Mercedes motorsport boss Toto Wolff said the team doesn’t understand how it lost the Australian Grand Prix to Ferrari.
Lewis Hamilton led the race from pole position but lost the lead to Sebastian Vettel. Hamilton was the first of the two to pit and the Ferrari driver was able to save time by pitting during a Virtual Safety Car period.
“We don’t know yet,” he said when asked how Hamilton had ended up behind Vettel. “We thought we had enough margin to beat Sebastian but then we saw the TV pictures and it wasn’t enough. So I think it must have been a software bug somewhere within our systems that got it wrong.”
“It’s always very painful when you’re in control of a race and you lose and you don’t understand why,” Wolff added. “That rarely happens in the data world of Formula One. But we are digging deep now to understand where we could have had a problem.”
Hamilton pressured Vettel for several laps after the restart before dropping back. He eventually finished five seconds behind the Ferrari which Mercedes said was due to high rear tyre wear.
“I think he knew that he couldn’t push any more because it would have ruined the tyres and he wouldn’t make it to the end,” said Wolff.
2018 F1 season
- McLaren staff told us we were “totally crazy” to take Honda engines in 2018 – Tost
- ‘It doesn’t matter if we start last’: How Red Bull’s junior team aided Honda’s leap forward
- Honda’s jet division helped F1 engineers solve power unit problem
- McLaren Racing losses rise after Honda split
- Ricciardo: Baku “s***show” was Red Bull’s fault
OmarRoncal - Go Seb!!! (@)
25th March 2018, 8:09
Toto, deal with it. The strategy didn’t adjust to a VSC. That’s it.
Ivan Vinitskyy (@ivan-vinitskyy)
25th March 2018, 8:44
@omarr-pepper With that kind of approach you’re going to have the same problem the next time VSC is out. The answer is there and now they will dig to find it.
MrBoerns (@mrboerns)
25th March 2018, 9:17
@ivan-vinitskyy this was no mistake. Nor a bug. The fact is the pitstop takes the same-ish time no matter if there is a VSC or not. But the laptime is of course higher so in relative terms the stop is much faster. Nothing merc can do about it unless their Software can mask speeding under VSC conditions.
Of course it takes a Vettel to know exactly in the heat of the moment that the pit entrance and exits don’t apply to the delta time restrictions, but that is just a case of reading the rules.
Patrickl (@patrickl)
25th March 2018, 12:01
@mrboerns Of course it’s a bug. Their simulation was supposed to account for VSC and still it gave the wrong prediction.
MrBoerns (@mrboerns)
25th March 2018, 12:43
And what exactly are they supposed to do unless they Stay out until every other car on track completed its pitstops?
Ian Thomas
27th March 2018, 14:04
@mrboerns Hamilton could have push harder before the VSC to increase the lead he had over Vettel. The simulation should have told Mercedes whether it was worth doing that.
MrBoerns (@mrboerns)
28th March 2018, 23:45
Ian Thomas yeah i get it now but it is kind of sickening to Think about it being Sooooo calculated. Like dayem!
Kribana (@krichelle)
25th March 2018, 8:10
One reason why you can never perfectly trust machines…
Ivan Vinitskyy (@ivan-vinitskyy)
25th March 2018, 8:43
@krichelle What else are you going to trust? If anything F1 teaches is that more data is always better. This was the case of not enough data / software testing / software development.
bull mello (@bullmello)
25th March 2018, 8:11
Realistically Kimi should have still been ahead of Vettel after his pit stop as well.
Justin (@boombazookajd)
25th March 2018, 8:19
This reminds me of Monaco a few years back where Merc was completely caught out by a VSC that led to Vettel coming out of the pits just ahead of Lewis.
Alonso (@alonshow)
26th March 2018, 3:54
@boombazookajd: That’s interesting. Do you have a link or something?
Paul2013
25th March 2018, 8:21
No PARTY MODE?
Phylyp (@phylyp)
25th March 2018, 9:06
I’m pretty sure that somewhere in Merc-land, there’s an embarrassed IT guy who’s just realized he forgot to put in a condition like “If VSC = true Then …“.
old
25th March 2018, 9:18
The workaround is easy, instead of factor-in opponent’s pit stop of 24 sec for your gap margin calculation, just assume VSC happening every time and use 14 sec instead. Let your driver and car work harder to create 34 sec gap. Of coz we knew that’s not realistic now with Merc’s tyre destroyer machine, so just accept the reality of bad luck then and you can’t win EVERY race.
Tifoso1989 (@tifoso1989)
25th March 2018, 10:08
@phylyp
+1
Ber101 (@cplchanb)
25th March 2018, 15:07
Just like Monaco 2015 their over reliance to a computer cost them a sure win. They need to rely more on exp and instinct and not only to a screen
nase
25th March 2018, 18:22
@cplchanb
Monaco 2015, I agree. But today, the situation was completely different. Hamilton drove as fast as he was allowed to under the VSC, but Vettel stayed ahead for the sole reason that he pitted under the VSC. That was bad luck for Mercedes, but there was absolutely nothing they could do. Even if the software had worked correctly, the only difference would’ve been that Mercedes would’ve know that Vettel’s overcut was going to work even before he entered the pits.
MacLeod (@macleod)
25th March 2018, 15:32
Still Ham should just engage his godmode and just pass Vettel but he didn’t. End of story you have to overtake to win and that isn’t possible on this track.
nase
25th March 2018, 18:19
I don’t really get the fuss. They didn’t lose the race because of a software malfunction, because there was nothing they could do, no matter what their software told them. Hamilton had pitted, the VSC was deployed, Vettel pitted, surprisingly (for Mercedes) his gap was large enough to stay ahead of Hamilton. End of story.
I agree that it’s rather unpleasant to lose a race like this, and that it’s even more unpleasant if it happens even though the strategy software tells you it isn’t going to happen. However, the software had absolutely no influence on the outcome of the race.
Ajaxn
25th March 2018, 19:19
The vsc should have been amongst the many scenarios that Mercedes should have forecast for. Of special note should have been the possible scenarios arising out of that Hass Ferrari association. I just hope this is the last time we see that card played.
The pity is, a year from now few will recall the circumstances under which Hamilton failed to turn yet another Australian pole into win.
nase
25th March 2018, 21:46
Yeah, except, not really. Hamilton was called to the pits because Räikkönen had just pitted and was thus attempting the undercut. If Hamilton had stayed on track instead of reacting, the normal course of actions would’ve been Räikkönen inheriting the lead later on. Mercedes didn’t really have a choice in that situation. Yes, a Safety Car is theoretically possible at any given moment, and if you pit just before it’s deployed, you’re inevitably going to lose time. But there was no indication of anything like that happening, and it only happened several laps later. At that stage, Mercedes’ software made the (faulty) prediction that Hamilton was going to reclaim the lead after Vettel’s pit stop. We all know that wasn’t the case.
What could Mercedes have done differently? Absolutely nothing.
Well, not quite. They could’ve chosen to ignore Räikkönen, leaving Hamilton out on the track. 5 laps later, Grosjean’s problem would’ve caused the neutralisation, handing Hamilton and Vettel (and Ricciardo, Alonso, etc.) a free pit stop. Hamilton would’ve won the race ahead of Vettel, no one would even think of Mercedes’ software.
But:
That would’ve been by far the least likely scenario, as it required a car to stop at an inconvenient place at the right time, and Hamilton’s pit window was nearing anyway.
The most likely scenario with Hamilton covering Räikkönen’s undercut would’ve consisted in a crushing defeat for Vettel, as he would’ve gained absolutely nothing from staying out longer on degrading tyres. His gap was down to 11 seconds by the time he pitted, so he would’ve rejoined the track in third place, far behind the leaders. The reason why he committed to that hopeless strategy was that he was going to finish 3rd either way, and that he had a very comfortable gap to the cars fighting for 4th. And he lucked out, because a neutralisation wouldn’t have helped him win the race if it had arrived just 2 or 3 laps later.
The most likely scenario with Hamilton ignoring Räikkönen’s undercut would’ve been the undercut working. Räikkönen’s first laps on the Soft tyres were rather sluggish, but it wouldn’t have taken him too many laps before he would’ve started outpacing Hamilton and inheriting the lead. Hamilton would’ve finished second, but behind Räikkönen this time.
All these scenarios have one crucial aspect in common:
Unlike Monaco 2015, where they pitted Hamilton for the sole reason that the computer told them he would keep the lead, the computer’s opinion didn’t matter at any time. They were in a bit of a difficult situation with Bottas stuck in the midfield and Hamilton closely followed by both Ferraris, and they opted for the only strategy that made sense 99% of the time. Unluckily for them, today was that 1% race, where an uncontrollable circumstance caused a disruption at the exact moment where that perfectly sensible strategy briefly left them vulnerable.
Oh, come on.
Potsie (@potsie159)
27th March 2018, 15:01
Good analysis
Stephen coleman (@sel1700)
25th March 2018, 20:24
I think the point Toto is trying to make is that the computer gave them a wrong delta before the saftey car. If the vsc gap was – 2 instead of +3 they may have told Hamilton to push more. Also with the gap Hamilton had to Kimi he may have stayed out longer balancing the risk of a disadvantaged between vsc against vettel and disadvantage of full saftey car against kimi.
Kris
25th March 2018, 21:43
I think a simple calculation using fingers and toes would have determined the gap was not enough, no need for algorithms on this one.
Balue (@balue)
26th March 2018, 16:34
Yes it seems just too incredible the strategists didn’t have the time for a VSC pit stop in their head. I don’t believe the software glitch story. It’s just typical Mercedes policy not to blame anyone.
KingKong81
26th March 2018, 11:46
At their level, I don’t believe a software bug would cause them to mess it up this badly, especially when any seasoned fan could come up with a better analysis in their head. Whatever software they are using must be relatively mature in terms of development. I hate the old cliche, but at a point where time literally is money, I very much doubt they would be using a beta version of VSC Royale or Pitstop Crusher.
Computers don’t make mistakes, humans do. At its most basic level a computer just adds two numbers together, there is no dark magic involved. Humans put in the numbers, humans read the results. If you were trying to calculate 2+2 on a calculator and it comes out as 5, then I would say it was your fat fingers that hit ‘3’ or that somebody needs a new pair of glasses, instead of some mystery bug that spit out the incorrect result (unless you live in a Douglas Adams universe).
More than likely there were a number of failings of the pink fleshy things that sit in front of the screens. Maybe somebody put the decimal point in the wrong place. Maybe it was fat finger syndrome. Maybe they were working to guesstimates (just like I am doing here).
Presumably they have a team of strategists working on this, there is something called “groupthink” where a group of people can become blinded (tunnel vision) into making an incorrect decision despite external factors that point to the correct result. They should have somebody (usually the manager) that says “yes, but what if…”. Maybe a bit of egotism carried over from 4 straight seasons as constructors champions.
Toto did what any good manager does, publicly deflects the blame off the staff onto the machine that can’t defend itself or feel any pressure. Privately, apart from a cursory look at the equations and formulas on the spreadsheet, I expect there will be a review of the staff involved in making the decision call as well.
But in any case, it is only the first race of the season there is still plenty of racing opportunity to make up for this “human” bug.
Heck, at least they didn’t put a wheelnut on incorrectly…twice…! Ice please!