategy, in order to maximise track position. Of course, this was denied, but the Raikkonen pitstop call doesn’t make a whole lot of sense really – maybe it’s just another one of Ferrari’s occasional strategy errors.

Raikkonen pitted just after Max Verstappen and Valtteri Bottas, who were both doing solid but not spectacular sector times on super-softs. Ferrari must’ve known traffic could play its part too, but still stopped Raikkonen. It wasn’t a super-quick pitstop, so maybe they just missed the window they wanted, but it still cost him time and (most importantly) track position.

His pace was comparable – but not quite so as consistent – as Vettel’s, but when he realised he was behind him, he backed off. Definitely a missed opportunity and no wonder he was even more downbeat than usual afterwards.

And how Vettel won it

Keeping in touch with Raikkonen through the first stint put Vettel in a strong position, with the ‘overcut’ working much better than many expected. The ultra-soft had very little degradation and around a seven tenth advantage, so it was surely going to be the best tyre to be on. Vettel stayed out five laps longer than Raikkonen and pitted on lap 39.

He picked up his pace with some impressive in-laps, which were traffic-free (as Raikkonen was caught up behind some slower cars), and a good stop meant he emerged clear of his team-mate in first place.

Ricciardo’s long first stint

Daniel Ricciardo put in a very similar strategy to Vettel, utilising the ‘overcut’ and pitting several laps later than his closest rivals Max Verstappen and Valtteri Bottas. The ultra-softs kept a good pace for some time, enabling Ricciardo to do some fast laps and pit on lap 38. He emerged ahead, much to Verstappen’s frustration…

Mad Max vs Flying Finn

What made things even worse for Verstappen was than he not only lost a place to Ricciardo, but he also dropped behind Bottas too. This was after Mercedes aced the in-lap and pitstop for Bottas, who pitted one lap earlier and did a nice out-lap as well. The ‘undercut’ worked well for Bottas and this cost Verstappen. Had he done something similar to Ricciardo, it might have been a very different result. In the end, though, he stopped for a second time at the safety car.

Hamilton stays out

As mentioned earlier, surely a smart move was to stay out as long as possible on the incredible durable but quick ultra-soft tyre. That’s what Hamilton did and it worked very well, he used the Mercedes W08’s strong pace (not shown in Q2) and the ultra-soft to move up the order as others pitted.

Then, when he decided to stop on lap 46, from sixth place, he only lost one position. The strategy played out very well in getting Hamilton up the order, helped by a few incidents and drivers getting caught in battles, which cost them time in the process. Maximum damage limitation for the three-time champion with a ‘super-overcut’, you could call it.

Vandoorne does the same

Stoffel Vandoorne looked on course for a point in 10th place after doing the same as Hamilton and staying out for a long opening ultra-soft stint, pitting on lap 43. It looked to have worked as he gained a few spots but crashing out just after the restart put pay to his race.

Unscheduled stops

A number of drivers should really have scored better results had it not been for unscheduled trips to the pits. Sergio Perez ditched his ultra-softs fairly early for super-softs (in part due to a front wing change) and this dropped him down to P16, which put him in slower traffic. A point may have been possible without a “PlayStation” move on Daniil Kvyat which required another stop for repairs.

His team-mate Esteban Ocon’s impressive run of top 10 results came to an end due to a puncture, which denied him a possible point as he had to stop for a second time – which was no-one’s plan, really. Kevin Magnussen also picked up a puncture, which prevented him from beating his team-mate Romain Grosjean.

Barely any degradation

Monaco’s low-grip track surface really is unique, presenting a completely different set of conditions. Pirelli took the three softest compounds to Monaco but even the ultra-soft had barely any degradation or wear, the tyre manufacturer admitting it could probably last the entire race.

Pascal Wehrlein did the most ultra-soft laps with 56 before he was pitched into the barrier, his Sauber on its side, by Jenson Button at Portier. Perez did the most super-soft laps with 47, while the soft wasn’t used in the race and barely made an appearance all weekend. This meant a one-stop was always going to be the only strategy call.

Longest Stints

Ultrasoft: Wehrlein (56 laps)
Supersoft: Perez (47 laps)

[MIKA27]

Video: Aston Martins, Caravans, Red Bull drivers and a race track...

There’s nothing wrong with a bit of healthy competition between team-mates and Red Bull Racing’s Daniel Ricciardo and Max Verstappen never shy away from a challenge.

[MIKA27]

Haas all smiles after ‘mature’ double points

27 races into their Formula 1 career and Haas are celebrating their first double points-haul achieved in Sunday’s Monaco Grand Prix.

Although Haas have already had both Romain Grosjean and Kevin Magnussen inside the points this season, the team-mates were, at least until Monaco, unable to achieve the feat on the same weekend.

However, this past Grosjean crossed the line in eighth place while Magnussen was P10 around the streets of Monte Carlo.

“It’s for sure a historic day and you always want to do better, that’s life,” said team boss Guenther Steiner.

“A first time with two cars in the points is something we wanted to achieve this year.

“We achieved it in race six. We wanted it before then, but race six is not too bad.

“We never lost our cool, we always stayed on top of it. We got unlucky, but then we got lucky again at the end, so we’re fine.”

He added: “We’re maturing. It takes time to mature and I think, now, we see some results. There will still be ups and downs, but we’re always making steps.

“Sometimes you don’t see them because we’re not in the points, so nobody realises, but the team has not just made a magic step. We’ve made improvements over the last six months.

“Its maturity and certain things you just learn with time. You cannot buy it. You just need to improve, make the mistakes, learn and react.

“This weekend I was very impressed with the team. We always executed. There was never any big issue, even in the race. With two cars fighting for points it was a very controlled environment.”

[MIKA27]

Massa column: Aggressive Perez helped me out in Monaco

In his latest column for Motorsport.com, Williams driver Felipe Massa looks back at a difficult but not entirely fruitless Monaco Grand Prix weekend.

I had hoped for a different type of Monaco GP weekend. On the eve of the race, I didn’t hide from the fact that we had had higher hopes after our recent experiences in my second home event.

But unfortunately what happened was not what Williams Martini Racing had expected. At the end of the weekend, a ninth-place finished was a result that allowed us to score points in the championship standings, but I think realistically it was not possible to have got any more.

That the weekend would be an uphill struggle I understood already in the first free practice session on Thursday.

Qualifying was also more complex than expected, and on my first run in Q2 I made a mistake. I went back to the pits and fitted a set of new tyres, but then I was hurt by a yellow flag and I had to abort what was my last lap available in Q2.

Ultimately though I think it would only have been possible to start one or two positions in front of the seventh row where I ended up, but no more than that.

  

Waiting game pays off

After qualifying, I had one goal in mind: just finish the race. I know the Monaco track well and I know that it is impossible to overtake if the car in front of you does not make a mistake.

But the story of this race is also that if you complete the 78 laps then you are normally rewarded with a good place, given the number of retirements that there normally are.

My race started with brake problems though on the first lap. Because of the issue, I could not use the brakes too heavily – because I had to prevent the temperatures from going up too high.

Luckily the nature of the track and the difficulties people have in overtaking meant that I could fight off anyone attacking me from behind, even when braking is not as good as it should be.

When the late safety car came out for Pascal Wehrlein’s crash, I was able to put on fresh tyres without losing positions – and it was a tactic copied by Sergio Perez. So we got on track in the same condition for the final laps, and our pace was very good.

I saw that Sergio was very aggressive in front of me, and when he made the mistake at Rascasse, knocking Daniil Kvyat out, I managed to go smoothly past both of them to take ninth place.

It was a lucky situation, but typical of Monte Carlo, and that's why I played a waiting game from the very beginning.

Now we are busy preparing for the Montreal track, where we head to with greater confidence after the difficult Monaco weekend. I think all of the tracks that are coming up will suit us better than Monaco did.

  

Ferrari's milestone

Looking back at the weekend, I also noted that Ferrari took its first Monaco GP pole position since I started from the front back in 2008.

Kimi did a good lap, and I'm glad he came back to taste the pole position. I think Ferrari’s car was the one to beat over the Monaco weekend. Looking at their onboard, and seeing how it was attached to the track, was just awesome.

Race after race, the Ferrari team is getting more and more in a head-to-head with Mercedes, and I think there are all the ingredients for this fight to last until the end of the season.

[MIKA27]

Kaltenborn furious with Button after Wehrlein flip

Sauber team principal Monisha Kaltenborn was furious with Formula 1 returnee Jenson Button after he collided with Pascal Wehrlein at the Monaco Grand Prix.

The duo clashed towards the end of the race when Button, who was standing in for Fernando Alonso while he competed in the Indianapolis 500, tried an ambitious pass at Portier.

Wehrlein’s car was flipped onto its side and ended up against the barriers but once it was righted onto its wheels, he was able to climb out and walk away.

The stewards investigated the incident and deemed Button was "predominantly to blame", opting to give him a three-place grid penalty "for his next race this season" plus two penalty points on his licence.

But given the 2009 world champion is unlikely to race again in 2017, the penalty is moot.

When asked if she was furious with Button, Kaltenborn told Motorsport.com: “Yes, I am because I don’t understand how it can come to that kind of situation. I don’t understand how one can assess a situation and get it so wrong.

“There was no way he could pull the move off, that’s why I don’t know why he would try to do such a move.”

Kaltenborn was also frustrated that a lack of pace meant Sauber could not repeat the feat of challenging for points as it did in Spain, when Wehrlein finished eighth.

“The pace of the car was not there, no strategy can help you to overcome that,” she said. “That’s a different story which is also frustrating. Now the engineers need to analyse what is happening here and rectify it.

“Apart from that, this kind of situation with Pascal, I don’t understand what went on there.”

  

Wehrlein fitness to be monitored

Wehrlein, whose helmet made contact with the barrier, was at the medical centre after the crash, but was cleared by track doctors and at this stage is expected to be fit to race next time out in Canada.

However, given he missed the first two grands prix to 2017 due to a lack of fitness after his training was compromised by him fracturing three vertebrae in an accident in January's Race of Champions, the team is being cautious.

His fitness will be monitored this week and it will be decided in the coming days if he requires further medical investigation.

Speaking to Motorsport.com after the race, Wehrlein said: "I'm feeling good about doing the next race. My back feels OK.

"After my Race of Champions crash it was one hour before I felt anything and then the pain was massive. Now after two hours, I'm feeling OK, so that's good.

"But it's difficult to say. I will see how I feel in the next few days."

[MIKA27]

The best commute in F1? Race day at the Monaco Grand Prix

Is this quite possibly the best commute of our season? Watch as we document the journey to work for the Monaco Grand Prix from the viewpoint of Daniel Ricciardo Max Verstappen and the RBR Team.

[MIKA27]

F1 shouldn't go "socialist" with income redistribution - Haas

Formula 1 team boss Gene Haas says the championship's new owner Liberty Media has to be "very careful" with income redistribution, as he believes the big teams should continue to earn more.

With the current Concorde Agreement running out in 2020, Liberty has made it clear that it wants to change the payment structure, which would inevitably mean that Ferrari, Red Bull, Mercedes and the other big players would have less of an automatic claim on the lion's share of the income.

Most midfield team bosses have already been angling for a bigger share of the pie. However, Haas said it was important that the leading outfits' bigger incomes are preserved.

"I understand that the new owners are typically going to do what new owners do, go out and raise revenue and cut costs," said Haas.

"And that's exactly what they'll do, and since we're on the cost side of it, it's a little nerve-wracking what they have in mind.

"On the other hand, F1 is kind of a crown jewel so maybe they'll tread lightly, and everything will work itself out."

Asked to expand on his comments, he said: "You know, most savvy businessmen in the US are public companies and it's bottom line, let's face it, it is very much to it, but since we're the newcomers in this business, our revenue stream from Formula 1 is nothing, so anything we get will be greatly appreciated.

"But I think we just have to be very very careful in how you redistribute the wealth because there are some teams at the top that have spent 50 years doing this, that have earned some entitlement to how the costs are distributed.

"I'm not saying that the teams at the bottom don't deserve more, but I'm still saying teams at the top deserve more.

"You can't just arbitrarily redistribute that because, quite frankly, winning races should come with rewards, and it should not be a socialistic-type structure."

  

Haas pointed out that these days it is much harder to find major sponsors, referencing his own experiences in NASCAR.

"The team owners are typically on the bottom rung of the income stream, and they're struggling - as viewership goes down, sponsors go down.

"It's been very very difficult in NASCAR, and I think to some degree that teams that rely on sponsorship are starting to find it's very very difficult to attract a major sponsor. A $25m sponsor is a huge sponsor.

"Today, that is practically non-existent. Most of the sponsors – at least I know from NASCAR, they're more in the $5m to $10m range and you have to have multiple sponsors on your cars at different races.

"There's some adaptability to that but at the same time there's a lot of demand from media, so how that money gets redistributed seems to be the question.

"But unfortunately the teams don't have a real strong position there to speak up about how it will get distributed, because we don't own Formula 1."

[MIKA27]

Monaco

Source: Joe Saward

There is a lot of chatter today about Monaco and how it needs to be changed. I remember the same sort of thing about 30 years ago. Cars cannot overtake, it’s boring, blah-di-blah-di-blah.

First of all, Monaco is never boring if you are there. If you watch it on television, you really don’t get the power of what these stark raving lunatics are actually doing. Go out on the race track (which I haven’t done recently) and you are reminded of why we are normal people – and they are not. They are crazy mixed-up heroes, who just love what they are doing, so much so that they are quite willing to risk life and limb to do it. It’s actually magnificent when you look at it in that way and the skill of the media is to capture that. One can question things like the camera positions and whether or not one really gets the sense of awe that one has when one is there. But when all is said and done, doe this warrant a change in the circuit? This year’s wider cars and harder rubber combined to make overtaking difficult but people are too quick to say that there was no overtaking. This is not true. There was not much, but Lewis Hamilton passed Stoffel Vandoorne on the first lap. All but two of the drivers were on the same choice of tyre (Wehrlein and Ericsson went for the harder Super-Soft, rather than the Ultra-Softs that everyone else had. As a result of this there was no overtaking until lap 33 when Perez passed Stroll for 15th after having pitted for a new nose and new tyres. In the course of the next 10 laps the main pit stops happened and thereafter the drivers were on rubber that had been used more or less depending on when the driver had stopped. We saw some moves after the Safety Car with Perez and Kvyat changing places on lap 66 after a bit of a bingle and then changing back again again on lap 67. On the same lap Ocon passed Stroll. We had various other attempts that went wrong, notably Button on Wehrlein on lap their 58th lap, which caused the Safety Car and Perez getting into another incident with Kvyat. OK, that’s not a great deal and it was very clear that when a driver got close to another it became very hard, but having said there were several battles where the drivers were close and even side-by-side lap after lap. The fact that these did not get the coverage they deserved is worthy of question. There was also no real coverage of the troubles caused by a manhole cover, which caused a couple of punctures in the middle of the race, and reports of the track breaking up at Turn 1. These were barely mentioned.

Oddly enough, at the moment there is the chance to do something about this. Changing the tyres would obviously help, but there is not much that can be done about the width of the track in most places. There are these things called buildings that get in the way and knocking them down is not really an option. At the last corner there is a tunnel exit behind the barrier, so that cannot be moved. Elsewhere there are cliffs and so on (which you don’t always see on TV. They migth route the cars differently around Casino Square. They might send them left between the Hotel Hermitage and the Hotel de Paris, on the Avenue Princess Alice and then create a tight right turn on to the Avenue des Beaux-Arts, which would create a longer straight from there down to Mirabeau. They might create a sharper turn there by cutting into the casino gardens. They might turn the cars to the left at the bottom of the drop down to Portier, and could send them around the traffic island there and that would give them a slightly faster run into the tunnel. But is that what one wants? Down at the chicane, they could send them straight on and have the chicane a little further down the Avenue JF Kennedy. They could change the area around the Swimming Pool, switching the grandstands around, but would it make a difference? They might eradicate the exit of the Swimming Pool and run the track along the water down to a modified Rascasse, but would that help? The answer is that we do not known unless someone has done some computer modelling of the options.

There is one other possibility that might be possible. Sharp-eyed observers will have noticed that the entrance to the tunnel no longer has a view of the Mediterranean, following the construction of a wall that has been put in place to hide a land reclamation project that has recently begun. It is going to last for at least seven years but will result in the creation of a whole new district where now there is water. This is to be called Portier Cove, but judging by the plans I have seen the entire area is to be pedestrian. From what I can see from the plans (and I am not 100 percent sure) the tunnel will be extended, so that the roadway is covered all the way to Portier, presumably to make sure that the noise is kept to a minimum in the new neighbourhood. The 15 acres of land will include housing, an extension of the Grimaldi Forum conference centre, a landscaped park and a seafront promenade, plus a marina. The potential did exist to have a road taking the F1 circuit into this new area, which might have allowed for the rection of a sure-fire overtaking zone – a wide hairpin for example – but it seems that this will not now happen.

[MIKA27]

FERRARI GO AGGRESSIVE WITH TYRE CHOICES FOR CANADA

Ferrari and Mercedes are deploying different tyre strategies for the Canadian Grand Prix on 11 June, as Pirelli offer up a softs, supersofts and ultrasofts for teams to use in Montreal.

Ferrari have opted for the exact same selection for their drivers Sebastian Vettel and Kimi Raikkonen, who will each have a set of softs, three sets of supersofts and nine ultrasofts sets.

Mercedes drivers have chosen to go serparate ways with Lewis Hamilton choosing one set of sifts, four sets of supersofts and eight sets of ultrasofts while Valtteri Bottas Bottas will have two sets of softs, three supersoft sets and also eight ultrasoft sets.

Red Bull drivers, Max Verstappen and Daniel Ricciardo, have opted for identical allocations of one soft set each, five supersoft sets and seven ultrasoft sets.

[MIKA27]

MERCEDES: WE ARE THE UNDERDOGS

Not long ago it used to be a case of guessing the winning margin for Mercedes in the Formula 1 constructors’ world championship, and a toss-up between which of its two drivers would win the drivers’ title.

Not any more. The Monaco Grand Prix clearly underlined how Mercedes is not the force it was, with Lewis Hamilton, who has won two of his three world titles with Mercedes, finishing seventh and new recruit Valtteri Bottas taking fourth place.

Up ahead, Ferrari clinched a clinical 1-2 finish with Sebastian Vettel beating teammate Kimi Raikkonen and opening up a 25-point gap over Hamilton at the top.

After six of 20 races, this lead is not big enough to be alarming. But the inconsistency of the Mercedes car certainly is.

The next race is the Canadian GP in two weeks’ time, and all eyes will be on Mercedes in practice and qualifying. That Hamilton even managed to take seventh place was a credit to his remarkable driving ability, seeing as he started from way back in 13th place on the grid after a calamitous qualifying session in Monaco.

But the team is struggling to find answers. Head of motorsport Toto Wolff even called the Mercedes car “a diva” and a “mystery” because of its temperamental and unpredictable nature.

There is even talk that Mercedes may have to give priority to one of its two drivers to arrest the current slide. At the moment, both are officially on an equal footing and free to compete fully against each other – as Hamilton and Nico Rosberg were over the last three years.

The unofficial talk is that Hamilton is the No. 1, ahead of Bottas – who had never won a race before joining from Williams to hurriedly replace Rosberg.

But in Monaco, Bottas’ car looked much faster and more reliable, which would make it difficult to give Hamilton the priority at this stage.

“I really have no idea,” Hamilton admitted. “Who knows? It might go the other way: I might need to give Valtteri the upper hand.”

The problem of the Mercedes, according to Bottas in his post-race debrief, appears to be an inconsistency between the front and rear axle. In turn, this affects the performance of the tires, as was shown in Thursday’s second practice session when Mercedes botched a switch to the faster ultra-soft compound and failed to get either driver into the seven quickest times in P2. It was an embarrassment for a car of such standing.

“It is clear that this weekend we didn’t give them the equipment necessary to do better,” technical director James Allison said. “We now need to go back to the factory and make sure we do everything in our power to ensure it remains our weakest result of the year.”

Last year, Mercedes finished nearly 300 points ahead of Red Bull in the constructors’ championship, winning 19 of 21 races as Rosberg pipped Hamilton to the title before dramatically announcing his retirement from F1. Ferrari was an afterthought, 367 adrift of Mercedes in third and scrapping for podium places rather than wins.

In 2015, Ferrari was 275 points behind Mercedes and 2014 was so dismal for the Italian manufacturer that it finished fourth and nearly 500 behind Mercedes.

With new regulations designed to make cars wider, heavier and faster this year, Ferrari seems to have worked wonders in the factory while Mercedes appears to be going backward.

“We are the underdogs,” Wolff said. “This is the new reality.”

[MIKA27]

Red Bull F1 team defends Max Verstappen Monaco strategy call

Red Bull says Max Verstappen's fury about losing a Monaco Grand Prix podium shot was quelled when the Formula 1 team explained the decision to him.

Verstappen shadowed third-placed Valtteri Bottas in the early stages in Monaco, and Red Bull opted to try to leapfrog the Mercedes driver by pitting before him.

Mercedes pitted Bottas on the very next lap and the positions were unchanged, with both drivers then overhauled by Verstappen's team-mate Daniel Ricciardo, who stayed out for another five laps and ultimately finished third.

Verstappen vented his frustration on team radio, and made it clear to Dutch television post-race that he was "incredibly disappointed" with what happened.

Team boss Christian Horner explained that Sergio Perez's pace on super-softs, having pitted on lap 16, was another consideration in Verstappen's stop on lap 32.

"We looked at Perez's out-lap, which had been pretty impressive, and rather than just sitting behind Valtteri and not trying anything, we thought 'OK, there is some traffic coming up'," Horner added.

"We could see the cars were quite badly affected by the traffic and we saw Ferrari take a bit of a hit in performance. So we went for the undercut.

"We looked like we gave one second away in the pitlane - not on the stop, the pitlane itself - and that was the difference.

"If the car had been square in the pitlane, if we had had a perfect stop, if we had a good getaway...

"That would have been enough, combined with Max's out-lap, to have got the jump on Bottas. In turn Bottas covered us, as he was focused on Max.

"That opened up the opportunity for Daniel, giving him some free air which he exploited to good effect and managed to jump both the guys and achieve third place."

Horner said Verstappen accepted Red Bull's explanation on Sunday night.

"After he got back here, he sat down and went through it calmly," he said.

"Of course emotions are running high in the car and of course you would expect him [to be like that].

"He has just seen his team-mate come from behind him to being ahead of him and in the podium position, so of course he was excited on the radio.

"But having looked at the facts and understanding the circumstances of how and why these things happen, he could understand the scenario."

Red Bull technical boss Adrian Newey says the team explained to both of its drivers pre-race that strategies would be split if they were running behind Bottas, but that neither option looked an obvious choice.

"It wasn't clear before the race which was more powerful, the undercut or the overcut," he told Autosport.

"It was close. The undercut almost worked. Unfortunately we had a slightly slow pit stop [with Verstappen].

"We said to both drivers in all honesty we don't know which is the better solution, the undercut or the overcut, and they both accepted it.

"It's the usual thing, when a driver gets out of the car he doesn't understand, his adrenalin is still up."

[MIKA27]

PIRELLI BOSS HITS BACK AT TOTO WOLFF’S “ITALIAN MYSTERY” LINE AFTER MONACO F1 DEFEAT

The president of F1’s tyre supplier Pirelli has responded to Mercedes’ boss Toto Wolff’s line that the reason why Ferrari is able to master the tyres and Mercedes cannot is an “Italian mystery”.
Mercedes lost the Monaco Grand Prix badly, not even sending a driver up to the podium for only the fourth time since the start of 2014 and afterwards Wolff made a mischievous comment about the way Ferrari is always able to find the right operating window for the tyres. This was a particular problem in Monaco last weekend for many teams as the tyres were too hard for the track and its surface, which meant that getting the front and rear tyres to the right temperature was a problem for many.
Then in the race, the etiquette around blue flags for backmarker traffic meant that both backmarkers and leaders slowed and that was all it needed for the tyres to fall out of their operating window. It was hard to bring them back.
Ferrari has had the edge in this area all season and we saw Mercedes struggle on the supersoft tyres in Bahrain, for example. Wolff claimed on Sunday night that they have yet to do a race where both Mercedes cars have the tyres within their ideal range at the same time, implying that Mercedes is trying different set ups across the two cars to scrabble for answers on some tracks.

Tronchetti Provera went on Italian TV yesterday and had the following to say about Wolff’s comments:

“The tyres are the same for everyone. Perhaps Mercedes, have been used to lots of success and now face an uphill task, but they will come back. However, with engineers that have worked like a team, Ferrari has done something that no-one expected. You have to give them credit and you have to be satisfied by the work of an Italian team.”
This comes back to the debate we had last season about the seriousness with which the top three teams took the 2017 tyre testing programme with mule cars, based on old designs with higher downforce to simulate 2017 levels.

Most of that work on Mercedes’ side was done by Pascal Wehrlein, while Sebastian Vettel took responsibility for the bulk of the work on Ferrari’s side. He also paid several visits to Pirelli, which is within the rules. The drivers were not told what tyres or details of compounds and constructions they were using, but a driver of Vettel’s experience and feel would have gained a lot of intelligence from these tests on the directions for 2017 and would have been able to work with Ferrari’s engineers to address what kind of set ups would be needed to work the tyres in their ideal operating range.
Lewis Hamilton Sebastian Vettel

“It was a very serious piece of work on the part of Vettel and Ferrari,” said Provera. “Vettel was always ready with humilty, to test when others were ‘not available’ and the results are the fruit of a lot of passionate work from a team that is totally focussed on winning.”

The implication is clear; Mercedes became complacent in 2016 after years of domination and didn’t take the tyre development test work seriously enough, when it has turned out to be mission critical to race outcomes in 2017. When the Mercedes is working the tyres within their operating window it is very fast, as we have seen in several races this season.

In this respect Vettel is like Michael Schumacher, who transformed Ferrari for a decade from 1996 to 2006, through hard work in detailed areas, especially looking for areas that other teams were not taking care of. Schumacher went much further, stacking the odds in his favour wherever he could in the ‘intangible’ areas of racing with relationships with the tyre suppliers and the governing body and other stakeholders that could influence outcomes.

But in the current era, it’s clear that Vettel has learned from him and is leading from the cockpit at Ferrari.

[MIKA27]

INSIGHT: KEY INDICATORS THAT SHOW WHETHER FERRARI FAVOURED VETTEL IN MONACO F1 GP

Looking back over the last few years’ Monaco Grands Prix, a pattern emerges, where controversial strategy calls have decided the race outcome.

When it is so hard to overtake, the decision-making is critical.

Last year it was Red Bull’s misstep on Ricciardo’s strategy and then an error in the pit stop itself, in 2015 Lewis Hamilton lost the race on a bad strategy call, in 2014 he was angry because Mercedes stopped both cars on the same lap behind the Safety Car, giving him no chance to challenge.

This year Ferrari had their drivers 1-2 in the grid, but the driver who took pole ended up losing the race on a strategy call, to his team mate.

As the winner was the driver on whom Ferrari is basing all its hopes of winning the world championship, then apparently the rationale becomes clearer.

But did they really favour him at Raikkonen’s expense? Or was there more to it than that?

There has been a huge amount of interest in this story and hopefully here, with a deep and careful analysis, taking in the private views of several of the F1 team strategists who were active in the race, we will get to the bottom of it.

Theory 1 – Ferrari favoured Vettel over Raikkonen

Although they are not open about it, Ferrari’s ethos has long been that the drivers’ championship is what matters to them, not the constructors’.

They have less need to worry about the financial aspects than other rivals, who prioritise maximum team points scoring in races because the constructors’ table is what pays the prize money.

Mercedes’ ethos is always to get the maximum team score, but also to win the race, but to do that they would not sacrifice one car and have that driver finish fourth instead of second as a result. Ferrari would and they have done it as recently as China with Raikkonen.

So is that what happened here in Monaco?

Raikkonen was leading the race and the rule in Monaco is when leading don’t be the first one to make a move.

There was no real pressure from behind from Mercedes or Red Bull, even though Max Verstappen had just pitted to try to undercut Bottas. Raikkonen still had margin.

He was catching up to Marcus Ericsson in the Sauber; as he came through Turn 18 on his in-lap to the pits on Lap 34 he was 2.2 seconds behind the Swede, so he would have caught him on Lap 35 and may have taken some time to pass him.

At the same time Ferrari strategists would be looking for the gap that Raikkonen would be dropping into after his stop and it looks like they believed he would clear Button and have just Wehrlein to pass on his out lap. Another lap or two and he would have easily cleared both, but he would have encountered Ericsson anyway, so it’s swings and roundabouts.

The tyre performance was clearly dropping off; Raikkonen was doing 77 second lap times and had begun to back his team mate Vettel into Bottas in third place.

The radio traffic made clear that both team and driver felt the tyres were near the end, probably down to around 25% left on the rears. The team strategists have access to a data screen that plots the tyre degradation lap by lap and other strategists could see Raikkonen’s deg curve clearly.

However, strangely, on the lap before he pitted, Raikkonen’s middle sector was 35.799s, which was four tenths faster than his previous laps. That would normally get your attention and indicate that there is potentially something left in the tyres and some strategists, under no pressure to stop, would leave him out.

As the team operates a policy of the lead car having the pit stop priority, perhaps what Ferrari should have done is ask Raikkonen what he would like to do and let him make the decision.

They didn’t do that, made the decision for him and he pitted. His in lap was slightly slower than Vettel did later, as was his stop itself and on the out lap he encountered traffic – losing around 1.5 seconds clearing Button and Wehrlein. He passed Button in Sector 2 of the lap and Wehrlein in Sector 3.

Vettel stayed out, found great pace over five laps and managed to pit and come out ahead, which many think is what Ferrari intended all along.

Further evidence for this theory is that Ferrari did not do in the first stint what a team would normally do when seeking a first Monaco win since 2001 and ask the second car to drop back several seconds from the lead car to hold the field up to protect the lead car against Safety Cars and other risks. (They did do this in the second stint to protect Vettel’s position, with Raikkonen dropping back.)

Theory 2 – Vettel won the race himself, not because Ferrari gave it to him

There is no denying the fact that Ferrari would have wanted to give their lead driver the extra seven points to make a maximum 25 on a day when his main title rival Lewis Hamilton was struggling and scored just six points.

And although that was the outcome, there is another theory about how they got there, which is that Vettel won the race in a way that no-one could have predicted.

Vettel was faster on the day and had he been stopped first he would have undercut Raikkonen. The data shows that. You can also look at Verstappen’s out lap from the pitstop on new Supersoft tyres to see that Vettel would have been even faster and would have undercut Raikkonen.

So if it was pure cynical pragmatism to get Vettel ahead, that’s what Ferrari could have done, clean and simple.

At this point, because Vettel had been sitting behind Raikkonen, Ferrari would have no clarity on what the degradation curve on Vettel’s tyres looked like – because he wasn’t running at his own pace. So they would not know what his potential pace was. This was also true for Ricciardo in the Red Bull, who did the same thing as Vettel, also with a positive outcome.

What actually happened was that once Raikkonen stopped, Vettel cleared Ericsson and then over the next five laps pushed hard. The first three laps were faster than Raikkonen had been managing; on Lap 34 he did 76.5s, then 76.4s and 76.2s, which shows that he was working out the best operating window for the tyres.

What was astonishing were the next two laps, when he found the sweet spot; 75.5s and 75.2s. This is two seconds faster than Raikkonen had been doing before his stop on worn ultra softs. Red Bull’s Daniel Ricciardo did something similar.

No-one operating in the F1 pitlane on Sunday would have seen that level of performance coming, even Vettel himself didn’t see it coming. He just pushed for all he was worth in the hope that it might give him a chance to win.

Actually the reference showed that Raikkonen was still on schedule – despite the traffic with Button and Wehrlein – to be ahead of Vettel at the start of Lap 37.

What swung it Vettel’s way was those two laps 37 and 38 which were in the 75 second range that meant when he pitted on Lap 39, he came out just ahead.

Anyone who tells you they could see the pace on those two laps coming ahead of time is lying. It was an astonishing performance and it won him the race.

Conclusion

Our conclusion is that this is one of the most fascinating scenarios we have encountered in the UBS Race Strategy Report since it began in 2011 and you can convince yourself either way depending on your own theories or biases.

There are a couple of things that don’t add up in Ferrari’s behaviour, which hint that Ferrari favoured Vettel, such as pitting him into traffic and also that quick middle sector for Raikkonen just before he stopped that hinted that the tyres still had some life in them.

But our conclusion – having spoken to insiders, the drivers concerned and strategists involved in the race with deep knowledge of the tyres and what they were doing – is that Ferrari got the outcome it wanted, but on this occasion favouring Vettel wasn’t what they set out to do when they triggered Raikkonen’s stop on Lap 34.

Red Bull pincer movement on Bottas

This was not Mercedes’ weekend; apart from Free Practice 1, they had problems all weekend with the tyres, getting them into the right operating window and paid a price for it, with fourth and seventh at the chequered flag.

Bottas did a wonderful job in qualifying to bag third place, but in the race he suffered with his tyres and was a sitting duck as a lone player against the Red Bull pair. Red Bull did what they often do in these situations; they split strategies with Verstappen trying the undercut and Ricciardo the overcut. If Bottas had stayed out, he would have been undercut.

Verstappen’s plan failed because his pit stop was a shade slow, due to poor position in the pit box. Ricciardo went long and, like Vettel, found good pace in the tyres to jump both Verstappen and Bottas for third place.

[MIKA27]

ALONSO: MY ONLY GOAL IS TO GET A THIRD F1 WORLD TITLE

In the aftermath of the Indianapolis 500 highs and lows, Fernando Alonso returns to his ‘real job’ for the forthcoming Canadian Grand Prix determined to keep on improving with McLaren.

Speaking after scooping the Indy 500 Rookie of the year, Alonso told Marca, “I want to be F1 World Champion again, but being in Monaco fighting for a seventh, a sixth, or even a fifth, is incomparable to being here. I have not missed Monaco in terms of results.”

“For the future, in Canada, we will try to keep improving again, the car seems to perform better every time, with seventh on the grid of Barcelona and with both cars in Q3 this weekend [in Monaco]. For the second half of the season we will be more competitive.,” added Alonso.

In the aftermath of his high profile foray to the Brickyard, Alonso said, “For the short term my only goal is to get a third Formula 1 world title. Next year I hope to be battling for it.”

As for another Indy 500 foray, McLaren team chief Zak Brown said, “If there is no change of dates, so that it does not clash with Monaco, it will be difficult for us to return soon. I hope next year we will be fighting for victories in Formula 1.”