Ferrari conquers Monza: why single pit stop became victorious in 2024 F1 Italian GP. Ferrari was the only top team to bet on the single stop, which turned out to be the winning choice.

Monza is Red. In the home Grand Prix, Ferrari achieved its third victory of the season after those in Australia and Monaco, but the one at Monza probably has a special, different flavor, especially considering how it was achieved. Ferrari was the only top team to bet on the single stop, which turned out to be the winning choice.

Looking at the standings, in fact, one can see that other midfield teams also managed to make this tactic work effectively, but with a much slower pace in the initial and central phase of the second stint, before almost aligning at the end.

The strength of Ferrari in this case was not just about choosing the single stop, which was already favored on the eve, but in adopting it and, at the same time, making it work by reading the scenarios well in real-time, despite a high pace. Several elements allowed Ferrari to achieve a result that fans will remember for a long time, starting with the overtaking of Lando Norris on the first lap.

Undoubtedly, that overtake found during the opening lap profoundly changed the race scenarios, especially because it pushed McLaren to react and probably plan some race choices differently. On Saturday, almost jokingly, Frederic Vasseur had said that probably everyone would push in the first stint, and this was also true for Leclerc, who indeed paid the price towards the end of the first stint: on the other hand, however, paradoxically, this was also one of the keys to the Monegasque’s success.

Having skillfully overtaken Norris by slipping through at the exit of the second chicane, the Ferrari driver tried to keep up with Piastri, who was leading the race, constantly pushing in the faster corners, those that put the most stress on the tires and had been a problem for everyone else, like the two Lesmos and the Parabolica. It’s no coincidence that, even from the pit box, they repeatedly told him to preserve the tires, while Leclerc’s goal was to keep pushing to stay in the DRS zone, which would later pay off when he experienced tire degradation.

In fact, as the tire began to degrade after 11/12 laps, the gap to the lead widened more and more: in the space of five laps, Leclerc went from fighting in the DRS zone to accumulating a four-second disadvantage, also allowing Norris to close in again. At the same time, however, it’s crucial to understand what the plans of the Woking team were, which, like many others, had started by aiming for the single stop, i.e., Plan A.

It’s in this phase that the scenario probably takes a different turn. Although the two papaya-colored drivers began to experience slight understeer, which in turn led to the first signs of graining, McLaren didn’t really try to capitalize on Charles Leclerc’s difficulties, preferring to attempt an undercut. Here it’s important to understand how concrete McLaren’s doubt was that it might be Leclerc who would stop first, but it’s clear that it was the British team itself that triggered the sequence of pit stops.

On the one hand, this didn’t allow Piastri to continue increasing the lead, while on the other hand, it also pushed Leclerc towards the pit stop, favoring Ferrari. Although Ferrari also aimed for a single pit stop, as seen with Carlos Sainz, Fred Vasseur explained that the strategists thought they could gain an advantage over McLaren, so they decided to follow their strategy by calling in Leclerc, while the Spaniard could stay on track for a few more laps, though he paid the price as he was going through the graining phase.

A significant factor in the second stint was the evolution of the track, which played a key role lap after lap. In the early phase of the race, there was quite marked graining, and this probably confused many teams about what the most suitable tactic actually was. Observing Red Bull, which started on hard tires, the feeling was that the graining was higher than expected on that compound, but with the progressive improvement of the track, those same indications became counterproductive.

According to Pirelli data, between the first and second stint, there was significant track evolution, due to the rubber left lap after lap by twenty cars still on the track. However, it’s clear that, based on what was seen earlier, the teams began to reconsider what the strategies could be, and both McLaren and Ferrari started leaning towards two stops for both cars.

Two factors changed the situation again: the drivers’ feedback and Norris’s situation. Just like Charles Leclerc in the first stint, in the second part of the race, the British driver was the first to enter the graining phase. However, what weighed heavily was the mistake at the Roggia, with a long run that allowed Charles Leclerc to close in and put pressure, so much so that Ferrari had considered pitting the Monegasque if Norris stayed on track. Once again, for McLaren, the move was defensive, which then led to Piastri also stopping.

According to Andrea Stella, the stop was also necessary due to some characteristics of the car: “I believe our car traditionally tends to be very good with the rear tires, but when it comes to front graining, we tend to be aggressive. This made us a bit nervous. Especially after Lando had a lock-up on the front left a couple of laps earlier.”

Clearly, the fact that the Australian also showed some signs of wear was a topic followed at McLaren, because indeed the lap times were slightly increasing during the most acute phase of graining, but they remained competitive and in line with Leclerc’s times. In fact, the Woking team found itself at a crossroads: cover Ferrari’s strategy or follow Norris’s tactic before he lost position and it was too late.

Indeed, at that stage, Ferrari had increasingly considered the possibility of betting on the single stop for two reasons: on the one hand, Carlos Sainz’s feedback, the first to suggest it, tended in that direction. Not surprisingly, looking at the Spaniard’s times, halfway through the stint, they were excellent and in line with his teammate’s, also thanks to a very gentle introduction after the first pit stop. On the other hand, even more importantly, Norris’s pace in the first 5 laps of his last stint wasn’t so exceptional compared to the two leading drivers, partly due to the various overtakes he had to make. For Ferrari, this was a golden opportunity because those seconds not gained by the British driver could play a crucial role.

At that point, the problem with Oscar Piastri became twofold: on the one hand, they wanted to continue waiting to understand if the single stop was actually possible, as the pace was good and he wasn’t losing time to Leclerc. On the other hand, they might have waited a bit too long, as the final stint was only 15 laps compared to the 22 of the central one. Essentially, the desire was probably to try to cover Ferrari’s strategy with at least one of the two cars, but at that point, a problem arose.

On one hand, Oscar Piastri indicated that reaching the end would be very difficult: in reality, the Australian had said that the tire wasn’t getting worse, but that the pace wouldn’t improve, which wasn’t essential anyway. On the other hand, waiting longer would have posed the serious risk of the Australian entering Norris’s pit window, putting McLaren in an uncomfortable situation. Indeed, both Andrea Stella and Oscar Piastri later admitted that it probably would have been better to try to get through the graining phase and go all the way.

However, once the graining was managed, as shown by the pace not only of Charles Leclerc but also of the drivers who opted for a single stop in the top ten, the pace was still competitive, precisely because this wasn’t a high-degradation race. The most important difference is that Ferrari, compared to other teams, managed to read the race in real-time, react, and manage the tires despite maintaining a much higher pace in the Italian Grand Prix.