Analysis: Behind the scenes decisions affecting Ferrari and Williams in Canada

The Canadian Grand Prix has a reputation for thrilling and unpredictable races, but this year’s event was more of a cat and mouse affair, with the exception of some fast cars out of position, which were able to make up ground from the back of the grid.

For Ferrari it is a case of what might have been, as Sebastian Vettel’s pace in the race suggests that, had he qualified in the top three, he would have made life difficult for the Mercedes cars in a way that his team mate Kimi Raikkonen was not able to do.

At the front the Mercedes duel was decided mainly in qualifying in Lewis Hamilton’s favour and, after also losing out at the start, there was little that Nico Rosberg could do as Hamilton kept himself out of reach.

But behind them there were some interesting things going on with strategy, which deserve closer inspection, with Ferrari and Williams particularly worth studying.

Pre-race expectations

Canada has always been touch and go on the fuel; last year the safety car early on for the accident involving the Marussia drivers, let everyone off the hook.

This year there was no Safety Car the whole race, so everyone needed to manage fuel and brakes. It’s the toughest track of the season on brakes as they overheat due to the frequent heavy stops.

For Mercedes the need to look after both was balanced with the need to let the two drivers race and technical boss Paddy Lowe admitted afterwards that the bargaining over how many metres before the corner to lift off the throttle was intense!

Last year simulations showed that there was little to choose between one and two stops in race time although a two stop was clearly preferable if you could run in clear air, as the Mercedes could at the front.

This year, with so little running in Friday practice, there was doubt about which was faster as no one had accurate data. Pirelli’s more robust rear construction married to the same soft and supersoft compounds as last year, meant that covering 70 laps with just one stop was certainly achievable for some.

Mercedes thought one stop was the way, Williams briefed on Sunday morning that two stops was preferable and Sebastian Vettel’s strategy suggests that Ferrari also thought most teams would two-stop.

What might have been - Ferrari left to rue their Saturday problems

The story of this race was that Ferrari came away with a far inferior result to the one they could have achieved. It may be an exaggeration to say that they could have won the race, but it’s not beyond imagination that they could have pushed Mercedes into problems, as the Silver Arrows drivers had to manage their cars to avoid reliability and fuel issues.

Although their race pace on Friday flattered Ferrari a bit, as it was achieved on lower fuel than the Mercedes was running, there is no doubt from the analysis that, had Vettel been behind Hamilton and Rosberg at the start, he could have troubled them.

The extent to which Mercedes was ‘managing’ fuel and brakes is not to be underestimated. Ferrari let them off the hook in Montreal because they were not able to put pressure on them.

With Vettel in third, Mercedes would probably have run a different strategy with two stops for both cars as to persist with the one stop would have been taking a risk of undercut from an aggressive Ferrari plan.

However, starting 18th after technical problems and penalties, Vettel’s optimum race result, according to most teams’ simulations, was fifth place, the result he achieved. There was a large gap that opened up behind Bottas and ahead of Grosjean and Vettel’s target was always to get into that gap.

And he had sufficient pace to achieve it with any one of a number of strategies. What is interesting about the strategy he chose; a highly unusual two stopper with an early stop at the end of Lap 7, then two stints of 28 and 35 laps respectively, is that it reveals that Ferrari thought most people would two stop. They had suffered quite high tyre degradation on Friday and so that looked the likely scenario. In fact they were the only front-runners to do so.

Vettel lost some time in his first stop, around four seconds, which delayed him in the early phase as he had a couple more cars to pass than he would have if the stop had gone smoothly.

Vettel coming in that early was a way to offset himself against other cars that would be coming in around Lap 15 and to gain track position then, hoping a well timed Safety Car might boost his fortunes.

Raikkonen’s pace was strong initially but dropped away and he lost the podium he was headed for when he spun at the chicane on Lap 27.

Fast reacting Williams get best result of season at Raikkonen’s expense

Williams had a very strong day with Valtteri Bottas compounding Ferrari’s misery by taking the final podium place away from Kimi Raikkonen.

The older Finn spun on his out lap, after taking on new soft tyres at his stop on Lap 26. When the Ferrari driver spun at the Turn 10 hairpin, Bottas was at Turn 6. Williams reacted quickly and brought him in for his stop, feeding him out ahead of Raikkonen as he started Lap 28.

But this was only possible because they had switched strategy from two stops to one after the early running in the first stint, as Bottas told the team the supersoft tyre was fine and the team was dynamic in its planning.

That’s why he said afterwards that this was a great team result. Had he stopped earlier on a two stop plan, he would not have been in a position to take advantage of Raikkonen’s spin at that moment to gain track position.

Later in the race, Lap 40, Raikkonen made a second stop, to switch onto the supersoft tyres for a late attack on Bottas. Williams considered covering it off by pitting Bottas again, but the gut feeling was that for Raikkonen, trying to do 30 laps on supersofts, was a long stint, which meant that he would probably not be a threat. They decided to sit it out and in fact Raikkonen did not catch Bottas. It was calm work by the Williams strategy team, which is clearly maturing as a group.

Looking at the relative race pace of the Williams and Raikkonen’s Ferrari when both were running the soft tyre, was comparable, which you could not have said a month ago; it shows that Williams has really made improvements. This should be confirmed in the next two races in Austria and Silverstone.

Felipe Massa, meanwhile, tried to come through from 15th on the grid to join Bottas. He started on a soft tyre hoping to run it as long as possible before switching to supersoft for the final stint.

Vettel was the challenger and when he pitted on Lap 35 Williams considered covering him off with a pit stop, but that would have required him then doing a 35 lap stint on supersoft tyres which the Williams is not capable of doing at the moment, as it still has higher tyre wear than Ferrari.

They needed to ensure that they stayed ahead of the Red Bull of Kvyat and the two Lotus cars, so they kept Massa out a couple more laps and although ultimately it meant that he lost fifth place to Vettel, it also meant that he didn’t run out of tyres in the final laps and drop to a lower finishing position.

It was a classic example of risk management in F1 strategy.

The UBS Race Strategy Report is written by James Allen with input and data from several F1 team strategists and from Pirelli

Kindly supplied by Martini Williams Racing. Click to Enlarge - Illustrating the performance gaps between the cars during the race.

Look at the relative pace of Vettel’s Ferrari and the Mercedes in the second half of the race. Also note the comparison of Bottas’ Williams and Raikkonen’s Ferrari. A line which moves steeply upwards shows strong pace.