Just last weekend, Lewis Hamilton looked set for another podium finish, this time at the United States Grand Prix in Austin. The seven-time world champion had proved his mettle on the track, finishing second just behind Max Verstappen.
The result promised to add a 197th podium finish to his already illustrious career. But what should have been a moment of triumph soon turned into a cloud of controversy. In the hours following the race, both Hamilton’s Mercedes and Charles Leclerc’s Ferrari were disqualified for non-compliance.
Hamilton a “marketing sell out” not a diversity campaigner
A system under scrutiny
In a candid interview with Sky Sports, a still bitter Hamilton expressed his displeasure with the decision, citing what he sees as inconsistencies in the regulatory system.
“This is the first time we have had a sprint race here. They only tested a few cars and 50% of them were disqualified. There are a lot of other cars that were illegal,” said Hamilton.
His comments highlight a wider issue of perceived unfairness in the way F1 rules are enforced.
“I’ve been driving here for 16 years. There have been many scenarios where some get away with things and others are just unlucky to have their car checked,” Hamilton noted, advocating a more comprehensive and transparent structure to ensure fairness across the board.
Focus on Mexico
The British driver has since turned his attention to the upcoming Mexican Grand Prix, but the sting of last weekend’s events is clearly not forgotten. According to Hamilton, the car he will be driving in Mexico is very different to the one that was disqualified in Austin.
“The car was completely different to the one in Austin a week ago and we need to understand why,” Hamilton revealed in comments reported by F1Only after the first two free practice sessions in Mexico.
F1 paddock reveals details of Horner/Marko “bust up”
Hamilton’s disqualification in Austin adds another layer of intrigue to an already turbulent season in Formula One, certainly behind Max Verstappen. As the drivers prepare for the Mexican Grand Prix, questions of fairness and compliance continue to hang in the air.
For Hamilton, who has long been a dominant force in the sport, the incident is a stark reminder that even the most seasoned veterans are not immune to the complexities and inconsistencies of Formula One regulations.
As the engines rev up in Mexico, all eyes will be on Lewis Hamilton. The seven-time world champion finds himself in the unusual position of not only trying to fight for victory on the track but also facing questions about the fairness of the sport he has dominated for so long.
Whatever the outcome, this chapter in Hamilton’s career is sure to fuel the ongoing debate about the governance and integrity of Formula One.
READ MORE: Perez’s father reveals new perspective on Verstappen’s relationship with Sergio
MORE F1 NEWS: Bizarre claim from Toto Wolff
The FIA has had a relatively quite season this year in terms of controversial decisions. In terms of uproar, nothing quite compares with the Michael Massi adjudication in 2021 at the final event of the year when he forced a final lap shootout between Hamilton and Verstappen.
Yet last time out in Austin, both Jewish Hamilton and Charles Leclerc were disqualified from their finishing positions in the Grand Prix because their cars did not have…READ MORE ON THIS STORY
Funny, it really starts to become clear that Hamilton is not the sharpest tool in the shed.
So many times we hear him ask questions over the radio that show he has no idea what’s happening around him or that make clear he does not really grasps what is discussed in the team before the start.
“What place am I?”, “Where is Max?”, “Why do I have red tires (at the start so he should’ve discussed/known) … the list is endless.
And now… “I don’t understand why he car was so different in Austin? “…
Maybe because you used an illegal low ride height Lewis? Which gives you lots of downforce..?
If you start paying attention to what he says with this in mind… you will understand what I mean.
Sharpest tool? Perhaps you should consider your own comments in that regard. Clues might be ride height was not illegal. Wear on the plank was marginally over limit and would not materially affect performance. Rhetorical questions are just that… understanding that a person is posing a rhetorical question may not be obvious to some people.
Well… of course you can talk it all down, ‘marginally’ and ‘ not materially… but that’s just because it suits your cognitive dissonance.
Fact: the plank was over the limit in wear.
Fact: this was caused by a too low ride height for this bumpy circuit.
Fact: even the smallest lowering of the car has a positive effect on the amount of downforce.
And yes you’re right, the ride hide itself was not illegal, only the wear it caused to the plank was.
Duckey, I also mentioned this in an earlier article on this subject. I find it remarkable that you immediately accuse LH of deliberately cheating and then leave Leclerc completely out of the picture.
Both were disqualified for the same reason.
It is the result of an incorrect estimate of the ride height. Which had already been fixed on Friday by parc fermee rules.
Your aversion to LH is now very much highlighted in your responses here.
You don’t have to praise LH, but you shouldn’t burn him down either because LH is LH.
Hi Dre, I never accused LH of doing this deliberately. Read more carefull please. What I say is that I noticed that LH very often asks a bit stupid questions. Things he should know if he paid any interest to what happens on track and in his team.
No need for personal attacks all the FIA need to do is check the top ten cars that score points which means money the rest are immaterial.
Absolutely right, Duckey!
Sanction rules are fine – unless applied to him/his car, and then it calls for change. Maybe if his car was “illegal”, his team mate’s car was also … so Mercedes should consider themselves fortunate? (Same goes for Ferrari/leClerc, of course)
But it’s never HIS fault, is it?
How is plank wear Hamilton’s fault? Does he design or maintain the cars? Never his fault? Did he not recently admit that he caused the collision with Russel because he misjudged how much room he required. The collision was very similar to Perez’s accident… as you turn into a corner it is difficult to judge when the car inside you has another car inside them.
Trolling of Lewis Hamilton is a popular pastime on social media… the real reasons are so very obvious.
It is a bit unfortunate that potentially some drivers may have been elevated to higher positions with cars that were also illegal. The problem is that there is little time to inspect a large number of cars before they are packed for shipping to the next venue. It is one of those things that you hope will even out over the course of a season. Random sampling is not likely to change.
Yes. True. In all sports it is common to test the podium finishers and a few random from the rest. Dis could do that too. Nrs 1, 2 and 3 by default and 1 more random from rest of field. If plenty time you could even say that the teammate of every car in fault, would be tested too
You should consider writing articles for the “Judge”… your spelling and grammar would fit right in 😉
I agree the testing is a bit off. The FIA “randomly” checked the cars of LH and CL due to the tech data they had (how that is random i have no idea). They then “randomly” selected 2 more cars which was used to check their data was correct.
So going on this satatment by the FIA one could assume that this data they get can show plank wear… realy?
But I cant help but note LH comments on “lots of other teams are illegal” really LH? If this is the case where is your proof? Or you crying wolf (no pun intended) and i was suprised that nobody (reportrs etc) asked LH for his proof.
But yes i do agree the FIA should do full checks on point scores and then a true ramdom tests on the rest of the finishes.
Gary Anderson recently described the inspection procedure on the race tech f1 podcast