This page will be updated throughout the day.
Please if you are on Twitter press the tweet button below. If you re-write and tweet individual story headlines don’t forget to include #F1.
You may not realise how hugely important this is and has helped grow our community significantly
Previously on TJ13:
Castrol #F1 GP Predictor Summary – Budapest 2014
#F1 Features: Lewis – Opportunistic or Naïve at the 2014 Hungarian GP
#F1 Features: Safety Car farce needs addressing – brought to you by @GoMotorFleet
OTD Lite: 1973 – Roger Williamson perishes in Dutch Grand Prix
Raikkonen beginning to emerge from his stupor
Villeneuve slams Rosberg performance
‘Hired to race’ not obey team orders – Hamilton (GMM)
F1 to ‘look at rules’ to stop ‘negativity’ – Ecclestone (GMM)
1 Malaysia Racing ‘employees’ to be sued by Caterham F1
OTD Lite: 1973 – Roger Williamson perishes in Dutch Grand Prix
On this day forty one years ago, a promising British driver lost his life in the most tragic circumstances. Roger Williamson had a suspected tyre failure which pitched his car over on to its side rupturing a fuel tank which ignited as it slid to a stop. In the car he was uninjured but could not extricate himself.
David Purley stopped at the scene abandoning his own race and film shows an increasingly desperate man attempting to save his friend from within the blazing inferno. Marshalls near by were ill-equipped with fire extinguishers and appropriate clothing and he fought in vain to combat the flames or to push the car back on to it wheels.
Even today, perhaps the most shocking thing about the accident is the other drivers who scythe past the blazing wreck, running over extinguisher powder on the track and nobody stopped to help. Maybe they had become blase to death – accepted the risk as part of their job, or maybe as the character Jean Pierre Sarti said in the film Grand Prix – “When I see an accident I put my foot down harder because I know everybody else will be lifting theirs..”
David Purley was awarded the George medal for his display of bravery.
Raikkonen beginning to emerge from his stupor
The chill that the Iceman has suffered this season is beginning to thaw if recent report from Kimi Raikkonen are to be believed. After a disastrous qualifying mistake which lumbered him in a disappointing 17th position, his recovery drive to finish in 6th position in Hungary has revealed a happier Finn than has been seen this year to date.
Of course, it’s not as impressive as Lewis Hamilton’s driver from pit-lane to the podium, but then again Hamilton is blessed to be pedalling the fastest car in Formula One whereas Raikkonen has been saddled with a bucking bronco that until recently only a Spaniard could tame.
“Today’s race was difficult,” admitted Kimi, “but much more fun than the others, as I had a good feeling with the car, the pace was good and I felt I could push. After the way qualifying went yesterday, sixth was the most we could hope for. At the start, I got away well but then I lost vital time behind a Sauber and when I caught Massa’s Williams, I couldn’t get past: here in general, overtaking is not easy and we lack speed down the straights.”
He continued in a similar vein to both Fernando Alonso’s statement and the team principal’s about keeping their feet on the ground, “Sure, this is a good team result, but we must not get too excited, because even if there are signs of improvement, we still have much work to do in a lot of areas to get to where we want to be. We’ve had a very complicated start to the season, but I hope the second part of the championship will go better. – “I don’t see things changing much in three or four weeks. Next year things will get better. I trust Ferrari and I know they are working hard, so that’s why I am confident about next year. Then we should be able to fight for race wins again,” he concluded.
Villeneuve slams Rosberg performance
As the year has progressed factions within the Mercedes power-base have begun to play their cards. For some, it is becoming apparent that Toto Wolff – representing the grey corporate monolith – favours a clean cut Rosberg victory. It is suggested that this would suit the German brand’s client base far more than an edgy controversial high maintenance superstar as protected by triple World Champion – Niki Lauda.
Following the weekends’ Grand Prix, Wolff moaned about the effect the safety car had on the Silver Arrows race strategy. “Finishing in third or fourth position was perhaps the best we could hope for. We have to sit down at the table and analyse some aspects, such as when Lewis was asked to let Nico through. Needless to say we are not satisfied with the results but now we move on to Spa.”
Wolff’s brother in arms, Paddy Lowe, took up the cudgels, “That was not an easy race, it must be said. For reasons still unknown the safety car divided the group into two parts and Nico found himself unable to follow the strategy we had prepared for such an eventuality. Rosberg was on three stops, where Lewis was on two. This misunderstanding has caused the drivers to question our motives, but whatever strategy was applied we would have finished in similar positions.”
Which begs the question – Why ask Lewis to move over then?
Charging in on his fine Austrian steed came Hamilton’s saviour, Niki. “They were close, but Rosberg was not even in DRS range. I fully understand why Hamilton asked why do I have to let my team-mate past. They are both fighting for the title and from my point of view, lewis has every reason in the world to refuse.”
Jacques Villeneuve having obviously in his normative judicial manner, heard the evidence from either side and proffered his opinion.
In a marked change of tack, Villneuve decided that in fact this time it was Nico Rosberg who had behaved in a childish manner during the Hungarian Grand Prix, when Lewis Hamilton didn’t immediately concede position to the teams supposed favoured son.
“Nico’s message made no sense as it was obvious Lewis would have lost several seconds to let him through. In addition, it would not have helped Nico win the race because his tyres were starting to fall apart and within two laps he was falling away from Lewis.”
“Then we began to hear Nico moaning and whimpering; but he wasn’t interested in helping the team or himself just in ruining Hamilton’s race. Ultimately Ricciardo was too fast for him so all he would have accomplished would to have beaten Hamilton to his final position…”
For once Villeneuve’s views may appear to represent a more balanced opinion, which he promptly wrecked by suggesting that this tension in Brackley will favour Hamilton. “He’s a fighter and seems to react better when things go wrong.”
Obviously Master Jacques read the recent interview where Hamilton declared his hunger as being different to Rosberg’s due to their respective upbringing, but failed to take into account the very public emotions that the rest of the world has seen. After all, Hamilton himself stated that he would be lucky to get in the Top 10 after his Mercedes self combusted into a raging inferno..
JV concluded with an original thought – one the rest of the world has held for some time – “well at least now they can stop acting as if they are the best of friends!”
‘Hired to race’ not obey team orders – Hamilton (GMM)
Lewis Hamilton has hit back at suggestions he was wrong to ignore team orders during Sunday’s Hungarian grand prix. Niki Lauda, who after Hamilton’s qualifying fire had cheered the Briton up over pizza, insisting with typical clarity that the driver was “right” and the German team “wrong”.
“Lewis ignored it because he remembered before the season that we said they could fight freely against each other. That’s why he did the right thing,” the great Austrian told Bild newspaper.
Not everyone is as convinced. The headline in the major German daily Welt claims Mercedes is the victim of “Hamilton’s ego-show”. “With his disobedience, Hamilton weakened the authority of the team leadership and provoked his teammate Nico Rosberg, for a comparatively low reward.” But according to Hamilton, that’s not the point. On Monday, he insisted he is “hired to race. It is not questioning authority,” the 2008 world champion explained. “I am hired to be me, and race my heart out.”
Team boss Toto Wolff and Rosberg agreed after the race that Hamilton’s defiance had cost Mercedes a race win. Again, Hamilton doesn’t see it that way. “I did not cost Nico a win,” he insisted. “I was racing against him! Why would I be concerned for him? I don’t think I was being ruthless. I was not even being bloody minded. I was doing my job. I tried my hardest to be ahead and I don’t feel as though I was obligated to help.”
John Watson, a former F1 driver turned commentator, thinks the problem is home grown. “Is Toto Wolff more interested in projecting himself?” he wondered. “Does he really have the authority?” the former McLaren driver told the Daily Mail.
“Paddy Lowe is a fantastic guy, but he is not the person to deal with this. Lauda is a very clever man, but I don’t know what authority he has. If there was one person who could kick ass in that team, it is the person that they let go, Ross (Brawn),” said Watson.
TJ13 comment: It’s intriguing that the German daily described Hamilton as an ego show. In much the same manner, David Beckham’s career faltered as his management company chased lucrative image contracts and forgot that he was in fact a footballer. It’s surprising that XIX management are using their original blue print to mould Hamilton into a music pop star, in a relationship with a fading pop-star and making demands as he builds his brand.
They say there is no such thing as bad publicity but it will not have gone unnoticed in Germany that Mercedes as a brand comes second to Lewis Hamilton…
Also interesting, Yesterday TJ13 likened Lewis Hamilton’s refusal to follow the team race strategy protocol to Sebastian’s multi 21 affair. Lewis similarly borrows from the Vettel book of “explanations”, “I’m paid to race”, first aired by the quadruple world champion following the Malyasian GP 2013.
F1 to ‘look at rules’ to stop ‘negativity’ – Ecclestone (GMM)
Bernie Ecclestone thinks Formula one needs to act now to prevent a downward trend of unpopularity. Before qualifying in Hungary, amid a climate of paddock doom about dwindling spectator and television numbers, the F1 chief executive met with team bosses. Afterwards, it emerged that Ecclestone would revive the F1 career of Flavio Briatore in the wake of his ‘crash-gate’ ban by appointing him the head of a new ‘popularity working group’.
When asked about the flamboyant yet divisive Italian figure, Ecclestone is quoted by Italy’s Tuttosport: “We’ll see. We’ll see what we can do.” Ecclestone is following up the Hungarian meeting with another meeting involving the governing FIA this Thursday, after Ferrari president Luca di Montezemolo urged the need for a crisis ‘summit’.
Confirming that team boss Marco Mattiacci will be there, Maranello based Ferrari confirmed on Monday that the meeting is to “look at the general situation of formula one and how to increase the sport’s appeal”. Ecclestone added: “We simply want to see if there is the possibility to look at the rules, because there has been so much negativity. We need to have a look at all of this and clear some things up,” he added.
TJ13 comment: Most octogenarians I know have this wonderful habit of having a conversation and immediately forgetting the details. Asked if they would like a cup of tea, they normally answer something about the milkman passing by for payment of a Friday evening and they often sit there smiling for the simple fact that the nurse has to clear out the bag….
Bernie would be wise to look throughout the history of F1 and appreciate that not every race was fantastic. There were an amazing number that had little or no passing at all, era’s of domination were accepted as part of the fabric and because the dominant team still allowed their drivers to race – well except the Todt/Schumacher era at Ferrari! Some of the racing recently has been electrifying and the added bonus of unreliability has brought the unpredictability back into motor-sport.
Bernie would receive the greatest applause if he took his withered claws out of Formula One. If CVC had had the balls to get rid of him earlier this year we would not have to be enduring this insufferable man any longer. Yet he hangs on and the Constructors continue to pander to him. The hypocrisy of these teams is sickening because if/when Bernie “goes down” only then will they have the courage to voice an opinion.
LdM attacked Mr E a few years ago in regards his governance of F1 and as usual opinions followed that Ferrari only cared for themselves, Luca was too old, should retire etc. It’s more than obvious – with the faltering talks in regards cutting costs – that ALL Formula One teams think only of themselves but for Ferrari that is a crime. Which is once again, what the British dominated media wants us all to believe.
It was interesting that over the weekend Mclaren’s Eric Boullier believed he had the power to speak to the FIA about taking a journalists press accreditation away, simply because the journalist asked questions in reference to the upcoming trip to Russia. If you can’t stand the heat…
All we need is heroes
Why do you follow Formula 1? Looking at the reaction after this weekend’s race the questions are not about who supports Mercedes, Red Bull, Williams or other teams. Rather, most, if not all discussion has been about Hamilton, Rosberg, Alonso, Ricciardo and Vettel.
Speaking on Sunday Christian Horner said the racing is great but F1 needs drivers that are heroes. “When we focus on the racing we have got a great sport.
“Formula One needs to be about the drivers being the heroes, and today they were. That’s Formula One at its best – not just this weekend but last weekend [in Germany] as well.
“That’s what I enjoy, that’s what I love to see and that’s all part of competition. We need to keep going down that direction.”
Asked why drivers are not seen as heroes Horner said races are too managed. He then continues to talk about Alonso, Hamilton and Ricciardo who drove great races and in the case of the latter made his strategy work.
He argues for more freedom for the drivers saying “We need to allow the drivers to be able to express themselves more without being criticised. We need to allow their personalities to come out. They have opinions and they’ve got personalities, we should encourage them to see some of them.”
Does he have a valid point, are the races too managed and the driver’s skill becoming secondary to the team of engineers and strategists working away in the background?
Or have the drivers historically taken all the credit and fame, for what is very much a team sport?
Maybe the drivers should be given no tactical information from the pit wall, thus placing the racing decisions into their hands alone.
Barr being one of the Tifosi, do you support the “heroes” or do you support the teams?
Mr E the stressed
Today AMuS reports Ecclestone’s defence lawyers have submitted a settlement plea, citing the ‘extremely stressful process’ Mr E is currently in. As part of the settlement offer, BayrenLB is being offered a rather nominal sum of 23 million Euros despite the bank suffering no financial loss.
The deal is said to be under evaluation of the prosecutor and they have until next Friday (8th August) to accept/reject the offer.
Maybe Judge Noll, will see this as an opportunity to truncate the overall spread of time allocated to the case, and insist all parties from herein attend not 2 days, but 4 days a week.
1 Malaysia Racing workers to be sued by Caterham F1
The Caterham F1 Team announces today that it has filed legal proceedings against a group of former workers who were recently relieved from their responsibilities within the team.
This is a legal counter action against the one already brought by the ‘ex-employees’. Caterham F1’s is claiming alleged misrepresentation by former F1 workers.
A statement from the team says,
“Caterham F1 Team has read with great concern recent reports about a group of individuals who are claiming unfair dismissal from the Formula 1 team following its takeover by new owners. The team is now taking legal action against those parties representing the individuals concerned, and each person involved, seeking compensation for the damages suffered by the team due to the gross misrepresentation of the facts made by all those concerned.”
This is a technical action, because the employees were in fact contracted by a company of the name, “1 Malaysia Racing”, not the Caterham F1 team directly.
Caterham F1 continue, “Additionally, the team has read claims that its staff were not paid in July – again, this is wholly untrue. Every individual currently employed by Caterham F1 Team was paid their July salary in full on 25th July, one week before it is formally due on the last day of the month, in this case 31st July.
A formal request for the withdrawal of the relevant press statement issued on 28th July has been made by Caterham F1 Team and the team will vigorously pursue its action against all those concerned.
However, it will not allow its core focus to be distracted from achieving tenth place in the 2014 Formula 1 World Championship, and building for the 2015 campaign and beyond.”
TJ13 did comment earlier last month, that the staff released from their responsibility’s were of a contracted nature. Further, to complicate matters, were the staff ‘provided’ by 1 Malaysia Racing deemed self employed for tax purposes, their statutory rights under their conditions of engagement will be at best fairly minimal.
Should 1 Malaysia Racing have been placed into “bankruptcy”, there may be little or no assets to meet any claims at all.
Certain teams employ a very significant number of their staff in this manner, or on a self employed basis. The workers may believe they work for a team, however, the are in effect agency staff whose employment rights are significantly smaller than directly contracted employees.
This practice was extended by some teams when the Resource Restriction Allocation was agreed. It provided the teams with the opportunity to cite a maximum number of “employees”, whilst utilising the additional services of ‘contracted’ or self employed individuals over and above their declared resource.
One team has more than 100 of these non-employed workers, and another’s workforce engaged on similar terms represents over 50% of the labour employed.
I have to say, I honestly don’t think Merc would sabotage a car, makes no sense, and even when Lewis’s pit stops were taking twice as long as Nico’s, really did think it was one of those things. But this race, I know it was the SC that put Lewis in with a shout, but once Nico pitted, Lewis took the advantage and overtook JEV, nice overtake too.
We had been told by the commentators the difference between the 2 tyres was a second and a half, but the durability was the same, which Lewis confirmed over radio in about 3 laps, even more surprising when he all those supersofts left. It does seem like they did try to shaft him a bit.
My personal opinion is he has Nico covered on speed, just, but has made mistakes chasing a points deficit that is no fault of his own. I think the big difference is race craft, I just think Lewis’s is better and that’s where he needs the chasing pack to be closer.
just saying …. just asking …. innocent face ….
After the Hungary fire, Lewis Hamilton said he feels his misfortune with mechanical failures is now getting to a point where ‘it is beyond bad luck’.
What was he implying when he said “beyond bad luck”?
Would a conspiracy theorist be justified in inferring and postulating a scenario scuh as this:
Just suppose that there is a mechanic in a garage who for some reason has a grudge against a drive. How easy would it be:
a. to introduce a hairline split in the side of a rubber tube that holds the Mercedes spark plug?
b. scratch a Brembo disk so that it fails after a few laps?
c. slightly undo a coupling on the high pressure fuel line to the engine?
If anyone thinks such things could not happen, just remember this:
On 27 May 2007, an incident occurred prior to the Monaco Grand Prix when white powder, later alleged to be a sabotage attempt by Stepney, was discovered in the fuel tank of Felipe Massa’s car and sent to the police.
On 29 September 2010, Stepney was sentenced to 1 year 8 months in prison and handed a €600 fine for his part in the spy affair, after being found guilty of “sabotage, industrial espionage, sporting fraud and attempted serious injury”.
Stepney was killed on 2 May 2014 in a road traffic incident on the M20 motorway at Ashford, Kent, United Kingdom. The exact circumstances of his death have not been established, however. Although, according to police, his vehicle was parked, and he appeared “to have [entered] the carriageway and was then [subsequently] in collision with an articulated goods vehicle”.
Let me answer that with a question of my own. Why are you drinking this early in the morning?
Your way with word Mr Hippo… I just love it! 🙂
The Koolaid, I think.
Possibly laced with vodka.
Shame it was in reply to a quite reasonable post.
I know it was the SC that put Lewis in with a shout, but once Nico pitted, Lewis took the advantage and overtook JEV, nice overtake too.
We had been told by the commentators the difference between the 2 tyres was a second and a half, but the durability was the same, which Lewis confirmed over radio in about 3 laps, even more surprising when he all those supersofts left. It does seem like they did try to shaft him a bit.
These are entirely reasonable points – and based on fact.
I don’t actually believe it was a deliberate ‘shafting’ – nine times out of ten cockup is a more convincing explanation than conspiracy, as is the case here – but the effect was undeniable.
… and if it had rained?
The options were still a better choice.
Had it rained anytime during the first stint, Hamilton would have been further up the road.
Had rain threatened towards the end of his first stint, he could have easily extended it until it was necessary to pit for wets/inters – and again would have been ahead of where he would on primes.
In the extremely unlikely even of it raining without warning just after he pitted for his last set of options, he wouldn’t have lost much at all (time for pitstop less time gained on speedier options – say 17 laps at at least 1.5 seconds per lap).
Any later in the race, he’d still be better off on options.
And it didn’t rain.
…. “It didn’t rain” – hindsight. Team’s are not armed with that particular tool.
One other factor was that Alonso had gone to the soft tyre, so Lewis was deemed to be racing him for second/third (depending on whether Rosberg had passed Hamilton).
Therefore the prime was the right choice given Merc didn’t believe Alonso could get to the end without pitting, and further they didn’t believe Hamilton could do the same on option either because his first stint on soft tyres included about 25% of the time run under the safety car and then lower grip conditions than would have been experienced toward the end of the race, were it not to rain…
A crystal ball is a wonderful thing – but Merc didn’t have it
Either that or they are trying to screw Lewis over… think what you will 🙂
I’m with Nigel on this, the options would probably have been a better choice (rain or shine). But that only became apparent during the race and Merc have shown consistently that they are not so great at reacting to new information. I also agree that most conspiracies are created out of incompetence. Maybe a mechanic drops a brake disc, doesn’t think anything of it, and then the disc explodes in qualifying. There’s no malice, just a lack of attention to detail. Likewise a fuel line gets kinked, car catches fire etc… There’s no way anyone inside Merc would sabotage their own car, engineers are real people with livelihoods and most have a huge amount of pride in their work. The difference, as has been said elsewhere, is how inclined they are to go the extra mile and check something a third time rather than just twice. This is where LH’s approach starts to look lacking compared to an Alonso or a Schumacher. LH would do well to nurture those relationships within the team, which (although I have no evidence either way) it’s rumoured he doesn’t do as well as some of the other drivers.
“I’m with Nigel on this, the options would probably have been a better choice (rain or shine)”
…with hindsight.
Mercedes were not in some meltdown where all their analysts had simultaneously self combusted….
….the decision to split the strategy is one of the simplest a team has to make – when they are uncertain…. it covers whichever strategy is best.
Willaims however….. more problems for them in the thinking department…..
I don’t think it would’ve been hindsight… the higher durability of the options became apparent during the race, so the risk of running them was reduced given that more rain was expected. I don’t believe Merc even considered it though, as they failed to take that info on board. But maybe I’m wrong, who knows 🙂
…. I only know what I was told… there were still variables in play – a drying track and rising temperature would push the likelihood of being able to complete the stint on the soft tyre further and further towards the impossible.
It was not such a stupid idea as others rashly comment, as RB made the same call for Vettel… once Ricciardo was committed to 3 stopping….
Plus there was a chance of rain – it comes with little warning at this time of year in that region. There was plenty of evidence that could happen 😉
I really want to answer that, but think I would get sued left right and centre as it’d only be based on 2nd hand gossip and maybe untrue.
Maybe judge could pm me and he could give his thoughts on it.
….. Haha
Having tried to take Judge Towers and failed miserably, the Hamfosi are alerted to a new enemy….
….It’s off to PK’s place to discover if he knows anything about skullduggery :):):)
Sounds like a load of pre-emptive reasoning for if Lewis fails to win the WDC, against a ‘girl’…. (a Hamfosi name for Rosberg)
Further, it would be embarrassing for Lewis to have been in a car which may be almost as dominant as the McLaren MP4-4, and as the ‘bestist’ ever driver in the world – ever, ever, ever… honest – not win the WDC
PEOPLE WAKE UP – this is how you sound
The most sensible answer I could give is this:
Cars are checked, double-checked and triple-checked. Maybe Rosberg’s car just gets a bit more attention as per corporate directive. Which is not so unlikely. Any corporation in other business areas is doing this to maximise the probabilities of success for certain projects they view as priority versus others.
Anything else is speculation and conspiracy…which I love, hehehehehe
Unless of course it is not a corporate directive but rather that Rosberg has a much better relationship with his mechanics than Hamilton does with his.
It just means that they do check and double check Rosberg’s car more thoroughly …
Definitely possible which is what was happening at McLaren if you believe the rumours. However, let’s not forget that Whitmarsh/Button poached Lewis’s engineer/s, and I might be mistaken, but wasn’t one of Lewis’s engineers moved to Rosberg’s team? Might be totally wrong.
Maybe because they want to get away from Lewis? 😉
Hey, that was my idea 🙂
My most humblest apologies sir 🙂
” .. Cars are checked, double-checked and triple-checked .. ”
Do they rotate the mechanics who do the checks?
Or is it just the same one person does the final check who has the opportunity to “fiddle” with the car? Perhaps they should be made to wear multple cams and have multiple other camera around the garage to record every move/action they make/take.
Good question and I’m afraid I have no idea
Surely there are security cameras everywhere….those cars are worth a fortune, I doubt they would risk anything happening to them. I don’t think Hamilton was implying any tampering was done to his car. We can infer from that that maybe he cannot believe how bad his luck has become. Let us all hope it improves, not just because I am a fan of his, I am a fan of Alonso and Ricciardo too (the 3 best drivers out there IMHO) but because we are all missing out on exciting wheel to wheel racing between him and Rosberg. 🙂
Hmmm… you’ve got me thinking, PK. That Paddy Low guy looks very much much like a Reptilian now that I think about it.
Toto Wolff? I’ve now got him pegged as a second-generation Lycan who only shows his human form (for obvious reasons). His name is a kind of a double bluff. Wolff – werewolf. Toto – dog, so wolf again. Ha! – he thought he had us fooled, but thanks to PK we’re on to him!
BTW, just saying … Mercedes Benz has thirteen letters in it as well as befits a Masonic organisation. Well it did have thirteen letters with their original spelling – “Mercedes Bends” – but they changed it to throw us off the track 😉
Nico? They had to change the New World Order reference a bit into New Inter-Continental Order – you can’t pronounce NWO so it would be a silly name and a bit obvious that he’s the Chosen One.
I want some of what you are smoking! 😀
Roger, I spat my drink all over my keyboard!
Hahahaha
Superb. Totally superb.
Take a bow that man!!
Nah, it’s the Illuminati.
I’m not anti Hamilton, he’s a great driver, has some issues, and will probably win a well earned Driver’s Championship. But you Hamfosi, you’re getting more and more paranoid; you guys should step back a little, get a grip, and read some of your own comments in a neutral way (if possible). You are starting to sound nuts and it’s getting pretty old. Man, give it a rest and enjoy a great F1 season.
My turn to poke the gruffalo then?
Not a lot of that made sense. Sabotage?? Not even Lewis has suggested that, and he’s been more than happy enough to blame everything else….
But to address your ‘facts’:
Time difference between compounds was around 1.8sec/lap new vs new. (Ask Kimi)
Durability was enormously different: softs ~18laps absolute maximum (ask Fernando) while the mediums were doing 30 with gradual deg and no obvious cliff (ask Lewis).
Therefore the two stop Hamilton strategy made sense at lap zero: run long for track position out of the back of the field. SC changed this and Mercedes failed to react. This is not an anti-Lewis agenda: the entire team failed to react and everyone in the team has acknowledged this is a structural problem (including Lewis). Nico lost out as well, and should have pitted earlier into his last stint once in Lewis’ air – but this wasn’t the pre-race plan either, so the proverbial hit the fan for both drivers. All because of inefficient (aka ‘shit’) team management.
I’m not even sure where to go with the last part, at least you made that out opinion. But pretty much anyone with any experience behind the wheel of an F1 car has acknowledged that Nico managed his race better in Canada and finished. While Lewis nearly crashed out thrice at the A1 making crafty moves… He didn’t. But hey… In my opinion 😉
softs ~18laps absolute maximum (ask Fernando)
…who did two stints of 29 and 32 laps on them !
He ran them too long though. Remember how easily Ricciardo just dispatched him from the lead. He made it work sort of, but he ran both sets very far past their sell-by dates.
Indeed – but they were clearly able to run long, which deals with the ‘primes were a better choice in case of rain’ argument.
Other than that, I agree with everything else cc wrote.
Yes but in the cooler temps the options still had better grip at the end than did the primes, according to Fred was the only reason he could keep Lewis at bay.
Indeed… if it was the other way around, I couldn’t see the Ferrari holding back the Mercedes..
…..If you’d like to write a proper article examining analysis including tyres, pit stop strategy, effects of traffic, SC car implications for race strategy, wet lines, dry lines, brembo or non brembo brakes, why and how teams employ split strategies, whether there is any politics involved, feel free…..
I’m days behind Matt, who did a pretty good job already –
http://thejudge13.com/2014/07/27/f1-race-review-red-bulls-ricciardo-pulls-a-rabbit-out-as-mercedes-miss-out-on-the-win/
– and have to get back to work this afternoon.
To sum up, though, you believe that Mercedes were acting reasonably in sending Hamilton out on the primes, and Hamilton unreasonably in not moving into the slow lane for Rosberg.
I believe more or less the opposite.
Neither of us think the other has made his case, so it’s probably sensible to leave it at that.
I still like the site, though.
🙂
….. me too 🙂 Have a good day
If and buts ….
1. ” … After all, Hamilton himself stated that he would be lucky to get in the Top 10 after his Mercedes consumed itself in flames. … ”
Yes, he said that, and he was proved right.
He was lucky to end up third – with the safety car breaking up the field as it did (i.e. losing Rosberg and Bottas a few places), and the two Force India cars dropping out, Mclaren cocking up their tyre strategy, Vettel spinning, and Rosberg being unable to overtake JEV or Hamilton.
2. ” … Team boss Toto Wolff and Rosberg agreed after the race that Hamilton’s defiance had cost Mercedes a race win. … ”
I think they said a possible win, not a certain win.
3. “… but whatever strategy was applied we would have finished in similar positions. …“
Yes, it seems Paddy Lowe knows Nico and Toto are bad losers, who are now whining because Lewis beat them on the track.
4. “… Wolff moaned about the effect the safety car had on the Silver Arrows race strategy. “Finishing in third or fourth position was perhaps the best we could hope for. … ”
So the pr*ck (Todger) Toto too seems to agree that second and first were out of reach for Nico. (His real full name IS Todger, isn’t it?)
5. “… After a disastrous qualifying mistake which lumbered him in a disappointing 17th position, his recovery drive to finish in 6th position in Hungary has revealed a happier Finn than has been seen this year to date. … ”
Kimi was lucky to end up 6th – with the safety car breaking up the field as it did (i.e. losing Rosberg and Bottas a few places), and the two Force India cars dropping out, and Mclaren cocking up their tyre strategy.
Kimi was lucky. Lewis earnt 3rd.
Same/same?
My turn to make no sense.
I meant: Kimi was lucky and happy, while Hami was lucky and disappointed. Same/same?
… I would in fact say no to your theory…
it is in fact…. same/Same 😉
Kimi was lucky and happy, because Ferrari were happy that they got more points than Williams.
Hami was lucky yet disappointed, because he couldn’t get past Alonso. And he thought he would have won if Toto had not vetoed a change to Lewis’s pit stop strategy to suit the race (instead of sticking to the original plan). Toto was thinking only about getting Rosberg to win, Todger didn’t give a toss where Lewis finished as long as he didn’t beat Nico.
….. Here’s one for the Hamfosi forensic investigation team…
There was a threat of rain, so given that scenario, Lewis had the preferential strategy….
Ooo – some 300 comments since the race, and this hasn’t been mentioned once?
Multiple Nico is sh^t and can’t overtake theories though…..
It was in the original article, though I removed it to see if the Hamfosi would opt for the….
“Toto shafts Hamilton/Merc inept strategy” theory..
…or something more plausible…
….like….
“here’s a reasonable line of thinking from a racing team trying to maximise their racing chances” ….. 😉
Ok…. so now I’m done with the Hamilton race ‘analysis’ debate…. time for something else chaps and Britney’s 🙂
There was a threat of rain, so given that scenario, Lewis had the preferential strategy….
That makes no sense.
Makes perfect sense to me. It might rain, get on the tyre you can run as long as possible with minimal deg and stay out as long as possible so you can change straight to inters.
If you are stuck with a strategy meaning shorter stints then you don’t have the ability to stretch the stints as much so have to pit even if you might have to come back in 2 or 3 laps later for inters.
Mercedes now reminds me a bit of Williams back in the early 90s. No ability to think once the race starts. Can’t respond to the circumstances. Can’t adapt. Just keep going with what they planned at the start and end up losing out.
They could have got Nico past Lewis simply by pitting him as soon as it was obvious Lewis wasn’t going to let him go. That way he would have lost much less time and had a better opportunity towards the end. They shouldn’t have needed to do that but Lewis proved he isn’t a team player so they will know for future.
Whether he should be a team player or not is the debate…
…. Interesting, though I think their mistake with Nico was not pitting him with 16 to go, instead of 14. I tweeted this opinion with 17-18 laps to go …. it’s still there on my timeline.
Of course, just one more lap and Britney would have blown past Hamilton and Alonso with a far better exit onto the final straight and DRS and miles more grip…..
There’s another way the article could have been written. “Mercedes favour Hamilton as the get Rosberg stint lengths wrong”
Not only did Lewis drive a mesmeric race, but the Rosberg charge with 10 laps to go was utterly thrilling too…
Bring it on Flavio – bet you can’t do any better than that race……
“Of course, just one more lap and Britney would have blown past Hamilton and Alonso with a far better exit onto the final straight and DRS and miles more grip…..”……..
That seems to be a common theme with Nico whenever he finds himself behind Lewis, always needing ‘one more lap’ despite being on the better tyres…Bahrain and Spain comes to mind. So is that why they asked Lewis to move over and let him past, because they know. he’d need ‘one more lap’? in this case he had 22 and still couldn’t do it.
I’m surely eating into my rations, so i will save some for when i’m feeling a bit more ravenous.
The Judge is replicating the worst bits of stories out there to imply that Lewis may be in trouble. He is a big boy, one of the most important drivers on the grid. He will survive & probably flourish in Merc or somewhere else.
He seemed to be the only strategic thinker within Mercedes in the Hungarian GP (he extended his 1st stint on mediums by a few laps when the team wanted him in & appreciated the impact of Nico being let through at the moment the team seemed clueless).
If strategy was flexible at Mercedes, this would have been the time to put Lewis on the softs & or three stops strategy & try for a win; but no, all minds including your ‘Prof’ Nico were frozen & not nimble to adapt to changing circumstances.
Struggling teams with resources wld have quietly noted the possible impact of Lewis in such changing circumstances & may hope to have him in their cars come end of his contract.
Someone you have branded weak in the mind may just be hard headed enough to win this year’s championship.
Still he rises
“He seemed to be the only strategic thinker within Mercedes in the Hungarian GP”…….. still laughing now
And here is a broadcast from the ‘None Hamfosi party’
…Lewis was pretty lucky not to end it all at turn 2 whilst racing his own shadow… which is why he thanked the Lord for saving him from his own ineptitiude…
Look folks – we can go on and on…..
…and yes I know, Lewis did in fact design the W05, and that’s why Ross Brawn left in a sulk – because it was his Meccano set….
Out of interest judge, put in the situation lewis was in on sunday (message to let nico past when he was 2 seconds behind), what would you have decided to do?
…exactly what Lewis, Nico and countless other number of team mates have done this year…..
run the split strategy 2/3 pit stops requires the 2 stopper to defer on track position when there is still one stop left for the 3 stopper…
The race is only a race between drivers running different 2/3 stop strategies when all the pit stops have played out….
Lewis didn’t have to be a strategic genius to realise if he ruined Rosberg’s second stint, he would improve his own chances….
No I mean if you were lewis, would you have yielded or ignored team orders?
Every driver in changeable conditions is lucky to finish, that comes with the territory! But that being the case there are moments in the race when a driver can be decisive & take chances. Lewis seems more willing to take chances & in the process has been appreciated by fans, you will not find this with Rosberg.
If Ricciardo keeps up with the kind of decisive moves he now tries, expect a firm following.
In this race (if you go by radio transmissions), Lewis’ calls turn out to be foresighted, yet they were made in the whirlwind of battle & your ‘Prof’ seemed overwhelmed.
Mercedes were unable to adapt strategy to circumstances as they evolved otherwise there was a possibility of a 1-2; with either Mercedes driver winning. Those of a purer form of conspiracy mindset may well suggest equalisation may have favoured Lewis with his better overtaking ability.
If you were balanced & did not obsess on a negative portrait of every thing Hamilton, you would realise what most teams see in him & wld still offer him one of the better contracts on the grid in case an opportunity arose.
“…Lewis was pretty lucky not to end it all at turn 2 whilst racing his own shadow… which is why he thanked the Lord for saving him from his own ineptitiude…” – The Judge
lol 😀
Happy it was you that said it and not me. I’d have had half the pro-Hamilfosi militia on the way to Australia as we speak had I done it.
Hah! I wonder if the AFP would have accepted me into some protection program off the back of imminent Hamilfosi danger.
And, Rosberg not lucky when he followed Magnussen off in qualifying? Or, got a second chance later in the session.
Hamilton was VERY lucky, I’ll grant you that. But, you make your own luck 😉
I agree Gonch re making your own luck. I was replying to Judge. It’s his comment. I merely found it amusing.
I wasn’t able to watch the race live, and was only able to check progress every few minutes on BBC F1 internet commentary.
This is how Coulthard and McNish reported the team order to Lewis:
LAP 50
Lewis Hamilton is still ahead of Nico Rosberg as they sit third and fourth. Fernando Alonso is looking mighty strong in second, with Daniel Ricciardo expected to pit from the lead. Alonso is unlikely to do the same.
Allan McNish, BBC Radio 5 live analyst
“Is it easy to listen to team instructions when you’re told not to hold up a team-mate? Yes it is. You do understand the radio conversation when team instructions come through. You don’t open the door and say: ‘After you.’ But at the same time, it’s a battle you don’t need to fight.
“It’s a battle Lewis Hamilton doesn’t need to fight. Having said that, he doesn’t want to lose time to Fernando Alonso.”
LAP 51
“Why is he not letting me through?” asks Nico Rosberg. The team then ask Lewis Hamilton to let Rosberg through on the straight.
The answer to that question should have been, “because this is racing, why not try and get closer for starters?”
David Coulthard, BBC F1 co-commentator
“I think that’s a tough call by the team there, in fact it’s an unfair call. There is a long way to go in this race and a lot can happen and these two are still racing each other. We are told Hamilton has said tell him to get closer and I will let him through, I am not just going to let him through.”
Allan McNish, BBC Radio 5 live analyst
“It’s fine waiting until a team-mate has slowly closed on you. There’s a different thing with a direct order saying let Nico past and he doesn’t do it.”
LAP 52
Lewis Hamilton is still ahead of Nico Rosberg. Why should Hamilton slow down? He needs to keep pace with Fernando Alonso if he wants to win this race. Rosberg needs to do a better job of getting closer to Hamilton. At the moment, he’s not even in DRS range.
Rosberg asks his team again: “Why is he not letting me through?”
Allan McNish, BBC Radio 5 live analyst
“There’s a frustration in Nico Rosberg’s voice. He knows he has to make one more stop. His race is now being compromised.”
David Coulthard, BBC F1 co-commentator
“I think Hamilton is doing what he should do, His exact words were I am not slowing down for Nico, which is right, why should he slow down when he is racing. Nico is just not doing enough, he has just gone wide there too, there is a bit of frustration coming into his driving.”
Allan McNish, BBC Radio 5 live analyst
“The problem for Rosberg is that when you are in that one-second range, you’re in dirty air from the car in front and you can’t get on the throttle, so you can’t stay close enough to overtake, so you do need a little help from your team-mate.”
Jennie Gow, BBC Radio 5 live pit-lane reporter
“Hamilton saying over team radio: ‘I’m not slowing down for Nico – if he gets closer he can overtake.”‘
If he’d not fought Nico and pushed the prime tyres harder than anyone else did at the start of similar stints, he would have had a net quicker stint on the prime tyre and passed Alonso – who had “zero” grip at the end….
After Lewis let Nico through, Nico may have cocked up somehow anyway/mechanical failure… Lewis cost himself a shot at 2nd….
Judge,
Actually Hamilton had a problem with top end speed by the end (revs over torque reccomended), so being sure what would have happened is a moot point. If not for that problem he might have got second anyway, and then maybe first (if he got Alonso before Ric got him). if not for the fire in qualifying he might have lapped the field. Who the hell knows?
And, you were right, this was pre-decided strategy to run them different, but when circumstances change, surely strategy should change? Again, if Ham had been moved to soft-soft, they could have had 1-2 (Ham/Ros). In short, your criticism of Hamilton seems to be, there was a 1-2 on offer, and because he qualified first, it should have gone to Rosberg.
I mean, by this logic, in Bahrain, Hamilton should not have fought Rosberg, and just let him past to ‘guarantee’ a 1-2. By fighting, they might have collided. Though, I always thought that was a risk when racing drivers raced.
Oh, Ricciardo overtook Hamilton in a slower car, on faster tyres. Rosberg had faster tyres. I know he was led to believe Hamilton would move over (though, we don’t know this for sure beforehand), but surely at some point Rosberg should have realised he wasn’t, and then stood up for himself and taken his place. I guess, one could say Rosberg did not want to compound Hamilton’s ‘egotistical’ behaviour with his own (or, in other words, would rather have the team engineer a win, rather than fight for it), or was looking at the long game in the championship (and not risk a collision). Fine. But, I do think it odd that someone in a comparable car with newer faster tires didn’t get close.
Maybe, the problem here was Rosberg engineer should have said “he ain’t moving, good luck”.
I can’t help but think unless things worked out perfectly, Hamilton was (is) damned if he does (looks weak, beaten by Rosberg) damned if he doesn’t (disobeys team orders).
Finally, on Malaysia ’13 equivalence (with Vettel). As far as I can tell, Red Bull had an agreement. After the stops, if 1-2 cars should hold station “multi 21”. Unless, Mercs agreement was “because you are on different strategies, regardless of the circumstances in the race, your strategy will never change, and you must always let your teammate through on a different strategy” there isn’t much equivalence.
This is much more like Massa and Alonso, than Vettel / Webber.
Another point, your snipe re: XIX. Slight problem with your logic. Andy Murray’s career improved after moving to XIX. And, unless it can be proven his lifestyle is affecting his performance, I believe what you have is post hoc ergo propter hoc.
“Actually Hamilton had a problem with top end speed by the end (revs over torque reccomended)”
Hi @The Gonch. That’s technically incorrect. The assumption that he had a top end speed problem based on having to rev higher is wrong.
Yes lewis was being asked to rev higher, past the beeps, and use the full rev range – then upshift. This is in relation to a technique called short shifting and keeping the gear/drive in the meaty bit of the torque range after each upshift, which helps off corners. It gives you more forward motion drive (hard to explain) and the ability to rotate a car on exit better. It takes much skill to do this. This extreme torque, if tractable, is a good way to power off corners and manipulate a car also. Something Kimi does too, but the Ferrari engine won’t allow.
The team were simply asking him not to do that. Lewis using the higher range of the RPM band would have had zero impact on top speed. He wasn’t compromised on HP and top end RPM. In fact, he might have been closer, or faster, in hitting the top speed point each time by stretching the lower gears and up changing later than normal. He would simply have lost his preferred throttle / car balance style off the slower bits.
Further more they said he was good on fuel and could go on full attack, therefore they said go past the bleep. Rev it up
Got it from the Autosport report:
“Hamilton, who did have some problems that slightly compromised his end-of-straight speed, couldn’t find a way past Alonso. This allowed the charging Ricciardo to close in and, with eight laps remaining, he had joined the battle”
This is not mutually exclusive with being safe on fuel and ignoring the beeps.
But, it all misses that if Hamilton was on the options, he would have been better off. That might be the way do it, and agreed by the drivers, but as was said on this blog, it’s pretty naïve from Merc.
The excerpt you put in from Autosport doesn’t make the connection between the engineers requirement that Lewis use higher revs and lack of or compromised top speed, as you suggested. I’m not having a go, but if he had top speed issues, it was something else. The call from the pitwall to use all the revs and less torque, to rev past the beeps, would have had zero impact on what Autosport reported. Just saying Gonch… He may have had top speed issues, but it wasn’t for that reason.
….. also less torque, less wheel spin….
Ok facetious nit-pickers!
But, he had an unforeseen problem, that’s my point! Bloody hell! 🙂
Could there be a clue as to why that was in his radio message to the team……
“hey guys, the left side of my seat is getting really hot, similar to Canada”…. A message that he later repeated
Could there have been a problem with the ECU or the battery overheating and as such, may have had some impact on engine performance?
(Disclaimer…..Just asking a question and not looking to cause any unecessary confrontation)
I think that is the main thing to take from this. Lewis would prefer to scupper his own chances if there is a chance of denying Nico any points.
If we were looking at a racing squad here – a McLaren or Williams – with such a massive championship lead then that isn’t such an issue.
However, Mercedes are much more corporate than any other F1 team. What Lewis did probably cost them a win. The points don’t matter to them, the ability to use a win as publicity does.
Whether it is fair or not, whether it is what a racer would have done or not doesn’t really matter as far as Mercedes is concerned. Their employee disobeyed an instruction which could well have given the team a win. He potentially cost himself points as well in the process. It was a selfish act which – in the circumstances – will not go down well with the ultimate paymasters at Mercedes.
Maybe this is why Nico has had a contract extension while Lewis is still ‘in discussions’ – Nico knows how to act for the benefit of the team when necessary.
This is absolutely fair enough. And I don’t care.
Unless we want to believe that in all circumstances because they pay your wages you should do what your boss says, the question comes down to whether it was a bad instruction and should have been resisted.
And, given the potential for Ham to win just as much as Rosberg, I think he was right, it was a stupid instruction.
There is no golden rule about whether he was right – as has been pointed out, it might have harmed his chances. But, it’s a 50/50 at best. If it was obvious it was not good for him to disobey, then I’d agree he should have done what they said. I don’t think it was at all obvious. Lauda thinks he was right.
This is why I think he was damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t. I doubt if he moved over and let Rosberg through, Rosberg would have thanked Lewis for helping him win afterwards!
Indeed, I think you are right, this might be why Rosberg got a contract extension. It’s also why I prefer Hamilton as a driver.
Having said all that, if someone wants to argue that in all cases you must do exactly what your employer wants, then, we’ll have to agree to disagree.
…. Mercedes did not believe Hamilton could win the race at his 2nd stop, and there is justification for this view so long as Ricciardo did what he did….. RB masterful strategy for Danny boy
You know this for sure because….?
Or, are you saying they should have thought of that?
…. it was a big ask for the soft tyre, given the data they had from the weekend – and given that the soft tyre first stints were run behind the safety car for a significant period of time – and then after the SC in less grippy conditions as the circuit dried….
And they didn’t believe it because they didn’t consider switching him to a 3 stop to cover Ricciardo even though he was lead driver and technically entitled to the strategy.
As you point out, given Mercedes issues with trying to ensure fairness this lack of ability isn’t entirely surprising and both Nico and Lewis are surely aware of it.
Beyond that they also could have covered Ricciardo with Rosberg or Hamilton. 16 laps on options didn’t seem like a far fetched possibility at that point in the race. Ricciardo was clearly going for the undercut and they simply didn’t react at all. It’s almost as if they stopped watching the race and were just staring at computer simulations.
The other thing that comes to mind is they seem to be weak with tyre predictions. They got the prime completely wrong at Silverstone and they seemed to be hopelessly off with both at Hungary as well.
And this is the thing, beyond the internal politics that interests me. I think it points to a weakness in their management/decision making process. Any time a situation gets outside the box they envision the race in, they do seem to have a bit of a struggle.
I agree…and it’s in these situations that the absence of Ross Brawn is is so noticeable..
+1,000 I completely agree. Toto might be more photogenic but TBH Mercedes is starting to look like they’ve reached the end of Brawn’s preparations and have just taped some bits on. It’s funny, because for all the fun of rooting for drivers etc., Brawn was my favorite. Not going to pretend he was pure as the driven snow, but I hope he comes back doing something that lets me root for him again.
…. Law suit pending… Ross refutes the IMPLICATION that his terminator-esque replacement is better looking than he is.
Further, he would argue Paddy Lowe is a descendant of from an unspecified middle earth species.
He does concede, Niki may be perceived by fans as beautiful due to his winning and self deprecating personality.
LOL! though for the record I did say *Photogenic* and not Better Looking. 😛
The implication (from the Judge) would be that Ross isn’t photogenic. 🙂 Can’t argue with that, if you asked me, but the pending lawsuit is going the other way, Judge..
But wait, I thought he inferred that implication…… So confused. 😀
According to a GMM report I read yesterday, Hamilton’s handlers want 90 mil euro for 3 years. That is seriously more money than a normally fast but compiant Nico. I repeat though, GMM.
I saw that as well… I am sure Mercedes can pay much less than that to buy Alonso out from Ferrari (and possibly get a better driver?)
Absurd.
The merc board of directors would never wave that through.
I guess now we will see how much they value the ‘marketing exposure’ that having Hamilton gives them, by what compromise the two sides come to. Their other option is take two ‘cheap but fast’ drivers and use the money to win with the best car…. No doubt in my mind that Bottas/Hulkenberg would match what the current two drivers have managed in the same car…
90 million for 3 years ? Bloody hell, that’s a greedy AND deluded bunch of managers he’s got at XIX. Can’t Hamilton just return to having his father manage him ? He’s got enough money to cover n generations with everything he’s got.
….. lol… you remind me of a saying Grand-pappy Judge used to repeat to me.
“Much wants more……. and the devil wants the lot”.
“I think that is the main thing to take from this. Lewis would prefer to scupper his own chances if there is a chance of denying Nico any points. ”
Say what? How do you get Lewis scuppering his own chances by not slowing down and letting Nico pass him? That’s a big charge to make, and I don’t agree at all.
Lap 50 (or maybe 51?), I tweet: “Mercedes losing the race here…”
I think I was proven correct on that one.
“…it will not have gone unnoticed in Germany that Mercedes as a brand comes second to Lewis Hamilton…”
That says it all and why Merc would prefer Rosberg to win the title. The only way for Merc to offer a big fat contract to Lewis and start favouring him (or as a minimum stay impartial) would be for Lewis to win the title and Merc to start selling more and seeing its image enhanced because of that (If it happens of course)
No, I think Mercedes would be happy for either driver to win the title. What they aren’t happy about is the way Lewis reduces their ability to generate positive PR from F1.
As I posted above, Mercedes gave the order they did to try and gain a win. Their PR machine could get much more from that than from a spat between the drivers. Come the end of the season they may also no longer be able to claim most wins in a season and certainly can’t claim highest winning percentage in a season.
Lewis doesn’t appear to have realised he is representing a large corporation rather than a racing team.
This is true, I think. Lewis doesn’t know he is representing a large mega-corporation, and not himself. And that sometimes his actions are more in his sporting interest, than the corporation.
Whereas Rosberg is more aware of his corporate responsibilities.
Hence, I prefer Lewis Hamilton. 🙂
What Lewis realises is that he wants to win the title and not end up another Massa/Barrichello/Webber for the ‘good’ of the team. Simple.
Agreed. I think this is what Coulthard keeps saying about him. Hamilton: heart in the right place…mouth so often not 🙂
Lewis really needs another title to go with his speed. Rosberg is a good fit for a 1x champion in a dominant car, as he’s only a tenth slower than Lewis on average, a bit like Button at his peak in that respect.
The most telling aspect is how Raikkonen, Alonso and Hamilton combined have 4 titles – the same as Vettel.. yet, they also have almost double the amount of wins combined as Vettel….
Alonso and Hamiton are in serious danger of ending up alongside Clark, Surtees and Senna in not having the amount of titles to go alongside their dominant speed.
Vettel has already almost ‘over-achieved’ and thus doesn’t actually need to win again before his retirement (and to have to, he would have to dominate Ricciardo, now a tough ask as they have been equal this year).
Vettel is 4th on the all time win list. Combined career totals of the three others is irrelevant especially when comparing them to a younger driver.
I agree that Alonso and Hamilton both have superior speed, but serious flaws hold both back. And that lies in their character.
True, although the win list is also skewed by how non-championship races were not counted, before the number of championship races increased to include all races in a season. This is why Fangio, Ascari, Moss and drivers from the 60s and 70s are much lower down in the win list…
I agree.. although they are both equal with or can slightly shade Vettel for speed/amount of seasons at peak speed, Vettel has really maximised the wins he could achieve in the 2011-13 stretch, when he was arguably at his peak speed and had the best package in two of those years (2012 was Hamilton/McLaren).
Vettel is much more a ‘complete’ driver than he is given credit for, and emulates Alonso in that respect. A few more ‘multi 21s’ and people might start to think that he can match Alonso’s cunning….
Although, I doubt that that will happen now, even if he is being beaten by Ricciardo. As I said, Vettel has ‘already achieved’.. he doesn’t need to underhandedly push to achieve more, at the cost of further reputation damage like Malaysia 2013.
So which do you think would be a bigger PR disaster for Mercedes…..
Lewis not moving over or Lewis moving over?……. Have you seen the reaction worldwide about that message? They’re already being condemned for issuing the message in the first place.Have you had a look at the teams official Facebook page and seen the amount of questions they have been inundated with about team orders?….
I’m sorry, but there was no way they could’ve spun this off in a positive way if Lewis had let Nico past. Simply because they themselves, stated publicly, “that there will be no teams orders issued to their drivers, that would only happen in the event they collide on the track, but until then, they are both free to race each other from flag to flag”. So to now publicly go against their modus operandi, is far more damaging than what Lewis did.
” Come the end of the season they may also no longer be able to claim most wins in a season and certainly can’t claim highest winning percentage in a season”….. I thought the goal they set for themselves, was to first win the WCC title? Or did they changed their mind midway through the season? But i’m quite sure that he’s fully aware that he’s representing a large coporation, given that he has been associated with them since he was 13 yrs old.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around one simple thing….if Nico who was in 4th had a chance to win, then shouldn’t Lewis also have had the same chance to win as well?……wouldn’t that be the fear thing to do?……
The safety car made it a level playing field, so there was no reason why Nico should have been given preferential treatment. It was the teams inability to adapt to a moving target that caused the problem and like Nikki and many others have said, they panicked and made it a bigger mess.
….. and the Williams ‘team order’ was the hot topic after the Massa/Bottas message in Malaysia – multi 21 was huge…..
By the way, the Massa/Bottas incident was completely different. Both drivers had completed their final stops and were racing to the end…….
Fair enough they are different situations. But given the magnitude of whats at stake, any driver worth their weight in salt, would’ve done the same thing, even SIS. Yes its a team sport, but sometimes you’ve got to be selfish and put your needs before the team.
…. I understand….
But I can’t think of another recent example – even where a team has a number one driver (or rookie who defers) – where the 2 stopper has blocked the 3 stopper PRIOR to the 3 stopper’s last stop… and for some 12 odd laps – that is what makes this significant.
Some crafty radio silence has happened – though for for a couple of laps
Though clearly the WDC title is reason for a driver to make this unusual decision…
I did say in the article had Rosberg known this was a change in the rules of the game he would have attempted a two stop too – as he had track position…. and would similarly abandon the team’s best strategy, for one of his own…
“But I can’t think of another recent example – even where a team has a number one driver (or rookie who defers) – where the 2 stopper has blocked the 3 stopper PRIOR to the 3 stopper’s last stop… and for some 12 odd laps – that is what makes this significant.”
I remain unconvinced, Judge. In any of the examples that you can think of, has the 3-stopper been slower than the 2-stopper at the relevant stage of the race (notwithstanding if Hamilton pushed or not)?
I believe that had Rosberg showed the speed and made passing moves for 1-2 laps, Hamilton would have conceded without much of a fight. But for good or bad reasons Rosberg was slower than Hamilton at that stage of the race, and in this sense Hamilton did NOT disobey the team order. It was Rosberg’s responsibility to show the speed when it mattered, but he didn’t; and NOT Hamilton’s responsibility to slow down (or fail to accelerate, depending on your world-view).
(And, for the fun of it, in any of those examples were the two drivers locked into exclusively in a WDC battle with the WCC all but sealed? And for more fun, how would you think Kimi would have acted if he were in Lewis’ position at the Merc; still remember the “Get the f*ck out of the way” from last year’s Lotus?)
….didn’t Kimi oblige?
Well, that’s.. one way to put it. 🙂
Another way would be that he silently radioed “F*ck off”, almost collected Grosjean who was faster and attempting to pass him (from memory, at the end of the straight in India), at around that time came the “Get the f*ck out of the way” which Kimi didn’t comprehend for several more corners, until he was converted to the belief that he had absolutely no tires left (or not, but with Kimi we’ll never know), and it was still up to Grosjean to forcefully pass him. From memory, he didn’t really oblige, no.
Can’t really find a full video of the incident, but here’s what I could dig:
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9gqNHQBiTw&w=420&h=315%5D
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9kN0f6UdlE&w=420&h=315%5D
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jkjG5CiteM&w=420&h=315%5D
Judge, are you suggesting that this is the manner in which Lewis should have let Nico past? 🙂 (Instead of collecting him, Lewis just pushed the accelerator and went faster; you can’t blame the guy for this, can you?)
Nico isn’t as popular in Germany as Michael was. From the PR point of view a hamilton win would be preferrable. Just look at the rabid crowd in here. How many Rosberg fans do you see?
Could it be, just maybe, that they actually want the race wins first and foremost and who wins is secondary? For all your blind support of HM, people like PK and Fortis have not a lot of confidence in their star if they make up reasons why he didn’t win with the season barely half-way over
“Just look at the rabid crowd in here. How many Rosberg fans do you see?”
If you don’t hear them doesn’t mean that they are not there. My theory is that fans tend to behave like their stars, so Hamilton fans make more noise than Rosberg fans.
….. Made me chuckle Hedgehog…
just out of interest as we’ve not had a declared Nico Supporter’s view, do you feel Nico was wronged this weekend?
Way too many armchair experts here that think that because they don’t like Hamilton that somehow he is of no marking value.
Totally ignoring his world marketability ranking. Totally ignoring that Hugo Boss is dumping McLaren at the end of their current contract to follow Lewis to Mercedes.
In my opinion McLaren is the real story. How did this team lose it’s cool factor so completely over the years. And now getting in bed with Honda, a car company for old people.
Imagine if this was the ’70s, seeing Button in his McLaren golf hat and polyester pants pulling up to the track in a Honda Accord while Gilles Villeneuve crash lands nearby, his helicopter out of fuel, and James Hunt stumbles around the corner without a shirt or shoes on.
While I agree with you re Hamilton’s marketing value (TJ13 ran a story a couple of months ago that had Hamilton on top) I don’t know where you get the “Boss following Lewis to Mercedes” from.
Have you got hard facts to prove this? Has Boss not been a sponsor of McLaren way before Hamilton arrived?
“Team boss Toto Wolff and Rosberg agreed after the race that Hamilton’s defiance had cost Mercedes a race win”……..
So yet again you fabricate a story line to suit your opinion. That’s not actually what Toto said…..
“Wolff: Nico could have won”
““It is a difficult situation now and as a team we have to learn how the season pans out now, because if Lewis had let Nico go then Nico could have won the race with a different strategy,” Wolff told reporters.”……
Lewis also could’ve won the race with a different strategy or was the sole focus only on Nico?
Clearly Toto wasn’t too sure himself that they could’ve won the race.
So which is it, was Nico guaranteed the win if he had past or COULD he have won it?
Did he cost Mercedes a win, or did he cost Nico a win, which yet again, based on Toto’s comments was only a possibility with a “different strategy”…..
He was already on a 3 stop strategy, what other strategy could there have been, given he was already on the optimum race winning strategy?
Toto’s quote was that Lewis cost Nico a CHANCE to win. If you’re a Hamilton fan, you’ll read this as Merc favouring Nico to win the race. If you try to see this from a corporate/team perspective, you’ll read this as Merc/Toto believing that Nico’s chance had higher probability of success than Lewis’ chance.
But irrespective of all that, very often impressions and perceptions are formed over a series of races, and the current perception is that Toto wants Nico to win the title.
I’d say Nico had a better chance. Both pitted after the first SC so you can pretty much draw a line under the race before that point. Nico was in front of Lewis at that point and was only behind him at the end as he was on a strategy that relied on him getting or being let past Lewis during the race.
The only thing we can’t tell is whether Lewis would have got past JeV quicker than Nico did.
What you can’t argue is that Nico lost more time behind Lewis than he was behind Ricciardo at the end of the race. Whether he could have done something with that we don’t know.
If Lewis had been put on the same strategy as Nico after the first SC then he would have had to pass Nico to win.
A win wasn’t guaranteed for either of them as they needed to work through other cars, but Nico was in the better position and would certainly have finished higher then Lewis did in the end.
…. indeed, a 2/3 was very probable, though Rosberg would have been second and Hamilton 3rd…. I did say Hamilton did the right thing for himself in the article….
You did, fair enough.
Actually, what this all comes down to is a uniqueness of F1 as a team sport. In most other team sports, following the interest of the team helps you win.
But, as we saw here, helping yourself might be in contravention of what the team wants.
Or, you could be right and he might have helped himself more by doing what the team wants. I dunno! If he has soured relations with Merc, then he has probably not helped himself. But, for all he knew, if Rosberg won / finished ahead, they might decided to support Ros anyway. It’s impossible to know what Rosberg would have done in the same situation. I can guess 😉
But this is where your idea is flawed….
If they had switched Lewis to 3 stop strategy, he would’ve come out ahead of Nico on his 3rd and final stop. Lets not forget, when Nico stopped for the 3rd time, he came back out in traffic behind Kimi & Massa, Lewis already had a gap big enough, that he would’ve been able to pit and still come back out in 3rd.
“The only thing we can’t tell is whether Lewis would have got past JeV quicker than Nico did”…….
But that question was answered, Nico spent 18 laps behind JeV, Lewis 2. JeV was the who held up Nico, Seb and Lewis. Had Nico been able to dispatch of him quickly or not aloowed himself to be past by both JeV and Alonso, then he would’ve walked to the win. So he has some part to play in this whole fiasco and should not be looked at just being ‘unlucky’, sometimes you’ve got to mke your own luck, you cn’t always expect others to just move out of the way and let you pass.
Sticking to the orginal strategy after the safety car is what brought on this mess.
Is that 4 or 5 of my daily rations i’ve used up?
Impossible to tell if Lewis would have come out ahead of Nico – most likely not as Nico wouldn’t have been impeded so would have been further up the road. Nico was ahead up until their strategies diverged so it would be probable he would still be ahead. Impossible to tell though as they didn’t both do 3 stops.
Consider also that as Nico was ahead he would have had first choice on when to stop first which would have had an effect on where they ended up on track.
The question re JeV isn’t answered at all. JeV was defending like mad for 18 laps. Once Nico got past him his tyres would have been shot leaving him easy meat for Lewis. Indeed, the fact Nico was on what should have been the better tyre for overtaking might even have meant Lewis would have been stuck behind him longer.
Certainly agree with you that the strategy was no longer optimal for Nico after the SC. Lewis was probably lucky that his pre-ordained strategy was actually better for him – in terms of being able to finish ahead of his title rival.
While “stuck” behind Lewis, Nico also gained 5 seconds on the leader. Just FYI. Contra, he lost over 5 seconds behind JEV, as did Lewis and Vettel since they were “stuck” behind Rosberg. The numbers are quite interesting and I suggest you go have a look see at the charts etc., over on the FIA site
There are times Fortis when your input is considered and welcome. Lately your blind support of Hamilton has become aggressive to anybody who supplies an opinion which is counter to yours.
Rather than respond in a blind rage and attack the site for manipulating words to supply an opinion look at the title of the section you quoted. Beside the bold script is three letters within two brackets, in the event you missed this, it reads GMM. Calm down man/ woman/ child – I know not which, stop attacking every non lover of all things Hammy.
Personally I’m a Ferrari fan, but when do you see me defending them to the death. Ultimately your opinion is as valid as mine but opinions are like arseholes, everyone’s got one!!
Sorry, but how exactly have I attacked anyone today? I gave my opinion by being reasonable and calm. I have not belittled or ridiculed anyone in any of my post. In case you’re not aware, the judge has placed me on probation for being a very troublesome lad and he’s reviewing all my comments, to see that there is no hint of malice, rudeness or abusive language used. Now if you’re able to view any of my comments, then that means I’ve been a very good lad and I passed the litmus test.
Now I’m not familiar with GMM, (I don’t speak German). But I’ll ask the question and I’d hope you’d offer me an answer…..”is there some reason why I should be aware of any story that comes from GMM? I’m asking a legitimate question here, because if it’s not a reputable publication, then why is the judge referring to articles it publishes?
Fortis, GMM is not German, it is merely an author of articles collected from around the world. Many commentators on this site don’t like them but to quote you:
“So yet again you fabricate a story line to suit your opinion. That’s not actually what Toto said…..”
I was merely making the point that the author was not TJ13.
As to suggesting about your use of language, it wasn’t for today but histprically every body knows if theres a story about Hamilton published, almost every other comment will be yours defending a global star that you don’t know and that doesn’t care what the public thinks.
It’s your God-given right to freedom of speech, something that many countries around the world do not encourage. but as you have that right, so does everybody else.
My comment was more because of how you react historically rather than anything you have said today but I thought you may appreciate the background behind who writes what etc
Because, Fortis, The Judge is not allowed to change anything in a GMM article. He has to publish it as written. That means, to we who understand this, that sometimes the article will be misleading or wrong, but The Judge cannot edit it. That is why some of us are in favor of dropping the GMM content.
….however, GMM pieces which are mostly translations of stories from none English sources are time consuming for TJ13 – and so this gives the news to the TJ13 readers – but come with a caution…..
I hoped for peace and reason to prevail in the site for longer. Maybe one day in the detention room wasn’t enough.
There are a lot of miss-quotes or partial quotes today. I listened to the audio of that Villeneuve interview today and reading it here later it’s interesting to see how it has been characterized.
Re: Raikkonen
His emergence is perfectly timed with Spa, a track he likes. Perhaps we’ll see two Fins keeping the Merc’s honest in the event they don’t want to win another race. Perhaps it’s wishful thinking…
Re: Villeneuve
When you are getting support from this guy, you know you are on the wrong track.
Re: Ecclestone / Briatore
This is interesting. It smacks of BE feeling isolated and wanting to bring in an ally. The fact that it’s Briatore means his ally pool is diminishing. He’d never have truly considered bringing back the scum bag Puppeteer of Singapore 08 when he was strong. I wonder also if impending jail time and an attempt to keep control is connected with Briatore being touted to return.
“It smacks of BE feeling isolated ”
If you asked me, Bernard seems as if he is living the dying moments of his dictatorship, when he doesn’t have enough power to stay on but still has sufficient power to throw some sh^t around. That’s how I see his on-screen flash in Austria (from memory) “Bernie thanks Mateschitz”, as well as the recent “Bernie says: Think before you bribe” (oops, I meant “drive”), as well as him pulling Briatore out of the bag..
If we’re lucky, the man is going down..
I guess it depends on whether BayernLB accepts 23m Euros or not.. they might as well, what else can they get out of the case?
Interesting perspective…
I hope we are indeed lucky!
RE JV I suggest everyone has a damn good look at his Multi21 comments, because he’s along with several other well known F1 people have successfully shown that their opinions differ depending on the driver involved. As such I took some delight tweeting this back to JV Yesterday:
“The team give you the contract and pay you money and so you do what they want you to do. It’s very simple”
Yep that’s right JV. Good show. A different opinion on team orders depending on his personal driver preference. During Multi 21 he even went on about how the infamous Villeneuve and Pironi incident angered Gilles to the point where he thought it contributed to his accident.
Why can’t these people stand by their quotes I must ask?! They just look like utterly biased buffoons by slating one driver for ignoring team orders and support another for doing so. My list of ex drivers who thought M21 was wrong but HUN was ok stands at:
JV
Brundle
Herbert
Most of the British F1 Press, Eason, Allen, etc.
Hill (possibly – he was a little more reserved)
The list of people who thought Vettel was right and Lewis right?
Niki Lauda
David Coulthard
Me (Gotta love a driver who doesn’t give a damn and goes for it, although I do admit that Lewis cost the team a chance at winning the race with two cars.)
…as always, blazing our own trail – TJ13 appears to singularly suggest Vettel was wrong as was Lewis…
#Consistancy
There we go Hamfosi, it was nothing personal 😉
So is it out of consistency that you seem to imply (at least from what I inferred) that Kimi’s reaction to the team order in India 2013—the politically astute “Get the f*ck out of the way”—was.. ahem.. appropriate. After all, Kimi obliged, did he not? 🙂
….my view of that was that Alan Permane was unnecessarily rude and inappropriate with his intervention….
…it was also inevitable Grosjean would sweep past him, but the team were concerned Kimi with less grip may lose control and take him out
– or maybe they thought Kimi would just take him out because they hadn’t paid him all year 😉
Oh, I definitely agree on rudeness (no matter how hilarious), but they became rude for the simple reason that Kimi wasn’t following orders in the first place. Repeatedly. And up until the end he didn’t, not really. Lest we forget the charging Ferrari closing in from behind, and Kimi was putting Lotus’ positions in serious (and immediate) jeopardy. As far as I’m concerned, Kimi is guilty of a more heinous crime in this case (than Lewis in Hungary), and I’m surprised that you are somewhat trying to present excuses for his behavior..
Hmmmmm….. Thinking Toto said they gave up a win because that’s what the strategist said, but Rosberg looked highly unconvincing being unable to get past JEV. I seriously doubt he could have gotten past Ricciardo. In any event, Mercedes failed to cover him with either driver and that is why the race win slipped away, had nothing to do with Hamilton or Rosberg.
As far as Briatore, I can’t believe for a second his name is back in the mix. I think desperate can’t even begin to encompass BE’s isolation if he’s looking to Flave to help him out. Hopefully the lot of them get the toss before they can do any more damage to the sport.
Based on his performance, I don’t think Rosberg really deserved the win. He expected the pole and strategy preference would hand him the win on the plate, even after changeable conditions. Hamilton looked hungrier, Alonso looked determined, Ricciardo looked like a cougar, and that’s why the deserved the podiums they got.
The thing that confuses me about Flav is not why he’s back in the sport, but how in the name of god he pulled all those sensational women.
Head like a shot turnip, face like a mile of bad road, belly like Jockey Wilson, hair like the Dulux dog.
Seriously, does he carry around a bank account statement with him everywhere??
What is wrong with the world. Apparently if you’ve broken the law you can just throw some money at someone and it’s all forgiven. Just when we all had our hopes up of waving cheerio to Bernie, he attempts to bribe a judge?? How can he get away with this?? Amazing
Such a deal is legal as per German law, but AFAIK it would be an implicit admission of guilt. Why else would they pay BayernLB Millions instead of waiting to be acquitted.
Unless he gets a full acquittal, I doubt Mercs corporate compliance rules allow to take part in F1 if E. returns full-time.
I’m sure that the deal would be clear on “no admission of guilt”. However, I think you’re completely right that such a deal would imply at least some guilt – I can’t imagine any real life scenario where a payment of 23 million Euros would be paid if the accused was 100% innocent.
Then again, I’m not sure that Bernie has been acquainted with “real life” for years….
Presumably there are other examples of this kind of “payoff to halt a trial” deal in Germany – what’s been the legacy in terms of “presumed” guilt or innocence and any impact on employment or whatever? Would be great to hear if you can think of any.
In Ireland an airline leasing firm executive sexually assaulted a woman.
He got 6 years, with 5.5 suspended on the basis he donated 75k to the woman.
The DA appealed the judges decision.
The world (of law) has gone mad….
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/anthony-lyons-will-always-be-notorious-appeal-court-told-1.1814079
In the States there is a plea in criminal cases called the Alford Plea; it is not a guilty plea; the defendant pleads innocent but admits the evidence would convict so accepts the sentence. I guess it makes people feel better because they can claim the are still innocent. Possibly Germany has a similar plea. Fat Hippo? In any case, long past time Bernie was gone.
In a lot of places, enough money always seems to ‘change how things work’..
Enough money works everywhere, literally. Well, maybe not with the Joker (the one from the Dark Knight for instance).
Lots of talk on why Rosberg received his contract before Hamilton. Here are the 10 reasons IMHO.
1. Rosberg is driving an incredible season when very few thought that he would be giving Lewis the fight that he has in leading the Championship. It hard to argue that any other driver other than perhaps, Alonso, would have given Lewis a better fight.
2. Rosberg has been there from the re-start of MB team and has proven to be a low maintenance and loyal member of the team.
3. Rosberg’s contract is up and there is still a year left to go on Hamilton’s deal.
4. Lewis is asking for 90 million Euros. This is not chump change, even for Mercedes. If it isn’t a slap in the face that MB waited this long to do Nico’s deal it certainly would be one not doing it before LH.
5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Nico is driving superbly.
The German Conspiracy
Does MB want to win the race? Of course. However any talk that they prefer a German to win over Lewis is simply fantasy, again IMHO. I simply don’t know if all this talk has roots in the sore feelings left behind from the 40’s (I jest, I jest) but the fact of the matter is that Lewis is the single most followed driver in F1. More so than Alonso and extremely more than Vettel, the other driver’s that people would put into the top tier of talent at the start of the season. Logic would then dictate that if PR and marketing reasons were solely for wanting Race wins, the team would favour Lewis and not Nico as they would be able to “amplify” their brand by providing the most popular driver a winning car. For the Hamilfosi, it matters not whether he whines “woe is me”, ignored a suggestion from the team to let by a great but grossly under appreciated driver in Rosberg or provided any other trivial drama to the proceedings. Conversely, it would not behoove the German mark to be seen doing anything that would be construed as against Hamilton either, again, in the eyes of the casual but Lewis loving fan. If Mercedes really wanted a German to win, it would have been a better strategy to have simply hired Crashtor as their other driver since at the very least, he would have brought enough money into the team to pay for the cars that he would surely have destroyed during the race year.
The Italian Stallion Marketing Consultant
Why is Bernie turning to Flavio to help “spice up” the competition and appeal of F1? Could it be that Bernie is feeling the heat from the teams and specifically Mercedes that he needs help on the marketing end and that he is turning to a associate that he knows will be loyal to him? Restoring Flavio back into the family would surely be the epitome of scratching ones back or at the very least give Bernie some assurance that his will not be stabbed.
Regarding “All we need is heroes”, I will cheer for McLaren no matter what and also hope for some drivers who do not race for them to do well. For exmaple, this season I’m rooting for McLaren but I’d also like to see Hamilton WDC and the Williams pair plus Raikkonen to have strong results.
…interesting, you’ve given me an idea for a poll – so you are a McLaren fan, but cheer for other teams and drivers…
I think with the exception of a large number of Hamilton fans, this is normative – could be wrong though….
A bit like golf…. rather than football
Just to make it more confusing, I’m brazilian but rooted very strongly against him in 2008 because he was at Ferrari (who I dislike) going against both McLaren and Hamilton. Yet in 2009 both McLaren and Ferrari struggled so badly I was happy with his form up until Hungaroring. So basically there is very very little patriotism in how I support drivers from one season to the next.
And Barrichello was such a moping cry baby I could never become too fond with/about him.
What about golf? I have no idea it works.
Here here to cheering for McLaren (and for Hamilton) but hoping other drivers – teams, for that matter, too – do well! Hamilton, yes. Alosno, yes. Ricciardo, yes. Hulkenberg, yes… and I root for Kimi because he’s such an iconoclast! And here’s to hoping Ferrari gets it together, and Force India, errr, SAHARA Force India (lol) can gain more traction and become competitive race to race!
I wonder if Rubrata Roy in his New Dehli cell, came to contemplate the irony that SAHARA is best known as one of the most barren and desolate places on earth…