Silver_Arrows

Bmw Race Tactics?

24 posts in this topic

This is not intended to be flame bait, it is a serious question. When Robert got past nick in the race, did BMW ask nick to let him go to avoid him being held up, or did Robert just overtake him? ITV did not cover the press conference so I do not know what was said after the race

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ITV did too cover the after-race conference. I saw it with my own two eyes, I did!

Heidi just said that because of strategy he didn't make it hard for Kubi to get past him. Nothing else was really said. I doubt there was any in-race instruction from the wall, more there would have been instructions during race brief when strategies would have been discussed. However, had Heidi held up Kubi for another two laps, then he might well have scored his first win. The final gap between the two wasn't really indicative of their pace. Heidi held station after Kubi came out of the pits infront of him. No point taking each other off the track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was the correct choice to let Robert through and not play havoc with his strategy. The call would have come in the form of some suggestive comments from the pitwall, and Nick knew what to do from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nick would have thought that he had it in the bag and that letting Kubi through (if that's what happened) would be fine, because Kubi had to pit again. Little did he expect for Kubi to pull out a whole pit stop advantage in just 10 laps.

At that point Kubi was racing the car behind him and so Nick letting Kubi through and holding up the other (was that Alonso, Webber or Coulthard - can't remember who it was at that point) was the right thing to do.

Kubi thanked Nick by putting in an amazing 10 laps and winning.

The pit could have told Nick "We're not racing Kubi, he's got another stop to make." which would have been quite true at that point in the race. Nick would then have figured - Kubi's lighter, his wheels are warmed up (remember Nick had just come out of the pits himself), so why not let him go when he makes the move. Better that than defend aggressively against a team mate who's a pitstop down and wants desperately to pass - had he not let Kubi pass, he might have taken them both out - EDIT in which case Coulthard would have won! - jesus - think about that /EDIT

Sensible driving - unfortunate for Nick that Kubi was so fast once he got past.

Edited by adamstrags

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

colutard winning ftw!!!!

but i cant imagine heidfeld making it that easy for him and tactics must have been involved. just look at the champiuonship table - who would BMW want to gain most points!?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nick had track position so the decison to fuel him to the end was a bit odd IMHO. If Nick had been switched to a 2 stop strategy he would definietely have been in a better position to the win the race. That said, BMW had both bases covered in case Kubica's race was compromised by a safety car before his last pitstop. You can rest assured that the Poles would have declared war on the Germans if it had been the other way round.

When all is said and done Kubi deserved BMW's first win as his pace has been right up there this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ITV did too cover the after-race conference. I saw it with my own two eyes, I did!

In the original broadcast they cut away to a football match :/ anyway, I was not trying to suggest he didnt deserve it, as I feel he did just wondering what was happening on the pitwall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was the correct choice to let Robert through and not play havoc with his strategy. The call would have come in the form of some suggestive comments from the pitwall, and Nick knew what to do from there.

Indeed, and to be honest, I think Kubica would have passed him any way. Kubica thoroughly deserved this one, his pace compared to Nick was amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here is what Dr. Mario said after the race about the switch for heidfeld

http://formula-one.speedtv.com/article/f1-...m-for-theissen/

“We were in the perfect situation, having the leading car of the not yet stoppers, and the leading car of the ones who had stopped. We didn’t expect a one-two at that time, but we saw we had a very good chance that one of the two will win the race.”
Edited by F1 FANatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me BMW just covered all their bases incase there was another safety car. If there was a safety car Heidfeld would of won, If Kubica crashed or made a mistake or a failure Heidfeld would of won. BMW knew they could win this race what ever happened.

They just used Heidfeld as their "safety net" if you like, he may not of liked it but someone needed to do it. This is a sign of a good well organised team.

As for teams like Mclaren and Ferrari, they constantly keep messing up their stradegies and races due to mistakes. Quite amazing as BMW arent exactly the experienced team.

Next Year I have a feeling this team will be a real force! Dont worry Nick you'll have your chance. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, I believe that Ferrari and McLaren (in particular their drivers) have made an unusual amount of mistakes this year, which has certainly helped BMW, but as I have said in defense of Alonso and Raikkonen, nobody in F1 wins by accident, and BMW are really stepping up to the plate at the moment, and they deserve massive credit for that. Although I am a McLaren fan, I am pleased to see another team enter the fray it makes life a lot more interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BMW did the right thing like Mclaren last season (Monaco GP), no foul play. Ofcourse, In the end of the day someone is disappointed. Nick can win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's obvious Heidfeld did not make it too hard for Kubica, but it was not like he was slowing down on purpose.

It was surely a right thing to do at that moment. If Heidfeld had decided to defend at any cost it could all turn out really bad :

-they would fight for a few laps (probably with Kubica ending up in front anyway cause he was much faster at that point of the race), but on a track like that there's plenty to go wrong and Alonso was just there waiting for his chance

-if Heidfeld did manage to hold Kubica behind he would probably ruined Pole's chance for podium (which isn't a thing you wanna do to your teammate unless your relations are like Prost-Senna)

-if NH postponed overtaking for few laps, they would ineavitably end up fighting for P1 in the closing stages of the race with the same fuel level and RK having an advantage in fresh rubber - and then team principals would probably interfere telling them to just bring the cars home...

So again this was the best decision he could make. Btw. I think NH thoughts was the same as mine - ok he's past me, but there's plenty of slower cars ahead (they were ~P10 atm) so he won't make it anyway. Honestly even when Glock finally pitted I thought Kubica would be 3-4 laps short to overtake Heidfeld.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed, and to be honest, I think Kubica would have passed him any way. Kubica thoroughly deserved this one, his pace compared to Nick was amazing.

Agree, Nick's race pace wasn't as good as Robert's but interestingly Nick set a faster lap than Robert by a massive 4 tenths or something!!!

Nick
Edited by aussief1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that BMW changed their strategy after the Lewis/Kimi/Nico incident. My impression was that both BMWs were on 2-stoppers prior to the Hamilton gaffe.

Finding themselves 1-2 in CANADA, it was essential to switch a driver to a one-stopper because of the possibility of a safety car. BMW was covering their arses. If a safety car comes out at the wrong time, screwing Kubica over, then Heidfeld will still be there to score their maiden win.

With regard to orders coming from the pits: the change strategy order was issued mid-race, so Heidfeld was quite aware of what was going on, and that he needed to let his teammate through. No need to send any specific instructions at that point, the driver knew what to do as part of a well-honed and orchestrated team strategy that was put into place well ahead of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And there's nothing wrong with that.

Unless Ferrari does that, then it is unsporting, not allowing drivers to race each other... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nick didn't really have a chance for the win as he had to make the option tyre last 40 odd laps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the Gilles Villeneuve track should ruled out the F1 Champ, even it was a very good show!
I think if the track was resurfaced, which I would say the FIA will demand for the 2009 round of the Championship, then all is well. I can't believe that the track passed the FIA inspection in the first place, after the track did the same thing last year especially at turn 10.

I agree... I understand that it is very expensive to attend the Canadian GP... one of the most spendy.. is this true?

Where is the money going, then? It is a joke to be running F1 on a track with patching laid down at every single turn.... not to mention covered oil spots, epoxy holding the entire thing together, paint spills on the track... quality!

aussief1 -- do you remember last year, most of the weekend they were blaming Bridgestone rubber for 'marbling,' when in fact it was the track falling apart!

This sheds some light upon the mysterious cause of Kubica's accident. It is easy to lose grip or hit some kind of weird bump when the track is in pieces...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Montreal is one of the last great F1 tracks around. with silver stone looking like it is on the block only Spa, Interlagos, Monaco, Montreal, Monza and Hockenheim (Even in its mangled form) are the only tracks left from F1's History. No matter how many new tracks there are being built in places all around the world F1 needs to keep its historical tracks. Yes, they need to be upgraded to have better pit facilities and some need a resurfacing, like Gilles Villeneuve, but you can not just say through out a track.

Throwing out historical tracks that only need be updated to meet facilities needs and have a resurfacing because of monetary gain is a disservice to the track's legacy. Not only that, most importantly it is also a disservice to the people who gave their blood sweat and tears, and often their lives, to bring fans great racing and make memorable moments over the last decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Throwing out historical tracks that only need be updated to meet facilities needs and have a resurfacing because of monetary gain is a disservice to the track's legacy. Not only that, most importantly it is also a disservice to the people who gave their blood sweat and tears, and often their lives, to bring fans great racing and make memorable moments over the last decades.

Totally agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Montreal is one of the last great F1 tracks around. with silver stone looking like it is on the block only Spa, Interlagos, Monaco, Montreal, Monza and Hockenheim (Even in its mangled form) are the only tracks left from F1's History. No matter how many new tracks there are being built in places all around the world F1 needs to keep its historical tracks. Yes, they need to be upgraded to have better pit facilities and some need a resurfacing, like Gilles Villeneuve, but you can not just say through out a track.

Throwing out historical tracks that only need be updated to meet facilities needs and have a resurfacing because of monetary gain is a disservice to the track's legacy. Not only that, most importantly it is also a disservice to the people who gave their blood sweat and tears, and often their lives, to bring fans great racing and make memorable moments over the last decades.

F1 doesn't have any obligation to any track - if anything, the tracks have an obligation to F1 to modernise and make sure they meet minimum safety standards. The drivers commented that the montreal track was a 'joke' and Martin Brundle even inferred that it was being resurfaced by 'pikeys'. While that may have been ok in the 1970's it is not acceptable today. It was a funny when a guy responsible for the surface in Montreal blamed the lack of traction control and grooved tyres on the track breaking up - what a load of rubbish!

Historical tracks need updating, at their expense, or they can be used as tourist atrractions as a form of homage to 'people who gave blood sweat and tears'

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Montreal is one of the last great F1 tracks around. with silver stone looking like it is on the block only Spa, Interlagos, Monaco, Montreal, Monza and Hockenheim (Even in its mangled form) are the only tracks left from F1's History. No matter how many new tracks there are being built in places all around the world F1 needs to keep its historical tracks. Yes, they need to be upgraded to have better pit facilities and some need a resurfacing, like Gilles Villeneuve, but you can not just say through out a track.

Throwing out historical tracks that only need be updated to meet facilities needs and have a resurfacing because of monetary gain is a disservice to the track's legacy. Not only that, most importantly it is also a disservice to the people who gave their blood sweat and tears, and often their lives, to bring fans great racing and make memorable moments over the last decades.

I agree!

F1 doesn't have any obligation to any track - if anything, the tracks have an obligation to F1 to modernise and make sure they meet minimum safety standards. The drivers commented that the montreal track was a 'joke' and Martin Brundle even inferred that it was being resurfaced by 'pikeys'. While that may have been ok in the 1970's it is not acceptable today. It was a funny when a guy responsible for the surface in Montreal blamed the lack of traction control and grooved tyres on the track breaking up - what a load of rubbish!

Historical tracks need updating, at their expense, or they can be used as tourist atrractions as a form of homage to 'people who gave blood sweat and tears'

:rolleyes:

Some tracks are more important than others, it's that simple, obviously there's a line but the older circuits should be able to get away with more than the newer ones. The track does need resurfacing..

..and fear not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now