SHARE

Join Paul and me as we review the Formula 1 Singapore Grand Prix. We cover each team and driver as they finished and even offer a few awards. We talk about the turn 1 incident and all about blame and who was wrong and who was right.

BTR Player:

Play
SHARE

An F1 fan since 1972, NC has spent over 25 years in the technology industry focusing on technology integration, AV systems integration, digital media strategies, technology planning, consulting, speaking, presenting, sales, content strategy, marketing and brand building.

  • p1ngu

    Todd, you seem slightly dismissive of Hamilton’s drive because, apparently, Danny Ric had a hydraulic problem all the way through the race, the implication being that without it Hamilton would have been toast.

    Christian Horner stated that they were dealing with the issue “from about half way through” yet Hamilton pulled away right from the start, and again after every safety car restart.
    And all of this with an older engine, specifically fitted as it’s not a power circuit. And then even that was turned down to minimum. The best comparison was that Hamilton was running hugely faster than his teammate, the guy with precisely the same equipment.

    I don’t know what Mercedes did to the car on Saturday night or Sunday morning, or maybe it was the rain, but Hamilton’s drive really stood out for me as one of his finest.

    Driver of the day for me, no question.

    • blacksmith

      “We had a couple of little issues. I had to manage the car in some situations with the gearbox and that, but ultimately I don’t think it changed the shape of the race. I don’t think that was the reason we were second and not first.”
      “I have an idea, if we were to do the race again, how to set up the car differently. I feel something we did on the car it would have helped if we went the other way for how the track conditions were, but it was fun nonetheless, you know the beginning, never going around here really in the wet.”

      So it seem that Hamilton just had better pace. I suspect Mercedes had a car that was setup to protect the rears from overheating and was thus better suited for the race.

    • I think he did a great job but having four cars move over makes life a lot easier for a three-time champ in a dominant car. Even with older engine, Merc is still dominant. Carlos, by contrast did a great job to finish 4th in a car that really doesn’t merit it. When handed the lead of a race, I expect a guy as good as Lewis to take advantage and win. Not so much for Carlos or Palmer or Stroll.

    • Geoff Peterson

      I also think that Todd was dismissive of Hamilton’s drive simply because he lead the race, and lead it well. It’s easy to dismiss drivers when they’re in the lead, I did it for many years myself in the case of Vettel at RBR. Maybe that was just my driver bias as a Hamilton fan, and my wish to see how the two would fair in equal cars.

      However, just 24 hours before race day, everyone was unanimous that the Mercedes was the third best car in Singapore. Suddenly, Hamilton was in the dominant car on Sunday? Sure the conditions may have changed things, but that doesn’t account the significant difference between Hamilton and Bottas’s pace. Bottas could not challenge Ricciardo, even with his gearbox problem, whereas Hamilton had pace to pace to spare for every challenge mounted by Ricciardo… in on much older tires nonetheless.

      • He definitely did have pace, no doubt, but he’ also a 3-time champ and according to many, the best driver on the grid so yes, I kind of expect him to win when four cars get out of his way. Still a great drive for sure but I tend to think getting a STR in the top 5 is awesome too. Or an RBR with issues in 2nd. As I said, you have to be there to take advantage of issues ahead of you and unlike Seb, Max and Kimi, Lewis ran a wide line, stayed out of the trouble and won legitimately for sure. a great drive.

  • blacksmith

    Vettel did nothing wrong and yet Ferrari gets “donkey of the day”? Was Ferrari driving the car?

    • p1ngu

      I sort of get it. Vettel did what any polesitter would have done – Ferrari management should have been talking him down, reminding him of the longer game, trying to get him to be a touch more conservative. Clearly they didn’t, and then they stuck out a tweet blaming Max. So yeah, DOTD for them.

      That said, Vettel really shouldn’t need to be reminded of the need for the longer view – he’s old enough and experienced enough to know that you don’t necessarily win at the first corner, but you can absolutely lose it there. He also knows that Max isn’t fighting for a world title and he’s never going to back off, so why Seb thought that veering across his line was the best thing to do is beyond me. A racing incident, certainly, but a preventable one, and with hindsight Vettel will admit that to himself.

      If he loses the title as a result of this – and it’s highly likely that he will – then he’ll win the Donkey Of The Season award.

  • Peter Riva

    Rat tailed fink?” Good one – wonder if Hamilton fans were listening?
    I am not a donkey of the race… I still maintain that Kimi did not swerve and he was hit on the rear tire, that’s hit from behind. I understand what happened and, yes, it’s a racing incident, but Max could have slowed. The fact that you all were happy to affirm he was going “balls to the wall” and that “other drivers should have known that” is like saying a murderer kills and it’s the victim’s fault if they know he a murderer.

    • If one wanted to, they could also use the same logic from Max on Max, right? If you felt is was silly for a team in the title hunt to squeeze and not back out of it and give you the corner, that could apply to you. Just because you had nothing to lose in the title fight doesn’t mean you had nothing to lose for the team and a podium finish.

      • Peter Riva

        I get that and agree with it, but I remember ALL the pundits blaming Vettel for touching Hamilton’s car in Baku from BEHIND. And countless other “racing incidents” where the blame was majority apportioned to the one “hitting the other car from behind.” Why is no one at least admitting that Max is more to blame because he struck Kimi’s car in the rear, behind the driver?

        • pmr

          Max didn’t hit Kimi in the rear. Kimi had much more speed then verstappen and because their wheels were interlocked, Kimi’s rear wheel ran into Max’s front wheel (not apportioning any blame here)

          • Peter Riva

            If Kimi did not change direction and Max’s front wheel hit Kimi’s rear wheel, how is that not Max hitting Kimi in the rear?

          • pmr

            Kimi and max were both driving strait lines, but those lines were converging. Kimi’s right rear suspension snaps because hes right rear wheel runs into max’s left front wheel. Max and kimi were side by side. In Baku Vettel drove into the back of Hamilton.

    • pmr

      So if you’re driving down the highway and some swerves onto your lane and you hit him it’s your fault? you could have braked. The simple thing is we can watch all the still images and super slomo’s as much as we want. If you look at the footage at normal speed you see the speed at witch it all develops. there is virtually no reaction time. No driver backs down the moment they see another car comming, They only back out when they can see things going pear shaped (correct me if i’m wrong here paul). But Vettel moved over with such speed that by the time he wanted to back out it was no longer an option.