Hamilton was fast enough for front row

2011 Turkish GP qualifying analysis

Lewis Hamilton, McLaren, Istanbul, 2011

Lewis Hamilton, McLaren, Istanbul, 2011

Lewis Hamilton missed out on a potential front row slot in qualifying.

His sector times show the McLaren driver was quick enough for second on the grid.

And Red Bull are giving away over 10kph in straight-line speed in Istanbul.

More analysis of the data from qualifying below.

Qualifying times in full

  • Michael Schumacher was the only driver who failed to improve his time from one session to the next. However, Felipe Massa abandoned his only run in Q3
  • HRT continue to get on terms with Virgin 0 Vitantonio Liuzzi out-qualified Timo Glock
  • The 107% time in Q1 was 1’33.104
Driver Car Q1 Q2 (vs Q1) Q3 (vs Q2)
1 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 1’27.039 1’25.610 (-1.429) 1’25.049 (-0.561)
2 Mark Webber Red Bull 1’27.090 1’26.075 (-1.015) 1’25.454 (-0.621)
3 Nico Rosberg Mercedes 1’27.514 1’25.801 (-1.713) 1’25.574 (-0.227)
4 Lewis Hamilton McLaren 1’27.091 1’26.066 (-1.025) 1’25.595 (-0.471)
5 Fernando Alonso Ferrari 1’27.349 1’26.152 (-1.197) 1’25.851 (-0.301)
6 Jenson Button McLaren 1’27.374 1’26.485 (-0.889) 1’25.982 (-0.503)
7 Vitaly Petrov Renault 1’27.475 1’26.654 (-0.821) 1’26.296 (-0.358)
8 Michael Schumacher Mercedes 1’27.697 1’26.121 (-1.576) 1’26.646 (+0.525)
9 Nick Heidfeld Renault 1’27.901 1’26.740 (-1.161) 1’26.659 (-0.081)
10 Felipe Massa Ferrari 1’27.013 1’26.395 (-0.618)
11 Rubens Barrichello Williams 1’28.246 1’26.764 (-1.482)
12 Adrian Sutil Force India 1’27.392 1’27.027 (-0.365)
13 Paul di Resta Force India 1’27.625 1’27.145 (-0.480)
14 Pastor Maldonado Williams 1’27.396 1’27.236 (-0.160)
15 Sergio Perez Sauber 1’27.778 1’27.244 (-0.534)
16 Sebastien Buemi Toro Rosso 1’27.620 1’27.255 (-0.365)
17 Jaime Alguersuari Toro Rosso 1’28.055 1’27.572 (-0.483)
18 Heikki Kovalainen Lotus 1’28.780
19 Jarno Trulli Lotus 1’29.673
20 Jerome d’Ambrosio Virgin 1’30.445
21 Vitantonio Liuzzi HRT 1’30.692
22 Timo Glock Virgin 1’30.813
23 Narain Karthikeyan HRT 1’31.564
24 Kamui Kobayashi Sauber

Team mate comparisons

Compare the best times of each team’s drivers in the last part of qualifying in which they both set a time.

  • Adrian Sutil out-qualified Paul di Resta for the first time
  • Sebastian Vettel, Fernando Alonso, Nico Rosberg, Heikki Kovalainen and Vitantonio Liuzzi kept up their unbeaten streaks against their team mates this year
  • Glock had the only MVR-02 equipped with the team’s full upgrade – and was out-qualified by his team mate
Team Driver Lap time Gap Lap time Driver Round
Red Bull Sebastian Vettel 1’25.049 -0.405 1’25.454 Mark Webber Q3
McLaren Lewis Hamilton 1’25.595 -0.387 1’25.982 Jenson Button Q3
Ferrari Fernando Alonso 1’26.152 -0.243 1’26.395 Felipe Massa Q2
Mercedes Michael Schumacher 1’26.646 +1.072 1’25.574 Nico Rosberg Q3
Renault Nick Heidfeld 1’26.659 +0.363 1’26.296 Vitaly Petrov Q3
Williams Rubens Barrichello 1’26.764 -0.472 1’27.236 Pastor Maldonado Q2
Force India Adrian Sutil 1’27.027 -0.118 1’27.145 Paul di Resta Q2
Toro Rosso Sebastien Buemi 1’27.255 -0.317 1’27.572 Jaime Alguersuari Q2
Lotus Heikki Kovalainen 1’28.780 -0.893 1’29.673 Jarno Trulli Q1
HRT Narain Karthikeyan 1’31.564 +0.872 1’30.692 Vitantonio Liuzzi Q1
Virgin Timo Glock 1’30.813 +0.368 1’30.445 Jerome d’Ambrosio Q1

Ultimate laps

An ultimate lap is a driver’s best time in each of the three sectors that make up a lap combined.

  • Had Lewis Hamilton done his three fastest sectors in the same lap he would be second on the grid
Pos # Driver Ultimate lap Gap Deficit to best Actual position
1 1 Sebastian Vettel 1’25.049 0.000 1
2 3 Lewis Hamilton 1’25.413 0.364 0.182 4
3 2 Mark Webber 1’25.454 0.405 0.000 2
4 8 Nico Rosberg 1’25.543 0.494 0.031 3
5 5 Fernando Alonso 1’25.851 0.802 0.000 5
6 4 Jenson Button 1’25.936 0.887 0.046 6
7 7 Michael Schumacher 1’26.072 1.023 0.574 8
8 10 Vitaly Petrov 1’26.132 1.083 0.164 7
9 6 Felipe Massa 1’26.395 1.346 0.000 10
10 9 Nick Heidfeld 1’26.564 1.515 0.095 9
11 11 Rubens Barrichello 1’26.764 1.715 0.000 11
12 14 Adrian Sutil 1’27.026 1.977 0.001 12
13 15 Paul di Resta 1’27.145 2.096 0.000 13
14 18 Sebastien Buemi 1’27.168 2.119 0.087 16
15 12 Pastor Maldonado 1’27.168 2.119 0.068 14
16 17 Sergio Perez 1’27.192 2.143 0.052 15
17 19 Jaime Alguersuari 1’27.342 2.293 0.230 17
18 20 Heikki Kovalainen 1’28.780 3.731 0.000 18
19 21 Jarno Trulli 1’29.673 4.624 0.000 19
20 16 Kamui Kobayashi 1’30.275 5.226 24
21 25 Jerome d’Ambrosio 1’30.405 5.356 0.040 20
22 23 Vitantonio Liuzzi 1’30.692 5.643 0.000 21
23 24 Timo Glock 1’30.769 5.720 0.044 22
24 22 Narain Karthikeyan 1’31.317 6.268 0.247 23

Sector times

Here are the drivers? best times in each sector.

  • Despite starting sixth on the Jenson Button was fastest in the final sector
  • Red Bull are typically superior in the parts of the lap where downforce are most important
Driver Sector 1 Sector 2 Sector 3
Sebastian Vettel 31.493 (1) 30.040 (1) 23.516 (3)
Mark Webber 31.659 (4) 30.226 (3) 23.569 (5)
Nico Rosberg 31.613 (2) 30.343 (4) 23.587 (6)
Lewis Hamilton 31.650 (3) 30.208 (2) 23.555 (4)
Fernando Alonso 31.897 (5) 30.361 (5) 23.593 (7)
Jenson Button 31.960 (8) 30.473 (6) 23.503 (1)
Vitaly Petrov 31.917 (6) 30.507 (7) 23.708 (9)
Michael Schumacher 31.938 (7) 30.627 (10) 23.507 (2)
Nick Heidfeld 32.145 (10) 30.595 (9) 23.824 (12)
Felipe Massa 32.080 (9) 30.523 (8) 23.792 (11)
Rubens Barrichello 32.352 (12) 30.735 (11) 23.677 (8)
Adrian Sutil 32.334 (11) 30.866 (14) 23.826 (13)
Paul di Resta 32.493 (14) 30.911 (15) 23.741 (10)
Pastor Maldonado 32.391 (13) 30.914 (16) 23.863 (15)
Sergio Perez 32.509 (15) 30.822 (13) 23.861 (14)
Sebastien Buemi 32.517 (16) 30.772 (12) 23.879 (17)
Jaime Alguersuari 32.545 (17) 30.925 (17) 23.872 (16)
Heikki Kovalainen 32.898 (18) 31.511 (18) 24.371 (18)
Jarno Trulli 33.248 (20) 31.855 (20) 24.570 (22)
Jerome d’Ambrosio 33.840 (23) 32.075 (21) 24.490 (20)
Vitantonio Liuzzi 33.692 (21) 32.481 (23) 24.519 (21)
Timo Glock 33.773 (22) 32.246 (22) 24.750 (23)
Narain Karthikeyan 34.105 (24) 32.751 (24) 24.461 (19)
Kamui Kobayashi 33.197 (19) 31.555 (19) 25.523 (24)

Speed trap

Here are the drivers’ maximum speeds from qualifying.

  • The Red Bulls are giving away over 10kph in a straight line which could leave them vulnerable when racing for position
Pos Driver Car Speed (kph) Gap
1 Sergio Perez Sauber 322.6
2 Lewis Hamilton McLaren 319.4 -3.2
3 Jenson Button McLaren 319.4 -3.2
4 Fernando Alonso Ferrari 319.2 -3.4
5 Vitaly Petrov Renault 319.2 -3.4
6 Felipe Massa Ferrari 319.2 -3.4
7 Nick Heidfeld Renault 318.9 -3.7
8 Sebastien Buemi Toro Rosso 318.5 -4.1
9 Jaime Alguersuari Toro Rosso 318.3 -4.3
10 Pastor Maldonado Williams 317.8 -4.8
11 Michael Schumacher Mercedes 316.7 -5.9
12 Rubens Barrichello Williams 316.1 -6.5
13 Nico Rosberg Mercedes 316.0 -6.6
14 Adrian Sutil Force India 314.8 -7.8
15 Paul di Resta Force India 314.7 -7.9
16 Sebastian Vettel Red Bull 312.0 -10.6
17 Mark Webber Red Bull 311.9 -10.7
18 Jerome d’Ambrosio Virgin 311.8 -10.8
19 Timo Glock Virgin 311.4 -11.2
20 Heikki Kovalainen Lotus 309.8 -12.8
21 Jarno Trulli Lotus 309.4 -13.2
22 Narain Karthikeyan HRT 309.2 -13.4
23 Vitantonio Liuzzi HRT 309.1 -13.5
24 Kamui Kobayashi Sauber 299.6 -23.0

2011 Turkish Grand Prix

Browse all 2011 Turkish Grand Prix articles

Image ?? McLaren

Advert | Go Ad-free

76 comments on Hamilton was fast enough for front row

  1. Icthyes said on 7th May 2011, 16:44

    Interesting and good news for the race, except Hamilton’s grid position might have put him out of contention already. If Rosberg doesn’t get in the mix it might be another predictable victory.

    • Hatebreeder (@hatebreeder) said on 7th May 2011, 17:28

      also the fact that lewis was complaining in china that rosberg’s defending style is dangerous. So he has to try and force his way past the german maybe by turn 1 or so, or he will be stuck behind until nico stops for tyres. but mercedes is known for their fastest pitstops. So it really depends on how fast lewis does his laps.

  2. Fixy (@fixy) said on 7th May 2011, 16:49

    Sebastian Vettel, Fernando Alonso, Nico Rosberg, Heikki Kovalainen and Vitantonio Liuzzi kept up their unbeaten streaks against their team mates this year

    Liuzzi is equalling Alonso and Vettel…

  3. VXR said on 7th May 2011, 16:52

    Could have, should have, would have. As it is, he’s fourth, and it’s not a bad place to be. Strategy is all that matters now.

    • Patrickl (@patrickl) said on 7th May 2011, 17:20

      Tyre preservation is all that matters.

      • VXR said on 7th May 2011, 17:48

        Strategical use of the tyres is all that matters now.

        Thank heavens they aren’t still on Bridgestones, otherwise Red Bull would be thinking that they already have it won now.

    • Corrections Dept said on 7th May 2011, 20:27

      Sector-based fantasy laptimes are meaningless.

      Taking time out of tyres in one sector, means time not available in others. Going too fast in one sector may end up with a slower overall laptime. The tyre is a resource to be managed over a complete lap, not a sector.

      Same goes for KERS deployment. Use more in one sector gives a faster split, but means that resource would not be available at that rate across multiple sectors.

      Setup changes between runs will also affect relative performance across sectors. An imaginary bisected track, one half Monaco, one half Monza, a fast setup in S1 would not be a fast setup for S2 … you therefore, without explicit knowledge of car configuration, could not simplistically add a fast S1 time, to a fast S2 time to produce an ultimate theoretical laptime … that laptime is simply not physically available.

      The adding of sector times is one of the most pointless exercises in F1 pseudo stats.

      • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 7th May 2011, 21:31

        Sector-based fantasy laptimes are meaningless.

        No they aren’t or I wouldn’t bother publishing them.

        Taking time out of tyres in one sector, means time not available in others.

        That’s not the case at all sectors or even, I would suggest, the majority of them.

        You may have a point when it comes to KERS deployment but even so variation in where drivers use KERS will be far, far less in qualifying than it is during the race.

        And do you really have to be so condescending as to call yourself “Corrections Dept”? How about joining those of us the real world and use your actual name?

        • Corrections Dept said on 7th May 2011, 22:29

          No, I think I must insist, they are quite meaningless.
          (Your decision to publish them or not is separate, and does not in fact actually alter the real-world versus fantasy nature of the arithmetic employed.)

          We see cars minimzing tyre exertion on outlaps. We see tyres give out on peak grip before completion of a single qualifying lap. Time extracted from a tyre early in a lap will not be available later in that same lap. Go fast S1, go slow S3; go slow S1, go fast S3. Those fantasy S1 and S3 times are simultaneously unavailable to any driver. They could choose to have one or the other, not both.

          It is meaningless to suggest that performance extracted, finite resource expended, in one sector is magically available at that heightened rate for all sectors. It simply is not true.

          Do a lap of Turkey, pit, take out a turn of wing, then go faster in S3, slower in S2, where does that leave the validity of combining those sectors; that multiple downforce configuration is not physically possible, the combined laptime is therefore fantasy, and therefore, pointless to speculate on, and pointless to include in any article headlines.

          … all just smacks of quasi-analysis for superficial analysis sake. None of the variables are controlled, none of the physical limitations reflected.
          There is no basis in real world race engineering for the conclusions asserted by the very unrealistic process of multiple-lap sector-time conflation. The number means nothing.
          But we usually just choose to summarize all that, by simply saying ‘meaningless’.

          • LHJBFTW (@lhjbftw) said on 7th May 2011, 22:39

            If ultimate lap times are unattainable then why did 9 drivers obtain them ;)

          • Nick said on 7th May 2011, 22:40

            What the hell are you talking about ?????

          • Nick said on 7th May 2011, 22:41

            PS I was obviously referring to Corrections Dept’s bizarre post…

          • Mr draw said on 7th May 2011, 22:46

            Good points, especially the setup- and KERS-issue, but I think it’s only a theoretical problem in most cases.

          • pSynrg said on 7th May 2011, 22:48

            @Corrections Dept (<- is this irony?)

            What you are seeing is also called the optimum lap time. It is used in just about every form of lap based motor sports. Every driver wants to know this optimum as it is the ultimate target.
            It's always a moving target, pretty much the proverbial pot of gold.

            But as LHJBFTW said, 9 drivers hit their optimum. Vettel of course most audaciously and as much as it pains me to say it, an utterly brilliant lap.

            Your objecting to one of motor sports primary tools. Very odd.

          • DVC said on 7th May 2011, 23:23

            It’s not an optimum lap, it’s just the best 3 sectors added together. If you are making mistakes, then this is a valuable measure. If you are not making any mistakes then Corrections Department’s points are valid.

            If your tyre is best on its second lap, and you do 2 flying laps with it, then it stands to reason that the beginning of your second flying lap will be quicker than the beginning of the first, whereas the same won’t be true of the end of the lap, thanks to the 2/3 of a lap you must do before you start your flyer.

            The more perfect and mistake free a driver drives, the less useful this ‘ultimate lap’ metric is.

          • pSynrg said on 7th May 2011, 23:59

            Oh yes it is! :)

          • bad_whippet said on 8th May 2011, 0:18

            @Corrections Dept

            I don’t normally do this, but I found the tone of your comment just a bit much.

            To point out how ‘meaningless’ this data is, here’s a quote from Martin Whitmarsh following quali today…

            “It’s very tight, very competitive, at the sharp end of the grid this year – and it’s worth noting that, had Lewis managed to string together his three best sector times in a single lap, he’d have been second-quickest. As things turned out, he was fourth-quickest, and Jenson was sixth-quickest, but they’re both fantastic racers and they’ll approach tomorrow’s race with all the controlled aggression that we’ve come to expect from them over the years”.

            (source – Autosport – http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/91218)

            That, I think you’ll find, is ‘correct’.

          • Corrections Dept said on 8th May 2011, 1:02

            9 drivers hit their optimum.

            No, 9 drivers did their 3 fastest sectors in their fastest lap.
            That is not the same as arbitrarily pulling fastest sectors from discrete and independent laps and misrepresenting their combination as an actually attainable hypothetical ultimate. Not the same thing at all, not by a long shot.

            What the hell are you talking about ?????

            I naively thought the problem to be actually fairly self-evident, imagine my surprise.
            Some people in this thread do clearly appreciate the nuance, I am therefore reasonably confident I have managed to clearly state the problem … without venturing into redundancy, I am not really sure how to restate it to help you further, Nick.

            Bad_whippet, that this calculation is used in team manager PR spin (but not in serious F1 race-engineering analysis) and on-screen in FOM TV graphics, I don’t disagree.
            I didn’t ever say it wasn’t, I only said it shouldn’t. My argument was that it is a simplistic and meaningless fiction which clearly misrepresents the respective dynamics within a lap, and the respective laps across a session. It tells us nothing of any utility. That’s all.

          • Oliver said on 8th May 2011, 8:46

            Theoretically you hav a point. But as precise as the drivers may be, they can never be absolutely certain that they changed gears at precisely the right moment, or took a corner at the exact angle or speed. When drivers are chasing times that are as small as a few tenths, a mild change in wind speed is sufficient to affect the times, likewise a small change in setup may not be detrimental to speed, but may be beneficial to handling and driver confidence.

            I don’t believe in statistics, but they still give an indication of consistency or the lack of. But be that as it may, it will appear that you have issues that are unrelated to F1 and you may need to have checked.

          • pSynrg said on 8th May 2011, 8:50

            @Corrections Dept, I’m sure this is a wind-up. You used to be a character in a comic called Viz didn’t you?

          • Johnny 5 said on 8th May 2011, 9:45

            Actually, I’m kinda with Corrections Dept on this… The fact that some drivers had their 3 fastest sectors in a single lap just highlights that they could have – possibly should have – produced a theoretical “ultimate” lap that was even quicker. For all the reasons that Corrections gave, and others, you can only optimise performance in one sector by compromising it in the other two sectors.

            Given that, in any engineering sense, it is nonsense, it’s still interesting nonsense that many people enjoy – as is a great deal of the rest of the flim-flam surrounding our beloved sport!

  4. BasCB (@bascb) said on 7th May 2011, 16:55

    Looks like Ferrari might have gone for a bit more top speed to have better opportunity for passing (or not getting passed) in the race.

    Button also seems to have a quite different setup, he was fast in the last sector all weekend.

    Nice to see how close it is right behind Vettel at least.

  5. Himmat S. said on 7th May 2011, 16:56

    So did Hamilton make a mistake or what on his final run cause I didn’t catch qualifying?

  6. AndrewTanner (@andrewtanner) said on 7th May 2011, 17:13

    We haven’t seen the RB7 that slow since Melbourne have we? I love how their car is, in one way, the slowest but usually destroys everyone regardless. They will be praying their KERS is upto scratch tomorrow because if Vettel pulls away from the line retaining the lead then their DRS is going to have a very quiet afternoon, well, at least Vettel’s is.

    I was thinking that was the first time Sutil put it ahead of Di Resta, now I have vindication.

    • Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 7th May 2011, 17:22

      It was much closer in Sepang, or “KL” as Coulthard likes to call it, where a tight race was possibly spoiled by Nock Heidfield’s start.

      • VXR said on 7th May 2011, 18:04

        where a tight race was possibly spoiled by Nock Heidfield’s start.

        Maybe there should only be the Red Bull’s and the McLaren’s on the grid? Perhaps all of the other cars should start from further back? As it was, the race wasn’t too bad.

      • Kpduke said on 7th May 2011, 18:38

        you might say spoiled, but i say it made the race better. Why should the race just be between mclaren and redbull? heidfeld was good enough, he came 3rd, while a mclaren came 8th.

      • Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 7th May 2011, 22:10

        Well I was referring to the runaway race victory.

    • Kpduke said on 7th May 2011, 18:35

      lets remember last year, mclaren was very close to redbull in this race, and then the redbulls collided, so if history repeats, then this track suits the mclaren a bit more then the redbull, also as last year quite possibly, redbull will still have an advantage at the next races, a bigger advantage then here.

  7. SabatFormulaOne (@sabatformulaone) said on 7th May 2011, 17:27

    I see Rosberg to confirm the podium tomorrow .

  8. RandomChimp (@randomchimp) said on 7th May 2011, 17:45

    Hamilton was fast enough for front row

    As tire heat management is more of a corner by corner job with the Pirellis as opposed to lap by lap with the Bridgestones (as far as I understand from the BBC track guide with Rosberg in Sepang), do ultimate lap times mean less than last year?

    For example, would Hamilton practically have been able to put those three best sectors together in the same lap without tire overheating compromising pace through certain parts of it?

  9. dlaird (@dlaird) said on 7th May 2011, 17:59

    Hamilton needs to clear Rosberg right away. He needs that same race start from china tomorrow.

    • VXR said on 7th May 2011, 18:07

      He doesn’t need to be on the dirty side of the grid then. Alonso will be looking for a good start on the clean side. It could be very tight between the two of them into that first corner.

      • Santi said on 7th May 2011, 18:22

        Well, I hope Alonso does a good start tomorrow. But he has been one of the worst starters of the year so far…

        • BBT said on 7th May 2011, 18:58

          Dirty and clean side is not so important with these tyres.

          Merc is quick in a straight line and good traction, they will be very difficult to overtake after turn 1 until the pitstops.

          • VXR said on 7th May 2011, 19:08

            Dirty and clean side is not so important with these tyres.

            Can you explain?

            Both Hamilton and Button looked to be fairly disappointed with having to start on what is obviously a poorer track surface condition.

          • BBT said on 7th May 2011, 19:27

            More disappointed from their positions I think. As Pirelli themselves have stated the track doesn’t rubber in like it did with the bridgestones, the dirty side is no longer as much a disadvantage (although it still is a bit)

          • RIISE (@riise) said on 7th May 2011, 20:35

            Well either way the tyres lay down rubber which in turn benefits the guy on the right hand side. Hamilton will be at a disadvantage at the start.

          • sato113 (@sato113) said on 7th May 2011, 22:22

            @bbt- the right hand side has been rubbered in for the last 6 years!

          • DVC said on 7th May 2011, 23:35

            Except that it rained on Friday and washed away the last 5 years, 11 months and 28 days worth of rubber.

          • VXR said on 8th May 2011, 11:30

            “I think the biggest worry is just that we’re on the dirty side of the grid and there’s quite a big difference from the dirty to the clean side here, so I think the most important thing for us is to try not to lose ground to either Fernando [Alonso] or [Vitaly] Petrov,” Hamilton said.

            His own words.

          • BBT (@bbt) said on 8th May 2011, 12:53

            This track is one where it is still important, probably the biggest difference of the season, I give you that… I’m just saying its not as bad as with the bridgestones.
            The last 6 years of rubber is pretty irrelevant, it washes away and its not the pirelli compound, refer to Brundles comments on the subject. However the GP2 car will have made the difference a bit more than the previous races this season, having though about it a bit more I understand the Mclarens drivers concerns.

  10. marcus said on 7th May 2011, 18:16

    So does this 10mph top speed advantage mean that when combined with DRS, a Mclarens (if they can get behind them) should sail past a Red Bull? And if a Red Bull gets stuck behind a Mclaren, the best the DRS will do is to negate their speed advantage?

    • VXR said on 7th May 2011, 18:32

      Since it’s obvious that the Red Bull’s aren’t the quickest in a straight line, they must be quicker somewhere else? This will be the problem that faces their competition. Trying to get near to the back of them in the first two laps when you aren’t allowed to use the DRS.

      • Kpduke said on 7th May 2011, 18:47

        they might not be able to get close enough to use the drs, as the redbull is a lot quicker through the fast turns, it will build an advantage before going into the drs zone. this happened last year where mclaren had a huge straight line advantage, but redbull were quicker through the long turns. but then the redbulls collided which gave mclaren a win without having to pass. this year i doubt they will collide, and i doubt they will pass them even with the straight line advantage.

        • RIISE (@riise) said on 7th May 2011, 20:37

          Sebastien has shown he can pull out more than a second gap by the 2nd lap which makes DRS useless for those behind him. I’d expect Mark to keep up with him though provided his KERS is working but whether he can make a telling overtake is another matter.

    • DVC said on 7th May 2011, 23:38

      It’s worth keeping in mind these straight line speeds are with the DRS activated.

      • Dave Blanc said on 8th May 2011, 0:11

        And also most cars were on the limiter for qualifying so will be different in the race

    • brendant (@brendant) said on 8th May 2011, 3:49

      Hitting your absolute top speed isn’t as important as maintaining a high average speed.

  11. Kpduke said on 7th May 2011, 18:29

    if we speculate about hamilton on the front row, then we also have to speculate about webber and vettel going for another run and going faster. the fact is, hamilton had two goes and didnt do the lap. with webber not going for another run, i thought a mclaren could split the redbulls, but mclaren must not be happy to have rosberg ahead also.

    • VXR said on 7th May 2011, 18:47

      Indeed. You have to wonder just how much quicker the Red Bull’s really are. And you could say the same for Rosberg’s Mercedes too!

      • BBT said on 7th May 2011, 19:00

        RBR yes, but Rosberg max’d that lap.

        • VXR said on 7th May 2011, 19:13

          but Rosberg max’d that lap.

          Well, he certainly went quicker than his team mate! But we have no real way of knowing if the Mercedes could have gone any quicker. I certainly wouldn’t have bet against him going faster on a second set of soft tyres.

          • BBT said on 7th May 2011, 19:30

            Maybe, but we’ll never know, what I saw looked prefect, unlike Vettel who missed a few apexes (last two corners) but still was miles ahead anyway, scary.
            Rosberg was quality today. There might of been a hundredth or two there.

          • Don M. said on 7th May 2011, 21:25

            My first thought was that Rosberg’s improvement from Q2 to Q3 was the least among the top 7, so he may have improved further with a second run.

            But, looking again, I think his Q2 lap – within 2 tenths of Vettel – was perhaps the most impressive lap of the day, so it’s not surprising he didn’t improve by much in Q3.

          • Oliver said on 8th May 2011, 9:04

            Rosberg set a much faster time in Q3 so I can’t understand why you say his slower time in Q2 was much better.

          • Don M. said on 8th May 2011, 12:17

            @ Oliver

            In qualifying, the pace of the Mercedes seems to be roughly the same as the McLaren. They were both about half a second off RBR in Q3.

            In Q2 Rosberg got within 2 tenths of Vettel’s time and was a quarter of a second quicker than Hamilton. I think that lap was a better achievement than his Q3 lap.

            Saying the Q3 lap was quicker, so it must be better, ignores the fact that the track is getting faster with each run.

  12. Daffid said on 7th May 2011, 19:28

    Blimey, if that’s the Sauber top speed I hope the director picks up Kobi nice and early in the race, should be some good entertainment value there.

  13. SupaSix-1 said on 7th May 2011, 20:26

    Yes well on a parallel, if mclaren listened to Lewis in q3 then he wouldnt have wasted another set of new options.

    Even if Lewis did get upto 2nd he wouldve been overtaken eventually by webber and rosberg as vettel, webber & rosberg have a spare new set of options. I would rather trade of a couple of grid positions for a spare new set of options instead. Without them he will not be able to keep pace to the three infront.

    You can also say that there are many other drivers out there who if they also did their best sector times in one lap then they would be way further up.

    Seeing as jenson is not mentioned Im assuming that none of his sector times (throughout all sessions) were not good enough – but he still gets praised. Jenson seems to get let off for performing badly when Lewis gets the usual digs from whitmarsh even when he does well (and better than his team mate).

    Ridiculous.

    • Nick said on 7th May 2011, 22:44

      Kind of agree. Lewis might not be there beyond the end of his current contract.

      • DVC said on 7th May 2011, 23:41

        Hamilton is the driver, the car can’t go back out on track with out him taking it there.

        If he really didn’t want to go back out no one could have made him.

    • VXR said on 8th May 2011, 10:08

      Are either of McLaren’s drivers performing badly?

      @ SupaSix-1. Your posts always seem to contain the same thing. A whinge about how Hamilton is being held back by his utterly incompetent team members and a dig at Button. Who, despite being apparently much much slower than Hamilton, never seems to be that far behind him when it matters.

      The truth is that McLaren take more data from Button’s car in order to get a reasonable baseline on setup. Hamilton would be content to drive around in a car that slid around and wore out its tyres in the same way that it did on the few occasions that he didn’t use Alonso’s car setup and went his own way instead.

  14. DVC said on 7th May 2011, 23:42

    I reckon Massa’s plan is to start on Hards.

  15. JUGNU said on 8th May 2011, 2:44

    When Nico took 3rd from Lewis, i thought Lewis has messed up his final lap. Strategy wise too his position isn’t the best. Hope any among the top group, preferably Hamilton gets ahead of at least one Redbull to make it interesting. RBR’s domination is getting very boring.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.