Race Strategies

[maure 1]

Alonso's qualifying in Barcelone opened the eyes of some of our fellow poster to the importance of fuel loads. Unfortunately, it seems that this new found knowledge is neither applied to all drivers nor understood in terms of race strategy. Perhaps this will help a little.

In terms of fuel loads (and all other things being equal), we could generalize as follows:

1. Stronger strategy (for a stronger driver, car, and/or setup) implies a heavy fuel load and is a relatively sure win (of position) if none, one, or more of the following happen

a. The driver qualifies ahead of lighter cars.

b. The driver passes on the first laps (first corner on) those drivers he couldn't outqualify.

c. The driver passes those lighter drivers still ahead as these pit while he still has a few laps of fuel.

d. The driver passes those lighter drivers still ahead while pitting himself as his pitstop can be adjusted by perhaps 1-2 seconds.

2. Weaker strategy (for a weaker driver, car, and/or setup) implies a light fuel load and does _NOT_ ensure a win (of position) even if all of the following happen

a. The driver outqualifies heavier (slower) cars.

b. The driver passes on the first laps heavier (slower) drivers.

c. The driver finds clean air and is able to pull away from heavier (slower) drivers.

If all 1a-d and 2a-c fail to occur, the strong driver wins every time. The fundamental reasons why the "stronger" strategy is superior are:

1. The weaker package _needs_ something to go wrong for the strong package.

2. The strong package has the benefit of pitting later and adjusting strategy.

In other words, the weaker package is at the mercy of the strong package. Further, the weaker package is more prone to failure. For example, a SC cancels out whatever time gained even if 2a-c have been followed to the letter.

It is in this context that one can understand why Alonso's qualifying was nothing but "showcasing". It should be easier now to extrapolate this information to other drivers and other races.

There you go. This is a very simple picture but it is a start and, hopefully, it will be helpful to some. There is no shortage of knowledgeable posters and, again hopefully, they will also contribute with other aspects of strategies.

[yurp 0]

strong beats weak - who'd a thunk it.

but remember this - paper beats stone, which beats scissors which beat paper - hope this helps to undo the good work from maure.

[pabloh20 1]

strong beats weak - who'd a thunk it.

but remember this - paper beats stone, which beats scissors which beat paper - hope this helps to undo the good work from maure.

Your reputation is safe

[maure 1]

strong beats weak - who'd a thunk it.

but remember this - paper beats stone, which beats scissors which beat paper - hope this helps to undo the good work from maure.

In other words, you cannot get your head around what fuel loads are. No problem. Read the posting before hitting the reply button.

[Max Mosley 2]

Alonso's qualifying was nothing but "showcasing".

There is no shortage of knowledgeable posters

Thanks.

Of course it's not always the case that someone is showboating just because they have less fuel than average. I see no reason to doubt McLaren's argument that Lewis was suffering worse tyre degradation in Turkey (and probably 'most everywhere else) than most drivers. If true then it makes good sense to stop more in the race. Also it's not always the case that a stronger driver will opt for more fuel than average, or his team mate.

[dribbler 6]

strong beats weak - who'd a thunk it.

but remember this - paper beats stone, which beats scissors which beat paper - hope this helps to undo the good work from maure.

In other words, you cannot get your head around what fuel loads are. No problem. Read the posting before hitting the reply button.

Nope, i think he gets it. I just think you don't.

[Autumnpuma 0]

Maure, lots of good info here, but essentially useless. Here's why:

(and all other things being equal)

[yurp 0]

In other words, you cannot get your head around what fuel loads are. No problem. Read the posting before hitting the reply button.

I read it fully. And it's blatently obvious.

You might as well have posted "Superman could beat Father Christmas at an arm wrestling championship unless he broke his arm, if both were not imaginary characters but real people with appropriate 'super' / 'getting down the chimney' powers".

Nope, i think he gets it. I just think you don't.

Thank you dribbler.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer 4]

Maure, lots of good info here, but essentially useless. Here's why:

(and all other things being equal)

Absolutely AutumnPuma.

Maure, making a generalisation like this and ignoring other variables is as valid as saying: all other things being equal, the driver who pushes hardest on the accelerator will win, as long as he overtakes all the other drivers, etc....

Other variables to name but a few = tyre choice, amount of dirt on the circuit, whether anyone has a first corner accident, behaviour of other drivers, whether the cars are setup with different suspension choices, how good a start the driver has, how good a start the other drivers have, whether a dog runs onto the track, whether the team are conserving the engine, the motivation of the driver, whether there are team orders, the wind speed, the health of the driver, the aero setup, amount of understeer/oversteer, attitude of the driver to risk, I could go on...

Maure I guess the reason for your posting was to demonstrate in the last race Alonso = great and Hamilton = crap. In which case, 1) your argument is invalid as it is based upon a fantasy in your fevered mind that the only thing that matters is the fuel weight and 2) where did they both come in the results? Ultimately it doesn't matter how great we think a driver is - its where they finish that matters.

And again I should mention I am not a Hamilton/McLaren fan (despite what you think Maure), I just can't abide a lack of logic.

[Grabthaw the Hammerslayer 4]

I read it fully. And it's blatently obvious.

You might as well have posted "Superman could beat Father Christmas at an arm wrestling championship unless he broke his arm, if both were not imaginary characters but real people with appropriate 'super' / 'getting down the chimney' powers".

Superman could easily beat Father Christmas, but it depends on the weight of the presents that Father Christmas was carrying....

[dribbler 6]

I read it fully. And it's blatently obvious.

You might as well have posted "Superman could beat Father Christmas at an arm wrestling championship unless he broke his arm, if both were not imaginary characters but real people with appropriate 'super' / 'getting down the chimney' powers".

Superman could easily beat Father Christmas, but it depends on the weight of the presents that Father Christmas was carrying....

You're also not considering whether Superman would be a bit tired from going up the Lane.

[yurp 0]

You're also not considering whether Superman would be a bit tired from going up the Lane.

Damn it - I just promised not to write any other stupid comments on maure's threads.....

Arrrgh - It hurts - The pain - The effort - I can't do it - I'm going to burst - I mustn't - I mustn't - I must respect his opinions - ksadf9uf09ufasdfjoper0a34ifdjfofpgvldasfffsaf!!!!!

Father Christmas would be knackered from squeezing himself up all the little kids chimneys.

bollocks

[BradSpeedMan 6]

Damn it - I just promised not to write any other stupid comments on maure's threads.....

Arrrgh - It hurts - The pain - The effort - I can't do it - I'm going to burst - I mustn't - I mustn't - I must respect his opinions - ksadf9uf09ufasdfjoper0a34ifdjfofpgvldasfffsaf!!!!!

Father Christmas would be knackered from squeezing himself up all the little kids chimneys.

bollocks

[dribbler 6]

Father Christmas would be knackered from squeezing himself up all the little kids chimneys.

Not to mention that he has to go down first.

[Medilloni 6]

Not to mention that he has to go down first.

Hmm. Strategy.

So, strategy for this Christmas - must remember to suggest the missus does the dress-up-as-Santa bit for this Christmas.

I think this will have me strong out-front in the early stages, until the positions are reversed and I have to stop for fresh rubber. Though if I maintain a good pace on the harder rubber, I should be able to come from behind at the finish and just snatch it.

Maure to this strategy than meets the eye.....

[dribbler 6]

Hmm. Strategy.

So, strategy for this Christmas - must remember to suggest the missus does the dress-up-as-Santa bit for this Christmas.

I think this will have me strong out-front in the early stages, until the positions are reversed and I have to stop for fresh rubber. Though if I maintain a good pace on the harder rubber, I should be able to come from behind at the finish and just snatch it.

Maure to this strategy than meets the eye.....

Would you be using slicks or grooves, for her pleasure?

[Medilloni 6]

Would you be using slicks or grooves, for her pleasure?

Grooves Steve, I predict it'll be a wet one.

[Max Mosley 2]

[Quiet One 15]

Ultimately it doesn't matter how great we think a driver is - its where they finish that matters.

I strongly disagree.

It's a common thinking around these forums that the only thing that matters is the final result (a twisted way of saying "the end justify the menas", perhaps?)

It was a common defense from Schumi fans during his reign, and it was used quite a few times here, mostly to attack Alonso and/or defend Lewis. Maybe it was not this case, I am pretty sure you are not that kind of person, but you still use the same basic concept.

If the final result is all that matters, then Stirling Moss and Gilles Villeneuve were crap. Lewis is just another driver that won a few GPs. Button is much worse than Fisichella, etc.

I don't think you really believe that is only where they finish that matters. There are/were wonderful drivers who never accomplished much due to other facts (inferior cars, short careers, accidents, etc.) yet that does not diminish the pleasure of seeing them race. Otherwise, what's the point of watching F1? Reading the final grid at some website would be enough.

[Fed up 0]

I strongly disagree.

It's a common thinking around these forums that the only thing that matters is the final result (a twisted way of saying "the end justify the menas", perhaps?)

It was a common defense from Schumi fans during his reign, and it was used quite a few times here, mostly to attack Alonso and/or defend Lewis. Maybe it was not this case, I am pretty sure you are not that kind of person, but you still use the same basic concept.

If the final result is all that matters, then Stirling Moss and Gilles Villeneuve were crap. Lewis is just another driver that won a few GPs. Button is much worse than Fisichella, etc.

I don't think you really believe that is only where they finish that matters. There are/were wonderful drivers who never accomplished much due to other facts (inferior cars, short careers, accidents, etc.) yet that does not diminish the pleasure of seeing them race. Otherwise, what's the point of watching F1? Reading the final grid at some website would be enough.

You are wrong of course Andres - It is ultimately a race to the finish so the driver that wins is the winner. The rest is semantics, conjecture, spin and personal opinion. Kimi was fast when he was at Mclaren, but he didn't have the maturity, mechanical sympathy or nous of Alonso. Prost used to be called the professor because he was not only fast he was also very clever in race conditions. It's not about being fast, there are so many other variables that make a WDC - If prizes were awarded for speed Lewis would have won the WDC in 07, the mistakes he made in Shanghai and Brazil would never have been made by Alonso, not because Alonso was faster but because he is a more complete driver in the mold of a Prost - Lewis's time will come as he is still young.

Fisi, Berger, Alesi, Nakajima (sr) were all very fast drivers, but they lack that little extra that makes a very good driver a WDC - I never watched Moss or remember much of Gilles, but view remains the same, if they were the fastest at the time they would have been WDC - Any other explanation is just excuses, myth and just topics for debate. They may have missed out on a WDC by 1 point or whatever or team orders, but at some point during the season they would have had the opportunity to impose themselves or gain the ascendency - Eddie Irvine nearly won a WDC for christ sakes.

Cream always rises

[monza gorilla 1]

I strongly disagree.

It's a common thinking around these forums that the only thing that matters is the final result (a twisted way of saying "the end justify the menas", perhaps?)

It was a common defense from Schumi fans during his reign, and it was used quite a few times here, mostly to attack Alonso and/or defend Lewis. Maybe it was not this case, I am pretty sure you are not that kind of person, but you still use the same basic concept.

If the final result is all that matters, then Stirling Moss and Gilles Villeneuve were crap. Lewis is just another driver that won a few GPs. Button is much worse than Fisichella, etc.

I don't think you really believe that is only where they finish that matters. There are/were wonderful drivers who never accomplished much due to other facts (inferior cars, short careers, accidents, etc.) yet that does not diminish the pleasure of seeing them race. Otherwise, what's the point of watching F1? Reading the final grid at some website would be enough.

Hooray! I likee that post. Chris Amon.

[dribbler 6]

I strongly disagree.

It's a common thinking around these forums that the only thing that matters is the final result (a twisted way of saying "the end justify the menas", perhaps?)

It was a common defense from Schumi fans during his reign, and it was used quite a few times here, mostly to attack Alonso and/or defend Lewis. Maybe it was not this case, I am pretty sure you are not that kind of person, but you still use the same basic concept.

If the final result is all that matters, then Stirling Moss and Gilles Villeneuve were crap. Lewis is just another driver that won a few GPs. Button is much worse than Fisichella, etc.

I don't think you really believe that is only where they finish that matters. There are/were wonderful drivers who never accomplished much due to other facts (inferior cars, short careers, accidents, etc.) yet that does not diminish the pleasure of seeing them race. Otherwise, what's the point of watching F1? Reading the final grid at some website would be enough.

I think maybe you are taking Meanies statement a little too literally. We have to have an official measurement of a driver's ability and that measurement will always be the points he accrues and the position he finishes in. Unofficially, it is very different from that; Gilles and Stirling are two great examples, as you mentioned. In my observations of Meanioni and his passion for our sport, i don't think the concept of being able to judge a driver outside of this box is beyond him for one second. Ultimately, a great driver (whether he achieves actual points/championship position success) will never escape the attentions of the informed viewer.

[monza gorilla 1]

I never watched Moss or remember much of Gilles, but view remains the same, if they were the fastest at the time they would have been WDC - Any other explanation is just excuses, myth and just topics for debate. They may have missed out on a WDC by 1 point or whatever or team orders, but at some point during the season they would have had the opportunity to impose themselves or gain the ascendency - Eddie Irvine nearly won a WDC for christ sakes.

Cream always rises

Nope.

[monza gorilla 1]

I think maybe you are taking Meanies statement a little too literally. We have to have an official measurement of a driver's ability and that measurement will always be the points he accrues and the position he finishes in. Unofficially, it is very different from that; Gilles and Stirling are two great examples, as you mentioned. In my observations of Meanioni and his passion for our sport, i don't think the concept of being able to judge a driver outside of this box is beyond him for one second. Ultimately, a great driver (whether he achieves actual points/championship position success) will never escape the attentions of the informed viewer.

Yep.

[Rainmaster 7]

I strongly disagree.

It's a common thinking around these forums that the only thing that matters is the final result (a twisted way of saying "the end justify the menas", perhaps?)

It was a common defense from Schumi fans during his reign, and it was used quite a few times here, mostly to attack Alonso and/or defend Lewis. Maybe it was not this case, I am pretty sure you are not that kind of person, but you still use the same basic concept.

If the final result is all that matters, then Stirling Moss and Gilles Villeneuve were crap. Lewis is just another driver that won a few GPs. Button is much worse than Fisichella, etc.

I don't think you really believe that is only where they finish that matters. There are/were wonderful drivers who never accomplished much due to other facts (inferior cars, short careers, accidents, etc.) yet that does not diminish the pleasure of seeing them race. Otherwise, what's the point of watching F1? Reading the final grid at some website would be enough.

I agree with your post, but also with what Steve said.