Medium or soft tyres? Confusion during Mercedes’ final Q3 attempt, with George Russell wanting to run the harder compound, once again highlighted the W16’s excessive sensitivity over a single lap. The softer compound created movement and heat through the corners, undermining the drivers’ confidence at the decisive moment.
In the battle at the top, one theme went almost unnoticed after Italian GP qualifying, overshadowed by Max Verstappen’s impressive pole and Ferrari’s internal debates over slipstreaming, namely Mercedes’ entire third row. Fifth and sixth places, influenced by the grid penalty that Lewis Hamilton must serve, also pointed to a more interesting topic: tyre management.
Before qualifying, Mercedes was one of the very few teams to have preserved a second set of medium tyres for the weekend. This curious detail suggested a strategy different from their rivals, leaving the door open for either a two-stop race strategy or the opportunity to try something different in qualifying, perhaps focusing on the soft compound during free practice where they had encountered more difficulties.
However, that second set of medium tyres was ultimately used in Q1, where George Russell immediately showed competitiveness, posting a solid lap that ensured his progression without needing to switch to the softs. This was important, especially as Mercedes had only four sets of soft tyres available before qualifying, one fewer than their rivals.
The speed Russell displayed on the medium tyres led him to request an additional set of the same compound for his final Q3 attempt. This choice went against the trend of all the other top drivers, who were opting for the softs. However, Mercedes decided not to follow the British driver’s request, instead fitting him with a set of softs, with which he still secured a place on the third row.
For Russell, the situation arose from an internal misunderstanding: “It was simply a misunderstanding between me and the team. So it’s not really their fault. Probably it’s as much my fault as theirs; I wasn’t clear. I thought, given the lap time I had done, it was obvious,” he said after qualifying.
“After Q1 I said the mediums were going great, and I asked if they could be considered for Q3. Then halfway through Q2, after my first lap, I said I wanted to use the mediums in Q3. Then in the garage I asked, ‘are we sticking to the plan?’ and they said yes, and I thought the plan was to use the mediums, but it was actually to use the softs. That’s why I was surprised. As I said, it’s also my fault.”
It was a regret because, as already noted on Friday, the W16 was not entirely comfortable with the softer compound, and Russell believed the medium could provide more stability for the final lap. For Monza, Pirelli kept the same allocation as in previous years, with the C5 as soft: a very soft compound that, through the long high-speed corners, can generate movement and heat, overheating the tyre.
Finding the ideal window and extracting maximum grip from the soft thus becomes a complex challenge, especially for a car like the W16, which throughout the season has shown difficulties in exploiting the softer tyre, preferring less performant but more stable and predictable solutions, as seen in Imola and Canada.
At Monza specifically, Russell felt excessive instability caused by the soft tyre’s movement in fast corners. Given that the performance gap between the two compounds was not particularly large here, he would have preferred a tyre with a smaller peak but more stability, from which he could more easily extract grip.
Notably, comparing timing references between Q1 and Q3, George Russell improved his lap by only three-tenths, while other top teams were half a second or more faster. This is unusual for a driver who normally performs best in the final qualifying stages. The detail did not go unnoticed by Russell, who admitted he was not particularly satisfied with his final laps.
“Usually you improve by five or six tenths. Considering I had already done two laps on that medium in Q1, the numbers suggested a substantial improvement compared to what I achieved. In the end, I think we simply underperformed in Q3.” Certainly, with nearly four-tenths off pole, dreaming of the top was difficult, but the second row was not far off.
Similarly, Andrea Kimi Antonelli revealed that he tried a different tyre approach on his final flying lap, but the result was not as hoped. This further confirms how Mercedes continues to show fragility in tyre management over a single lap. The W16’s operating window remains particularly narrow, resulting in fluctuating performance where even minor variations can alter lap times significantly.
Leave a Reply