https://www.racefans.net/2022/07/05/racefans-round-up-05-07-5/
Ferrari chose to pit second-placed Carlos Sainz Jnr but not race leader
Leclerc when the Safety Car was deployed towards the end of the British Grand
Prix. Leclerc fell from first to fourth, passed by Sainz and two other
drivers who pitted for fresh tyres.
當英國大獎賽接近收官的時刻出動安全車時，法拉利選擇讓當下第二的Sainz進站而非領
先的Leclerc。
Lec從第一掉到第四，被Sainz與另外兩名換了新胎的車手超越。
Binotto said “it was common sense to prioritise the lead car by protecting
track positions” at that point in the race. “There’s nothing unusual in
this strategy, we always prioritise the lead car and therefore Charles in
this situation. He was on fresher tyres at that point, and if he had pitted,
our opponents would have done the exact opposite and gained track position on
almost new hard tyres.”
比諾托表示: 在那個狀況下"優先考慮領先車的位置是常識"
"策略沒有問題，我們一直都優先考慮領先車，因此Lec在那個位置"
"Lec的胎當下較新(跟Sainz比?)，如果他進站，對手會反過來(不進站)而且在有新白胎的
狀況下推進位置"
“Just think of Lewis Hamilton at last year’s season finale in Abu Dhabi
when he stayed out on track,” he added. Mercedes chose not to pit Hamilton
from the lead during a late Safety Car period, a decision which cost them
when the race was unexpectedly restarted in a manner which did not conform
with the regulations.
比諾托補充: "想想去年阿布達比最後(出安全車時)Ham沒進去換胎"
賓士在比賽末段的安全車下選擇不叫Ham進站，這個決定在比賽未依常規重啟後讓他們付
出了代價。
“At the same time we decided to put Carlos on the opposite strategy in order
to cover all opportunities,” Binotto added. “If we wouldn’t have done that
split strategy, we would have risked losing the race and handing the win to
our opponents.”
比諾托補充: "同時我們決定讓Sainz做相反的策略來對應所有的狀況"
"如果我們沒有錯開策略，我們很可能會輸掉比賽並將勝利拱手讓人"
---
https://redd.it/vrkg3y
國外鄉民表示:
"我的天啊，你的舉例證明你錯了r"
"除非他們打算把Ocon的車推回車庫，不然哪來的13圈安全車"
"當下唯一的可能性是法拉利策略組有比諾托的裸照"
"你確定他們有策略組?對付預算帽的master plan"
"沒有策略組可能還好點"
"這對引號(指常識)縮短了Lec三年的陽壽"
---
看前面都沒有罪魁禍首的自述，貼個新聞給各位看看...
英文不好，如果有翻錯還請不吝指教
--
Ferrari chose to pit second-placed Carlos Sainz Jnr but not race leader
Leclerc when the Safety Car was deployed towards the end of the British Grand
Prix. Leclerc fell from first to fourth, passed by Sainz and two other
drivers who pitted for fresh tyres.
當英國大獎賽接近收官的時刻出動安全車時，法拉利選擇讓當下第二的Sainz進站而非領
先的Leclerc。
Lec從第一掉到第四，被Sainz與另外兩名換了新胎的車手超越。
Binotto said “it was common sense to prioritise the lead car by protecting
track positions” at that point in the race. “There’s nothing unusual in
this strategy, we always prioritise the lead car and therefore Charles in
this situation. He was on fresher tyres at that point, and if he had pitted,
our opponents would have done the exact opposite and gained track position on
almost new hard tyres.”
比諾托表示: 在那個狀況下"優先考慮領先車的位置是常識"
"策略沒有問題，我們一直都優先考慮領先車，因此Lec在那個位置"
"Lec的胎當下較新(跟Sainz比?)，如果他進站，對手會反過來(不進站)而且在有新白胎的
狀況下推進位置"
“Just think of Lewis Hamilton at last year’s season finale in Abu Dhabi
when he stayed out on track,” he added. Mercedes chose not to pit Hamilton
from the lead during a late Safety Car period, a decision which cost them
when the race was unexpectedly restarted in a manner which did not conform
with the regulations.
比諾托補充: "想想去年阿布達比最後(出安全車時)Ham沒進去換胎"
賓士在比賽末段的安全車下選擇不叫Ham進站，這個決定在比賽未依常規重啟後讓他們付
出了代價。
“At the same time we decided to put Carlos on the opposite strategy in order
to cover all opportunities,” Binotto added. “If we wouldn’t have done that
split strategy, we would have risked losing the race and handing the win to
our opponents.”
比諾托補充: "同時我們決定讓Sainz做相反的策略來對應所有的狀況"
"如果我們沒有錯開策略，我們很可能會輸掉比賽並將勝利拱手讓人"
---
https://redd.it/vrkg3y
國外鄉民表示:
"我的天啊，你的舉例證明你錯了r"
"除非他們打算把Ocon的車推回車庫，不然哪來的13圈安全車"
"當下唯一的可能性是法拉利策略組有比諾托的裸照"
"你確定他們有策略組?對付預算帽的master plan"
"沒有策略組可能還好點"
"這對引號(指常識)縮短了Lec三年的陽壽"
---
看前面都沒有罪魁禍首的自述，貼個新聞給各位看看...
英文不好，如果有翻錯還請不吝指教
--
All Comments