Toto Wolff: Mercedes F1 need to “wake up” after Canadian GP errors
Mercedes
Posted By: Editor   |  11 Jun 2018   |  8:56 pm GMT  |  105 comments

Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff has rarely called out his team after a performance – the drivers maybe in the Rosberg vs Hamilton days- but not the team.

So it’s noteworthy that he has called on his team to regain focus and resolve the errors that hampered their Canadian Grand Prix weekend.

The reigning constructors’ champions went into the weekend as one of the favourites, with the German marque and Lewis Hamilton having won three of the four Canadian Grands Prix in the hybrid era.

However, the team were hampered by various setbacks which made their weekend even harder.

Prior to the practice sessions, a postponement of the delivery of the latest Mercedes power units due to a quality issue meant they had to continue with existing parts.

In qualifying, Hamilton was unable to complete a clean lap and could only start the race in fourth place, marking only the second time he has been out-qualified by a team-mate in Montreal.

During the race, any attempts of trying to ‘overcut’ the Red Bulls in the pit stops were scuppered by an early pit stop for the Briton.

The Mercedes was suffering from a cooling issue, which meant Mercedes brought him into the pits at the earliest opportunity to carry out work to improve the problem.

He rejoined behind both Red Bulls and could only keep ahead of Ferrari’s Kimi Raikkonen, meaning he finished in fifth place and lost the championship lead to race-winner Sebastian Vettel.

Valtteri Bottas qualified in second place, but he was unable to mount any serious threat to Vettel’s lead during the race.

Speaking after the race, Toto Wolff disappointed that their weekend became one of “damage limitation” and called on the Mercedes team to “wake up” and maximise future opportunities.

“Not at all. It is a s*** result for us,” said Wolff to Austrian TV station ORF. “I have to put it like that. It is a strong track for us, but all weekend long we did little mistakes, from the beginning on.

“The only feeling I have is that we have to wake up.

“We fall behind in every aspect. This is a track where we should have maximised points. It was not about performing damage limitation.”

Wolff was then asked if there would be consequences for failing to achieve a better result.

“That’s necessary…We will look at that internally,” he replied.

The upgrades that were due for the Canadian Grand Prix are now expected at the next round, the French Grand Prix at Paul Ricard.

Wolff added that he has no concerns about the reliability of the Mercedes team over the rest of the season.

“We went to Montreal expecting our car to be really strong and we are leaving Montreal seeing that we haven’t been where we thought we should be,” said Wolff.

“You need to find the right balance between pushing the development very hard and at the same time keeping reliability.

“This team has been extremely strong in the past at keeping reliability at a high level. That is not something that worries me.

“It is more that we have seen Ferrari has had the stronger car here. Stronger in qualifying, stronger in the race. At no point did we have a real chance of fighting for the win.”

What do you think of Wolff’s comments? Leave your comments in the section below

Featured News in mercedes
MORE FROM MERCEDES
LATEST FROM THE MERCEDES COMMUNITY
Previous
Next
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 that something went wrong, repeat again!
1

Fernando for Merc, that would wake them up right and Lewis too i think. It would be great to see Fernando ring the neck of that car. He just wants to race with a chance of winning, cant fault that. Equally i am not sure that Lewis wants to stick around, he seems to have a different mindset to most drivers.

2

I think this is going to be one of those uneasy years for a fan. I predict that Vettel will win the championship largely because of Mercedes’ desire not to back one driver. As a fan we like to see the drivers all have their own fair run at it, so it sits uncomfortably when a driver wins due to a team legitimately taking the choice to back one.

3

Mark Hughes has reported that Hamilton may have had a dead bird lodged in his brake duct during qualifying… which would certainly contribute to his challenges in getting a clean lap.

Combined with the strange cooling problem Hamilton had during the race – and the failure to bring the new engines in on time, it does suggest that Mercedes has some gremlins in their processes.

A wake up call early in the season, is far better than a post mortem analysis at the end!

4

I read that, about the bird. Said there was a distinct barbeque smell whenever his car came into the pits (agh, poor bird!). Now I wonder did it fly into the brake duct out on track, or did it go in while it was in the garage? Birds will try to make nests in the weirdest of places, that’s for sure.

5

@ KRB…of all the excuses i’ve ever heard including the ‘dog ,the homework and the breakfast, this has to be the ‘doozy’ of them all! As if?

6

Kenneth, how about “I couldn’t challenge my team mate because my engine had calibration errors”……

7

So you’re saying Mark Hughes is lying about that? Why make up something like that?!

8

Dodo Bird?

Is there confirmation?

Did any of the mechanics dare each other to taste it, see if it’s cooked right? They may be onto a new dish for the VIPs!

9

@ KRB…Just to have some fun and see how many people actually believed it! Stay loose….

10

Its there in pint for all to read Kenny. Its not difficult to find. Of course that wouldn’t suit your anti Hamilton agenda though so it will just be an excuse created by Merc I guess. You really are laughable

11

@ Dean…lucidity, lucidity, lucidity…..check it out then post.

12

Yep its still early in Season.

Gremlins need to be sorted asap.

Toto et al will be working hard to square everything. The German manufacturer main aim is to deliver a rock solid car for both drivers.

Also British GP they have to have a solid set of cars. Hopefully both will get a one two there. With the New power units.

13

@ BKF….easy done. Just clear all the gremlins out of the brake duct! easily solved.

14

He should have said whilst putting on his sunglasses……. “we’ll be back”

15

@ kenneth

Actually no, the experts including Lauda are of the view Ferrari have caught up with Mercedes in engine performance probably as early as 2017, this is the reason why Ferrari is now able to pole it

As for Lewis’ personal trainer, I am not sure maybe the lady is his PR manager

16

@ Goferet…..lauda would say that wouldn’t he? PR managers are not ‘general factotums’, generally.

17

She is a triathlon specialist.

Suzie Wolf mentioned her being an elite athlete.

18

Man speaketh the truth. Merc and Ham both need to wake up or this championship is gonna prancing away from them like a horse. I was under no illusion Merc would win this with the upgrade delayed but expected better from them.

19

Man with many Buffalo need good supply of running water and as The Great Fonz say….”Hay!!”

20

Are Mercedes a) teetering at the top of ‘Mount Success’ contemplating the slow slide down the other side?, or b) over playing their Canada performance for maximum drama?

Early days but inevitably “what goes up must come down”. Vettel & Ferrari are determined, the Red Bull boys are hungry and Lewis seems somewhat less than enthused at the moment.

On a side note – Toto was extremely ungracious in his lack of acknowledgement for Valterri’s efforts this weekend. He qualified well and skillfully held off Max. I have to say if I was sitting in a boardroom in Stuttgart at the moment contemplating driver’s contracts, it wouldn’t be the Finnish side of the garage giving me cause for hesitation.

I’ve no doubt Mercedes will reassert their authority at Paul Ricard with their upgrade but the days of total domination are, in my opinion, over. This is a team very used to winning, let’s see how they deal with a small bit of adversity and some genuine competition.

21

@ Aussie F1…Good post. i tend to agree with all your points. Obviously the Hamilton on/off contract signing is having an effect. It was rumored some time back that it had already been signed and would be announced at Silverstone but none of the media are commenting at all lately!!! There’s a great and topical story in there just waiting to be told. As for the rallying call by Wolff, well that seems to be a bit of ‘overkill’. Bottas wasn’t unduly affected by a seven race old engine and i didn’t hear that he had, with an identical car, the same overheating issues supposedly suffered by Hamilton. All that aside, Paul Ricard will tell us a few things about where this season is headed as it will be a ‘virgin’ race for all.

22

Dam I wouldn’t want to be on the wrong side of Wolf this season. He sure doesn’t like it when one of his drivers isn’t winning the race by 20 seconds does he.

23

Well . . . ain’t that his job?

24

I would like to propose a new idea to F1. Why not scrap all titles since let’s say 2009 and until today. If this is too controversial, name them with quotation marks.

25

Chris D…Doh !!

Another custard pie statement from a nimrod.

26

?

27

Total Plank comment from CD aka Clinically🤦‍♂️👻

28

Isn’t Mercedes being on the back foot what we want? Isn’t this is great! My life in the USA: Recently my professional life and income have improved. The local sports pub has been indulging my requests for f1 rebroadcast’s. The bartender asked me at the end of the GP do they drink milk? A patron asked me what it is I get out of NASCAR! I love any opportunity to discuss F1 as the ground car fighter pilot aerospace engineering contest I love. I brag about money spent, g-forces, and about how used up, and tired, f1 racers get a second life winning indy car. It’s not easy answering distracted milleneals and miss-rembering elderly; however, a general curiosity exists. I’m hopeful Liberty can popularize the potential. Indy, Lemans, NASCAR, etc are very contrived with their formulas. I have faith in Ross Brawn and company. F1 is the last true automobile racing where the automobile still matters!

29

@Stefan, if you really want to impress Americans just show them some F1 footage with average or top speeds listed. They just cannot fathom it’s clicks instead of miles per hour shown. Works like a peach!

30

Well the last two races aren’t going to win many new fans in the US. F1 keeps shooting itself in the foot in my opinion with overly complicated technical and sporting rules.

Like you I moved to the US 10 years ago and I have to say I enjoy IndyCar more every year and F1 a little less. Indycar was broadcasted live in HD well before F1 was and have had free live streams. The races are very affordable to go see and are equally as entertaining as F1 and the quality of racing is getting better. It’s just a shame that the crowds are low at races other than the Indy500.

Overall F1 could learn a thing or two from IndyCar.

31

Isn’t that what Toto say’s every year especially at this stage of the season? Time to wake up ect. Bottas was SECOND. When every else had their upgrades and fresh miles! Whats more then bothersome is that the experience watching a race is getting insulting to say the least, then this absurd politics…

32

Don’t watch it then go ride a bike a crochet a violin 😊🤣

33

If they had the engine upgrade then perhaps Bottas could have got pole and the win. That still does not explain Hamilton. I am not his greatest fan out of the car but in it he will deliver ( complaining yes) almost all of the time. So what was wrong? Putting his performance down to an off day at this track does not ring true to me.

34

Agreed. His performance, regardless of the car issues during the race, was poor. Mistake after mistake in qually on a track that he knows all too well. He was quite average and not the for the first time. Inconsistency is gonna lose him this championship.

35

Kursk, by “agreed” you mean “disagreed.” Got it.

36

Straight from the archives of ‘Conspiracy Inc.’ courtesy of Sebee et al. Hamilton’s performance in Montreal was directly related to Hamilton’s contractual demands, ergo, see what happens when i decide to take a day off. Mercedes are nowhere. Give me what i want or else i will not perform for the rest of the year……hahahaha

37

Ps Kenneth last post was a comedy Mulder & Scully special🤦‍♂️😊

38

@ BK F recognition at long last.

39

You mean he is doing a Leicester City FC after winning the Prem title they performed a ‘go slow’ attitude until Ranieri (The Tickerer) was sacked. Then boom they won or drew every game after.

There may be some truth to this. Even I a Brit and always gunning for the Brits. Have had a slight tussle with this. He has recorded some of the fastest sectors on some tracks then when its come down its slightly down in speed Q3. Its contractual toing and froing thats been a bug bare between Legal Reps of Mercedes and Legal Reps Team LH. Now once this is sorted it might a totally upscaling in performance. There be be some juice in this outlandish off the wall comment Kenneth.

40

@ BKF…hahaha You do me proud my good man.

41

Nice one Kenneth.. However as stated not a Lewis sycophant so I do not believe his massive ego would let him throw a race not matter how much contract cash was up for grabs. There was something wrong with his car that has got Totto worrying about the Wolf’s end of season bonus.

42

Nice attempt.

See the real deal further down. 🙂

43

The Mercedes Team has made a lot of errors this year, so Toto is right to say that the team needs to refocus.

A lot of the regular commentators (@NickH, @AndrewM, @KRB) have said on the last post that the 17 point swing in Australia was just Vettel’s luck because of the safety car, but that isn’t really true. Sure Vettel would have jumped Kimi (+3) due to the safety car “luck”, but jumping Hamilton (+14) was possible only because the Mercedes Team made a calculation mistake (under the pressure of the safety car).

Then there was the gearbox issue in Bahrain, and only because Max crashed and Danny and Kimi’s cars failed was Hamilton able to make it to the podium.

Montreal was the pits, because they couldn’t bring the engine upgrade, brought too few hypersofts which left them on the backfoot for qualifying and finally engine cooling issues lost them any chance of a podium.

This is going to be a tight season, and I have to wonder if Mercedes can afford to back both drivers. Ferrari have made more errors, Pit Stop issue in Bahrain, engine blown up in Spain, Intercooler changed in Parc Ferme in Canada and a few dodgy strategy calls, but given their focus on Vettel, everything has happened on Kimi’s car ( A few might be coincidence but all seem to suggest some preferential treatment)

44

If Australia was Mercedes’ fault then Baku was Ferrari’s fault – they chose to cover Hamilton who’d already stopped instead of waiting for Bottas.

Either way, it certainly wasn’t Hamilton’s fault that the team made the error, and even if they thought they were safe, presumably Ferrari could have tried to push the engine and keep within the VSC window. Either way, I don’t think saying Vettel “earned” those points over Hamilton is right, so in a comparison between the two I think saying it was a 17 point swing is correct.

45

If Australia was Mercedes’ fault then Baku was Ferrari’s fault

– Not exactly

Mercedes’ fault was not in covering Kimi, the fault was in the offline tool used to predict the gap needed for a safety car. This was a team error and neither luck nor Hamilton’s fault. (https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/headlines/2018/3/mercedes-investigation-identifies-why-hamilton-lost-win.html).

A close example is Bahrain not Baku. If Bottas had made the overtake stick, it would not have been Vettel’s fault but because the team ran him on soft tyres for 30% longer due to the pit lane error and the missed pit window.

I do agree that using “earned” is difficult when team error is involved, especially in a driver head-to-head, but I feel using “luck” is equally wrong.

Take China for example,

1. Everyone agrees Hamilton was unlucky, with the 5 place gearbox penalty (Team Error)

2. Nobody says Hamilton was lucky to finish 3rd instead of 5th (Kimi and Danny’s engine fails = Team Error), even though he benefited from a Team Error. [If Vettel’s +14 is luck because Mercedes made a Team Error, then shouldn’t Hamilton get a +2 for China because Ferrari made a Team Error]

I agree that it is a 17 point swing, but in an article titled “Mercedes F1 need to wake up”, it can be argued that +3 is safety car “luck”, and +14 of that swing is Mercedes-F1 Strategy Team Software Error.

46

“A close example is Bahrain not Baku. If Bottas had made the overtake stick, it would not have been Vettel’s fault but because the team ran him on soft tyres for 30% longer due to the pit lane error and the missed pit window.”

I don’t agree with that at all, Vettel was only ahead of Bottas in the first place because of that strategy. At no point was Vettel ahead of Hamilton in Australia, and he had no (realistic) chance of beating him.

Also (and I know this isn’t everyone’s viewpoint), I don’t equate safety cars to retirements/strategy errors in any way; safety cars are random events (or as close to random events that you get in F1), that give drivers who have had absolutely zero performance/strategic advantage over a rival who is quicker a chance to get ahead (see Vettel in Australia, Bottas in Azerbaijan). I am not denying they are part of F1, and teams clearly need to plan for them and take them into account (which Mercedes failed to do in Australia and Ferrari failed to do in Azerbaijan); I don’t equate it to, for example, putting the wrong tyres in a wet/dry race. I have long believed that you shouldn’t be allowed to pit under a VSC/safety car, or if you do you serve a time penalty equal to the delta between the two so you don’t gain a strategic advantage (or if there is an advantage it is very small, not 7-15 seconds).

47

I know the argument, I just don’t agree…

@AndrewM : Fair enough – I see your point, that Baku was also caused by Ferrari Strategy and not just the SC. But to me there is one vital difference between the two. Bad(?) Strategy (Ferrari) versus Bad execution of Best Strategy (Mercedes).

In Australia, Mercedes’ strategic decision was correct and not debatable – pit to cover Kimi, build a gap over Vettel, and win the race; as it exposed them for just 3 laps. They made a mistake with the Maths. So no one, not even Mercedes have claimed that it is not an error .

Ferrari’s decision itself is debatable [Bad(?) Strategy], cover Hamilton and risk being overtaken by Bottas, (For: Hamilton was slow on new tyres, Baku has high SC risk Against: The Pit Delta variation was huge at Baku, Risk a repeat of China) – and Ferrari chose Option B. Ferrari this year are racing for the WDC against Hamilton so while the compelling argument for the race win was – Don’t pit and mirror Bottas; the compelling argument for the WDC (as per Ferrari was) – Cover Hamilton (avoid China untimely SC). That is Ferrari’s way of racing and while I don’t agree with it, it is for them to decide.

In that sense, I agree that the loss to Bottas in Baku can probably be called a “Strategic Decision”, while Australia is a “Strategic Error”.

Note: I know it sounds pedantic, but to me an error is when something happens that your calculations had shown would not happen.

Also seen in this light, Vettel’s lunge on Bottas (completely counter to Ferrari’s strategy) is probably the mistake of the season, and the Ferrari Debrief room at Baku would have been interesting place to be second year in a row.

48

I know the argument, I just don’t agree…

…and I definitely don’t agree that you should say Australia was a Mercedes error but Baku wasn’t a Ferrari error; there was a much less compelling argument to pit Vettel and cover off Hamilton than cover of Bottas, after it was clear Vettel on used tyres was faster than Hamilton.

49

teams clearly need to plan for them and take them into account (which Mercedes failed to do in Australia

Mercedes was blindingly fast in Melbourne and they did plan for the safety car. They built up what was they thought was a safe gap in 1.5 laps.

If the safety car had happened on Lap 20 or 21 just after Hamilton pitted it would have been pure luck/random event. and would have been a case of ” drivers who have had absolutely zero performance/strategic advantage over a rival who is quicker a chance to get ahead”.

The VSC actually happened on Lap 26 and Mercedes had enough time and speed to make a “safe gap” but they miscalculated. (Mercedes Debrief: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3-ZQqU8m08 ). So it is a strategic error. [I agree it would not have happened if the safety car had not happened, but at this level the team must be prepared to react under pressure)

I agree with your views on safety cars, and there should be a better way to neutralize the race.

50

Hamilton’s gearbox penalty was in Bahrain.

51

Sorry.

Meant Bahrain, where Lewis got the gearbox penalty and Kimi’s wheel failed and Daniel had an Electronics Failure in the engine.

Did Lewis earn the +3 points because Ferrari made a blunder on the pit stop or was it luck. The same applies to Vettel’s win in Australia, where Mercedes’ software failed and Lewis was asked to drive to a delta which was wrong, that cost him the win not the Safety Car as Mercedes was fast enough to win despite it.

52

Ashish I am in agreement that Hamilton has had better fortune overall than Vettel, this includes safety cars, crashes, drivers in front retiring etc.

53

Hmm, there may have been more incidents for Vettel, but the actual points swings are bigger in the Hamilton incidents.

For drivers in front retiring, all I can think of are Bottas in Baku, and Ricciardo in Bahrain. With Ricciardo in Bahrain, it wad the first lap, so we have near zero idea of how he would have fared in terms of race pace. Can you say that he would for sure have stayed ahead of Hamilton, yet not have challenged Vettel or Bottas? With a retirement like that (right at the start), it’s better to exclude their race altogether.

Hamilton was quicker than Bottas in Bahrain, but had no chance after the gearbox penalty. If he had started P4, that race would have been very different.

Hopefully Andrew M will take a run at it, as I trust his methodology over Ashish’s.

54

I am meaning to have a go, there are a lot of variables and assumptions to be taken into account (vs, say, 2014/2016, when it was basically two drivers in the same car that was normally running 1-2). From a quick read I think Ashish’s analysis is good, I can’t think of anything obvious I’d change.

55

Hopefully Andrew M will take a run at it, as I trust his methodology over Ashish’s.

– Will also look forward to it.

Though, actually @KRB my number is lower than yours [Just +5 for Hamilton], when comparing Vettel’s luck to Hamilton.

The post above was about Hamilton+Mercedes versus Vettel+Ferrari, and how team errors should be counted as team errors and not luck, in what is a team sport.

My assumptions (for driver luck), assuming that all change of positions where the driver has not made an overtake or mistake are “not earned” and hence luck :

1. All change of positions in race due to safety car, adjusted for pit stops are luck.

2. All equipment penalty not caused by the driver is luck. (Hamilton’s gearbox failure is luck, but Bottas taking a penalty for a new electronics set as he crashed in Australia is not luck)

3. All Team Errors where the driver is not involved is luck.

4. All Crashes where one driver is penalised are luck for the driver not penalised.

5. All retirements in-front of the driver where he gains a position is luck (Equal to his change in position for calculation)

Australia – [Swing -17, Cumulative Swing -17]

Hamilton (Team Error 1st-2nd) = -7

Vettel (SC 3rd-2nd[+3]+ 2nd-1st Mercedes errror[+7]) = +10

Bahrain [Swing-6, Cumulative Swing -23]

Hamilton (GB Penalty 4th – 9th[-10], Ricciardo Failure 10th-9th[+1], Kimi failure 4th-3rd[+3]) = -6

Vettel = 0

China [Swing +14, Cumulative Swing -09]

Hamilton[4th-4th, SC+FasterRedBull+KimiOvertakeInCrash)=0

Vettel (2nd-8th, FasterRedBull+VerstappenCrash)= -14

Baku [Swing+14, Cumulative Swing +5]

Hamilton ( Vettel error 3rd-2nd[+3], Bottas puncture 2nd-1st[+7]) = +10

Vettel (Safety Car 1st-2nd [-7], Bottas puncture 4th-3rd[+3])= -4

Spain

Hamilton – 0

Vettel – 0

Monaco

Hamilton – 0

Vettel – 0

Montreal

Hamilton – 0

Vettel – 0

There are two things probably that are marginal in this.

1. Including Hamilton’s loss of position on the grid due the gearbox penalty as he has easy cars to pass, but i think that is offset by the chances that he lost in the race.

2. Vettel’s loss of position in Spain under the VSC. Vettel has repeatedly said that this was necessary for Ferrari and they actually saved time by pitting under VSC, so it was about Ferrari being the 3rd fastest car on race pace in Spain, not luck.

I actually agree with Toto that the 2018 Mercedes is not that bad [@AndrewM’s 4-3 Ferrari was better], coupled with Kimi underperforming, unreliability, and Bottas doing good on Hamilton’s bad days, I don’t think @NickH should expect the gap to be huge. This is going to be a close season.

56

Let me try and do a tally.

57

I don’t think its time for them to focus on one driver and it would be a bit unfair. Bottas and Riccardo still have a decent shot at winning the championship if they are consistent and some luck comes their way. The focus on one driver conversation can start happening when we see where everyone is in the points standing going into the summer break.

58

In a close season, where Ferrari seem to have the stronger car, mid-season might be a little too late.

59

Hmmm… I’m sceptical of Toto’s words. Their Canada result has no single root cause – it was a consequence of unrelated issues in different domains – inconsequential in isolation – but cumulatively able to influence performance. The holes in Swiss cheese lining up.

The problem with the new PU is obviously a concern, but their processes worked – they caught it before it became an issue on the race track, where it would have been more costly. Unlike Ferrari*, who only discovered an issue with their new intercooler after the Haas failure on Saturday.

So what to make of Toto’s harsh words then? I suspect its an attempt to deflect attention from the fact that even with an old PU – with degraded performance – they had the pace to be competitive. They banked a 2nd and 5th after all, and just missed out on pole – hardly a train smash. With a fresh PU, they likely would have dominated. Lets see how they do in France. With new PU’s and shaved tyres, I’d expect them to be the team to beat.

*The strength of the Mercedes quality processes were identified by Ferrari as one of the foundation blocks of their success, and they have made significant efforts to close that gap. Not as sexy as designing a quick car, but ultimately just as important.

60

@ Redline…’hmmmm….I’m sceptical of Wolff’s words’ I agree 100% with that statement.

61

James,

What do you make if 3M now officially challenging the F1 logo. Looks pretty bad for the current F1 management considering there was much opposition to the change from the F1 community in the first place. In my opinion they have lost a great logo to replace it with one that has no defining features or recognition.

Current management have been spending big with a reducing revenue and if Ferrari win the drivers championship this year it will put Ferrari in a stronger negotiating position regarding future revenues from F1. In saying that a Ferrari win will be needed to help boost interest in the sport.

F1 management seem to believe spending more will generate more.

How long will they be able to do this before the F1 teams lose confidence or they run out of money?

62

My scalper sourced 2018 Canadian GP Friday ticket had the old logo pre-printed on it.

I looked at it fondly.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out. 3M has a strong case here.

63

The only feeling I have is that we have to wake up.
—————————————————

Interestingly, boxing has a famous saying that goes, when one has achieved success, it becomes even the more harder to train and put in the hard yards

I guess this would explain why Lewis parted ways with his personal trainer

64

I thought that little blonde lady that shadows Hamilton’s every move no matter where or when was his personal trainer?

65

She an Aussie or a Kiwi Kenneth so you should be backing your Ned Kelly offsprings instead of taking sling shots at them with your extra small budgie smugglers.🤣

66

Pretty sure she’s his PA.

67

His trainer from Mercedes.

But not his Personal trainer.

His PA is a bloke.

Get with the times AussieF1.

Hey Kenneth

Taking about how Australia … I see rascism is still full on in the AFL with female supporter chucking bananas at a Aborginal player plus derogatory comments from some Perth supporter on a Aboriginal AFL footballers Instagram account.

That’s shocking. Read it Gold FMs news feed.

Sad times in 2lst Century Australia. I’m assuming some Right Wing Australian wouldn’t even class Redemption Ricci as a full Australian either. Which I would find a sad state of affairs.

Seems some individuals social values are still set in the early 19th and 20th centuries.

68

Kenneth I’m on your side regarding race . The Ned Kelly inference was just a 2 dimensional statement in a 3 dimensional world. Ned Kelly is a modernish version of the anti government hero from the colonies. So I’m all for him👍

Regarding the AFL problems its quiet sad that still going on.

69

@ BKF…Your racist comments i will leave for another day as this is neither the time or place to debate the issue faced here in what was an inherited British colony, inclusive of former British values maybe old habits die hard.

As for Ricciardo, well obviously you are so far behind the times that it comes as no surprise that you fail to acknowledge the complete and satisfactory integration of Italian people into out midst. They are wonderful people with whom we share so many great values. A nation rich in all things, their art and culture has enriched this nation. Enough said.

70

yeah the boy that cried wolf

71

What I think of Wolff’s comments is that he is a tough boss who expects nothing but high quality from the people that work for him

Sure, the team was expecting a win but didn’t get it but considering that the team didn’t have the upgrades other teams had, I would say a 2nd and 5th place was a pretty good result taking into account Lewis had some technical problems.

Having said that, I think the biggest problem for the team was the hypersoft tyres which needed to be run in Q3 and seeing as Pirelli said they will review the tyre after Canada and decide if it’s to be used again, perhaps this may come as a blessing for the team

At the end of the day, it appears Canada was never meant to be a success for the team which means no team and no driver has won 4 back to back victories there

On the topic of Mercedes reliability, it’s quite astonishing that they still have good reliability, this is almost as good as the Ferrari reliability when Alonso went 4 seasons with around 1 mechanical DNF at Ferrari or when Schumi went 3 straight seasons without a mechanical DNF

P.s.

Yes, Wolff really talks like Schwarzenegger

72

@ goferet…I am somewhat perplexed. Mercedes have dominated in the engine stakes and i was under the impression that they were still on top, even marginally. If so then the upgrades brought in Montreal by Ferrari and Renault should’ve more or less evened out the variances and equalised. If that was the case then Mercedes problems may lie elsewhere. As for the overheating…why? Any issues surely would’ve been isolated during FP1,2,3. where they ran race sims? Something doesn’t quite add up. Maybe Teutonic thoroughness will only take you so far before the reality of ‘randomness’ takes over.

73

Even last year, Ferrari had the stronger package than Mercedes. The only reason Lewis won in a weaker car in 2017 was that Ferrari made operational errors and Seb made mistakes.

This year, the Ferrari is again stronger than the Merc. Power is virtually identical but the car is more driveable. Unless Seb or Ferrari drop the ball again this year, I think the 2018 WDC and WCC is nailed on.

Plus the aero means that overtaking at the front of the field is virtually impossible at all but a few tracks. So Valtteri couldn’t get close to Seb; Max couldn’t get close to Valtteri; Lewis couldn’t get close to Max (and later, Daniel). May as well have done the whole race under VSC.

74

@ jim…I’m not so sure that Ferrari are equal in ‘power’ terms. They may be close but, yes, maybe the overall, package is superior. I guess that we’ll find out soon enough.

75

Overheating cherry on cake is a good one. It wasn’t hot in Montreal at all. 19-22C over the weekend. Suddenly a proven used engine turned down overheats? Can’t keep track of all the reasons.

0.2mm, upgrade late, Lewis, our PU overheating in the crazy Canadian heat…is that enough for a bulls**t sandwich?

76

They chose wrong cooling configuration setup. That’s what I think commentators said.

77

Meaning what exactly? Was it different to Bottas and if so why?

78

Apparently now a bird flew into the cooling system. Yes, a froo froo air-borne biological life form with feathers and everything!

Some claims that with all the burning oils in the PUs it smelled like fried chicken.

79

Just so Toto doesn’t say, “get woke.”

80

In the big picture of things, the best teams are decided by the best engine – which I think is wrong. If they were all in parity, Hamilton wouldn’t be so high up in the pedestal as he is – perhaps. He is a fast driver for sure, but is there others who man-handle their machines for results despite their inferior engines? I think so. Look at Bottas driving this year, does he deserve a second drive next year? Yes, he is doing well I think. He has the same machine as Hamilton. Merc are under pressure, and under pressure, the cracks show up.

81

It was a strange old race all round I felt.It lacked something.

Weird vibe around Mercedes all weekend.

Lewis wasn’t even sure of how the race unfolded around him etc..

Lost sheep ?

Jeez,I hope not !

82

Come on Toto, even NACA has some “off”s at times not only your team.

83
Tornillo Amarillo

What do you think of Wolff’s comments?

Just a wolf or fox blah-blah…

Reality is Bottas did a great qualy and result as a nr 2 driver, being 3rd in the standings and adding points to the team outperforming his high regarded teammate (as Max did for Red Bull). Bottas is earning his contract extension like this (Kimi isn’t).

Hamilton lost his qualify skill locking in turn 10, and nowadays if he is not in pole he gets difficult to overtake anybody… Maybe Coulthard was right when he said Lewis is losing motivation?

Well, next race should be for Lewis, he needs to be a winner in all circuits and this one is the only pending. If he wins he will retake the WDC lead and wolf will say the team working head-down blah-blah again. 😉

84

Mercedes will be there in november i jave no doubt …..considering the old engine i think merc done ok this weekend

I really think the cars this year are even worse than last year to follow each other , defo more boring this year , only a rain packed race will make me look forward to a start off a race.

85

Sassi is working harder than you

86

Wha? You realize Sassi is with Mercedes now, right?

Top Tags
SEARCH Mercedes