Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, 2015

Hamilton coolly sees off Rosberg threat

2015 Canadian Grand Prix review

Posted on

| Written by

After the astonishing conclusion to the Monaco Grand Prix – which dominated the discussion in the lead-up to the Canadian round – normal service was very much resumed on the Isle Notre Dame.

Lewis Hamilton may have rarely had much more than a second in hand over Nico Rosberg for much of the race, yet his team mate never presented a credible threat. Hamilton himself said as much after picking up his fourth winners’ trophy of 2015.

Vettel’s early pit stop gamble

Start, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, 2015Twelve months ago Rosberg had started from pole position and firmly closed off Hamilton’s advance at the start. The positions were reversed this year, but Rosberg didn’t get away well enough for Hamilton to feel the need to put manners on him at turn one.

The opening corners were an orderly affair: the top five drivers held their places, then Nico Hulkenberg lunged into sixth place at Pastor Maldonado’s expense on the outside of turn three.

Nearer the rear of the field, Sebastian Vettel was disappointed by his lack of early progress having lined up 18th on the grid. “In the opening laps I was not very happy with myself,” he said.

“I was very aggressive but I could not find the gaps, I wanted to go crazy but there was no room, so I had to be patient and it’s a shame because these are the moments when if you are lucky you can gain easily five, six , seven or eight seconds in total race time.”

By lap seven he was part of a three-car battle for 11th behind Marcus Ericsson and Felipe Massa. Ferrari opted to bring Vettel in and switch him to the soft tyre compound, but were slow dropping him off the jacks, losing at least three seconds. He was now dead last.

Go ad-free for just £1 per month

>> Find out more and sign up

Fuel saving dominates

Jenson Button, McLaren, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, 2015The two Mercedes drivers had been separated by just 12 thousandths of a second on their super-soft tyre runs in Q2. But reacquainted with the same rubber in the race, Hamilton now had a clear performance margin, and progressively grew his lead over Rosberg. After 19 laps he had a healthy advantage of nearly four seconds.

The pursuing Kimi Raikkonen and Valtteri Bottas had dropped back at a similar rate in a race which was shaped by the high fuel demands of the Circuit Gilles Villeneuve.

The scintillating race at the track 12 months ago had featured an early Safety Car period which let drivers off the hook as far as saving fuel was concerned. But unusually for Montreal, this race ran green from lights to flag. The need to watch the fuel allocation therefore weighed heavily on the minds of strategists, who in turn ordered their drivers to ‘lift and coast’.

The McLaren drivers, struggling with a shortage of top-end power and poor fuel economy, were dismayed by how frequently they had to back off. “You would not believe how early I am lifting off,” Jenson Button exclaimed at one point.

Like Button, Fernando Alonso preferred to enjoy the brief amount of time he could spend racing other cars before worrying about fuel saving later. He was already being passed with ease by anyone who cruised up in his mirrors, though he pushed Vettel to the limit when his Ferrari successor went wheel-to-wheel with him at the final chicane on lap 19.

Rosberg tracks Hamilton

Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, 2015Hamilton’s advantage over Rosberg all but vanished during the course of their pit stops. Rosberg enjoyed the quickest pit stop of the race, but Hamilton’s was just three tenths of a second slower. Rosberg made his gains with a rapid lap prior to his pit stop and thanks to a slow lap from Hamilton shortly after he changed tyres.

Now little more than a second behind his team mate, Rosberg was able to get the fuel numbers working in his favour.

“I think because Nico was in my tow he was able to save more fuel,” Hamilton explained afterwards. “Naturally when you’re behind someone you use less fuel.”

Rosberg’s superior fuel economy threatened to give him access to more power at the end of the race. “I thought I had saved enough but I needed to save some more, so through that period I was just fuel-saving,” Hamilton continued.

The race leader had one eye on the fuel gauge, and another on his mirror to check the number six Mercedes did not suddenly appear within his DRS window. “I was saving a lot of fuel,” said Hamlton, “and then once I’d saved enough, I was able to get on it a little bit more”.

Rosberg – who at one point was warned his brakes were in “critical” condition due to running in the hot air of the other W06 – was eager for information on the state of Hamilton’s fuel consumption. As on previous occasions this year, his team had to tell him they couldn’t answer his questions about the other car.

“I wasn’t to know if Lewis would run into trouble at the end of the race or not,” said Rosberg later, “because that could help me judge how much fuel I would need to save at that point in time and when I should try and put the pressure on.”

“But unfortunately that’s been banned, to give that information, so I wasn’t able to get that,” he said, “which is a pity because it would have helped me judge, maybe put on a better attack if I had that information.”

This snuffed out what small chance there was of a battle for the lead emerging. But behind them the occupant of the other podium step had changed.

Raikkonen slips up

Kimi Raikkonen, Ferrari, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, 2015In a puzzling repeat of last year’s race, Raikkonen had spun his Ferrari at the exit of the hairpin at the far end of the track. He was mystified by the car’s behaviour, which he attributed to a sudden surge of power, and which cost him third place to Valtteri Bottas.

Team principal Maurizio Arrivabene said they didn’t understand what had caused it. “It may be a case of contributory negligence as he said the same thing happened last year,” Arrivebene remarked, noting also that another unspecified issue had delayed Raikkonen later in the race.

That would go some way towards explaining how Vettel was able to gain on him in the latter stages of the race. Having caught Massa once more his second pit stop allowed him to easily jump ahead of the Williams once Massa finally made his single visit to the Williams garage.

Like several of his rivals, Vettel found the track’s generous DRS zones made for straightforward overtaking. However his attempt to pass Hulkenberg nearly wiped out the pair of them – the Force India driver spun but managed not to collect the Ferrari. Vettel then demoted Maldonado for fifth, and so having started 15 places behind Raikkonen he crossed the finishing line as the next car behind his team mate.

He would have had to fight Romain Grosjean for the place, but the Lotus driver lost the place with a clumsy mistake while lapping Will Stevens. After reviewing the video Grosjean admitted he’d been at fault.

Despite a five-second penalty, Grosjean held on to the final points-paying position behind Massa, who recovered to sixth, Maldonado, Hulkenberg and Daniil Kvyat’s Red Bull – the only Renault-powered car in the top ten at a track where their shortcomings were plain for all to see.

Rosberg settles for second best

Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, 2015An undramatic run to victory was just what Hamilton needed after the aggravation of Monaco and a problematic build-up to the race.

However it does not bode well for the rest of the season that even the Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, a venue which can normally be relied upon to throw a few curveballs at the drivers, failed to generate much excitement in the race.

Rosberg’s wins in Spain and Monaco might have generated the kind of momentum he built up at mid-season last year. But Hamilton’s victory arrested the trend before it had really begun.

While he is far from secure in the championship lead, Rosberg is still yet to give a convincing answer to the question of how he can regularly take points off his team mate and make the fight for the championship any more real than the fight for the race was in Canada.

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

62 comments on “Hamilton coolly sees off Rosberg threat”

  1. Great race… it was like expected that Merc would help HAM to come over ROS, am not sure what was with the damaged tires at quali and if that has to do anything with helping HAM?

    1. Sarcasm? …Hopefully

    2. Anyone else found it curious how Lewis was told about Nico’s fuel situation but Nico couldn’t get an answer on Nico’s?

      1. Typo… Should say “Nico couldn’t get an answer om Lewis’s?”

    3. yeah its like they not sharing info with Rosberg, call me crazy but also i think they lie to Rosberg about the brakes just to slow him down. i hope im wrong.
      And its the first race they dont have the same treatment, in my opinion.
      Aaaand like i said in other comment they were coaching Lewis about the lift and coast.

      1. @alan1oo1 and Rambler The drivers can’t get specific information about other car or driver situation so that’s why Nico can’t get the answer on Lewis fuel.

        Lewis himself is only told to lift and coast which is about himself so its fine. There’s one instance when he specifically asked when he should start lifting and the pit answer him. I don’t know if it within or skirting the rules since specific driving instructions is banned, but this is not about gaining performance so maybe its still allowed.

        1. No that’s not it, Lewis was told about Nico’s fuel situation.

          And as far as Lewis being told to lift and coast for 50 meters, that’s driver coaching which is also banned.

          1. Yes, you are not alone. Lewis was told that that Nico was “fine of fuel but had to look after his brakes”.

          2. Yes its really confusing. Driver coaching is banned but information about fuel saving is permitted under revised radio ban. I also noticed when they told Lewis to brake 50 meter earlier and that’s why I said probably skirting the rules, but it wasn’t for performance gains so maybe it’s fine. I personally think it’s fine if Nico is told Lewis fuel is looking fine or he is lift and coasting since lap x since that information is publicly available and not to detailed.

            Remember the rule that known to public is really vague and I think most if not all of it is explained more clearly during driver/team briefing. We don’t even know what kind of penalty if someone broke it too.

            Original ban rules
            Revised ban rules

        2. petebaldwin (@)
          8th June 2015, 10:23

          @sonicslv – It’s a slightly dodgy one – if Vettel comes over the radio and says he is struggling with brakes, can Mercedes tell Lewis? I was under the impression they could…

          On that basis, is it only OK to talk about your team mate once it’s been broadcast over the radio?

          1. @petebaldwin And it it wasn’t the race engineers could just say ‘Vettel is having banana’s.’

          2. @petebaldwin In your case, they could. Information regarding potential competitor problem is permitted. In this case Vettel himself reporting he had potential brake problems.

      2. I thought that too about the lift & coast could be understood as coaching. The coaching rule can be a bit difficult to understand sometimes.

      3. Alan Torres (@alan1oo1) said on 8th June 2015, 7:06

        yeah its like they not sharing info with Rosberg, call me crazy

        You’re crazy

        1. thanks man !!

      4. The difference is Rosberg asked for information and Lewis Didn’t. Also they didn’t specifically say to Lewis what Rosberg is doing, all they said was Rosberg is on the same fuel as you and he his managing his brakes.

    4. Merc would help Hamilton to WHAT?

  2. Everyone has their own opinion about what exactly it’s ruining F1. You’re all wrong.

    DRS is ruining F1. Not even the unfair economic war some teams face, the restrictions on development, the mountain to climb for other engine manufacturers, the lack of sponsorship and money for smaller teams, pay drivers, etc are as dangerous as DRS has been since its introduction to the whatever’s left of the racing essence we used to love and care for.

    I was so excited after Monaco, it had brought my love for F1 back after such an unexpected outcome. But what are the chances for the unpredictable to happen if overtakes are a given? there’s no risk involved, there’s no second thoughts. Everyone is just waiting their only chance per lap they have (assuming there’s only 1 DRS zone) to have a go at the guy they are following.

    Why would anyone try anywhere else? I was actually surprised Vettel made a couple of moves into the harpin… probably because he wanted to get past those very slow cars as quickly as possible… but in any other case, it just doesn’t happen.

    It’s lame. It’s disgusting. And it really is killing this sport. And the worst bit is that it’s infecting other racing series…

    1. I completely agree

    2. I’m not a fan of DRS but I don’t think I would go as far to say it’s the thing that is killing the sport. It’s artificial for the most part, having said that you can’t simply get rid of it without making changes to how these cars are designed, change the design so that cars can follow others and at least get in the position for an overtake, then you could get rid of DRS.

      All in all I think there as much bigger problems the sport faces than the existence of DRS.

      1. And a big part of that following closely problem is the lousy tyres that disintegrate in a couple of laps if subjected to any sideslip.

      2. @woodyd91 Sure, but covering the problem with DRS isn’t the solution either. So I rather keep it real than make it all look as lame as it is.

        It’d be brilliant if they just tried, once, at least, not to use DRS for a race. Silverstone for instance. Why not avoiding DRS there?

        1. Monaco was a DRS-free race, more or less (DRS didn’t make a blind bit of difference) and that was just fine, with some imaginative passing going on.

        2. I agree, I don’t like DRS anymore than you but we have to balance it with other changes.

      3. its gonna be less than half of overtakes than now, but ceirtanly better ones.

    3. if only Alonso hadn’t got stuck behind Petrov that one fateful race…

    4. I have to admit that wheel to wheel action on this track was far better before the introduction of DRS.

      The 2010 race is a fun one with lots of REAL overtakes that plays exactly like theses DRS ones.

      They could use DRS only on tracks where overtaking is too difficult. It would still be difficult, but not as much as without it.

    5. @fer-no65 The reason of why we have DRS in the first place is because even faster cars have big trouble passing slower cars because they can’t stick to them in corners behind dirty air. DRS is meant to give that gap back (hence the 1s behind requirement which determined usually at the exit of last corner before DRS line). If you think it’s artificial and bad solution, I think it was picked because its the easiest and cheapest one to do. Also it was really the same system as F-Duct which already proved itself in 2010 so it was less risk of not working as intended (help overtaking) too.

    6. @fer-no65 One needs to know why this DRS was introduced in the first place? If there was no issue with F1 and cars following each other, then why would they want to use it starting in 2011?

      Maybe we need to address the root cause of the need for DRS before getting rid of the band-aid. They get it spot on in some circuits but in others the effect is amplied.

      The Honda and Renault engines being anaemic didn’t help as well. Vettel and the Mercedes engined cars scrap was good. The pass was not a given until Vettel closely followed the leading car out of the hair pin.

      1. I get the feeling that it was a knee jerk reaction after some races of 2010, such as Bahrain. But 2010 had more overtaking than any season than refuelling, so why did the FIA feel the need to go overkill with DRS?

        It was announced before the end of the season, and got more support after Abu Dhabi.

        Personally, I want another season like 2010. Even if the driver behind couldn’t overtake, at least they were trying: using different lines, braking later, basically anything to force the driver ahead to crack under pressure.

        You don’t see that today, because the fuel, engine, brakes, and tires need to be saved. F1 is becoming less and less about the racing and nobody is doing a single thing about it.

    7. @fer-no65 You fail to make an important distinction: DRS ruins racing, but for me, predictability ruins races. Yes, we have “given Picasso photoshop”, but we also have a situation where one engine, one team and only one driver in that team is capable of winning. The immense predictability of modern F1 has seen us great the utter facepalm of Monaco with exultation, finally something to talk about, something that during other seasons would have been the most sour moment of the season.

      By contrast 2012, a season in which six teams won a grand prix, was seen by many as one of the best seasons of modern times for the sheer predictability of the unpredictable. Yes, DRS ruined races in 2012, but the championship essence of the competition was maintained by unpredictability.

      What is perhaps most frustrating is that the obvious case for change stars right at us every time F1 enjoys an amazing wet weather race:

      (1) DRS was only deemed necessary because of the enormous aerodynamic wake in modern F1.

      (2) Aerodynamic grip is infinitely more resource dependent to develop than mechanic grip.

      A reduction in the aero dependency in F1 would, to my mind, solve many of the issues current faced. Not only does it have the capacity to improve racing on-track, show off the skills of the grid’s better drivers, improve the aesthetics of the cars (with wider tyres and smaller wings) but it would rob the larger teams of some of their resource advantage. Certainly, it makes no dent in the supremacy of Mercedes’ powerplant, but as stage one of F1’s much needed revolution, I feel these proposals would have a highly positive effect.

    8. tgu (@thegrapeunwashed)
      8th June 2015, 10:40

      @fer-no65 Get rid of DRS and we’ll be in the position of the Schumacher domination of the early-mid 2000s, i.e. nothing will change very much.

      F1 is always boring when one driver dominates, whatever the technical regs. Last season we at least had a good fight between teammates, this year there’s nothing.

      My solution would be to do nothing: keep the regs stable to allow the other teams to catch-up. Failing that, allow the chasing teams more time to develop their engines.

      1. Are you Jean Todt in disguise?!

    9. The fix for DRS is not to scrap it, I like the idea and want to keep it around. Obviously the boring passes need to go though.
      3 easy steps to fix it.
      1)Anyone can use DRS as a performance boost, not a passing aid. No artificial 1 second gap stuff leading to slowing down to be behind someone.
      2)Allow front wing stalling, or a flap system like the rear wing. When trying to increase performance, less drag from the front(or better air handling) will increase top speed.
      3)Add more DRS zones. If it is not a passing aid, almost any straight could be a DRS zone right from the apex of the previous turn.

      There would have to be discussions on where it was safe to open the flaps, the use of zones in qualifying for safety reasons needs to stay.

      Higher top speeds would reduce lap times. Car manufactures can actually use information on active aero to design more fuel efficient cars which stay cool in the city and close up at speed. There could be some interesting front wing changes if you can add flaps that can move up/down and or left/right. Do you simply lose flap angle to drop drag? Deflect air towards the tires to help reduce that drag? Aim the air to the sidepods in hopes of getting more air per cross section and the same cooling with a smaller footprint? Allowing the DRS zone from the apex of the corner to the straight would create some more spins like Kimi encountered, but even more so would create less dramatic wheel spin. Regardless of tires, wheel spin is slow and leaving DRS closed is slow which adds real choice for the drivers in their search for speed.

      3 easy steps (it would work even with only 1 and 3) takes a push to win button and makes it a real indicator of how well the driver is in touch with his (or her) car.

    10. Perhaps the answer is to move DRS from the straights to the corners, and to FORCE the car in FRONT to use it, not the car behind. Then the overtaking will be in the corners, not the braking zones. It will be much more risky and races will therefore be less predictable. Both seem to be what people want.

      Seriously, if you remove DRS you need to remove a lot of the aero if you want to allow the car behind to get close enough to start a passing manoevre. Reducing the aero would certainly help get costs down. Cars would be quicker on the straights and slower in the corners, so generally safer. (Alas Beckets would never be the same!) Driving would be more challenging and accidents more common. Manufacturers would not want to be associated with all the DNFs. (The rumour is that Mercedes and Ferrari they have been turning their engines down this year to improve reliability. There are more points for 3rd place than a DNF.)

      The other reason for the emphasis on reliability must be Bernie’s points system, designed to reward the winner disproportionately. This is also seen as punishing unreliability and is why designers, engineers and drivers do not take risks. Any position is better than a DNF, both in the championship and in the media.

  3. Not a classic Canadian GP by any stretch, but overall it wasn’t a bad race at the same time. I’m not much of an Alonso fan myself but I particularly liked his refusal to give Vettel the place easily, Although I’m sure that was probably the only smile that would have be found inside Alonso’s helmet all weekend. I’d say the only way is up for Mclaren but I don’t actually think that’s true. Hopefully I’m wrong on that one.

    Great to see Williams up on the podium again, something I think they clearly needed after being a little crest fallen since the start of the season. Not sure how long it will last but I’m sure they will enjoy it all the same.

    Hamilton made an interesting comment about fuel after the race, something to do with his engine although been driven in the same way as Nico’s during the weekend was burning more fuel, something he said was most likely a software setting, that’s something that Merc will want to fix, and something Hamilton will clearly wanted them to look into given he has proved to be more fuel efficient than Nico ever since the new engines came in, which means he has the potential to take less fuel on board and use more ballast, small thing but F1 is all about details and small changes.

    The great thing about Canada is that it feels like a European race, with European fans and the passion that comes along with that. Props to Hamilton as well for spending a good 15 minutes after the race signing autographs and taking pictures with fans. Going to races can be quite expensive so giving the fans as much back as the drivers can is important.

    I gave the race a 6/10 overall, not a classic but not bad.

    1. + 1. Alonso’s resistance in his Mclaren to Vettel was good to watch:)

      The Canadian GP even for the viewer at home seems to have a certain feel, air or atmosphere about it that is interestingly European. And another boost is the quality of races held there each year. It’s indeed an event every F1 fan looks forward to on the calendar.

      Hamilton’s approach to fans and the way he treats them is a mega plus and I am certain he will be missed by many when he retires from the sport. He has become indeed an important personality in the sport. And he handles it well.

      1. Another plus to the man is his dedication of the win to Peter Bonnington whom he said had endured a ‘difficult week’.

        1. Massive respect goes out to him for even coming to the race.

    2. Hamilton made an interesting comment about fuel after the race, something to do with his engine although been driven in the same way as Nico’s during the weekend was burning more fuel

      The on screen graphics paint a different picture. They showed that Nico had used more fuel than Lewis (a fairly consistent theme throughout this season and the last). I wonder whether it was a particular point in time (I only saw 2 graphics of their fuel use) or if there was something else in play?

      1. You are correct, the onscreen display showed Lewis was always about 0.3 Kilos lighter on fuel throughout this race and even more this season and last. This race must be the heaviest on fuel, the cars were full up because the final readout of usage was like 99.7 kilos for some drivers.

  4. There was quite a number of DRS passes in the race and as always people blame DRS as one of F1’s major problems. The problem is the DRS was introduced because people, wait for it, complained that races were boring with little to no on-track passes. So came the DRS.

    Agreed some twicks are needes here and there but banning the thing completely as some are suggesting without any significant and meaningful alternative makes no sense. Are F1 fans’ memories that short?

    DRS is bad, yes but what should be done in its place that hasn’t been done before?

    1. @tata, unfortunately you are 100% correct just taking into account the lousy Pirelli tyres, both need to go together. A good battle for position can provide excitement and suspense for lap after lap after lap, even if the status quo is maintained, but only if the attacking drivers tyres remain in as good condition as the lead drivers tyres, which these tyres most emphatically do not.

    2. The problem is the DRS was introduced because people, wait for it, complained that races were boring with little to no on-track passes

      @tata – The problem is a very large part of F1 its fanbase might even like it. Just because F1Fanatics do not does not mean the ‘I just like fast cars’-F1-Fan doesn’t. For he does not care about the financial state of F1 but does about the colours of the cars. Is essence how much F1 fans are on F1Fanatic to rant about DRS after each race. It gives us the impression 100% is against it but we’re hardly the average fans.

      1. @xtwl Funny thing is DRS is derived from F-Duct which I think has many fans here on F1F. But of course FIA needs to impose more rules like DRS zone, 1 second gap before it can be deployed, and worst of all, the car in front can’t deploy their own which makes us hate it. I really wish we got active aero because for me that’s the future.

        1. The difference with the F-duct was: a) that was an innovative technical solution, which in itself was interesting to me, and b) it was available to all drivers anywhere.

          That’s what I feel is wrong with DRS, not that it exists, but the way it is implemented. Allow free use and it becomes more skilful. If we haven’t fixed the fundamental problem of cars not being able to follow closely enough, add a rule in reverse to what we have at the moment: In the “DRS” zone, the you may not use it if there is a car within 1s behind you.

    3. petebaldwin (@)
      8th June 2015, 11:56

      @tata – You’re right that DRS was introduced because races were boring and there were no overtakes however it was a crude, easy “solution” that didn’t actually tackle the underlying problem but just stuck a plaster over it.

      It’d be like saying there is a knife-crime issue in London so from now on, everyone has to wear stab-proof vests. Problem solved.

      We have some of the best aerodynamicists in the world working in F1 – they are more than capable of sorting this problem out but instead, they ignore the problem and use DRS.

      The fact is that with the current regs, F1 would be an absolute borefest without DRS. The cars wouldn’t be able to follow closely enough and would kill their tyres trying – F1 is designed around DRS at the moment!

      DRS isn’t a long term solution – certainly not for me. I love F1 and will stick with it even when it’s a chore like it is this year but that can only go on for so long and I’m sure it’s the same for many others on here. If F1 is serious about sorting itself out, it needs to address it’s problems rather than opting for quick and easy fixes that ruin the sport.

  5. Ian Laidler (@)
    8th June 2015, 3:04

    Not the most exciting of races but a great win for Lewis, fantastic drive from Seb to finish 5th, but the pass of the day has to be Felipe (Massa) on Marcus (Ericsson) … really enjoyed that.

  6. For a Brit that could be coolly, but for rest it’s obvious team is holding Rosberg behind.

    1. @regs Time and time again Mercedes have shown they go to great lengths to treat their drivers equally. It’s a pity some choose to ignore that.

      1. @keithcollantine Conspiracy theory, no matter how silly they are, will always have someone who believe it.

      2. Well, in effect, MB handicaps the driver who is behind, because he will never be able to make a tactical move in race strategy against the man ahead, because his teammate will simply be advised on how to nullify it. This is not favoritism, but it serves to stifle some real racing just the same. If you recall, Hamilton only beat Rosberg in Austin last year because he ignored express directions to conserve his car at an apparent critical juncture. Doing so, he caught Rosberg napping.

    2. @regs If you seriously think Mercedes would handicap one of their drivers, then this is the wrong sport for you. Such a ridiculous, insulting suggestion.

      1. So you think we witnessed an even straight fight in the Canadian GP, with no team orders or interference?

        1. Yes. Hamilton is simply faster than Rosberg. He’s shown that conclusively this year and last.

          Please provide evidence of team orders or interference.

    3. @regs

      Obvious how ? If you were watching the race you’d have seen the gap between Hamilton and Rosberg grew or shrunk depending on their fuel usage. Hamilton came out of the pits around 2.4 seconds over Rosberg. The fuel use flashed up on the screen and Hamilton was using 1.38 per lap and Rosberg was using 1.42. The gap then came down to around 1.4 seconds as Rosberg was in a faster setting. The only time I saw them both on the same fuel usage Hamilton stated to pull the gap slightly from around 1.2 to nearer 2 seconds. In the end Rosberg was using 1.43 and Hamilton was on 1.45 and he again opened up the gap to around 3.5 seconds, which is more than Rosberg closed in when he had a faster setting.

      The only thing holding Rosberg behind is Rosberg.

      1. how much fuel did they start with though? if hamilton started with 98.5kg and rosberg 100kg, then hamilton could not have gone faster or he would not have finished the race.

        1. @kpcart – I guess they started with around the same amount as the race average for both drivers was exactly the same at 1.44 per lap. I’d bet they put a little less in both cars as a safety car was expected.

    4. petebaldwin (@)
      8th June 2015, 12:03

      @regs – Explain to me a single reason why it would benefit Mercedes to do this?

  7. I thought a driver being told to lift and coast and by how far they had to lift and coast was driver coaching and was banned, Hamilton was told lift and coast 50m, isn’t that therefore telling a driver how to drive but I have heard nothing about it from anyone

  8. Am I the only person that saw Vettel operate his DRS immediately after taking the bend following his overtake of Maldonado on lap 56?

Comments are closed.