What kind of Ferrari did we see in Jeddah? The same as always would be the most accurate answer. In fact, this so-called step forward has been talked about for a month and a half now. And yet, despite all the talk that there seems to be a glimmer of light, in reality darkness and gloomy tones continue to prevail. The disappointment affects not only the fans but also lingers in their minds.
Ferrari did optimize things with Charles
Fred Vasseur claims more could have been done, because losing more than two and a half tenths in two corners is not acceptable. That’s exactly what happened to Ferrari, but the reasons are different and quite clear. Fred states that by optimizing performance, the gap would have been different, but we strongly disagree. Charles Leclerc doesn’t agree either. That’s exactly why he’s disappointed with Ferrari.
The team went out with a baseline setup where the SF-25 worked well in the more technical sectors. However, in direction changes it lacked the necessary precision — a situation, as explained in our usual technical analysis, that led the team to stiffen the car further. Some improvements followed, but as a consequence, grip management in the slower corners worsened.
The story remains the same. The infamous short blanket: wherever you pull it, you expose a weak spot. That’s why there’s no point in talking about optimization. Car number 16, in Leclerc’s hands, produced a superb lap. Once again, Charles drove beyond the car’s problems. He did it by taking major risks. The snap in Turn 16 during the Q3 flying lap is the perfect snapshot of the situation.
Fred’s flawed and puzzling view
Over a 300-kilometre race, in theory, tyre degradation should be much lower than in Bahrain. There may be some graining issues on the front tyres, which tend to cool down on the straights — that’s true. Fred Vasseur also claims that Ferrari has always performed well with a high fuel load. We’re not exactly sure which car Fred, always cheerful, is referring to.
Because if “performing well” means not even reaching the podium in four races, then that says it all. In FP2, the long runs were disrupted due to Yuki Tsunoda’s crash at Turn 27. Only a few laps were completed, which cannot and should not be a reference. The gap to McLaren was well over a second in the two laps put together, which suggests the fuel loads were significantly different.
Moreover, the Ferrari team principal claims that in races, the Maranello car performs better than in qualifying. Again, based on the average gaps over the first three races, we don’t see such a big difference in race pace. We’re talking about the usual 3–4 tenths per lap on average — which, in fact, were sometimes smaller in qualifying. Again, we struggle to understand the reason for these statements.
The Frenchman’s proud stance
“We’re not here to be three tenths off pole.” Setting aside the fact that the gap was almost four tenths, even the fans don’t attend races to see Ferrari getting beaten by that margin. But fans can only watch and support. Those who actually have the power to change things and make a difference are the ones within the team. And they must act fast.
Fred Vasseur has a feeling — a hunch that points to the inability to put everything together. But nothing changes, Fred. It’s always the same story. With this car, there simply wasn’t more to be done. Charles’ words are so clear that they categorically contradict Fred Vasseur’s thinking. Then we move on to the supposed tyre management mentioned earlier. According to Ferrari’s boss, everything will depend on that.
True: this year more than ever, tyres are playing a key role in performance. But in the end, assuming equal skill in managing them, the faster car will always come out on top. And with all due respect to the former Alfa Romeo boss, we strongly doubt the SF-25 will show better pace than McLaren, Red Bull or Mercedes. We’d be happy to be proven wrong, of course. Happy Easter to everyone — even to Fred.
Leave a Reply