The end is near
Yas Marina 2017
Abu Dhabi Grand Prix
F1 team orders in Hungary: A question of honour, or a deal not clearly defined?
News
Valtteri Bottas, Lewis Hamilton
Posted By: James Allen  |  30 Jul 2017   |  4:02 pm GMT  |  447 comments

“It is tough for the championship but I’m a man of my word,” said Lewis Hamilton after finishing fourth in the Hungarian Grand Prix, giving up three points in the process to his championship rival Sebastian Vettel, who won the race.

I find the contrast between the way Ferrari and Mercedes go racing really fascinating and I wish, for the sake of the F1 ‘story’ that they were more open about it.

Bottas, Hamilton

One for all
Under Toto Wolff, Mercedes goes racing with emotion, but also has a clear “team-first” policy, where they will act in the team’s interests, not the individual driver’s.

They are used to it now after three years of Rosberg and Hamilton and both current Mercedes drivers have a chance still in the championship, so they ensured that a deal proposed to Valtteri Bottas during the race by Hamilton, was honoured.

After being without team radio during a crucial phase of the race, Hamilton asked for the chance to be let through by his team mate to challenge Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen. He said he would give the place back if he was unsuccessful.

But after agreeing, Bottas then struggled on the soft tyres and with lapping backmarkers and fell a long way behind when the end of the race came. Worse still Max Verstappen, on much fresher tyres, was closing fast on Bottas, so there was some real risk to trying the switch at the end.

Bottas, Hamilton

The basic deal proposed is something Mercedes has done before and it is the correct way to handle situations like this, it’s how you avoid conflicts like Force India had in Canada, for example.

Toto Wolff accepted after the race that they could look naive at the end of the season if Hamilton loses the title by three points, but his view is that the values behind the decision and the deal, were the same values that has won them the last three world titles, so today was the flipside.

However in this situation, there may have been another way to approach it.

With Bottas clearly struggling for pace, and Hamilton now 14 points behind Vettel, rather than 11, one wonders whether there should have been a condition applied for Bottas that he had to stay within a certain number of seconds of Hamilton to get the place back.

It was in the team’s interests to let their faster driver on the day have a crack at Ferrari. On soft tyres today, that was clearly Hamilton.

Vettel, Raikkonen

All for one

At Ferrari, things are different. They are all about winning the drivers’ championship.

Today, they knew about the Mercedes deal, so that meant that from their point of view they just needed to tough it out with Raikkonen in second place, blocking Hamilton and protecting Vettel, who was nursing a handing problem on the lead car. Hamilton would give Vettel a bonus three points at the end as a bonus. And as the Mercedes long wheel base is likely to be stronger in Spa, as it was at Silverstone, it was important to bag the points.

“We have the best car,” said Vettel after the race. ‘We have done the biggest jump of all the teams and a lot of teams are playing copycat.”

He had the steering pulling down to the left from the start of the race and was told to keep the car off the kerbs, which is not the fastest way at Hungaroring. It was a brilliant drive by Vettel under the circumstances, but without Raikkonen as a tail gunner he would have been stuffed.

As we have seen several times, Ferrari priorises the lead guy and his quest for the drivers’ championship; today was perhaps the most graphic example for some time. But they are less explicit about it than Mercedes are about prioritising the team’s outcome.

In this situation today, they did the right thing. They had made their plan; it was a brave call to hold station as Hamilton closed up. The risk was if Raikkonen made a mistake, then Hamilton would have got past and then attacked Vettel and the win would have been very vulnerable.

It was also noticeable today again that the Ferrari is more easily able to follow the car in front without overheating the tyres and engine, than its rivals. This will be useful for them at other races to come in the second part of the season.

Vettel Hungary 2017

Raikkonen knows the Ferrari way and accepts his role, which is a bit of a shame for a great racing driver and a world champion. But he collects the cheque and gets the company car and knows the rules.

In all likelihood he will sign on for another year of this, while Ferrari prepares Charles Leclerc to replace him.

And if Vettel wins the title this season it will have been worth it. Even though that is still a big “if”.

What did you think of the way both Mercedes and Ferrari went racing today? Leave your comments below

Featured News
Editor's Picks
Share This:
Posted by:
Category:

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry, you must be logged in to post a comment.

447 comments

by Oldest
by Best by Newest by Oldest
1

Vettel beat everyone fair and square in a broken car. Why are people screaming for teamorders PRO Kimi? He lost in Q3 and at the start.

"The risk was if Raikkonen made a mistake, then Hamilton would have got past and then attacked Vettel and the win would have been very vulnerable."
The risk is ALWAYS there. Kimi in P1 could have also made a mistake with a Hamilton behind. What kind of logic is this?

Hamilton was only nice to Bottas today because he knows he needs all the help he can get, even though he has by far the fastest car out there.

2

The Mercedes was in no way the fastest car round the Hungaroring this weekend. It's an oddball circuit that shakes up the order - that's a big part of why McLaren managed a double points finish. It's a circuit that doesn't play to the Merc's advantages of power and aero efficiency. The Ferrari has very good mechanical grip and up until practice, I expected them to be quickest here. Oddly, the Ferrari's previously rock-solid rear end seemed to be upset by the track and the drivers were never entirely comfortable, but were still ahead of the Mercs.

As for Ferrari team orders, I think the team manipulated Kimi's strategy to ensure he was out of the equation for the win. I doubt it would've made any difference to the outcome, but in doing so they spared themselves the kind of team wranglings that we saw at Mercedes. They just go racing in a different way to Mercedes and it's not hard to see the benefits in doing so. Sucks to be Kimi, though.

3

" even though he has by far the fastest car out there."

Nice try.

“We have the best car,” said Vettel after the race. ‘We have done the biggest jump of all the teams and a lot of teams are playing copycat.”

4

"Vettel beat everyone fair and square in a broken car."

No he didn't - Kimi was not allowed to challenge him.

'"The risk was if Raikkonen made a mistake, then Hamilton would have got past and then attacked Vettel and the win would have been very vulnerable."
The risk is ALWAYS there. Kimi in P1 could have also made a mistake with a Hamilton behind. What kind of logic is this?'

You're missing the point. Ferrari are exclusive in that they have a no.1 driver and supporting driver. The latter is not allowed to overtake the former. That's why they left the fast Raikkonen behind the slower Vettel - to protect their no.1 driver. It sucks. I love Ferrari as a marque, but can't stand them as an F1 team because they're so unsporting.

"he has by far the fastest car out there."

In a straight line perhaps. But you'll have noticed that those confounded racing circuits have corners, and the Ferrari is better than the Merc around slow corners. The Ferraris were fast than the Mercs on Sunday. Hamilton compensated well using superior skill but couldn't get close in the turbulent air.

If you listened and absorbed the info from experts instead of spinning everything to make it what you want to be, we wouldn't have to explain this stuff to you.

5

I wish you would share the sources of information that makes you so certain about this. The only possible explanation for someone thinking unconfirmed suppositions, aka speculations, are unjustifiable and shameful, and consider the very same thing, admitted by themselves, ok, not a problem, normal, brilliant, or whatever, is you knowing things we don't. So, please don't be shy, enlighten us, please.

6

Ok, erm, TV commentary on a number of channels, the sports press, the drivers' and teams' own comments.

That enough? I'm not clear what you think I'm "speculating" about - that racing circuits have corners? That Ferrari have a No.1 and No.2 driver? They've always been that way, the evidence is abundant. If you're expecting me to provide a copy of the drivers' contracts then no, I can't do that. Nor do I need to for it to be evidently true!

7

Ferrari correctly read the situation that ....

A) Hungaroring is almost always a ridiculous race where the cars cannot pass.

B) This years bad aero design on F1 cars makes it much harder to pass even on a better track than Hungaroring.

Thus, Ferrari correctly added 2+2 and got the answer that Vettel could stay in front and nobody could make any passes and thus Vettel could win the race with a slower car.

The Hungaroring is a silly race where qualifying basically determines the points. Hamilton and Mercedes lost the race because of their weaker qualifying performance. The rest is just a bunch of whinging that Hamliton isn't allowed to automatically win every race by fiat. Hamilton couldn't even pass his teammate without team orders letting him past. Hamilton earned 4th place fair and square given the overall silly nature of the track.

Hungaoring is always my number one pick for a track I'd like to see off the schedule

8

I think it highly likely that Hamilton could have passed his team mate, but while he and Bottas spent ten laps playing cat and mouse and risking wiping each other out and losing the team a host of points the Ferraris would have been out of reach. What Mercedes did was arguably the most sensible thing they could do as a team, why spend numerous laps fighting among yourselves when there's Ferraris to catch.?

9

Little Clarke, I agree with everything you say except "whinging that Hamilton isn't allowed to automatically win every race." I have genuinely never seen any comments that even hint at that. Mostly Hamilton fans spend their time defending him against the ill-informed comments of his haters - a thankless task.

I've never seen a comment saying, "he should have been allowed to win because [insert reason here]." There ARE plenty of comments saying, "He SHOULD/WOULD have won except for [insert reason here]" but that's not the same thing at all.

10

Completely agree.

It's funny how some people hate team orders and want to see drivers battle it out there on the track; but suddenly it's all good if the team order is to ask Vettel not to overtake or let someone by (multi 21 and now this).

11

it is not fair, and certainly not square when a driver is instructed not to pass another in a race while they could.. how is the act of barrichello, who had hardly won races, being asked to slow down to let schumacher, who had won a record number of races, to pass him in austria for victory!
bullying and cheating don't sit well with me..

12

It's a team sport, though. It's all fun and games until your two drivers take each other out and you lose a boatload of points. Winners win, and they're not too fussy about how they achieve it.

13

why do you say that? hamilton, 32, has been in the game from the age of 8 and won numerous championships, races and pole positions. in f1, he has won more races and pole positions than anyone in history except schumacher. and we all know how schumacher won. hamilton doesn't want to win like schumacher did. so he goes about his racing the way he sees fit. we all saw him gave away 3 points to his teammate. i believe he knows better how to win ethically than anyone.

14

aveli,

Your comment that Lewis "gave away 3 points to his teammate" is misleading. Those 3 points never belonged to Lewis in the first place. Don't you recall that Lewis and Bottas swapped positions to give Lewis 5 laps (which was extended) to try and track Vettel down. He couldn't so Lewis did the correct thing and gave third place and the 3 points that goes with it back to Bottas.

Having said that I think Merc should scrap 'team orders' and back Lewis as their number 1 driver to win the WDC. Ferrari certainly don't appear to be backing Raikkonen.

15

hamilton did give away those 3 points. it wasn't hamilton's fault bottas was slower. hamilton had already lost a race to vettel, at the start of the season, after being stuck behind bottas for several laps. so why would mercedes want to watch their faster driver stuck behind his teammmate? mercedes had every reason to ask bottas to move out of their way....insisting that hamilton got ahead by racing bottas could have resulted in mercedes losing both drivers in the race likebtgey experienced in spain last season. so as you can clearly see, there is absolutely no logical reason for mercedes to want to keep hamilton behind bottas..that'll be undoing all the work they'd put into building such a team as well as a competitive car...it can only be antihamilton to suggest that bottas got the point,s he had lent hamilton, back at the end of the race..

16

Lol!

17

I think the Lewis of a few years ago would've disappeared off after Kimi and told the team "sure, I'll let Valtteri past...when he catches me." In fact he did it to Rosberg in this very race in 2014 ("I'm not slowing down for Nico").

Fast forward three years and a more mature and experienced Hamilton knows he's probably got the measure of Bottas and sees the value of maintaining good will and harmony in the team. Mark my words, those lost points could win Lewis the championship.

18

hamilton hasn't changed one bit. he is exactly the same and will make the exact same choices.

19

@Aveli again,,lol

show us radio transcript to support your claim of kimi being instructed not to pass. And i'm dead sure you just talking while doing something else..ie not focus at all

20

hi s andretti...you have only identified yourself. why not identify to rest of the member of "us"?
why would i want to provide a radio transcript anyway? afterall i didn't mention those two words "radio transcripts" in any of my posts above. i can only be held responsible for what i do and not what someone else, like yourself, does..

21

It's not about being told not to pass over the radio. there's this whole other part to racing called Strategy.

They didn't let Kimi try to run longer than Seb or try to undercut Seb. they made him pit on the very next lap and he came out right behind Seb. If they'd let him go another lap or two, OR pit a lap earlier he would've almost definitely come out ahead of Seb.

There has been more than one instance this year where they've let Seb undercut Kimi, why not return the favor?

22

the ferrari teamorders weren't given during the race, they were given at the start of the season...we all heard raikkonen complaining of vettel being too slow for comfort..if you think ferrari have no teamorders then you might be just right about that..

23

So the same team orders didn't apply in China that cost Vettel the race win?

24

as teammate's has raikkonen ever finished ahead of vettel in the history of the sport?

25

@Fedor
I think the risk was exaggerated as well, very cool and calm heads on the Ferrari pitwall made some great calls today.
1) Ham could not pass Bot even though he was significantly faster
2) Vet had been cruising and didnt up his pace until Ham came into play, Bot could not keep up with Vet pace and dropped further back
3) If Ham could not pass Bot at that slower pace then very unlikely he would get Rai at the new faster pace
4) Ham is playing a longer term game and not risking too much (i.e. didnt take on Ver in early stage of race and said on radio it wasnt worth the risk) therefore very unlikely he would push Rai too much as Rai has little to lose if an incident happens
5) (and perhaps most importantly) Rai with a perfect car is far more likely to successfully defend against Ham than Vet with a damaged car so Rai is the perfect rear gunner to get the 1:2 that the desparately need with the Boss in attendance.

I think James wider point of differing team orders is interesting and we have seen it before in this season, but almost a shame he has raised it today as I think Ferraris call today was more about protecting the 1:2 rather then than just all about protecting Vet.

What I will say is this, thank goodness for this intrigue as otherwise the race was very very processional.....

26

I suspect Hamilton could have passed Bottas, but with evenly matched cars it wouldn't have been easy, it would have risked both cars in an incident and even if he eventually passed without any incident the time spent doing so would have left the Ferraris way out in front. For the sake of the team the Mercedes way on the day makes perfect logical sense if you give the drivers equal respect (as their current points tally arguably deserves), The Ferrari way makes it clear who is the also ran driver, and that's fair enough it's worked for them in past seasons, It's hard to argue with either strategy but clearly it is quite a different approach, I would expect at the end of the season to see Merc switch to Ferrari strategy if only one of their drivers is in contention, their difficulty will be if both are.

27

your logic makes sense but f1 often defy logic....so i lend to have a strong affinity for what actually happen..

28

Fair and square? Kimi wasn't allowed to challenge him.

29

Hamilton refused to obey team orders in Abu Dhabi last year. Raikonnen could've done the same...but he didn't. Why, because he couldn't either because he didn't have the speed or that his contract doesn't allow him. Now if the latter point is valid he can't complain.

30

raikkonen is known to have taken ferrari euros to sit out whole f1 seasons. so his motives are very clear to us all. he accepts the cash to race for ferrari..whatever ferrari wants from raikkonen, ferrari gets..

31

I personally thought Ferrari used strategy to take Kimi out of the equation to the extent that his pace probably didn't have any bearing on the outcome. Clever and a very Ferrari way to go about things, as it's a lot harder to quibble with pit strategy than a direct instruction to let a teammate through/not challenge a teammate.

32

are you still at it? did you not hear hamilton? rosberg wasn't close enough!

33

i think that thing in your cranium is shrivelling now...since when did hamilton refuse to follow team orders? did mercedes ask hamilton to slow down for rosberg to pass him or did they ask him to let rosberg through? hamilton refused to slow down he didn't refuse to let rosberg through..rosberg just wasn't fast enough to stay with hamilton let alone pass him..come on, have some water, please..

34

@Aveli.. To refresh your memo. Abu Dubai 2016, Hungaria 2014..remmmmber? more??

35

S Andretti, remember more? No you can't, two occasions in ten year career where Lewis refused to comply with a team request. In Hungary 2014 Lewis didn't actually refuse to let Nico by, he just asked that Nico put a bit more effort in and refused to compromise his own race to help his team mate. In Abu Dhabi Lewis was running his own race in the best way for him, as race leader it is his right to do that.
I can remember Max and Seb directly refusing team orders to let their team mates through, and it is also worth noting that Nico lost nothing in Hungary 2014 and Merc got gheir one two in Abu Dhabi last year.

36

they are all dustcarts timw...don't let them fool you..

37

@timW : You can't pass a car in Hungaroring unless they are significantly slower. you only had to see what Bottas had to do to let hamilton pass. you just can't get run within a second of a car ahead without destroying own tyres. Heck, Lewis couldn't get close enough to even pressurize Kimi, despite Kimi driving to the pace of a car ahead with messed up steering.
and, yes, Lewis not letting Rosberg pass cost Rosberg and Mercedes a win in Hungaroring. Mercedes has an agreement within the team to maximise the team's chances of win first and Lewis didn't honour it. Not the first time he can be accused of breaching such an agreeement. Incident in Hungaroring 2007 with alonso was started by him ; he breached a team agreement, refused to let alonso pass during qualifying and that started a chain reaction which cost the team driver's championship, constructor's championship and $100. ( alonso should have had an advantageous position in qualifying, thus ensuring pole and pole being everything in Hungaroring he would have been 1st instead of 4th, Lewis 2nd, aka driver's championship for alonso ).
Also, Lewis reneged on a pre race agreement to not run aggressive engine setting, thus cheating Nico of a win in a Malaysia. How else do you think he defended against's nico with significantly slower tyres ( I didn't make this up nor is it hearsay, Toto wolff said this. )

38

stick with the truth effuno..

39

*not malaysia, but bahrain 2014, i believe. The race which Lewis defended vs Nico, despite having slower used up tyres.

40

Also remember that by Abu Dhabi Merc had already sealed the championship so there was no team imperative for Hamilton to speed up, if anything the team order was for show (i.e. so that Rosberg didn't through his teddies out of the pram in the event that Hamilton's tactic actually paid off and Rosberg was passed). Given that Rosberg bailed out of the ten not long after they could have saved their breath!

41

Team orders can blunt the championship. This shouldn't be a bloody coreographed ballet. Let's race! Subjectively, it was vital that Seb won today. Ferrari want the drivers championship too.

42

Nic, Lewis has gained precisely zero points through team orders this year, has Seb?

43

So Bahrain does not count? He was let by twice.

44

Rockie, and he lost zero points both times.

45

VET has long benefited from team favoritism, particularly at the Bulls with a car that was developed directly towards him and was shown up by WEB most times the team was pegged back by rule clarification, before further changes skewed things back towards him again. HAM seems to have changed a little this season and was pleased to see him slow right down to rightly give the position back to BOT.

Those three points that everyone seems to be talking about being disadvantageous to the team could well be the ones that win them the drivers title through BOT, as he is far from out of the title race with the best part of half a season to go. May the contest last until the final race and laps.

46

So if you own a company you will run it by favouring your least performing employee interesting!

47

Couldn't agree more. This can cut both ways, especially if Lewis needs a hand later on. I find Kimi's emasculation rather sad frankly - time to call it day rather play the lap dog for Seb.

48

@ Nigella.....Why does Raikonnen stay there if that is the case. He can always leave of his own volition.

49

raikkonen was paid by ferrari to sit out of f1. so what makes you think he will refuse to be paid not to challenge his teammate?

50

Hmmm... let's see. Raikonnen can choose to lapse into (relative) obscurity or he can act as Seb's rear-gunner and blocker for several million a year, not a difficult choice!

51

Kenneth, why did Webber stay at Red Bull for so long when they were so beastly to him?

52
Ahmed of Sydney

The main difference is that there is only 21points between Hamilton and Bottas (prior to this race) and qualifying is almost even, however there is 79 points between Vettel and Kimi and Vettel has dominated his team mate. It is obvious that Kimi has no chance in this years WDC, add this to the fact that Ferrari will be on the back foot for the remainder of the year, it is the reason why Merc are favourites for both titles! It is a no brainer, Ferrari has to maximise any opportunity to even fight Mercedez, the most dominant F1 team over the last 3 years (arguably ever)...

53

Agreed, this point is ignored far too often. I have no problem with teams issuing orders for the good of the championship, I would have done exactly the same as Ferrari and Mercedes today.

54

if raikkonen won the remaining races, will the fia refuse to classify him as the 2017 f1 champion?

55

@aveli - IF you ever happen to change your mind, should I classify you as a better person?

56

better than who?

57

Forbidden? By whom? There were no team orders. Kimi just couldn't get it done.

58

They called Kimi in the next lap after Vettel pitted. If Kimi had stayed out he would've jumped Seb. Team order, pure and simple.

59

And had Kimi jumped SEB at the start you just know that the team would have swapped them with a pit stop strategy call.

60

Might have been tricky with VET steering issues

61

As I said, don't claim something based on your beliefs. I believe in evidence, which have none of. You are trying to bluff your way through as usual. You wanna know example? You mentioned my comment about Ves to be related to Vet, which is completely out of context. And my reply was yes it can be attached to any driver that's being an a$$. Please cut the hypocrisy and talk substance. I'm tired of talking points. That's why I didn't even look at the comment section in the last couple of weeks.

62

😂😂😂😂😂😂😀😀😃😂😂

63

Really ? I saw Kimi was able to get within a second of him and was forbidden to mount any kind of attack, and was supposed to sit there and defend from Mercedes. It was clear from Kimi's radio that he thought he could go faster, but he played the tame stooge.
Hamilton proposed being allowed to have a try to get past and said he'd give the place back if he failed, there were only 3 points in it - which might hurt if the season is very close, but if the situation comes up again Bottas will feel he can trust Hamilton. Being a man of your word sounds lovely as a principle but it also means people will help you in the future. If Lewis needs Valteri to move over to give him a place at the end of the season he's more likely to do so after today.
Can't see VET doing that (remember "Multi 21")

64

@James. have look into lap times of Vettle vs Kimi to see how Kimi was way slower than Vettle, then misses using DRS on Hulkenberg as Vettle did, which increased gap between both even more

we all can see and imagine things but this won't change the fact Vettle was faster than Kimi, Beside Kimi is not that pro in taking over as Alonso for example.

65

Multi 21 was a team order against Vettel.

Just keep going you will have the opportunity to overtake later, the team then reneged on it's word by issuing Multi 21.

Webber on Multi 12 tried it and failed.

66

raikkonen was worried about damaging his tyres, he wanted to fall back to protect them but was ordered to stay put..

67

"I saw Kimi was able to get within a second of him and was forbidden to mount any kind of attack"

I saw Lewis was able to get within a second of Kimi too. Was he also forbidden to mount any kind of attack?

My point is, at Hungary, with these cars, it needed a really big performance difference or a significant mistake to overtake a car. Lewis was almost a second faster than Bottas when he was let by but couldn't overtake without a team order. So may be Kimi was also faster than Seb but was not fast enough to overtake.

68

hamilton waited behind raikkonen for a mistake which never came..

69

@ yeah, he waited till race finished. ...lol

Kimi stated, he has no worries of Hamilton passing him, full stop

70

what worries has raikkonen then, adding to his single championship or helping a 4 time world champion add to his?

71

Most people could care less about multi-21. Personally, I have always felt that Red Bull was under no obligation to gift Webber a win. Most people have moved on but apparently, you are one of those people that would rather hate.

72

@ Bob W...obviously you don't know the details of multi 21. It was an agreement between three people, Horner, Webber and Vettel. Why do you think that Horner told vettel to give the place back by reminding him of that? You also do know, i presume, that when faced with the possibility of internal sanctions he, Vettel, threatened Red Bull with legal action! Webber was winning that race on merit and there was no gifting involved.

73

"I already turned my engine down.", tells me he was cruising and feeling entitled to a win he didn't have to earn. Assuming I don't know something shows a lack of intellectual rigor on your behalf or else you were just being rude.

74

BobW,

Webber turned his engine down because he thought Vettel would comply with the agreement that was in place between the two drivers that whoever was ahead after the last pit stop would take the win. Webber trusted that Vettel would comply but he reneged. Dare say if Webber had known that Vettel was going to act dishonorably he would have not turned his engine down and fought for the win.

Your comments about Webber having a sense of "entitlement" to the win without having to "earn" it demonstrates that you don't know what Multi 21 was about.

Perhaps you would like to comment on Vettel's lack of ethics regarding this and his intention to take legal action against his employer (RBR) if they took disciplinary action against him when he was the one who failed to comply with a lawful team (employer) instruction.

Vettel has shown himself at times to be a lose cannon. Mexico last year and Baku this year for example.

75

did vettel not enjoy the ferrari's version of multi21?

76

@James. Go look at lap times then sit and think a little then maybe can talk if you have guts to say so

77

The lap times show VET was never more than 4 seconds ahead .

78

Remember Hungary 2007?

79

Which bit. Alonso blocking in the pits and all the things which stemmed from that ?

80

Alonso blocking in the pits and all the things which stemmed from came from Hamilton not obeying what was pre determined whitin the team about fuel burning and not letting Alonso by. Then Alonso gave McLaren 100 million reasons , and rightly so, to think what favouring Hamilton and allowing Hamilton to get away with disobeying pre determined procedures that had been in place in all the races up until then.

81

I am a KR fan and he could have easily won the race if Ferrari would have let him. It looked like he could have taken Vettel at the first stop with the over-cut, but Ferrari forced him immediately after Vettel. Unfortunately for us KR fans it was a perfectly legitimate and defendable call by Ferrari and from their perspective it turned out perfectly. Racing isn't always fair and that is the way it is sometimes.

82

you're right...even anti raikkonen fans observed that..

83

@Rib. Explain how ferrari held Kimi back?
Explain how merc screwed Bottas for 3rd times then when LH realized he can't catch Kimi. He gave Bpttas position back?? Is that sportsmanship?maybe in England where right is wrong amd wrong is right

If you don't have proper data..don't even bother explaining. Save my and your time

84

S Andretti, in what way was Bottas screwed? Use as much data as you like.

85

he did not get screwed as such, but letting Hamilton by cost him more than 2 seconds. It did not matter at the end l guess but it still helped Verstappen catching him faster won't you agree? Marc

86

Comet, I think Max would have caught him anyway, but as you say it didn't matter.

87

ferrari provided raikkonen with a contract which states that he must do as told. he was also provided with a radio earpiece through which instructions are given..and not only the instructions were given during the race, he stint was cut short to ensure he didn't pass vettel by accident..

88

For sure Ferrari circus has left Kimi hung out to dry so many times that I have lost count. In Kimi's first stint at Ferrari it was Schumacher "A German" who had no place in dictating the development direction of the car and screwed Kimi because the great Schumacher was either helping Felipe or getting worried that Kimi winning with Ferrari multiple time would tarnish his legacy or something. And now its Vettel "A German" who is basically driving a car developed on Rai's feedback. Even James Allison has praised Kimi so many times on his ability to give precise feedback that invariably help develop a car in the right direction in long term. Plus my theory that Vettel needs Kimi as his teammate not only to develop the car but also to study Kimi's telemetry and improve his pace because even today Rai in his twilight years is comfortably able to match Vettel's (who is in his quote "Prime") speed. Sometimes, it makes me angry that how Kimi lets these Ferrari losers run him over again and again.

89

Ultimately though, what is Kimi to do? He doesn't follow orders and takes matters into his own hands and he loses his seat and money. He is in a tough spot. This is why I say Hamilton has a greater challenge this season than Vettel as Ham has to fight not only Vettel but Bottas as well as the team will give them equal billing. Vettel has a very reliable wingman and is using that to full advantage. I just can't see him NOT winning the championship this year. He is consistent and the car is almost on par with the Mercs if not better (as the reds can follow and mercs can't). Not happy about it but hey.

90

hamilton says, "still i rise, people are like dustcarts. they runaround with rubbish, full of disappointments, full of frustrations, full of anger and when the cart is full, they need a place to dump it..,,sometimes they dump it on you. best not to allow their rubbish spread onto people you know at work or at home by moving on regardless..love those who treat you right and wish well, those who don't. life is 10% what you make it and 90%!how you take it.....still i rise".

91

hahaha...who actually wrote that nonsense?

92

that's why hamilton is described as the best ever..

93

I am not one, but no need for the "A German" crap. Otherwise I can agree with most of your post.

94

I guess I was out of line there, didn't realize at the time. Sorry about that, I didn't mean in the way it reads now and other connotations tit might suggest. I agree that was not required.

95

Bryce thank you for your statement. people have to stop saying things like that. it can lead to some very nasty things indeed. cheers.

96

Talk about losers. When did Kimi get his WDC? What has he been doing since 2007? You are also showing your ignorance because it is well known that Vettel has been the driving force behind Ferrari's development. He practically lives at Maranello between races. So at any rate, there's no educating a Kimi fanboy I guess.

97

Kimi was staying clear of Ferrari's petty politics and being cool. He is not a attention seeking man child but in the end that costed him many titles. Ferrari always needs somebody who they can cling on to. In that sense, Kimi can blame himself for not playing the Ferrari game of politics. And for sure Jean Todt, Ross Brawn all left Ferrari, otherwise Kimi would have more titles with Ferrari. So perhaps, you need to educate yourself to free yourself form reality distortion field called Vettel. Vettel lives at Ferrari because he wants Ferrari to hand over the wins that do not belong to him...like Monaco, Hungary 2017.

98

Funny that every one accepts at this weekend and at this track the Ferrari was the fastest car, and if vettal hadn't had a issue he would have been gone up the road, but that would have ruined your little Lewis rant.

99

Very good analysis, objective and impartial. One of the best written in English from an Englishman. Much better than other websites who crucify Ferrari for their choice and picture Hamilton as a saint ascending to heaven! Well done James. Keep up the good work,,, er I mean pen/keyboard!

100

Mercedes did it already once this year to Bottas and did it last year to Rosberg, this swapping places. Just ugly. I haven't seen Ferrari do it to Kimi. I think it is a big difference in staying behind your teammate or been giving a place at the expance of your teammate. For me swapping places is only justified if the other is not in contention for the championship. Staying behind your teammate is more normal, it will be too much of a risk fighting.

101

You seem to be forgetting that this is a team sport. Of the two merc drivers Lewis had the upper hand in terms of outright speed and was able to bring the challenge to Ferrari. I am not under estimating Bottas here. But if as a team had they forced Kimmi into a mistake then the team gained for sure. So yes as much as the swapping sounds ugly to you it becomes perfectly legitimate in the constructors point of view.

102

Hamilton can argue that he's not accepted the charity of a team mate to win any championships, and there's a value in that.

Ferrari's way means I've have less respect for Vettel as a driver, he's benefitting from a clear tactical advantage, and I've barely any respect for Kimi at all. I never saw a character like him accepting a number 2 role. It's a sad way to end a career.

103

I would disagree because Kimi himself stated that he lost the race in qualifying. If he was P1 in qualifying, Ferrari may have given him the go ahead to drive into the distance. Kimi is also aware that the with the points gap to Vettel being what it is, Ferrari have to give Vettel the chance to win. Especially when they are challenging again after the dark and dreary Alonso years
PS : Anyone else thinks Alonso is as big a cry baby as Shamilton

104

he can argue whatever he wants, but if he's silly enough to say he's going to give the place back but doesn't, he won't get let past again.

105

Swapping places is just not ethical by any means. Full stop...Got it?

106

S Andretti, its a team sport. Who is your favourite driver, and how many times did/has he benefited from team orders?

107

And not allowing the second driver to pass or a few extra laps in clear air is ethical?

Maybe you can try to get down from your high horse and address the ones not agreeing with you in a friendlier manner, it does wonders.

108

Why would Ferrari such? allow a driver who is over 75pts behind finish ahead, it would have been suicidal.

What I see here is fans of Hamilton wanting to limit the amount of points difference nothing more.

109

Don't hold your breath!

110

So there's be no overtaking in your version of F1?

111

But he has accepted. Wasn't Bottas told twice to let Lewis by in the same race? Didn't Rosberg let him by in Monaco of all places where he could easily have held him but he didn't?
The value, the true value is Lewis' teamates always doing what they are told which he always benefits from.
Bottas is 19:points behind do you expect that's enough for Mercedes to tell Bottas to not fight for the championship? Most people ( Lewis's fans) criticise Ferrari for for not telling Vettel to move over. Kimi was never in a position to pass Sebastian. Did Lewis pass Kimi?
Vettel is 86 points ahead of Kimi. He is that good. Lewis must concentrate to win the WC but firstly beat his teamate, which he didn't last year.

112

Its a team sport and always has been
the Drivers are just car jockeys, I mean look at the results from qualifying or the race, a driver cant make a lot of difference to an underperforming car so what do you expect?

113

Lewis couldn't overtake Bottas but says he had the speed. If he couldn't overtake his own teammate, how was he going to overtake Kimi? Merc made a mistake by letting Lewis pass Bottas in the first place. Lewis didn't gift anything to anyone. He never had it in the first place.

114

In order to overtake in Hungary you have to be position to take advantage of your opponents mistakes. Botas couldn't keep up with Raikkonen. Hamilton could. Unfortunately for Mercedes Raikkonen didn't make a mistake therefore so the point became moot. But how hard would Mercedes have been kicking themselves if Kimi had made a mistake and neither driver was close enough to capitalise because they'd held Hamilton behind the slower Bottas

115

Well said. Sanity at last.

116

Clearly you didn't watch the Bharain Gp or the Spanish GP where 1)Bottas was asked to move aside for Hamilton 2) Bottas was told to hold Vettel back. Very selective memory people have these days

117

Kenny, people have incredibly selective memories when it comes to their favourite drivers benefitting from team assistance, the truth is they all have at some point.

118

Hamilton was always going to get past Bottas in Bahrain. He was far, far quicker. That was more about not having Bottas hold Hamilton up for the 1-2 seconds that might have been important if he had managed to catch up to Seb afterwards.

In Spain with Kimi out, Bottas was 3rd running a fair ways behind the front two. His 3rd was always secure, so he was asked to run some interference on Seb. That is perfect team tactics. Whereas in Austria, Kimi was left out long, which forfeited his 4th place to Hamilton, in an attempt to turn Seb's 2nd into a win. It's clear that Ferrari will give up Kimi's points for even a small chance at more points for Seb.

119

Bahrain - yes. Bottas was slow, Lewis went for the position, but couldn't get it, and didn't give the place back.

Spain - no. Bottas was not in a winning position. His role in that situation was similar to that of Lewis in Russia... help the team.

120

Kenny, when accusing Hamilton of asking Bottas to let him past etc (to condone the preferential treatment of Vettel at Ferrari) you forget or choose to ignore vital context;

When Bottas let's Hamilton past, it's because for whatever reason at that stage of the race Bottas doesn't have the pace to attack those in front of him. Whereas Ferrari consciously choose to cripple Raikkonen's race to facilitate Vettel, even when Raikkonen has the chance for a win, like today.

Asking an ailing Mercedes to help out a superior paced teammate vs hindering one driver to help the other are two different scenarios.

And crying "well why doesn't he over take then?" Everyone knows overtaking is difficult when travelling behind another car in modern F1, and it's only amplified when driving the same car.

121

I don't get this Raikkonen qualifies behind Vettel and in the race is behind Vettel, but somehow Ferrari should employ a strategy that gets Raikkonen ahead?

The mental gymnastics here is beyond comedy.

122

@F1Fan,
Do you believe that Mercedes would ask Hamilton to let Bottas through if they were sitting 1 and 2 in a race? More speficaly one where passing is difficult in the first place? Marc

123

Marc, if the merc were in the same situation as on Sunday? One carrying an issue in front of the other? Yeah I believe they would if they felt the win was in danger. They're more concerned with the constructors and getting a win. If they felt letting the car go by with the superior pace would give them the win

124

They would prioritise the 1-2 result and so they'd do the same as Ferrari Di, keeping on,e driver behind

If you let the healthy car go, you risk losing P2 with the unhealthy one that is no longer protected

125

James, I nearly wrote this exact observation myself, that Mercedes would probably try a blocker move but I think this would happen on specific tracks only, street style where it's hard to overtake. But I still believe generally, Ferrari would keep Raik behind but Mercedes would allow Bottas to overtake.

126

No, Ferrari consciously choose to cripple Raikkonen's race to facilitate team's 1-2, not Vettel.

127

andrew.cocos, A 1-2 in favour of Vettel, never the other way round. If Vettel had some sort of mechanical issue, one that drastically impedes his speed, and he was in front of Raikkonen and leaving them both vulnerable then perhaps Ferrari would allow Raikkonen to pass. BUT it would have to be a serious mechanical fault because as we saw at Hungary, the scenarios I just described happened except the fault on Vettel's car wasn't serious enough for the Ferrari management to allow Raikkonen past, And to add to my previous comment and this one. when I say "allow Raikkonen to pass" I don't mean telling Vettel to let him by, I mean to be even allowed to overtake Vettel. He obviously isn't even allowed to make a legitimate overtake in those 1-2 situations.

128

Kimi IS allowed to race Vettel, he just cannot overtake him. Hey, Kimi had the same pace as Vet, Ham was much faster behind him, does your logic tell you Lewis isn't even allowed to overtake Raikkonen?

129

andrew.cocos, If Hamilton could have overtaken, he would have but the merc struggles following other cars

130

The Merc was slow through the last two corners of the lap, which meant that while Hamilton was sub 1s behind Kimi for large portions of each lap, at the DRS detection point he was usually outside of a second, and so wasn't able to try a pass into turn 1.

131

Bottas is allowed to race Hamilton. If he's quicker on the day he'll win. If Kimi's quicker on the day Ferrari will find some weasely way of getting Seb ahead.

There's nothing wrong with that, it's their way of going racing, it just disheartening to see a once great driver like Kimi seeing himself as some sort of latter day Eddie Irvine. It's demeaning, and it cheapens his legacy. I can't believe he needs the money that badly.

Merc's approach is better for the sport. With a dominant car they gave us a championship battle last year. When Ferrari have the same dominance what's the point in watching? Some of Michael's WDCs were complete borefests.

132

Which day has Kimi been quicker that he has been hobbled?

Last race Kimi looked quicker because of Vettels issues a look at the lap times will tell you all you need to know.

133

Rockie, looked quicker, he was quicker, Vettel had a problem car, the issue is he wasn't allowed to overtake the "number 1" driver. That is the difference between Merc and Ferrari.

Also it is difficult to pick a day when Raikkonen has been faster then hobbled because his race is hobbled before the lights go out, he is Vettels blocker, that's his role. They don't get half way through a race then think, "Raikkonen isn't doing very well, let's get him to help Vettel", no. When they pit Kimi, what tires they give him, all strategic decisions made for Raikkonen are based on how to help Vettel. How many times has he been brought in early, left out too long, just to be in a Mercedes driver's pit window?

It didn't really bother me, that's how Ferrari have always raced, once you're up against Ferrari, you're up against one tea pushing one driver, and if Vettel loses, then it's all the more sweeter for Hamilton or Ricciardo or Bottas or whoever beats him because they've beaten the highest funded team that's sole focus is helping one driver. What bothers me is Ferrari throw Kimi under the bus every race weekend then come Monday morning Marchionne criticises him.

134

He could've tried to overtake Vettel, nobody told him he has to stay behind him. If he would've been the faster guy today, he should've overtaken Vettel. He didn't....and Vettel was in a barely damaged car. I don't think that Kimi is still not the number 2 at Ferrari. But he wasn't let through for first place ordered by the team. That's racing. Respect to Hamilton....never thought he would let Bottas pass for 3rd at the end of the race. He never would've done that to Rosberg, that's for sure.

135

Yeah like Seb and Kimi care if you respect them lol
Kimi is fighting for the WDC, Seb is

136

I can barely conceal my contempt for Raikkonen these days. He's just making up the numbers at this point in his career.

137

I am sure Kimi can hardly conceal a smile while looking at his bank balance these days. I do agree with you though, it is time for Kimi to retire.

138
Clarks4WheelDrift

I hate that they made Bottas park the car to let Lewis past when Kimi and Bottas were being held up by Seb, Bottas beat Lewis in qually, Bottas is close to Lewis in the title race, Bottas was on the same strategy as Lewis, and he was fighting for the race lead!

I'd have rather seen Bottas doing a two stop, with extra undercuts into clear track whenever possible!!

Actually, I'd rather see Alonso and Hamilton in the same team, then you wouldn't have any of this nonsense, there'd be a lot more racing and they'd probably take more points even if there was contact a couple of times in the year!

139

"and he was fighting for the race lead!"

Lol

140

Andrew, Ha ha, no doubt Clarkes thinks that Valterri was lapping slower than both Ferraris to lull them into a false sense of security, and that he was just about to overtake them both when the dastardly Toto hatched his evil plan...

141

And Alonso would win every race.

142

Nic, just like he did in 2007....

143

If Bottas had done an aggressive 2 stop they would have lost track position to Verstappen, and as it proved again, track position is key on this track.

144
Anthony Okwumo

Hamilton and Alonso were once in one team McLaren. Alonso left to Ferrari after a heated season with Hamilton. That was the year Raikonen won the championship. Hamilton could have won it if Alonso spared him 2 points as team mate but Alonso was giving it and Hamilton went on to win another 2 championship.

145

Hamilton still didn't manage to win in 2007 despite all the help McLaren provided him with and not allowing Alonso to fight on equal terms.

146

McLaren started 2007 working for Alonso. Hamilton showed he had the speed, so they were given equal opportunity. That wasn't good enough for Alonso, who started to complain.

If anything, McLaren lost it for Hamilton with bad tire calls in China and Germany. An incorrectly affixed tire at Nurburgring also led to a mighty shunt in Q3 there, and starting P10. Yeah, all that help ...

147

Popov the only time McLaren didn't allow their drivers to fight on equal terms in 2007 was in Monaco when they strategically hampered Lewis. Remember Fernando asked the FIA to inspect both cars to make sure they were the same? They did and they were, how did all that team help work out for Lewis in China when they left him out on tyres that were down to the canvass?

148

Interesting comments bottas was asked to move over because he was making no impact, Lewis went past was faster didn't get the job done and handed the place back no harm done in team relations.
Bottas is doing a good job so why replace him with a driver almost st the end of his career.

149

Unless you were watching another race, bottas had no pace compared to ferrari. Vettel was struggle and bottas still couldn't keep up. Once unleashed lewis' pace was ridiculous. That being said, he struggled on SS, faltered in qualifying and cost himself a podium. Keeping his promise justifies my eternal fandom to TeamLH. Top man!

150
Clarks4WheelDrift

If Bottas had no pace Lewis could have at least tried to pass him to get the extra points. Once unleashed Lewis' pace was not rediculous, his pace was the same as Max till he was stuck behind Seb and Kimi.

151

Clarkes, his pace was ridiculously better than Valterri's.

152

the team should have known from qualifying that hamilton started the race on the best set of tyres available and those tyres could've gone a lot further into the stint. as hamilton said "those tyres were still very good, i could've gone a lot longer on them."
anyway the outcome was good for both sides, those who enjoy fairness and the others who enjoy " win at all cost".

153

You're forgetting the other top man.
Bottas, for letting Lewis by because he couldn't do it on his own.He only passed because of team orders.

154

come on now, bottas is on a one season contract and on the verge of being confirmed for an extension..would have been wise of him to refuse? was there another option?

155

Clarkes. Bottas was not being held up by Seb, he was falling behind both Ferraris.

156

When Bottas let Hamilton pass him, he was around 2 seconds behind Kimi if I recall properly. While he did not seem to be able to make a move on Kimi, neither did Hamilton. Marc

157

are 2 seconds and 0.6 seconds the same?

158
Clarks4WheelDrift

He wasn't as fast as Lewis then, but they were on same strategies and he deserved to be ahead. He was About 2.5s behind Kimi when he had to park before turn 1 to let Lewis pass.

159

Clarkes, 2.5 seconds and rising....

160

@TimW,
Rising? here are the 10 laps prior to Bottas letting Hamilton by. Sorry but I don't see it that way. He went from 2.5 second behind Raikkonen on lap 36 to 2.2 on lap 45. And still he rises (bit of a punt there.). Marc
LAP 36
NO GAP TIME
33 1:22.693
5 10.658 1:23.090
7 12.098 1:23.352
9 1 LAP 1:27.585
77 14.645 1:22.566
44 15.778 1:22.508

LAP 37
NO GAP TIME
33 1:22.970
18 1 LAP 1:26.017
5 10.171 1:22.483
7 11.960 1:22.832
77 14.746 1:23.071
44 15.763 1:22.955

LAP 38
NO GAP TIME
33 1:22.041
18 1 LAP 1:23.426
5 10.473 1:22.343
7 12.119 1:22.200
77 14.650 1:21.945
44 15.372 1:21.650

LAP 39
NO GAP TIME
33 1:22.404
18 1 LAP 1:23.510
5 10.344 1:22.275
7 12.007 1:22.292
77 14.122 1:21.876
44 15.188 1:22.220

LAP 40
NO GAP TIME
33 1:22.351
18 1 LAP 1:23.378
5 10.281 1:22.288
7 12.027 1:22.371
77 13.765 1:21.994
44 15.262 1:22.425

LAP 41
NO GAP TIME
33 1:22.422
18 1 LAP 1:23.465
5 10.266 1:22.407
7 11.784 1:22.179
77 13.532 1:22.189
44 15.026 1:22.186

LAP 42
NO GAP TIME
33 PIT 1:25.012
26 1 LAP 1:41.793
18 1 LAP 1:24.264
5 7.380 1:22.126
7 9.057 1:22.285
77 10.908 1:22.388
44 12.087 1:22.073

LAP 43
NO GAP TIME
5 1:22.449
7 1.530 1:22.302
18 1 LAP 1:26.961
77 3.367 1:22.288
44 4.501 1:22.243

LAP 44
NO GAP TIME
5 1:22.181
7 1.419 1:22.070
77 3.376 1:22.190
44 4.559 1:22.239

LAP 45
NO GAP TIME
5 1:21.996
7 1.205 1:21.782
77 3.420 1:22.040
44 4.619 1:22.056

161

Comet, good data! Using your numbers we can see that Valterri was slower than Kimi on four out of yhe last five laps, and that he lost two tenths on lap 44, and three tenths on lap 45. If Mercedes saw this trend developing, and could see from his tyre wear that it was going to continue, then they were bang on weren't thay? Bottas dropped back at a pretty alarming rate of knots after the switch didn't he?

162

drop back might have been because he was dispirited from the switch.

163

I'm a team follower, not a driver follower. So, for me team order doesn't bother me one bit as it isn't illegal. But I understand why you hate it. It's team sport. Drivers are just the employees.

As for Alo/Ham paring, that's never gonna happen again for sure. The same reason Vet/Ham or Vet/Alo paring will never happen. But it would be great to watch if it did happen.

164

it's meant to be a race...with all things being equal at the start..

165

@Clarks,
"park"? Did the team make Bottas drive slowly to let Verstappen catch up?

Two, Lewis could waste his tires to pass Bottas, or he could waste his tires trying to catch and pass Kimi, which is most beneficial to the team? Teammates are hampered when racing one another, no matter what the team says, so while VB was ahead, was he really faster and "fighting for the race lead"?

If the team had put VB on a "two stop", imagine all the screaming by fans afterward accusing the team of putting VB on the non-optimal B strategy, while he was "fighting for the race lead". The point being, either VB is not fighting for the race lead, and as you suggest he should try a 2 stop strategy, or he is fighting for the race lead, and should stay on his optimal 1 stopper. What you suggested makes no sense if VB was indeed "fighting for the race lead".

166

KenC, all good questions. You have zero chance of getting answers though...

167

You can't say that Bottas had the same pace as Lewis on the softs. He didn't. Merc did the right thing letting Hamilton have a shot.

A great example of team play was Mansell and Patrese attacking Senna at Monza in 1991:

https://youtu.be/-YKCrvB3Qas

168

#2 as I said before, all assumption. JA also made assumptions. There's no evidence what so ever. In other words, excuses for nothing. No fact means fake news.

169

I'm guessing that reply was meant to go elsewhere? Anyways, you're being deliberately obtuse again. Do you really want to be JAonF1's answer to Trump?!? You do know that "fake news" is funny because it's just Trump declaring any news he doesn't like as fake ... you know that, right? So any F1 news you don't like, oh well that's fake news, yeah?

I guess when I go to bed tonight I'll again rely on my assumption that the sun will rise the next day. 😀

170

Sergio Marchionne - ruthless, hard headed capitalist/businessman. Makes clear to his employees that they are exactly that - an 𝘦𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘰𝘺𝘦𝘦. And that includes even a highly paid member on the FIAT payroll, Kimi Raikkonen. The message is: Kimi, if you don't want to be sacked, you'll play rear gunner mate.............

Morals and ethics are irrelevant really. Williams lost the 1981, 1986 and arguably the 2003 drivers championship by letting their two drivers take points away from each other and general squabbling. What Mercedes have done is very worthy and admirable, but admiration and worthiness don't equal points on Lewis Hamilton's account.

171

Hey Gaz, you remember that 1981 season?

The season where the virtuous Frank Williams showed his morals and ethics at the SECOND race of a 16 race season?

You remember, where Carlos Reutemann was ordered to let Alan Jones through to win?

You remember Carlos refused and the blockhead Aussie was so angry he wouldn't talk to him afterwards?

It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Reutemann screwed up his own race in Las Vegas that year to deny Williams another title.

Morals and ethics haven't played a part in F1 for some generations.

172

It was in Reutemann's contract that if he and Jones ran 1-2, that he would hand the lead to Jones. He'd already done precisely that in the first race at Long Beach, so he wouldn't have been surprised by that call.

A horrible thing to sign up to though.

As for Carlos intentionally ruining his own race in Vegas, no way. He tried to win with a brake test on Piquet. I could see Williams scuppering him, with a faulty gearbox. They celebrated Jones winning, even though they just lost the championship with Carlos.

173

@Gaz I'd argue that the drivers loyalty should always be to the team, you know that group of people who earn a fraction that they do and put in more hours and don't get the perks but just hope that their team is recognised as the best?
So your point of "Morals and ethics are irrelevant really" for me at least is completely null and void. Drivers are employees and are paid to race for the team.

Just my view anyway

174

But there could be a gentleman's agreement behind the scenes that once one of the Merc drivers is mathematically out of the contest, that they always play second fiddle. Won't surprise me one bit if say, Bottas is out of the running come Singapore, and he finds himself leading a race with Hamilton second, that he let's Hamilton take the win. That would be a +7 point swing more than making up for the -3 today...

175

a good point. A gentleman's agreement is almost certain at Merc as proved in Hungary - but simply not possible in a team that includes Vettel.

176

Good points...

Just for the record though: Singapore will be Ferraris and don't think HAM will come out with lots if points....

177

The payoff for Lewis will come later in the season at tracks where Merc are comfortably 1-2.

178

Well, Raikkonnen is nowhere near Vettel in the championship race, so yes it was the right call. With Mercedes, the situation is different - both guys are in contention so they need to race on merit. And let's face it Raikkonnen would've passed only if let through - why enforce team order that endangers your lead driver's lead? We are drawing unnecessary parallels.

179

not true, they could have done what they did with Vettel a few races ago: stay out longer and try the overcut. Kimi was clearly faster (arguably because of Vettel's issues, but still).

180

It turned out well for Ferrari today. If the dirty air killed Kimi's tires or caused overheating, and allowed Hamilton to sneak past, they would have looked silly, as Vettel would have been vulnerable to Lewis. They could only do what they did today because of the track.

If both Mercedes stay in contention late on, then it could hurt them. Hamilton has been quicker, so if he get his nose clearly ahead, then it could pay dividends later on.

It would be interesting to know what effect the two philosophies have overall on pushing performance higher. One would think that having two drivers with equal opportunity pushing each other, would lead to greater general performance within a team, rather than a team where the lead driver is not threatened by their teammate. However, it's impossible to measure. It could very well be that it's better the other way.

Lastly, KMag v Hulk in the pen was entertaining! 😃

181

It is not about equal opportunities just for that, it is because Bottas is kind of 50-50 with Hamilton, a DNF and a victory would reverse positions. He beat nicely LH a few times on merit, not to mention gifting positions. LH is not consistent. I would not wonder VB taking the lead

182

I have Russia, Monaco, and Hungary qualifying as the only times that Bottas has beaten Hamilton on merit. Hamilton has been faster on race pace more times than not. Lewis should be on 5 wins but isn't because of a loose headrest. At the tracks where the Mercedes doesn't work as well (Russia, Monaco, Hungary), Bottas has done better there. So I guess we should look to Singapore for that next. Even in Hungary Lewis had more pace, but flubbed it with his first Q3 run. They're closer in points than they've been on performances.

183
rossopervincere

Mercedes did everything right. Both drivers are still in the hunt for the championship.
Ferrari did everything right as well.
Only Seb is in the hunt for the championship with Kimi all most 100 points behind him.
Kimi was the moral winner today by not attacking Seb.
So both teams absolutely in the clear.
F1 is and always will be a team sport with team orders.

184

"F1 is and always will be a team sport with team orders."
exactly - and those may or may not be published or heard on the radio

185

Spot on.

186

I guess Ferrari don't need to worry about the constructors as much due to being guaranteed the extra money they get....
It's really disappointing to see Kimi sidelined, it would be great to see him win again, and Ferrari should really consider the great PR a winning Kimi brings. Not sure anyone cares if the [mod] wins again, he burnt his goodwill years ago.

187

I guess Ferrari don't need to worry about the constructors as much due to being guaranteed the extra money they get....

1 VET
2 RAI =43 pts

1 RAI
2 VET = 43pts

Still trying to understand what you have stated above?

188

My statement makes sense if you read it as a reply to the the article, in which JA States:

"Mercedes goes racing with emotion, but also has a clear “team-first” policy, where they will act in the team’s interests, not the individual driver’s."
Whereas : "At Ferrari, things are different. They are all about winning the drivers’ championship."

This suggests that Ferrari care more for the WDC then the Constructors championship, as such they want to get Vettel the maximum number of points, not just having Ferrari 1 and 2.

That aside, the risk for Ferrari was not Vettel coming second (as per your points calculation) but rather that if Kimi didn't provide his tail gunning services, Vettel would not be able to hold off Hamilton and he would drop further down the order. Of course knowing what we know now, that may have been less of a risk then what everyone thought (at least on the US Broadcast) when it was occurring during the race.

189

That statement of yours reads to me like you think Ferrari did the right thing to win the 43 points for grab then. Marc

190
Clarks4WheelDrift

If Kimi had won he would have 123 points, 46 points behind Bottas.
If Seb was 2nd he would have 195 points.
Kimi should be closer and should take points off Merc a lot more often

191

You are obviously aware that Mercedes, Red Bull, McLaren, Williams and Renault also get "extra money" in historic payments every year?

192

Yep I am aware, however Ferrari receive the largest payment, somewhere in the order of $35Mil more. (Basing on this source: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/129388)

193

PR is nice to have

Championship title much nicer tho'

194

'Tis true.

195

Naive decision from Merc. Ferrari will cream every point they can for Vettel through team orders and if Merc aren't willing to make the tough decisions then they will lose the drivers title.

196

Funny thing is, Ferrari has not issued a single team order this year while Mercedes has done multiple times...

197

" there should have been a condition applied for Bottas that he had to stay within a certain number of seconds of Hamilton to get the place back."

This makes total sense.

198

Not when Hamilton could't pass Bottas on track. He would only get 3rd place if Bottas let him through. You're forgetting that Bottas is also fighting for the WDC.

199

Unfortunately, we don't know whether LH could have passed VB on track, since he didn't try. He only demonstrated to the team that he was quicker, which led them to decide to let LH swap places with VB.

To be fair, it's difficult to pass at the Hungaroring, but VB was considerably slower than LH. And, while LH and VB are fighting for the WDC, VB does know that the team wants them to MAXIMIZE points for the team. Pulling a Perez, and not acknowledging that he was having difficulty keeping up with KR, and letting LH have a go, would not do him any favors within the team.

200

I don't see how that would be fair. The reality was Hamilton couldn't overtake Bottas without the team asking Bottas to move over. So how fast Hamilton was didn't really matter. Bottas would have kept 3rd place if not for the team order. So it was the right thing to do to give the place back.

And much respect for Merc and Hamilton for doing that.

201

Actually, we don't know whether LH could overtake VB or not.

202

Well if he could, why didn't he overtake Bottas until he got the radio working and got team's help?

203

James Allen, here are some questions for you in regards to your article.

1: Ferrari's philosophy has made them the most successful team in terms of race wins, wdc and wcc. So, why not follow the same path?
2: When you look at the clear cut team orders this season based on the radio messages we heard, how many times you heard Ferrari telling Kimi to move over for Vettel? I can't recall any. On the flip side how many times you heard Bottas being told to move over for Hamilton? I recall 3. Why not report fairly?
3: Hamilton couldn't pass Kimi. And Kimi couldn't pass Seb. Don't you think you should give Vet little bit more credit for managing, defending and keeping up the speed as needed to win the race?

204

Here are the facts of the situation: Hamilton did not lose 3 points because he never EARNED them in the first place. hamilton finished exactly where he deserved to finish in 4th.
Mercedes and the British press are enjoying leading most of you around like sheep thinking Hamilton did some noble thing.
He didnt have the pace to pass Bottas and was gifted third place where he showed he didnt have the pace to catch kimi so he went back to the position he deserved based on his performance this weekend.Why is he being praised for being handed a chance to actually compete when he couldnt do it on his own merit?

205

@ Mark...very well said. As i have said before, There was a deal cut in order to give Hamilton a crack at the Ferrari. Fair enough. He couldn't do it so Hamilton was obliged to hand the position back. A deal is a deal.

206

Exactly Mark. Glad to see someone else saw it for what it was.

207

Sheesh.....i really shouldnt be surprised but c'mon! What exactly would it take for you guys to say "Well Done Lewis"? He was FAR up the road from BOT and VES was nigh on second behind him on that last lap... Lewis slowed right down, letting 2 backmarkers pass, and only just finished 4 tenths ahead of VES.... All to honour this agreement. He wouldve been perfectly entitled to keep that 3rd place with the situation as it was. I thought id come here and see SOME praise for that risky move....i certainly thought the Aussie contigent would respect that! Lesson learned. Well done to VET for getting through a tough race and well done to ALL at Mercedes. They have a perfect team in place there..... Seats set for at least another year id say. Watch out though VET Lewis is coming for you and when he does win this WDC he can hold his head high and say he did it the way it SHOULD be done... No road rage tempers, no foul mouthed rants, honouring his deals with his team mate, no pathetic childishness. Fair play for Sunday though, fully deserved.

208

@Formul Zero To imply as you do that in this article James has not been fair to Vettel, shows the bias in your thoughts, rather than in this article, which was a fair and reasonable interpretation of the situation as is. I'm no sycophant towards James and have criticised him once or twice in the past, but his articles are always informative to the likes of us who are on the outside of F1. This article perfectly reflected the situations at Ferrari for many years and Mercedes under Toto Wolff.

209

If F0 hasn't heard it, then it doesn't exist. No team orders at all at Ferrari; no no, not a one.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds

We're a curious species, that's for sure. Some more curious than others. 😉

210

Shows bias in my thoughts? Tell me one thing I said is factually wrong. When you point out the obvious with facts, it's call fair observation not bias. I love this article, but it's not a fair one "in part". I have no issue with it, but I have issue with people not admitting truth.

211

Ferrari have 40+ years of outright cheating and generally dishonourable conduct behind them - they still openly take cigarette money long after it was supposed to have been banned. Mercedes care more about the constructors championship and will lose the drivers rather than win it with Ferrari-like behaviour. Williams were the same in the past.
We have the team orders we have heard on the radio ("Fernando is faster than you" when team orders were still illegal , a classic bit of unpunished rule breaking by Ferrari) and team orders which are written into contracts and given in the briefing room. Kimi wasn't allowed to attempt any sort of move on the team's number 1 driver.

212

Yeah, it was McLaren who used stolen Ferrari data to build their winning car, Renault who used mass damper, Honda who used double gas tank, RBR who cheated with diffusers over the seasons, and Mercedes who did secret illegal tyre tests. But Ferrari are outright cheaters. So much logic.

213

Anyone who disputes Ferrari taking Cigarette money, go to their home page, click partners and click the top sponsor : it takes you to

http://formula1.ferrari.com/en/partners/philip-morris-international/

"Philip Morris International is the world’s leading international tobacco company"
Best known for Marlboro.

214

what's wrong with taking cigarette money?

215

(a) Tobacco sponsorship is banned, but Ferrari take the rules to mean if they don't put the logo on the car, that's OK. If it were actually illegal it wouldn't be on the web site, and they wouldn't have a Marlboro place-man as team principal
(b) Would you like your team to be sponsored by a payday loans company ? Makers of landmines ? A few eyebrows were raised when Heineken became sponsors of F1 in general and we have beer advertised track side, but for now at least, alcohol is accepted.

216

nothing wrong with cigarette companies. politics got them banned in f1.
there is no scientific evidence to confirm that cigarette smoking causes cancer.
resent scientific reports suggest cancer is a nutrient deficiency syndrome..so cigarettes have been wrongly accused and convicted..

217

Factually pretty much everything you said are just incorrect. I don't have time to go through everything. Just give you couple of examples,

1: Your comment about Ferrari cheating sounds bitter rather than factual. Some fans react like you when their team or driver doesn't win. And some people are just bitter about everything.
2: Ferrari was fined $100k for coded team order for the famous "Fernando is faster than you" message.

I am always up for debate as long as you have facts to prove. Please don't reply if you can't back your comments with factual evidence.

218

What would you call deliberately breaking the seal on Massas gearbox to manipulate the starting grid in order to give Alonso a better grid slot. That "cheat" also had implications for other drivers.

219

I would be reasonably certain that Raikonnen knew this when he signed back into Ferrari and if he didn't then he should've. If he is happy to take the salary, then he should be prepared to do what his employers require him to do. Kimi always has the right to withdraw his labour if he's unhappy with the conditions. Simple really.

220

did raikkonen not once take money from ferrari with the instruction to sit out of f1?

221

This is the same Kimi that was being soundly beaten by Alonso and it was because the Spaniard was " relentless, matadorish, the best thing since slice bread".
He is being soundly beaten in a car that suits Kimi's driving style a lot better than when Alonso was at Ferrari, yet Vettel's superiority is in question.
Go figure?!

222

Your opening 13 words have confirmed, once and for all, that your opinion is not worth considering.

40+ years would mean since 1977 at least. Ferrari cheating since the 1970's?

Yet in those same 40 years, haven't McLaren and Williams also blatantly cheated? What about Brabham and Lotus breaking technical rules to gain race wins? I'm assuming that the British teams taking on Ferrari with Bernie and Max in support was perfectly legitimate? After all, who remembers Williams and McLaren colluding at the 1997 European GP to keep Schumacher and Ferrari from winning. Led to DC gifting Mika his first win and yet nothing was done over a highly illegal practice.

Tyrell was banned in 1984, BAR were disqualified in 2005 for a couple of races. Red Bull broke technical rules during dominant seasons...

My God, there's so many examples of British teams cheating in that 40 year period it's a joke but narrow minded observers believe Ferrari is the dark force because a biased media says it's so.

Think for yourself. If this were true, wouldn't Ferrari have been called out previously? Oh right, I forgot the Ferrari International Assistance.

Personally I'd call it Fricking Inglander Attitude!!

223

I first became aware of Ferrari either actually cheating or at least behaving dishonourably in the 1976 championship. It's widely written up. It's in their DNA as much painting the cars red. Who said Bernie supported the British teams ? The first $100M of TV money is skimmed off and given to Ferrari - that was Bernie's doing. Put that beside the money they get from Phillip Morris and on its own that is more than the budget of every team except Red Bull and Mercedes.
From corrupt funding to, breaking the rules on wind tunnel time by claiming that they working on parts for Haas, to improper pressure not to punish their team lead for pulling alongside a competitor and deliberately steering into him.
You talk about the European Grand prix where a Ferrari driver tried to ram his championship competitor off the track ... that's your example for how innocent Ferrari are ?

Ask when Alonso was at Renault they got their wrists slapped for a displaying "Ferrari International Assistance" banners on their computers because they thought they were not on a level playing field. Ask a Red Bull fan, or a or Mercedes Fan which team has decisions unaccountably go its way, and they'll say Ferrari. That's a French team, Austrian Team and a German team. Never mind McLaren (still bitter about 2008) and Williams ...

224

Well said.

225

Perfect.

226

Bottas moved over for Lewis to pass under one condition - that Lewis would give back the position if he was unable to pass Kimi.

And guess what, Lewis was unable to pass Kimi so he HAD TO give the position back as per the agreement. Sky F1 has been playing it up as though Lewis gifted the position to Bottas, yet Lewis had been unable to pass Bottas and wouldn't have been ahead had Bottas not moved over for him.

227

Exactly so. An agreement was made, and it was possible to keep to it - not easy with Max's position, but possible. So Hamilton did: if he had failed to do so Bottas would never trust him again, as it is, if he needs help in the future Bottas knows he's not going to get screwed. Lewis gave up a third for him ... if a championship depends on it, might he give up a second or a win for Lewis ?

It's pretty sad that we expect sportsmen to be so unsporting that they'd automatically break these agreements. Hamilton could have got away with it on the grounds the Bottas was too far back and Verstappen too close to him, but he did the right thing.

228

All Hamilton did was fulfill the agreement. Nothing to do with the right thing at all. The deal given to Hamilton was conditional.

229

LH was a man (honoring his agreement) giving back the position at the final turn. But, after the race, his ego showed through saying he hopes it wasn't a mistake losing the 3 points. That was bad form.

230

He was meant to give it back aftet 5 laps and didn't. It was all rubbish and it wasn't until his tyres were much more worn that they had to "honour" the arrangement.

231
Torchwood Mobile

Nic, true that Hamilton was supposed to give place back after 5 laps.

Radio message I heard on Sky, Lewis told his engineer that he was going to give the place back, but the response he got was, "We have been given another five laps; keep pressurising that Ferarri."

232

That's him showing his true colours

233

Finally somebody sober, well said.

234

Sky isn't playing up anything. Had you watched the race, there was a real possibility of losing out to verstappen because bottas was far too slow. What lewis did was dangerous, not only to his championship but overall team results.
To slow 7 seconds, allowing your slower teammate pass on a promise, show how much class lewis has. It wasn't easy but he did it. Especially considering how close max was. Team LH!

235

Hamilton keeping up his end of the agreement is an example of his integrity. Its not an example of his 'class' at all.
The fact you and a select group of others are gushing over it merely highlights how you shocked you are that he actually had it in him.

236

Class...surely you must be joking?

237

Kenneth, does insulting your team mate show class?

238

The only dangerous thing Lewis did all weekend was qualifying 4th. Which ruined his race.

239

Obah, so honourable of you to automatically assume I didn't watch the race. So just to confirm, yes I did watch the whole thing.

Yes there was a risk. But do not forget that Bottas risked giving Lewis the position in the first place because there was a real possibility that if he did, he could have been caught by a charging Max. Bottas had done his job well in qualifying and in the race this far to ensure Max was not his problem.

So risky for Lewis or not, the agreement was to give up the position and that was the only real thing to do. Had he not, he would have gained 3 points, he would have fleeced Bottas for them. Very dishonourable and Bottas would not trust him in future under a similar scenario.

If Lewis loses the championship by three point, that again is not Bottas' problem but his own doing. He should have qualified higher to begin with. PS before people call me an LG hater, I'm just calling it like I saw it.

240

Bottas has done the same for quite a while, so Kimi is no different.
LH would have passed Vettel? How? He could not get close enough to Kimi to pass him that was held back by Seb, so how he would have passed SV?

241

Raikkonen was going as fast as Vettel and Lewis could not overtake him. I'm not sure why Vettel would have been "stuffed" if Raikkonen made a mistake and got passed.
Tough one for Lewis. Said he could do magic and couldn't. Would have looked a fool if he then did not give it back.

242

because with Kimi riding shotgun Vettel was 'safe'. Without Kimi Vettel would have been under the sort of pressure he doesn't handle well.

243

Yes, Ferrari values the driver championship, but this move also greatly benefitted the team. By letting Kimi's pass, it likely would've resulted in a 1,4 finish and maybe a 1,5 finish. By holding Kimi back, it guaranteed a 1,2 finish, gaining valuable team points on Merc.

Vetted earned his spot in front by out qualifying everyone. I doubt any team would tell the leader of the race/championship to move over for a teammate 80 pts behind...maybe if he was in 2nd lower at the time, but not when leading.

244

This constant debate about team orders is so tiring and pointless. What I find most tiresome is how commentators, journalists and fans never claim the team orders used to help their preferred driver to be "team orders," but rather a stellar example of team work. However, when their preferred driver's main protagonist makes use of " team orders," it suddenly becomes the scourge of F1.

Team orders will always be an integral part of F1. Ever since the days of Michael Schumacher dominance with Ferrari and in today's day and age of multi-year and multi-million dollar driver contracts. You don't pay that kind of money for the likes of Vettel, Hamliton, Alonso and so on, without expecting those drivers to win or be involved in driver's championship. When that happens, it brings more TV time to your team, more sponsorship dollars, more prestige to your team and at the end of the day, all anyone ever talks about is which drivers are vying for the driver's championship.

Let the drivers race is what everyone says they want, but even the journalists and commentators took issue with Force India in Canada for not having enforced the team orders to gain more points.

Time has come to move on from this pointless discussion. There is no right way to use team orders because regardless of what you may feel is a right or wrong way of utilizing them, the fact remains that they take the element of surprise out of the race and diminish the impact of the under dog.

The time has now come to move away from these pointless discussions and focus on the racing and strategies implemented to achieve the results.

245

Well said Nick. Team orders are just a vehicle for fans to axe grind!

246

Nick, best comment mate.
Please copy and paste it from now on everytime people get ahead of them with their opinions.

247

Lewis Hamilton went up a few notches in my estimation after today. What he did was really decent. As James said, doing things like that could cost him, regarding the title, but everyone watching will remember that move for a long while.

248

Are you serious?

249

Why wouldn't he be? You kenneth called Ricciardo a "gentleman" for doing the same at Monaco '15 ... though actually it was easier for Ricciardo to do then, as there was no title on the line for him that year. That makes Hamilton's gesture that much more commendable. So kenneth, what's one up from "gentleman"?

250

@ KRB...my response evidently didn't make the cut ? Can't be bothered to do it all over again. So I'll simply state that Ricciardo wasn't a gentlemen at all as he was just fulfilling his verbal contract with the team and Kvyat...happy now?

251

Colm, so your previous estimation of him was that he would propose a deal, then reneg on his word. I could maybe understand that...but he is not worthy of praise for simply keeping his word.

252

But you would have critisized him if he didn't, woudn't you?
Mate, he PROMISED that, and now everybody makes a glory of that.
He is the same 'honorable' guy badmouthing his team players (Baku 2016), or Schumacher or Michael, or asking for Bottas help, or trashing his motorhome, or belittling Rosberg title and merits. Yea, a honorable man.

253

You forget to add how Shamilton is one of the few drivers to crash into another one at the pitlane exit. (Canada 2008)

254

AlanF1. [mod] you come up with a list of terrible things that Lewis has done, but some of them never happened and the rest are things that all the drivers do, or have done.
I realise you find it difficult to deal with people saying nice things about Lewis, but you have to realise that this will happen now and again.

255

I realise you find it difficult to deal with people saying nice things about Lewis, but you have to realise that this will happen now and again.

Do well to remember your own words when its applied the other way .

256

Sarsippious. You mean when Lewis has done something wrong in the eyes of you and your pals, or when he has actually done something wrong? When Lewis took a penalty for holding Dan up behind the safety car, I agreed that he was wrong, when he didn't go to that fan event before Silverstone, I agreed that he was wrong, but when people were coming up with imaginative reasons for Baku being his fault, I did not agree. I think this is allowed, in the same way that is allowed for you to take people to task for calling Danny Ric a drama queen.

257

Spot on.🖒

258

Intresting topic as always. I have two comments to make. Bottas let Hamilton through in Monaco and played the team game at other occasions. Secondly I hate team orders, but as i see this is the second career of Kimi. He is 38 and getting pole in Monaco, beating Vettel in his prime some times. I for one really rate him highly for that. He is being with the nr1 team holding off young guns.

259

I have a strong feeling of disgust against the Ferrari way of racing. How can a driver (in this case Vettel) think of himself that he's the best, when your teammate can't attack you, and he's you're slave (what other word to say better). And to make the matter worse, Raikkonen, a world champion. He doesn't have my respect since he joined Ferrari again, and Vettel never had it. Then you have Hamilton, that gives away the points that he might very much need. Just stupid. Like to bring a knife to a gun fight.

260

I think that multi 2-1 tells you all you need to know about what vettel thinks!

261

Did you feel the same way about Mercedes when Bottas let Hamilton past TWICE in one race and he still didnt win?
did you feel the same way when hamilton was asking bottas to give up a potential second place at the time at baku so lewis could get past Vettel because he couldnt do it on track?
Did you feel the same way when mercedes used Bottas to back vettel up so Hamilton could catch him and go on to win in spain?
You are the worst kind of uninformed hypocrite.

262

"You are the worst kind of uninformed hypocrite." Thank you. I give you the Magnussen anwer for that. I think there is no comparision between the Ferrari way or the Mercedes way, or anybody others's way. We all know the politics at Ferrari and James's article say is perfectly.

263

Re mark , did you feel uneasy about kimi being used in the same way at the Austrian gp, on worn tyres being sacrificed in the hope of holding up bottas so Seb could reel him in , the exact scenario as Spain, thought not# hypocrite

264

Lemon is helping? You will never have respect for Vettel and Kimi ever, so no worries. Cannot tell how much disgust many around may have for your potential hero, but that is fine, it is normal. As Seinfeld said, the most people are undatable, read unlikeable, based on personal criteria.
There is a remedy for disgusting rivals, start taking an objective aproach for you driver and give him a healthy portion if shite anytime he is in the wrong. And if that is LH, my guess, you need tons of as a starter

265

With a strategy geared to benefit his side of the garage Kimi would probably have won.
You have to guess he is more comfortable where he is than being in another team with all the squabbling and stress and less chance of winning.

266

Kimi is so behind that his move would not have had a merit. Ferrari did perfectly today. A master move after so many blunders, but many dislike to recognize thst.

267

Both teams handled their respective situations well. Ferrari shouldn't have let Kimi through, even if that meant his second place was under threat, Seb had earned his place at the front and is entitled to defend it. The big question of course is what would have happened if the two cars had been reversed?!
Mercedes did the sensible thing in letting Lewis have a crack at the Ferraris, he was a lot faster than Valterri and he gave the place back, so no problem. Making it more complicated by telling Bottas he had to stay within a certain distance of Lewis would have been pointless.

268

Tim,

That's a pretty apt summary of the protocols that exist between the two teams.

To your question as to what would have happened if the cars were reversed. The question that flows from that is would the Ferrari Pit Wall instruct Kimi to move aside for Seb if Seb didn't request it? Given Ferrari's now apparent acknowledgement that Seb is their lead driver who they are backing to win the WDC I think they would have.

Lewis complied with the deal to give back Bottas 3rd place and in the process 3 points (a net loss of 3 points to Lewis). Perhaps, given the closeness of the competition, Mercedes might want to rethink their current policy and given Lewis the benefit of their strategic decision making. Otherwise they might just lose (forfeit) the WDC to Ferrari. I have a feeling this is going through Toto's mind right now.

269

To be honest I was bracing myself for the monster backlash when it looked like Lewis wasn't going to give the place back, but then he moved over at the last corner and so only recieves a moderate backlash! We can't know what Ferrari would have done, but it's a fair bet that they would have made the switch .
Kvyat watch continues! No penalties or crashes this time, but not on Sainz' level was he?

270

Tim,

Yes, I was amused by some here (and I'm not referring to my fellow DR posters) that said or implied that Lewis was doing the "honourable" or "noble" thing by handing the place back to Bottas. Talk about overcooking it. He was merely complying with the instruction of his pit wall, an instruction which itself would be in line with Merc's "team first" policy which I think they should scrap if they hope to get one of their drivers the WDC. Got to fight fire with fire with Ferrari. I mean this isn't a 'gentleman's' game that cricket once was.

As to Kvyat.............I would be shocked if he was retained for 2018. Personally I think the only reason why he got a drive this year was a bit of PR by RBR to show that they were a caring employer! Carlos Sainz far superior driver.

271

Adrian, both Valterri and Lewis had the opportunity to do the dishonourable thing, but they both did the honourable thing instead. As examples of honourable acts go, it doesn't score very highly though. I like to see the drivers working together as a team, and while I don't think either man deserves much in the way of praise for completing a pretty run of the mill team manoeuvre, nether of them deserve any stick for it either!
Kvyat needs to be gone, he's had plenty of chances and there are plenty of talented young guys out there chomping at the bit, one of them was testing for Red Bull today....

272

100% agree Tim.
I like it when we agree!

273

LKFE, don't we always?

274

Hi James,
I have a newfound respect for Lewis. I never questioned his driving capabilities. On the other hand, I always found his demeanor less than genuine. His conduct at the Hungarian GP clearly showed his high degree of integrity and will place him among the truly greats not only from a statistical perspective but also from a human perspective.

On a different note, Magnussen's conduct with Hulkenberg in the media pen was an absolute disgrace. He's a lout. Gene Haas should tell him not to report back after the August break. There are plenty of fine drivers who could easily fill the seat.
Joe

275

So its now a high degree of integrity to return something that you borrowed?
You have got to be kidding me with some of the nonsense some of you post right in check with the vomit inducing spin coming out of the mercedes camp about the situation.

276

@ Mark...how very true. Bottas couldn't pass Kimi for the same reasons that Hamilton couldn't either. To claim, as some have, that Hamilton showed 'integrity' is simply rubbish.

277

Yes Mark, someone took the bar real low...oh to be a "great" for keeping ones word!

278

@ LKFE...we are living in a different world now. Simply keeping one's word in a verbal contract is now seen as a display of 'integrity' and hailed as 'truly great and munificent'.

279

Joe, I disliked Magnussen saga, but don't forget these young lads are no ladys, they are high testosterone people, you don't touch a man unless you are ready to get mortally punched. Regarding respect, there should be a positive spin for a bad day and a promise made.

280

I know if you're a danni ric fan your going to be very disappointed, but as a fan with no ties to either driver or red bull, this was one of the best things to happen the fireworks in this team is going to be so entertaining, imagine if there was a world title up for grabs between these two,

281

@ Fursty ferret...not quite that simple. Ricciardo came close to having a very serious accident as a result of Verstappen's ill timed and inept driving tactics.

282

There is no more exciting pair on the grid tham Max and Ricci. PERIOD!
I was gutted when they hit each other, they would have eclipsed Mercedes drivers without any doubt pushind them two places down the grid... right in Alonso's arms 🙂

283

We have to remember that F1 is foremost, a team sport.

Against that background, the arrangement made by Mercedes today was the right one and it was honoured by Hamilton as one would expect of an Englishman with our sense of fair play. I somehow doubt whether Vettel would have handed the place back in any circumstances !

The Ferrari approach to racing has always been different, a throwback to the fifties where the lead driver would take over the car of a teammate in order to win a race ! Thankfully that could no longer happen.

It is a shame that the driver's championship is now by far the most important of the two. If it were not, there would be no need for team orders.

I for one would like to see Kimi win a race or two. Sadly, given the way the championship is currently poised, I doubt that he would be allowed to take the chequered flag if Vettel was second.

In essence, that is the crucial difference between Ferrari and Mercedes,

284

The crucial difference is that every time Mercedes asks Bottas to let Lewis go by, he does so without any hesitation. Talk about being subservient. And this when Bottas is still fighting for the championship.

285

@ monza F1 so long as there are two WDC's there will always be team orders.

286

Sense of fair play?

I won't go into the history of F1 and highlight all the "unBritish sense of fair play" that has existed throughout F1 history.

I most likely won't mention the British Empire and it's colonial attitude to its member countries.

I won't repeat earlier points I've made about collusion between British teams or technical rule breaking over the decades.

It's probably best I don't repeat my examples of team orders as conducted under the rule of British teams.

Just one example from 3 years ago at the same venue.

Lewis was asked to let Nico through and he told the team he wasn't close enough. Subtle, undeniable but as any expert will tell you, unless you are 2-3 seconds a lap quicker around the Hungaroring, it's impossible to pass.

British sportsmanship? Poppycock!!

287

Hehehe he! Rule Britannia! ! Have a bit more respect to your colonial masters! If the British say it's fair... it's fair! 😀

288

Thats unfair. I'm sure if Bottas is out of the championship and leading a race and if hamilton is second in the race but still in contention for the championship then mercedes will ask bottas to move over and concede his position. In ferrari's case, there have been moments when vettel has been held up by raikkonen early in the year and there were no team orders to let vettel through at that time. it is only now, when it is clear that raikkonen does not have the pace or the consistency to compete for the championship that ferrari have openly put vettel ahead.

289

Wolff said exactly that point blank..in the post race sky interview..."when one of the drivers is clearly ahead we will back that driver for the championship" Not all of us are sheep to believe the nonsense you just posted.

290

If either Mercedes driver had no mathematical chance of winning the championship but the other did, Team orders would apply and that's fair enough.

Ferrari, however, have a history of applying team orders much earlier in the season to support their "No 1" driver : they did it frequently to Massa, for example.

That is the essential difference between the two teams.

291

They actually didn't. Massa is a footnote in the history of F1, his team-mates, Schumacher and Alonso were/ are in the pantheon of the greatest.
In 2008, Massa's only inspired season, Ferrari did everything they could to aid his title charge.

As to Mercedes, a number of times this year, they have told Bottas to make way for Lewis. They have also proven in recent seasons that they will use team orders when necessary. Rosberg allowed Lewis past at Monaco last year but how many times did Lewis have the grace to let Nico by?
Hungary 2014, he flat refused, so not quite a team player I'd suggest...

292

Let me ask you this, why would anybody be willing to work if their fellow employee was being favored by the boss because of his productivity? Kimi is not stupid. He knew the deal when Vettel came on board. He certainly has not been as productive as Vettel. If he doesn't like it, he is free to move on next year since his contract will be up at the end of the season.

293

You should also consider the fact that Vettels problem today was probably due to an error from the team. Considering this Ferrari could not ask Vettel to move over for Raikkonen.
If the damage had been caused by Vettel in the race it might have been another story. Ferrari might have found it prudent to safeguard a win by letting Raikkonen pass Vettel.

294

When you are automatically guaranteed $100m just for taking part, I guess you can afford to be a little more laissez faire in which championship you choose to prioritize 🙂

295

Am i the only one who thinks ferrari actually did the right thing letting seb stay ahead? Cuz if kimi was ahead he will have pulled away and that would have left seb vulnerable to the mercs and the 1-2 will be gone?

296

Right is a subjective thing.
Vettel had a damaged car and is leading the teams attempt to win the championship. Having Kimi play rear gunner - especially at track where passing is hard - was the best way ensure a 1-2 finish and gives Ferrari's #1 driver the best chance of the championship. So Yes, the right thing.
OR
Given that Kimi was restricted to Seb's pace Lewis couldn't pass him, it's fair to assume in hindsight that Lewis wouldn't have got past Seb either.
Seb might have got 8 points fewer because Kimi was not allowed to race him. As spectators are we entitled to see a driver give his best or should a driver Kimi's calibre be there to play rear gunner rather than race ? So No not the right thing.
Ferrari are entitled to do it, but it isn't great.

297

In fact no, most people excepting non-Ferrari fans. Doubt about Seb's vulnerability.

298

"Most people excepting non-Ferrari fans ? "
What a strange phrase . You mean "People who are fans of Ferrari".

We might prefer to see teams to let their drivers race each other it's not Ferrari's way and hasn't been for decades, they're not obliged to do it differently it's a bit naïve to complain about it TBH

With hindsight I don't think Seb was vulnerable, at the time calls were being made there must have been some doubts about the state of his car and whether it was going to get worse.

There was a risk that Lewis would get past Kimi , then have a go at Seb and win. They could mitigate that by letting Kimi past and streak off into the distance, but the risk was small.
There was a risk that Hamilton would get up to second but if Seb's car was wounded, Kimi was better placed to do whatever defending needed to be done. They came up with the best defence against the more realistic danger, it's rational behaviour even if non-Ferrari fans would rather see Kimi allowed to race Seb.

299

Today's race clearly outlined who are the number one drivers in Ferrari and Mercedes.

If it had been the other way around with Mercedes with Bottas being the faster car in 4th place, I doubt the team would have instructed Lewis to let Valtteri pass.

300

For Ferrari all you need to know the number one is the points table.

301

My take is that Hamilton has three benefits:
1) If he wins, he won it, wasn't gifted it through team orders.
2) Builds trust with Bottas, especially as he had to bend over backwards to deliver which he can bank and if things in the last race do come down to needing Bottas to concede points to let Hamilton have the championship over Ferrari then he can cash in (on the basis it is better to beat Ferrari than be too gentlemanly!). Contrast with the Rosberg dirty tricks relationship.
3) Sits better with the fan base. Verstappen has failed to see that while some might see his selfish behaviour as good "hard" driving most people prefer "hard but fair".

302

I disagree with the basic premise of this article - what Ferrari did was in the best interests of the team. As Merc did by giving Bottas the place back.
It was clear that, had Ferrari allowed Kimi ahead, Vettel with his problems would've been a sitting duck to Hamilton - ie, a Ferrari 1-2 would then have diminished to a 1-3.
By that logic (and with the post-Silvestone pressure and Marchionne in attendance), maximising their result was the right thing to do from a team perspective.

303

Marchionne in attendance will have mattered not a jot to the race strategy. The team will do whatever it takes to maximize their chances of a WDC, whether the boss is there or not.

304

RAI seemed unable to close the gap to VET. Switching was not with risk. First it would have brought HAM closer to both. They could have lost second and RAI didn't seem to have anymore pace in the car than VET had.
I don't like it when drivers ask for the team to move the second car out of their way. If they are faster then prove it and make the pass on track.

305

Rubbish piffle AT

306

If you read the article you'd see that I think Ferrari did the right thing.

The Merc one is subtly different.

307

Ferrari may have done the right thing for Vettel. On the other hand can you imagine the backlash Lewis would have got from all the posters who go on a Lewis bashing post frenzy.
I think he did the right thing.
Besides anyone who has won the Hungary GP has never gone on your win the world championship in that season.
So the '📍Hungary Hex📍' will come in to bite Vettel hard after the summer break.
Plenty engine penalties for Ferrari are looming.

308

Fair analysis James. I would have loved to have seen them give KR a fair chance at the win, but as you argued Ferrari got the best result possible from their perspective so no argument. It isn't the best practice from a pure racing perspective since the result was stage managed but defensible nonetheless.

Your point about the LH/VB situation is a very good one. Once VB fell off the pace, the promise to give back the place should have been voided. Foolish for LH to sacrifice 3 points in what is looking to be a very tight title race.

309

James, I don't think your suggestion that Kimi is only doing it for the money is entirely fair. He is enormously wealthy. It is actually a very much more complicated situation than that, and would be interesting to analyse further....

310

I don't see what's there to analyze further. If he doesn't do what they say he loses his seat. Kimi is clearly not in this for the championship and there is no other team he can go to that has a competitive car and he hasn't been as competitive as Vettel so what other reason apart from him liking the adrenaline and/or money?

311

I agree entirely. You only have to look at Kimi on the podium to see that not winning really hurts him in a way that is never apparent amongst the others, with the exception, perhaps, of Lewis.

He doesn't have much of a choice if he wants to keep racing, does he ? Realistically Red Bull nor Mercedes are going to give him a seat and even Renault, who we can assume have a fair chance of being on the up, have Kubica.

Let's hope Kimi can get another year at Ferrari because the F1 grid without him would be a less interesting place.

I would love to see Kimi win LeMans but sadly, a top flight seat in the WEC is probably not going to be an option with Toyota as the only major manufacturer left in the field.

Apart from being a spectacularly boring series to watch, Formula E is doing untold damage to other categories like Sports Car racing. All in the interest of political correctness.

312

Notable team is a sporting Team.
Mercedes shows the way.
Gentlemanly gesture by a true sportsman Lewis Hamilton.
Disgraceful moment by Ferrari dumping Kimi behind Vettel.
Clearly Kimi and Lewis had shed loads of performance compared to their team mates.
They would have been way ahead. I stead Ferrari are loved up behind Vettel and Kimi is the fall guy. Sad but that's what you get with a team kissing the ground where Vettel walks on.
Unlike their old world champion Kimi.
Hats off to Mercedes and Lewis 👍👏

313

You mean hats off to Bottas to let Lewis go by on team orders, something he couldn't do on track.
Very sporting of Mercedes to ask Bottas twice in one race to let their preferred driver go by again when Hamilton couldn't do on track.