FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[darwin dali]

Rubens wasnt happy in the press conference, you could tell he was pissed off that Jenson was moved to a two stopper.

Why they move Jens and not Rubens??
Rubens was faster in the fist stint even when a bit heavier so didnt he deserve the move to the more favourable strategy?

Once again:

Jens was being moved onto what they thought was the less than optimal strategy. Brawn were expecting Rubens to beat Jenson's 2 on the 3.

Well thats stupid. Anyone could see the move to two stop was better. Why would you move someone from what you assume is a winning strategy to a less than optional one??

Because JB was faster behind RB and was held up by him at the beginning (team radio!). So Ross wanted to separate them by switching strategies on the fly.

The lap times would disagree with that. After the safety car, there was never more than a tenth in Jenson's favour and for most of that stint Rubens was faster.

Lap times are not necessarily that telling, especially when teammates are in the lead.

[FerrariFan63]

youre missing the point though, Rubens and Jenson both had a 3 stop strategy. if they both stayed on that Rubens would have won. the fact BrawnGP switched Jenson to a 2 stopper stuffed Rubens up! No way a 3 stopper will beat a 2 stopper

I'm not sure Rubens would have won. Rubens had a bad stint and Jenson seems very good at making strategies work for him. I feel that it's at least plausible that Jenson would have found a way past.

[racechick]

Rubens wasnt happy in the press conference, you could tell he was pissed off that Jenson was moved to a two stopper.

Why they move Jens and not Rubens??
Rubens was faster in the fist stint even when a bit heavier so didnt he deserve the move to the more favourable strategy?

Once again:

Jens was being moved onto what they thought was the less than optimal strategy. Brawn were expecting Rubens to beat Jenson's 2 on the 3.

Well thats stupid. Anyone could see the move to two stop was better. Why would you move someone from what you assume is a winning strategy to a less than optional one??

Because JB was faster behind RB and was held up by him at the beginning (team radio!). So Ross wanted to separate them by switching strategies on the fly.

The lap times would disagree with that. After the safety car, there was never more than a tenth in Jenson's favour and for most of that stint Rubens was faster.

Yes Id agree with that. I assumed Rubens was lighter(id not seen the weights only that Lewis was heaviest) I was suprised when Jenson went in first because Rubens was looking better.

[Jensonb]

Rubens wasnt happy in the press conference, you could tell he was pissed off that Jenson was moved to a two stopper.

Why they move Jens and not Rubens??
Rubens was faster in the fist stint even when a bit heavier so didnt he deserve the move to the more favourable strategy?

Once again:

Jens was being moved onto what they thought was the less than optimal strategy. Brawn were expecting Rubens to beat Jenson's 2 on the 3.

Well thats stupid. Anyone could see the move to two stop was better. Why would you move someone from what you assume is a winning strategy to a less than optimal one??

They wanted to cover their bases.

[racechick]

Rubens wasnt happy in the press conference, you could tell he was pissed off that Jenson was moved to a two stopper.

Why they move Jens and not Rubens??
Rubens was faster in the fist stint even when a bit heavier so didnt he deserve the move to the more favourable strategy?

Once again:

Jens was being moved onto what they thought was the less than optimal strategy. Brawn were expecting Rubens to beat Jenson's 2 on the 3.

Well thats stupid. Anyone could see the move to two stop was better. Why would you move someone from what you assume is a winning strategy to a less than optimal one??

They wanted to cover their bases.

Mmmmmmm. Fair enough but why choose to give the better option to the driver in second place?

[Denthúl]

Rubens wasnt happy in the press conference, you could tell he was pissed off that Jenson was moved to a two stopper.

Why they move Jens and not Rubens??
Rubens was faster in the fist stint even when a bit heavier so didnt he deserve the move to the more favourable strategy?

Once again:

Jens was being moved onto what they thought was the less than optimal strategy. Brawn were expecting Rubens to beat Jenson's 2 on the 3.

Well thats stupid. Anyone could see the move to two stop was better. Why would you move someone from what you assume is a winning strategy to a less than optimal one??

They wanted to cover their bases.

Mmmmmmm. Fair enough but why choose to give the better option to the driver in second place?

It wasn't the better option. Had Rubens' times in the third stint been as good as the ones in the second, he'd have been ahead of Jenson.

[racechick]

Rubens wasnt happy in the press conference, you could tell he was pissed off that Jenson was moved to a two stopper.

Why they move Jens and not Rubens??
Rubens was faster in the fist stint even when a bit heavier so didnt he deserve the move to the more favourable strategy?

Once again:

Jens was being moved onto what they thought was the less than optimal strategy. Brawn were expecting Rubens to beat Jenson's 2 on the 3.

Well thats stupid. Anyone could see the move to two stop was better. Why would you move someone from what you assume is a winning strategy to a less than optimal one??

They wanted to cover their bases.

Mmmmmmm. Fair enough but why choose to give the better option to the driver in second place?

It wasn't the better option. Had Rubens' times in the third stint been as good as the ones in the second, he'd have been ahead of Jenson.

Well Im not convinced but never mind . Jens drove well particularly on the hards.

[Jensonb]

Mmmmmmm. Fair enough but why choose to give the better option to the driver in second place?

It wasn't the better option. Had Rubens' times in the third stint been as good as the ones in the second, he'd have been ahead of Jenson.

Well Im not convinced but never mind . Jens drove well particularly on the hards.

Fair enough, but all we can tell you is what Brawn were thinking. Whether you believe it or not is up to you. Though I can't see why you wouldn't.

[Gaz]

Regadless of all the above it was mentioned that Brawn would favour JB because he's the better long term option.

If the fight between Vettle and Jenson which is threatening to happen kicks of and the's a point in it like last year.

best to let JB get the points now who is looking like the better option.

[Juliet P]

http://www.itv-f1.com/news_article.aspx?id=45834

Arrggh - there's no conspiracy. Brawn thought the 3-stopper was faster, but switched Jenson to 2 stops to cover all their bases.

Juliet

[f1usa]

Regadless of all the above it was mentioned that Brawn would favour JB because he's the better long term option.

If the fight between Vettle and Jenson which is threatening to happen kicks of and the's a point in it like last year.

best to let JB get the points now who is looking like the better option.

Agree 100% and Vettle is not running double-deck diffuser yet. Now factor in points Vettle lost and Barachello gained from the collision in the Australian GP with three laps remaining. Vettle could have 31 points to Barachello 24. Brawn made the correct decision today.

[McLaren Fan]

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2009/05/10/d ... utton-win/

[Jamie]

In my own opinion i sense it was a ferrari day...Wait....Brawn used to work for the team...maybehe was the man to always put Barichello behind Schumi.....I see no tem orders now at Ferrari...Kimi & Felippe are both equal...Strange

[Gilles 27]

I don't believe it was a team order thing but it's getting to the point when that might be the smart thing to do. Having a 1 and 2 driver strategy is by far the best way of winning the WDC as has been proved by basically every team that has won the WDC in the last 10 years. Even Ferrari switched to a number one driver strategy at the end of 2007 to ensure the title for Kimi.

As for Brawn being the kinda guy who doesn't like an equal driver policy, I would imagine that he doesn't. He is extremely clever and knows how to run a successful F1 team and so he will know that equal driver policies are not the way to go in modern F1.

[Juliet P]

I don't believe it was a team order thing but it's getting to the point when that might be the smart thing to do. Having a 1 and 2 driver strategy is by far the best way of winning the WDC as has been proved by basically every team that has won the WDC in the last 10 years. Even Ferrari switched to a number one driver strategy at the end of 2007 to ensure the title for Kimi.

"Even Ferrari"??? Ferrari are the worst offenders!