پن کیا گیا ٹویٹ
Michael Schumacher was born 57 years ago. Born to be a leader. Find out why his mechanics were willing to do anything for their boy.
#KeepFightingMichael #Schumacher
👇open.substack.com/pub/grumpykerb…
English
Grumpy Kerb
2.1K posts
English
A lot of things are being put under the "deployment issue" umbrella, and it's unsurprising that not everyone understands how complicated the power demand rules are. This isn't an "issue" in the usual sense of the word, but rather oddities in the regulations being exposed by the near 50/50 power split.
Sometimes, the way the driver uses the throttle pedal induces "deployment issues." We already saw what happened when a moment that usually proves inconsequential ruined Leclerc's SQ3 lap in China.
In this case, Hadjar, who is lifting through 130R to manage tyres, is affected by the quirks of the power demand rules.
The MGU-K must give at least 200 kW of electrical power for 1 second when he goes from lifting to beyond 98% throttle. Throttle position >98% is defined as the power-limited pending period.
What accentuates the issues for Isack here, is that from 130R to Casio Triangle - where cars typically harvest when not attacking - instead of recovering energy, it spends an extra couple seconds deploying it. He is left completely exposed on the subsequent straight because it used energy when it was supposed to recover it.
It's easy to fix in this case. Don't lift on the next laps. Where it becomes tricky is when the driver uses the throttle in a way that doesn't necessarily help the "issue" due to their driving habits, or trying to push a little harder at some points.
It's precisely this thats frustrating so many drivers. Because they don't really know they're doing something "wrong." The reason its become such a prominent aspect is because of the need to have 100% optimal deployment all the time, the product of a 50/50 power split.
English
@ESPNF1 How ironic that the guy who has been shilling for these regs became an indirect victim of them. Lol.
English
@DeltaData_ How dare your data to not comply with his agenda?
English
Come on mate, this must be a joke.
You accuse us of pushing an agenda when you only ever share post-race pace analyses when Hamilton wins?
You know perfectly well that doing this kind of analysis is complex. There are hundreds of external factors which, in many cases, simply cannot be controlled, especially with these new regulations, where it seems that every driver has some sort of mechanical issue at some point during the weekend, and finding out about all of them is practically impossible.
We analyse each lap individually and publish the results every race weekend, regardless of who comes out looking better or worse. We never try to lecture anyone about anything because we make it clear that, in this sport, data should always be taken with a pinch of salt, and we always point out that it should never be treated as the absolute truth.
We have no problem correcting any mistakes we make and we are always willing to learn and improve our analysis. But rather than criticising us without even mentioning us, it would have been far more useful if you had taken the time to message us privately about all this.
We also listened to Bottas’ comments and he didn’t make any particularly relevant remarks. We checked the telemetry from some of his laps and compared it with Checo’s, and it even seemed as though Pérez was losing more power towards the end of the straights. Could Bottas have had an issue? Of course that’s entirely possible. And if we had seen any indication of it anywhere, we would have pointed it out. But making an accusation with the intention of trying to discredit our work over a case like this isn’t particularly honest on your part, especially when, on the occasions we have disagreed with any of your data, we have always raised it with you privately and respectfully, without undermining your work in any way.
Udi@FormulaPace
Can’t expect much in terms of context from these lot but here’s what really happened: Bottas clearly had some kind of issue in the 1st stint (was doing high 38s on the Hards when others were in the high 37s). I’d suspect due to Hard tyres + high fuel + cold = massive graining which is what we saw. Perez’s medium stint was in the mid-high 37s around half a second quicker than the Astons behind both on Mediums. Bottas’ medium stint was lapping in the mid-high 36s whereas the Astons in the low 37s both on Mediums. Applying fuel-correction (0.03s) once again confirms Bottas and Perez being equal on the Mediums. On the Hards however, Bottas was 2-3s slower than anyone else which is clearly not representative pace. 1 week ago, Bottas finished 20s ahead and outqualified Checo by 1.5s but nothing was said. Focusing on drivers in the slowest car for a team who aren’t at the level of any other is a new level of cope and damage control. Using unrepresentative laps 2-3s off the pace just to push a silly agenda about Hamilton is an all-time low
English
@F1BigData @Monascope7 Time to open the champagne. The worse it gets, the better. The FIA and Liberty will have to make changes.
English
In France, the audience also fell by 43% compared with 2025
2026: 404,000
2025: 705,000
📊@Monascope7
Holiness@F1BigData
In Spain, the race at Japan lost 49% of its live audience compared to 2025 2026: 63000 2025: 124000 2024: 137000 2023: 152000 2022: 143000 2019: 48000 2018: 33000
English
Oliver Bearman’s crash is a consequence of the governing body ignoring drivers’ warnings. #F1 #JapaneseGP
open.substack.com/pub/grumpykerb…
English
Looks like the FIA is slowly coming to terms with reality.
Thomas Maher@thomasmaheronf1
I'm hearing some interesting admissions off the back of Suzuka - namely, that there's a growing awareness within the FIA that the 50/50 split has been the wrong direction. It's understood that, in the short-term, energy deployment limits are being looked at while, longer-term, a change in the ICE vs. electrical split. Getting the drivers and teams in alignment is a hurdle to clear, with the teams not all agreeing with their drivers on the issues, but there is an awareness now that changes are needed. #F1 #JapaneseGP
English
@Versutta Don't know about these regs, but Wolff hadn't designed the 2014 ones, 'cause when they were approved in 2011, he was at Williams.
English
Yes, he did, just like back in 2014.
For 2026, Audi wanted a front MGU-K, but Toto shut it down, even though it would have made energy recovery under braking far more efficient and avoided this excessive super clipping phenomena. Now we're stuck in this mess.
V F1@swiftsambi
@FormulaUR_ That pure bait Toto didn’t design the regs
English
@F1BigData If they nerf the mushroom, then there will be less yo-yo battles, and overtaking in general. It will lose its intended purpose. Lol.
English
Carlos Sainz on Bearman's accident:
"This break is good for F1. The accident we saw today was something the drivers had been warning the FIA and FOM about; it was just a matter of time. We're reaching speed differencials of 40-50 km/h using boost, and this accident was inevitable
I hope Formula 1 reconsiders its position, because it is clear that these regulations have loopholes and problems that need to be addressed before going to Miami"
English
Grumpy Kerb ری ٹویٹ کیا
Hope you are alright @OllieBearman, and it's nothing too serious. 🙏
English
Oscar Piastri to Charles Leclerc watching Bearman’s crash: “I finally see what you mean about the mushroom.”
English
@F1BigData A fitting picture. Wheel-to-wheel, Russell is closer to Bottas than to Leclerc.
English
@cytrusf1 Seems logical. They're not gonna shoot themselves in the dick. Publicly.
English
LAP 38/53
Problems for Russell...
He's dropped behind Leclerc and is down to fifth
#F1 #JapaneseGP
English