What would have happened on track if it fails to alter the race in the absence of 10 laps to the end? Maybe that nothing, or everything. But it is clear that we would have enjoyed as dwarves in a race that had been left to the three candidates to victory, hooked one after another, and in reverse to the freshness of your tyres. Come on, we would have enjoyed an ending to the story, as does quite there in Monaco.
But Monaco is the case, and the appearance of the Safety Car must always be considered in the equation. The decision to stop the race with red flag was successful, first by Petrov, of course, but selfishly thinking by power see those last laps without going to the wake of a Safety Car who had killed the show. At the end, the show not killed him for Safety, but regulatory stupidity that allowed to change tires to all, to leave us with a mini career to sprint that nothing had to do with the scenario put forward before the break. Cut the strategic essence of the race. A slump in all rule after expectations that us had been generated the race as the laps were consumed.
We will all agree, I guess, in that an end was so is nonchalant since the first release of the Safety Car, when the race had just passed the ecuador. It is true that there was possible strategic variables, but all of them leading to tight end, in a momentazo for the story in which confluirian in track in the last three laps, bets completely different, but each of them with so many pros like cons to his credit. Three successful strategies that would leave in the hands of pilots make them winners or not. As it should always be.
It seems incredible to me, everything is said, that the winning strategy of Vettel was accidental. Apparently, his first stop (and ultimately only) was to mount another set of superblandas, as confirmed by Red Bull. That Yes, put up with a very hit soft pressure of Alonso and Button was still all a gesture, helped unconditionally by the characteristics of Monaco. Although a pilot must always consider the factor circuit, it would be more. I dare not make sure that Vettel would have endured the final onslaught of Alonso. In fact, for more laps that I give, I firmly believe that Vettel would have not won this race if he would have ended up as everyone had hoped.
The statements of Fernando Alonso at the end of the race left very clear intentions that had the community pilot for those last laps. Your career plan was keep those soft tires to the maximum, and attack in the final laps. It had nothing to lose, and Vettel Yes. I have no doubt that Alonso would have gotten the car knowing of their advantage at the level of rubber. I have more questions about if Vettel had defended his position or had assumed the overtaking Calculator in hand. In Monaco does not assume an overtaking tends to be a synonym of accident, as we saw in several maneuvers, and if Vettel there is something that does not need, these accidents. That Yes, it should also be seeing the Button role in this fight.
The McLaren driver was the gums cooler, not only by having them mounted more later, but also because it came rolling in clean air during more laps. But Button had to pass two rivals to win, and being as he is, I doubt that it would have taken the slightest risk. Indeed, their statements (do not remember the source where I read them) are in the line expected to win by elimination of Vettel and Alonso. Come on, I saw clear that Alonso so try and be Vettel they would resist.
Monaco left US performances of important contrasts. Carrerones as the of Kamui Kobayashi, and other more shutdowns as Webber or Hamilton were. About Mark Webber begins to have no name. If exactly the same car that Vettel is to study why is able to squeeze it so little. And lucky had the red flag, because otherwise you would have not stolen position to the Japanese of Sauber. And eye with Kobayashi, because following the Button theory would have trampled the podium though the trio's head had been in action. On Lewis Hamilton… deserves a paragraph he alone.
I was disappointed much Hamilton's career, because he was expecting too much of him and his McLaren at Monaco. You always have to expect something of the great drivers in this layout. He punished the break in the Q3 and its bad position on grid, but beyond that, his career was a lot to forget. Lewis attempted to climb positions as he is only able to make a circuit of these characteristics, and precisely for that reason ended up coming out in pictures. Although everything is said, have no very clear that in these cases has be more penalized the ambition of which anticipates that the obstinacy of the defending. Even if there is to blame someone or not. What I have said before: in Monaco, not to assume an overtaking, is to provoke an accident Yes, or Yes. And in Monaco, to advance, you have to risk. Then, do we have clear that we want to criminalize the attempt to overtaking? I think that a much more complex issue is than many "experts" believe following what one reads. And with this analysis, I would not like or remove reasons, simply say that you have to look in more detail especially the on board of each incident, because they give much information that input is not noticed.
As always, will end with a brief: Mercedes are a real joke in career, Renault has faded after first promising careers, Jaime alguersuari still does not achieve a result that a little calm the rumor mill on the future of Ricciardo (who won the World Series), in spite of his pilleria of hook after Maldonado and Hamilton to a handful of rivals, and finally, we have had a few scares in this Grand Prix, which fortunately have ended as everyone wanted. We do not download the guard.
We read after Canada here, or while waiting on my twitter (@ smarcusf1).
