Ron Dennis owns up to team orders?!

[ioan]

Now this is a first time for him:

"It's frustrating for the driver, but we have to function as a team, and slowing them down was difficult, because you have to maintain concentration, but that's my job."

Link: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/59204

[GridGirl]

Ioan, I dont think the link you provided was whatever you were intending. When I click on it i get an empty new topic thread.

Deducing from the quote you posted, Ron said slowing them down. He could have slowed Lewis down, but Ron is Ron. He'd rather them both slow down than loose a 1-2 result, especially at Monaco.

[ioan]

Ioan, I dont think the link you provided was whatever you were intending. When I click on it i get an empty new topic thread.

Deducing from the quote you posted, Ron said slowing them down. He could have slowed Lewis down, but Ron is Ron. He'd rather them both slow down than loose a 1-2 result, especially at Monaco.

Sorry for the link, it should point to the right place now.

[GridGirl]

Thanks for changing the link Ioan.

My opinions still stands. It doesnt sound like he was implying team order to favour a driver, but the team in general. I can highly understand his logic, Wasn't it Eddie Jordan who once said Monaco is like a £100m race or something to that effect. Its pretty much the number one Grand Prix where you sell your product to your sponsors and get yourself a decent budget. I know McLaren have lots of money with Mercedes and Vodaphone backing but you need to keep winning to keep them happy.

Plus wasn't todays race Mclaren's 150 race win. For them to do that at Monaco must be extra special. There is no way on earth that Ron would have wanted them crashing out if they were racing each other.

[raphael123]

Seems like the drivers were told to back off in the final stint, though Ron seems to claim it was much earlier, but the lap times, and the way they were driving during the 1st and second stint seemed to suggest they were proper going for it for the first 2 stints, so maybe Ron is playing games?

Surely if they could have gone much quicker, then they would have done so in qualifying, and then just took the race easier, unless they orchestrated that Hamilton would b 0.2 slower than Alonso, but they both seemed to try their best yesterday, as well as today until the final stint.

I think had Lewis been infront, and Alonso behind, Ron would have taken the same actions. There's no way he would have switched the drivers around like one team use to do. It's not really what I want to see, but when so much is at stake, letting them race till the final round of pit stops, on a track which you can't overtake is understandable.

[wedge]

I've said it before and I'll say it again

THERE'S ALWAYS TEAM ORDERS IN F1!!

It's quite normal for team-mates race each other up until their final pitstop. This has been happening for a number of.

It's because idiots like Schumi who have made team orders a dirty word in F1.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was team orders for the start - do not take out your team-mate!

[GridGirl]

Wedge, taking out your team mate is the almost the ultimate sin in F1.

Rule No 1: Don't take out your team mate.
Rule No 2: Definately dont take out your team mate. ;)

[BeansBeansBeans]

It seemed the sensible thing to do. Hamilton and Alonso are building a very healthy rivalry, but they were both sailing very close to the wind all weekend trying to out-do each other. It made sense for Ron to slow both drivers down and maintain position, rather than risk a retirement.

[Dave B]

18 points or risk a rather stupid collision? Hmmm, that's a tricky one...

[ioan]

I have nothing against what they did (as I thought the same about Ferrari ), and I am pleased that Ron also owned up to it and trashed the myth about how McLaren drivers have the right to fight it out on the track.

[BeansBeansBeans]

I have nothing against what they did (as I thought the same about Ferrari ), and I am please that Ron also owned up to it and trashed the myth about how McLaren drivers have the right to fight it out on the track.

I think McLaren drivers are allowed to fight it out more than most, but it was just obvious by that stage of the race that Lewis wasn't going to pass Alonso, so it made sense to hold position.

[rohanweb]

Seems like the drivers were told to back off in the final stint, though Ron seems to claim it was much earlier, but the lap times, and the way they were driving during the 1st and second stint seemed to suggest they were proper going for it for the first 2 stints, so maybe Ron is playing games?

Surely if they could have gone much quicker, then they would have done so in qualifying, and then just took the race easier, unless they orchestrated that Hamilton would b 0.2 slower than Alonso, but they both seemed to try their best yesterday, as well as today until the final stint.

I think had Lewis been infront, and Alonso behind, Ron would have taken the same actions. There's no way he would have switched the drivers around like one team use to do. It's not really what I want to see, but when so much is at stake, letting them race till the final round of pit stops, on a track which you can't overtake is understandable.


I agree with the last paragraph, & believe in Ron Dennis that he is not a cunning man like people at Ferrari to favour a driver unless one's championship dream is mathematically over!
but its completely understandable that Ron decided that letting LH to race FA on this tighter circuit might just crash one or two of his cars and its not good for the team as overall, and the race I have watched definitely suggested that both FA & LH were racing each other untill the 2nd pit-stop and its fair for Ron to tell the guys that chaps thats enough untill now, save the equipments & save the 1st & 2nd.
again if LH made it to the 1st corner & led the race all the way I bet Ron wouldnt have called up LH to giveup the place in favour of FA.

[aryan]

Ron did the sensible thing.

He let his boys race yesterday and today, and they were only told to back off on the final stint, after all the pits had been done. On a place such a Monaco, which is very hard to overtake without taking someone out, I think it was the proper decision.

[PSfan]

I don't think Ron had to tell his drivers much, except maybe Hamilton after a few close calls. I really don't think he told them to stop racing each other because from the start they weren't racing each other... I don't think I've seen a driver starting 2nd concede the lead so quickly after the start... Hamilton wanted to run 2nd from the get go...

[ioan]

Hamilton wanted to run 2nd from the get go...

He's got instructions in written before the race! Just kidding! :D
For sure Ron decided that the one who get's thru the first corner in first place will not have to be attacked by the other one.

I just find it a little early in the season to impose team orders! :p :

[Ian McC]

Hardly teams orders :rolleyes:

It is almost impossible to overtake there and both of them were pushing to the limit, so it makes perfect sense.

[Big Ben]

After talking about how FIA is favoring McLaren now this... Hilarious... One question for Ioan.... leaving the start behind... did you see any overtaking during the race?

[gm99]

I just find it a little early in the season to impose team orders! :p :

I found the Austrian GP of 2002 also very early in the season to impose team orders ;)

And I do think there is a big difference between telling both drivers to take it easy in the last stage of a race when they're heading for a 1-2 finish, in particular on a track where no-one was able to overtake all day long, and switching the order of your drivers around within reach of the finish line.

[Big Ben]

I found the Austrian GP of 2002 also very early in the season to impose team orders ;)

And I do think there is a big difference between telling both drivers to take it easy in the last stage of a race when they're heading for a 1-2 finish, in particular on a track where no-one was able to overtake all day long, and switching the order of your drivers around within reach of the finish line.

You shouldn't waste logic on this

[GridGirl]

leaving the start behind... did you see any overtaking during the race?

That could be the best point that has been made in this thread so far.

[DimitraF1]

whats the point on that?ioan ferrari was too slow,what do u want to say with this thread mclaren must punished? lol

[donKey jote]

From what I saw, even though they both "slowed down", they were still ~1 sec per lap faster than the ferrari, who must have really slowed down :p :
Alonso was in front and in control throughout.

[Allyc85]

whats the fuss about it was the sensible thing to do, anyone with half a brain can see that.

[donKey jote]

careful astraracer or that might be construed as a personal attack :D

I might add that the only other reason for Hamilton being so close, apart from Alonso cruising, was Trulli's colour blindness :p :

[Ian McC]

was Trulli's colour blindness :p :


:laugh:

Surprised he didn't get in trouble for that!

[Eki]

I think McLaren drivers are allowed to fight it out more than most, but it was just obvious by that stage of the race that Lewis wasn't going to pass Alonso, so it made sense to hold position.
Yes, wasn't Hamilton leading the WDC then? Telling Alonso to let Hamilton pass him to increase that lead would have been team orders in the MS sense.

[ArrowsFA1]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/59231

[jas123f1]

There was (is) no team orders BUT ..

(RD said ".. this circuit inevitably has to be addressed in a TEAM WAY, and I make no excuses for INSTRUCTING the racing DRIVERS to SLOW their pace after the FIRST STOP and EFFECT OUR STATEGY based on probability of the safety car or other cars that could threaten us as a result of the safety car being deployed.

"This race is nothing about the drivers other than the necessity for them to drive really quickly and give us the opportunity to determine the outcome of the race. And that's my job.

"I don't like to slow drivers down, don't like them to be frustrated, don't like these things to happen, because I am an absolute racer.

"But that's what you have to do to win the Monaco GP and I'm not going to make any excuses for it."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

No, there was not any team orders - only some "but team orders" - what's the difference? :)

[ioan]

A few more interesting comments from the McLaren main protagonists.
Link: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/59222


L. Hamilton:

"I was quite surprised, because I was fuelled to do five, nearly six laps longer than Fernando, and they stopped me with three laps," Hamilton said.

"So the time where I was really able to bridge the gap, I wasn't really given much time. I came in two or three laps after. So that's unfortunate, but that's the way it goes.

"I am looking forward to speaking to my engineers. I'm pretty sure the reason they would have pulled me in earlier than I have fuel for is because of the safety car.

"If the safety car had come out, it could really have changed the result. So it was better to get the pitstop done."

Safety car? What Safety car? There were no safety car concerns out there, not more nor less 3 laps before LH should have originally stopped according to his words.
At least he told his story about the fact he was amazed by the teams tactics.


F. Alonso:

"I'd just like to maybe clarify the situation," Alonso said.

"I was two laps later than I should have been in the first stint because I saved fuel in the first part of the race, and the formation lap and things like that. They were telling me that maybe I was only three laps shorter than him."

No kidding, he managed to overall lap faster than LH in the first stint, and I the same time he saved 3 laps worth of fuel (LH said it should have been almost six, but it was just 3 in the end).


And now the best one:

R. Dennis:

"Once the first round of pitstops had taken place we reverted Lewis from a one-stop strategy to the faster two-stop strategy and at the same time slowed both cars down to conserve the brakes."

So Lewis was on a 1 stop strategy with 29 laps of fuel (make it 32 if they really cheated on him and called him in 3 laps earlier, as I hardly believe the FA fuel saving fairy tale) when a full race is 78 laps long?
Who are you guys kidding?
And changed his strategy after the first pitstops were done? They really filled the guy up for 49 laps and than decided to call him in after only 24 laps (his 2nd pit stop was lap 53)?
In fact the live footage showed that LH had taken 24 laps of fuel on board at his first stop.

So What are RD and FA trying to hide?
That McLaren didn't believe in LH being able to make it to the end and win the race, so they put the money on FA knowing that if they got 1-2 they will be tied in the standings and maybe the young one won't be bothered?
As it stands it seems they denied LH 3 laps on a light car when he could have attacked FA's position.

Anyway the comments are as contradictory as they were after they screwed JPM in Canada in 2005 when they favored the second positioned driver over the first under SC.

[Sleeper]

I think thats just Ron atlking up his teams advantage today, effectively saying "we cruised and still laped almost everyone else today". The fact that right up until the second stops were done it looked like Alonso and Hamilton were really pushing hard to out-do the other dosnt back this up, though they were definitely cruising by the end.

[Roamy]

the way I saw it is that Ron let them race until after the final pitstiop. then he slowed them down to preserve a 1 2 finish and to prevent graining of the tires. Good call by Ron.

[Daika]

So we are on the 5th race of the 17 races in the season and the drivers aren't allowed to race each other after the first pitstop? what kind of stupid logic is that? From what i can gather is that Lewis could win it. Not by overtaking Alonso on the track but through a pit stop. Lewis pit stop strategy change in favour of Alonso.

I assume that Alonso got the right to "win" because he got pole position but he also qualified lighter than Hamilton.

[BeansBeansBeans]

So we are on the 5th race of the 17 races in the season and the drivers aren't allowed to race each other after the first pitstop? what kind of stupid logic is that? From what i can gather is that Lewis could win it. Not by overtaking Alonso on the track but through a pit stop. Lewis pit stop strategy change in favour of Alonso.

Lewis failed to pass Alonso during either pit-stop, therefore the decision was made to hold position.

[PSfan]

the way I saw it is that Ron let them race until after the final pitstiop. then he slowed them down to preserve a 1 2 finish and to prevent graining of the tires. Good call by Ron.

And the way I saw it, Ron probably convinced Hamilton not to battle Alonso on track because Lewis had the better fuel strategy and would probably be able to pit pass Alonso, and then took that away from him.

[ioan]

Lewis failed to pass Alonso during either pit-stop, therefore the decision was made to hold position.

They cut his first run by 3 laps so of course he failed to pass Alonso during the first stop.

[Ian McC]

So What are RD and FA trying to hide?

Nothing as usual, what's wrong in a team wanting to get two cars home in one piece.

[Valve Bounce]

Looking at the pic in the link ioan gave us, Lewis H didn't look all tha happy towards Alonso, who appears to be wiping his eye in a sorta shrug gesture. Maybe I'm seeing too much in this.

[ioan]

Nothing as usual, what's wrong in a team wanting to get two cars home in one piece.

I doubt you are so naive.

[PSfan]

Looking at the pic in the link ioan gave us, Lewis H didn't look all tha happy towards Alonso, who appears to be wiping his eye in a sorta shrug gesture. Maybe I'm seeing too much in this.

I don't need to look at the links to agree with you on this. I noticed even during the champagne ceremony that Hamilton wasn't very enthusiastic about 2nd. I had also commented on Alonso's last win that Hamilton sounded a little angry when he made his "I wanna win" comment over the team radio, and now it looks like Hamilton had to concede race wins to Alonso twice now.

I bet in a few years when the Hamilton/McLaren relationship sours, that he's claim that he should have won this years championship, but had to play second fiddle to Alonso... God bless the politics of F1 racing... :)

[Daika]

Lewis failed to pass Alonso during either pit-stop, therefore the decision was made to hold position.

Lewis failed to pass Alonso because his pit-stop was forward three laps, if he stayed those three laps out, he could have passed Alonso. He didn't failed, the opportunity was taken away.

Ofcourse it makes sense that Ron Dennis is preventing a crash because they are heading for a 1-2. But you can't collide into each other in a pit-stop, safest way to let teammates battle each other.

[Ian McC]

I doubt you are so naive.

Naive? I just don't see conspiracy theories where it fits for me.

[Cozzie]

Its just bloody annoying he ruined the last twenty laps!

[jso1985]

well I think there's a big difference between:

Team order type 1: X driver is in front of Y driver, order: Let Y driver win because he's the team's number one driver

Team order type 2: X driver is in fron of Y driver and the team having a confortable 1-2, order: don't take out eachother, in Monaco words: don't try to overtake.

Type 1 happened some years ago, Type 2 happens all the time. one is clear wrong the other is just safe playing

[Daika]

well I think there's a big difference between:


Team order type 2: X driver is in fron of Y driver and the team having a confortable 1-2, order: don't take out eachother, in Monaco words: don't try to overtake.



If driver Y can overtake driver X during pit-stop (can't crash unless both are heading for pit-stop), but isn't allowed, what is the difference bewteen team order type 1?

[jas123f1]

Ok - what are we learning about this little story?

Team-orders are not allowed and therefore Ron D newer gave any team orders.

But orders to team are allowed and therefore Ron D did give that kind of orders.
Hamilton was called in 3 laps earlier (or he thinks that he was? but he wasn’t – it was Alonso who was called 3laps later because he had saved fuel for 3 laps? same time when he made a gap to all the other cars? Or the reason was – a risk for a SC? It’s however fanny to be called in 3 laps later only because.. or if it was 3 laps earlier? because the risk for a SC.

And after the first pit stop gave Ron D a order that both car should be slowed down to secure the 1, 2 win. Ron D thinks that drivers hade still possibilities to fight against each other (but with a slowed cars) ..

--------------
Honestly I believe that the reason to those orders was because Alonso was in the lead and Hamilton in second place – Ron D decided that - that’s it. It was 9 years ago McLaren had a 1, 2 win (I think) in Monaco and it’s stupid to take any risks to endanger it. So it was therefore Ron D gave his orders - which Alonso was happier than Lewis for …

Maybe Hamilton will get a better result than Alonso in next race .. not because team orders.. which - as everyone know - are not allowed, but only because of orders..

But but - I don’t think it’s only McLaren, every top team use those “orders” allowed or not – which is very understandable and regrettable in same time..

[raphael123]

careful astraracer or that might be construed as a personal attack :D



Oh dear - a personal comment!!! yellow card for you mr naughty! :p :

[ioan]

Oh dear - a personal comment!!! yellow card for you mr naughty! :p :

I doubt pino will find it as funny as you do.

[raphael123]

I doubt you are so naive.

Oh dear, another personal comment :dozey: :D
Or is this an attack? :p :


I doubt pino will find it as funny as you do.

Personal comment :dozey:

[raphael123]

Does anyone know why Lewis Hamilton pitted in when he had 3 laps left of fuel on board then?

To me that is bang out of order! I was rooting for Alonso to win I must be honest, and am glad he did, but if Hamilton had 3 laps of fuel left, then surely they should have left him out! And as Ioan says, how on earth did Alonso save 3 more laps more fuel than Hamilton when driving that much quicker?

I think, if this is true, is almost as bad as what Ferrari use to do!

[raphael123]

They cut his first run by 3 laps so of course he failed to pass Alonso during the first stop.

Saying that, the 3 laps Hamilton was out for longer, he didn't make any impression, I think he was going maybe 0.2ish a lap quicker, nowhere near the 1sec he was needing. So maybe it didn't have that great of impact.

[V12]

This is a non-issue. Team-mates are routinely hold position after their final stops, whether they are battling for a win, 3rd or 8th. And I was going to say something else but it's already been said:


there is a big difference between telling both drivers to take it easy in the last stage of a race when they're heading for a 1-2 finish, in particular on a track where no-one was able to overtake all day long, and switching the order of your drivers around within reach of the finish line.

[leopard]

Whatever the reason, I think McLaren is now confused about who is supposed to support whom?

Considering this is the first year of Lewis, I see that he has more hidden potent of talent than what we are thinking of, but it sounded too naive if he has to win over the reigning champion such early.

[Hawkmoon]

I found it interesting that Hamilton cut straight to the left at the start to block Massa and didn't even try to have a go a Alonso. It didn't look like he got a bad start and considering he has made up quite a few places off the line this year I found it surprising that he conceded the first corner so quickly. Ron having a word in his ear before the start perhaps?

A lot of people bemoaned the fact that Ferrari were ruining F1 by calling off the racing after the second stops a few years ago. Apparently it's OK for McLaren to do it after the first stop because that's the sensible thing to do to save the cars and all that.

Ron Dennis is the DEVIL, I say. He speaks with a forked tongue and will turn your children to the dark side! Beware!

;)

[Valve Bounce]

This is Monaco, where overtaking is almost a suicide attempt; and an overtaking move on your team mate can be described as a double suicide. Once the order was established at the front, with McLarens proving much faster than Massa's Ferrari, the only way McLaren could avoid a one-two apart from mechanical intervention would be driver stupidity. At any other track, (maybe except Hungary), one of the drivers could have passed the other on the track. From what I saw on F1.coms Live Timing, Lewis didn't look like being able to make up the difference in time to Alonso to overtake him in the pits. I also got the impression that Alonso was already easing off around lap 10.

It was vital, when McLaren had the superior speed at this track, to get maximum points and they did. What else was there to gain for the team?

[pino]

Oh dear, another personal comment :dozey: :D
Or is this an attack? :p :



Personal comment :dozey:

I am tired of your stupid comments and ironic posts, so stop it, or I will do that for you ! This is my last warning to you...

[leopard]

Oh dear - a personal comment!!! yellow card for you mr naughty! :p :
Was it a red yellow Mastercard? :D

[ArrowsFA1]

Safety car? What Safety car? There were no safety car concerns out there.
There is always a concern at Monaco regarding the safety car being deployed. The teams take account of this when determining their strategy before the race, and constantly review strategy during the race.


What are RD and FA trying to hide?
It's only your POV that says they're hiding anything, and you're hardly Ron's biggest fan, so excuse me if I don't take team order conspiracy theories very seriously.

I doubt there would have been so much fuss over nothing had the running order been Hamilton-Alonso.

[Big Ben]

FA got pole position, set the best lap and won the race... How can one driver prove better that the win was a deserved one... Some can see only the things that suit best their opinions.... Another question for Ioan (though I see he doesn't respond to questions that don't go well with his opinions) didn't you notice for example that LH got closer to FA only because of the traffic?
He lost sometimes like 2 or secs in the process... at least that's what I saw!

I know it was a rough day for the reds... I hope we will discuss stupid claims like this in the future too.... as often as possible

[Mickey T]

On the live timing, three laps more would not have helped Lewis catch Fernando, much less pass him.

Lewis jumped to the inside at the start because he was heavy with fuel and needed to block Massa. Not because of some team orders not to attack Fernando.

Your two drivers are one and two, and a minute up on anybody else. Gee, what would Ferrari have done in the same position? Or any other team?

At least Lewis was given up to the first stop to overtake Fernando, which is a bit more than Rubens was ever given during his time as a Ferrari driver...

[ShiftingGears]

Its just bloody annoying he ruined the last twenty laps!

That's the only thing I'd fault him on - I nodded off with 20 laps to go :p :

The conspiracy theory is a load of Bull****, in my opinion.

[jens]

This article hints that there indeed were team decisions in Alonso's favour.
http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2007/05/28/dennis_we_decided_alonso_would_win/

Lewis Hamilton fought hard through out the race to allow his one-stop strategy to give him the lead only for his team to change him to a two stop programme.

Hmm. I remember during the race I discussed with a friend whether Hamilton was on one-stopper (and as he was quite close to Alonso before stops, then he would have won) or two-stopper and it turned out to be that way...

[jens]

This article hints that there indeed were team decisions in Alonso's favour.
http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2007/05/28/dennis_we_decided_alonso_would_win/

Lewis Hamilton fought hard through out the race to allow his one-stop strategy to give him the lead only for his team to change him to a two stop programme.

Hmm. I remember during the race I discussed with a friend whether Hamilton was on one-stopper (and as he was quite close to Alonso before stops, then he would have won) or two-stopper and it turned out to be that way... "Conserving the brakes"... several teams were running on one-stop strategy and had no problems.

But still some questions raise. If there are team orders in Alonso's favour, then why have they chosen him? Is it because he is expected to be a stronger contender for the title? But Hamilton led the WDC before Monaco and was theoretically in better position.

[Daika]

On the live timing, three laps more would not have helped Lewis catch Fernando, much less pass him.

Lewis jumped to the inside at the start because he was heavy with fuel and needed to block Massa. Not because of some team orders not to attack Fernando.

Your two drivers are one and two, and a minute up on anybody else. Gee, what would Ferrari have done in the same position? Or any other team?

At least Lewis was given up to the first stop to overtake Fernando, which is a bit more than Rubens was ever given during his time as a Ferrari driver...

Overtaken on a track like Monaco on your teammate is too risky. That Ron Dennis forbid that is wise. I'm talking about overtaking your teammate during/in the pit-stop. Everbody seems to dodge that bullet.

[Valve Bounce]

Well, maybe it's wise to dodge the bullet - I sure as hell wouldn't like to take it in the knackers. :(

[Ranger]

But still some questions raise. If there are team orders in Alonso's favour, then why have they chosen him? Is it because he is expected to be a stronger contender for the title?

He'd probably be a safer bet if there were indeed team orders. But remember Hamilton was heavier and had more laps to catch Alonso, but didn't do so.

Hamilton was also looking much more unsteady and erratic than Alonso as the race progressed.

[leopard]

this sounds contradiction

Hamilton more steady standing at the podium.

[ArrowsFA1]

IMHO this issue is far more about Lewis Hamilton than anything else. After a series of second places LH is looking for his first win, and Monaco was built up as a real opportunity for him to get that win.

It's astonishing that we should be looking at a rookie in those sort of terms, but that's the measure of Hamilton's ability. That brings with it an unprecedented level of attention, particularly from the British media who have made Lewis their new 'hero'.

That media were expecting a win yesterday. Unfortunately they didn't get their headline, but the alternative of making Ron the 'bad guy' for "preventing" the new hero from winning was just too tempting to miss.

It's what the media do, and in some ways it's not bad for F1. Hamilton is a breath of fresh air, and he is making headlines everywhere. F1 is news again, and facts rarely get in the way when there's a good story to be had.

[555-04Q2]

I think its time that people realised that team order (as well as cheating or "bending the rule" as they call it) are a fact in F1. It aint gonna change.

[AndyRAC]

Can't really see the problem, Ron wanted a 1-2 for his team, didn't want anything to jeapordise this, sensible decision. The British media are idiots, just because 'their man' didn't win they look for stories that aren't there. If it had been the other way round you bet nothing would 've been said.

[Big Ben]

when one begins believing what the British press says there's something really wrong with him

they say McLaren didn't allow LH win... I just wonder... where did he actually prove he could win it??? FA was on top the whole week-end.

FIA is investigating the case! what a joke! they should be thrown into the ocean... that's the first step for a cleaner environment... they are wasting valuable oxygen

[jas123f1]

A statement issued on Monday:

"The FIA has launched an investigation into incidents involving the McLaren Mercedes team at the 2007 Monaco Grand Prix in light of a possible breach of the International Sporting Code.

[OTA]

Don't really see anything wrong. FA and LH were given, and I beleive they will continue to be given a fair chance to fight it out on the track. They fought it out in the session were Mac decides who takes first in chossing strategy, they fought it out in qualy and they fought it out in the race.

They fought as the brave and outstanding drivers that they are, and while I agree that the race from a visual point of view was dull, it was exciting to see 2 drivers in equal machinery fight it out as they did from thursday. They are both outstanding drivers and no doubt their battle will bring their game a couple of steps forward. IMO they are the 2 best drivers in the current grid, and Mac again is doing a very good job at keeping it fair.

Cheers
David

[F1boat]

I don't believe this. McLaren decided to protect their race after the first round of pit-stop, a completely sensible decision. British media should stop spamming the world with their superstar and Hamilton should accept his defeat.

[F1boat]

A statement issued on Monday:

"The FIA has launched an investigation into incidents involving the McLaren Mercedes team at the 2007 Monaco Grand Prix in light of a possible breach of the International Sporting Code.

If they punish McLaren with something more than a fine, or if they punish FA, the championship will turn into complete FIAsco.

[ioan]

So the FIA did finally decide to enforce their rules:

<<Autosport.com understands that the team will be investigated into whether they have broken Article 151c of the International Sporting Code, which makes it clear that damage to the sport can be caused by: "any fraudulent conduct or any act prejudicial to the interests of any competition or to the interests of motor sport generally.">>

Good read:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/59249

[Daika]

I hope that they clarify the rules on this matter.

And he (Ron dennis) admitted he "virtually had to decide in advance" which one of the drivers would win Sunday's race.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/6698349.stm

So it was given that Alonso won it after he got pole position.

[ioan]

I hope that they clarify the rules on this matter.

And he (Ron dennis) admitted he "virtually had to decide in advance" which one of the drivers would win Sunday's race.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/6698349.stm

So it was given that Alonso won it after he got pole position.

So McLaren broke the rules yesterday.

[raphael123]

I am tired of your stupid comments and ironic posts, so stop it, or I will do that for you ! This is my last warning to you...

I'm sorry Pino. I'm not trying to be tw*atty. But you've warned everyone that posting personal comments (a bit silly I think personally) and personal attacks are forbidden. I point out one member in particular is doing exactly what you said was not permitted, and I'm the one being warned with a warning for pointing it out. I'm baffled :dozey: It's like punishing an eye witness for witnessing a crime!! Maybe EU was right, the rules are only applied depending on the username, rather than when rules are broken.

Disappointed, very disappointed :(

[raphael123]

I do think if McLaren changed Lewis's Hamilton's tactics, for the sake of making sure Alonso would win - that was wrong! Very wrong. I hate to say it, as if I was a supporter of any team, it would be McLaren, but I'm pretty disappointed.

The things Ron Dennis is saying makes it look like they decided to hand Alonso victory, and make it all but impossible for Lewis to challenge him. If that's true, it's a disappointing result!

Should the FIA punish them? Maybe, but if thats the case, why wasn't Ferrari punished when they did the same thing? Oh yes, of course no favouritism exist :dozey: silly me.

[F1boat]

The truth is that Alonso won every session in Monaco, bar the warm-up, which was chaotic. How his win could be put in doubt is beyond me.
Maybe I should switch to the IRL... :(

[Daika]

The truth is that Alonso won every session in Monaco, bar the warm-up, which was chaotic. How his win could be put in doubt is beyond me.
Maybe I should switch to the IRL... :(

That is all irrelevant. His win was put in doubt due to Ron Dennis comments and the pit-stop.

[OTA]

Mac changed his tactics? how do we know that? couldn't it be that they had a tactic if the race was A and another if the race was B.
Unfair and illegal team orders are when one driver is favoured over another. This wasn't the case here as the result of the race was not affected by it.

It's funny how for the first time in a while we see a real battle between team mates and some start to talk about team oreders.

May I ask then why is not illegal to tell a driver who holds a comfortable lead to save his engine or tires. It's cleary in detriment of whoever holds second place who could take advantage of an engine failure. There are many things that need attention in the sport, and honestly I beleive Mac's Monaco is not one of them.

Cheers
David

[F1boat]

That is all irrelevant. His win was put in doubt due to Ron Dennis comments and the pit-stop.

How his pace could be irrelevant? :(

[raphael123]

Mac changed his tactics? how do we know that? couldn't it be that they had a tactic if the race was A and another if the race was B.
Unfair and illegal team orders are when one driver is favoured over another. This wasn't the case here as the result of the race was not affected by it.

It's funny how for the first time in a while we see a real battle between team mates and some start to talk about team oreders.

May I ask then why is not illegal to tell a driver who holds a comfortable lead to save his engine or tires. It's cleary in detriment of whoever holds second place who could take advantage of an engine failure. There are many things that need attention in the sport, and honestly I beleive Mac's Monaco is not one of them.

Cheers
David


I think it is quite different (which I hate to admit).

Lewis had a strategy, which if used to the full extent, he could have beaten Alonso. However, they changed his strategy on the off chance a safety car would be deployed. Ok, you can argue a SC is more probably in Monte Carlo, but say Alonso was a Ferrari, I doubt they would have changed his strategy giving up any chance of victory.

Don't get me wrong, Alonso is definately the worthy winner, however I don't like the way they took away the chance for Lewis to win. No wonder he made those comments, saying at the end of the day he was a rookie, he had the no2 number on his car, and he was a number 2 driver.

If McLaren aren't careful, they are going to lose Lewis. I wonder, if Alonso had been in 2nd, and Lewis in first, whether they would have denied Alonso the chance to beat Lewis in the pitstops. I think the fact Alonso is the World Champion, means they wouldn't even dare try it, but Lewis is a rookie in his first season, and they are exploiting that.

It reminds me of the days when Ferrari would hire a weak No2 who they knew would accept BS, like Irvine who was a nobody when he first joined, and Rubens, who had never had a competitive car before, and then Massa - all three drivers were given their first ever opportunity in a big team, and Ferrari knew they would take more BS than if they were already a proven race winner.

[Daika]

Mac changed his tactics? how do we know that? couldn't it be that they had a tactic if the race was A and another if the race was B.
Unfair and illegal team orders are when one driver is favoured over another. This wasn't the case here as the result of the race was not affected by it.

It's funny how for the first time in a while we see a real battle between team mates and some start to talk about team oreders.

May I ask then why is not illegal to tell a driver who holds a comfortable lead to save his engine or tires. It's cleary in detriment of whoever holds second place who could take advantage of an engine failure. There are many things that need attention in the sport, and honestly I beleive Mac's Monaco is not one of them.

Cheers
David

Because Ron Dennis made up his mind before the race and not during the race. Read the provided links.

[leopard]

Because Ron Dennis made up his mind before the race and not during the race
So, would you agree with me that he's forced to hand his position over his team mate again?

[leopard]

lol, sorry I wanted to quote raphael's :laugh:

[ArrowsFA1]

So the FIA did finally decide to enforce their rules
Not quite. They're looking into the circumstances of the Monaco GP.

Unfair and illegal team orders are when one driver is favoured over another.
Ron Dennis gave his definition:
"Team strategy is what you bring to bear to win a Grand Prix. Team orders is what you bring to bear to manipulate a Grand Prix."
McLaren's strategy on Sunday was designed to earn the best possible result for the Team, not any one driver.

If strategy is being considered a "team order", then F1 will become a farce because strategy is central to every race for every team, has the potential to benefit one driver over another, and so every team should be investigated by the FIA :rolleyes:

[wedge]

Ferrari used a similar system in 2004, they allowed Schumi and Rubens to race until the last pitstop. No-one made a complaint.


If McLaren aren't careful, they are going to lose Lewis. I wonder, if Alonso had been in 2nd, and Lewis in first, whether they would have denied Alonso the chance to beat Lewis in the pitstops. I think the fact Alonso is the World Champion, means they wouldn't even dare try it, but Lewis is a rookie in his first season, and they are exploiting that.


That's part and parcel of F1. It about usurping the #1 status because there will always be a #1 and #2 driver.

Nelson Piquet tried to convince Frank Williams to issue team orders against Mansell because Piquet undermined Mansell's talents as a racer.

Senna and Prost hated each other so much that they later expressed to have #1 status in the respective teams.

Mansell wouldn't have signed with Williams again unless he had #1 status.

Schumi had it sussed. If you want to win and become WDC then having #1 status is very useful. A shame he never had a titanic battle with his F1team-mates.

[leopard]

Definitely right Arrows,
The problem is, this is the first season McLaren playing this sort of strategy, why would apply the old conservative strategy that has proven without satisfied result.

Having said before, They might be confused over decision who they have to lean the title of the driver on?

Seeing that Lewis has contributed a lot on Alonso’s wins and didn’t see the other way around, it seems that Alonso is the main target, although actually Lewis isn’t worse than Alonso. I dare saying that he is better.

[donKey jote]

No wonder he made those comments, saying at the end of the day he was a rookie, he had the no2 number on his car, and he was a number 2 driver.

To be honest, those comments aren't worthy of Lewis and his aura up to now. Had anyone else -Alonso for example- said anything similar about being at a disadvantage with respect to the team mate, many here would be going on about "moaning", "feeling the pressure", and so on.
He doesn't need to make such comments, he is the next best thing and his time will most definitely come and last an era.
I guess he is just human after all.

[OTA]

First even if he say so, RD couldn't make up a final decission before the race. He could had though of an ideal scenario, but scenarios have to be allways backed by reality, if not they are nothing more than wet paper.

Second, it's highly arguable that FA could not make up the 25 or so seconds needed to beat LH in a one stop strategy, and more importantly that would make Felipe an issue as the three could get in the mix. The fastest strategy here was the 2 stopper, but it's nothing unusual for teams to mix strategies in case the race develop in a different way.

I honestly beleive Mac wanted the 1-2, and tried to make sure they coverd all options. Their drivers fought hard from practice 1 and delivered the 1-2, nothing wrong there. If LH had taken pole he would hold the winning strategy.
FA and LH fought it out and this weekend it was FA who won. Just like LH was the better man in Bahrein, FA was the better man here, not by a lot I beleive, but by enough.

I honestly think that RD could not stablish a hierarchy in his team at the moment, he can stablish rules, but hierarchy no, because his 2 drivers don't really respect hierarchies when they step in the car. They both want to win and RD has neither the will nor the power to stop this 2. If RD tried to do it, one of them would definately tell him where to stick it. And Ferrari is looking for a leader...

[ioan]

Ferrari used a similar system in 2004, they allowed Schumi and Rubens to race until the last pitstop. No-one made a complaint.

The difference is that the McLaren drivers were allowed to compete up to Q2 (not last pitstop) and than it was over.
The race was a farce planned by RD before it even started.

Exactly what I was thinking about Saturday after the qualifying session:

BTW I'm very eager to see how will Ron manage the team orders tomorrow.
Hamilton was very very fast today and pole was his if not for traffic in his last lap and knows he can beat Alonso.
Alonso needs to beat his team mate more than anything else.

It will be very delicate and they could easily lose everything on this track, so maybe Ron is thinking right now about what orders he'll have to impose tomorrow.
http://forums.motorsport.com/forums/showpost.php?p=273673&postcount=12

[Roamy]

funny that FIA is concerned about team orders after watching Ferrari for the last 10 years. What is this new revolution about. Oh maybe FIA thinks that Massa should have won !!

[Roamy]

another fact is that I can get where so many of you think that LH could have even remotely had a change to pass Alonso.

[raphael123]

lol, sorry I wanted to quote raphael's :laugh:

Quote me on what?

[raphael123]

Ferrari used a similar system in 2004, they allowed Schumi and Rubens to race until the last pitstop. No-one made a complaint.



That's part and parcel of F1. It about usurping the #1 status because there will always be a #1 and #2 driver.

Nelson Piquet tried to convince Frank Williams to issue team orders against Mansell because Piquet undermined Mansell's talents as a racer.

Senna and Prost hated each other so much that they later expressed to have #1 status in the respective teams.

Mansell wouldn't have signed with Williams again unless he had #1 status.

Schumi had it sussed. If you want to win and become WDC then having #1 status is very useful. A shame he never had a titanic battle with his F1team-mates.

If it's about usurping the no1 status, what else can Hamilton do but be leading him in the drivers title, when they've both had 100% reliability, and beaten him in the last two races.

I like McLaren, I like Alonso, and I think Hamilton is very good, but McLarens actions, if they did pit Hamilton in before was necessary on the off chance that a SC was going to be deployed - that is wrong.

Telling them to ease off in the final stint, that's fine, but denying Hamilton a chance to win a race by messing up his strategy is wrong.

[ioan]

another fact is that I can get where so many of you think that LH could have even remotely had a change to pass Alonso.

Maybe during pit stops as it is so usual in modern F1?!

[raphael123]

Definitely right Arrows,
The problem is, this is the first season McLaren playing this sort of strategy, why would apply the old conservative strategy that has proven without satisfied result.

Having said before, They might be confused over decision who they have to lean the title of the driver on?

Seeing that Lewis has contributed a lot on Alonso’s wins and didn’t see the other way around, it seems that Alonso is the main target, although actually Lewis isn’t worse than Alonso. I dare saying that he is better.

Better? There's no evidence to suggest that.

[raphael123]

To be honest, those comments aren't worthy of Lewis and his aura up to now. Had anyone else -Alonso for example- said anything similar about being at a disadvantage with respect to the team mate, many here would be going on about "moaning", "feeling the pressure", and so on.
He doesn't need to make such comments, he is the next best thing and his time will most definitely come and last an era.
I guess he is just human after all.

I'm glad he made those comments. We need drivers who aren't scared to show their personality, or express their opinions.

So far, though Hamilton is a joy to watch on the track, he is probably one of the most boring people to watch being interviewed because he is so PR orientated.

[ioan]

Telling them to ease off in the final stint, that's fine, but denying Hamilton a chance to win a race by messing up his strategy is wrong.

Now you might realize what it is like when 90% of the forum says you are wrong no matter the facts. ;)

[Big Ben]

I'm glad he made those comments. We need drivers who aren't scared to show their personality, or express their opinions.

So far, though Hamilton is a joy to watch on the track, he is probably one of the most boring people to watch being interviewed because he is so PR orientated.

You know, Alonso's car wears number 1 because HE IS THE WDC!.... and do you know why LH's car wears number 2? because ALONSO IS THE WDC! If the idea was that his team mate is the wdc then everybody misunderstood him, if not then he spoke without thinking

Now...
1. In 3 laps LH wouldn't have got in front of FA
2. If McLaren had decided to go on with the one stop strategy LH would have spent more time during his first and only pitstop.
3. Alonso, in a lighter car would have been able to build up a confortable lead... 25 seconds should have been sufficient.
4. FA would have won anyway and the British press would have said that McLaren lost the race for LH with a poor strategy

someone talked something about facts.... here are some:
Alonso dominated every session this week end (except one)
LH's race wasn't that perfect... He admitted that he brushed the walls a few times.
FIA is a group of idiots.
The British press invented Beckham.
Ioan can't stand RD.
Ioan hates FA.
The thread was planned before the race.
These are facts... what some imagine are nothing but dreams.
pretending that 90% of the members can't understand the facts... that's arrogance and lack of common sense.

[donKey jote]

The thread was planned before the race.


probably :up: :laugh: :laugh:

[ioan]

Ioan can't stand RD.
Ioan hates FA.

Another fact:
eu can't stand ioan! :D

[aryan]

The thread was planned before the race.



:D :D :cool:

:up: :up:

[F1boat]

You know, Alonso's car wears number 1 because HE IS THE WDC!....

:thumbs up:

[Robinho]

i don't get it, they would not have passed each other on the track, they called off the "fight" betwen the drivers when it was obivous a 1-2 for the team was on the cards.

the drivers were obviously told not to try and race on teh track, and not too take each other off in the 1st corner, all this seems to be common sense management, especialy at Monaco, the most prestigious and most difficult to overtake at, oh, and when your rival team have one car struggling down the field, and it will be your teams 150th race win.

i will be stunned if the FIA do anything off the back of their "investigation", but if they don't i'll eagerly wait the "FIA favour McLaren" thread that will inevitabley follow ;)

i also expect different strategy at other races, where its not an insane idea to let your drivers race each other into the wall.

[wmcot]

I'm a Ferrari fan and not particularly fond of McLaren, but I have to admit that the "investigation" is pretty lame. Team orders have always existed in one form or another in F1 and most other forms of racing. They always will. I suspect that any other team would have done the exact same thing to get a 1-2 finish.

[ioan]

Telling them not to race each other on track because they can take each other out is OK by me. But getting away Hamilton's chance to try to earn a position during pit stops is what I question here, and that only because they pretend it wasn't an influence on the outcome of the race.

[F1boat]

You can't be sure that Hamilton would have beaten Alonso. Alonso deserved his victory. Hamilton was going too fast for his own good, brusing the walls and to no avail.
IMO Hamilton was NOT ready for a Monaco victory, that's why Alonso won.
The investigation is a joke.

[Daika]

You can't be sure that Hamilton would have beaten Alonso. Alonso deserved his victory. Hamilton was going too fast for his own good, brusing the walls and to no avail.
IMO Hamilton was NOT ready for a Monaco victory, that's why Alonso won.
The investigation is a joke.

Reading on RD his comments, it was decided that Alonso could win because he got pole position. That's why the FIA is investigating them.

At the post-race press conference Dennis admitted he "virtually had to decide in advance" which driver would win because of the challenging nature of the tight street circuit.

Really can somebody be that stupid? to say that out loud.

[jso1985]

Telling them not to race each other on track because they can take each other out is OK by me. But getting away Hamilton's chance to try to earn a position during pit stops is what I question here, and that only because they pretend it wasn't an influence on the outcome of the race.

but let's take count Hamilton had very little chances to overtake Alonso in the pits with only 3 laps!

[donKey jote]

I admit I was a bit concerned when I saw the headline about the FIA investigating McLaren, what with them almost lapping Massa in P3...
I was relieved to see it was only about "team strategy orders" :p :

What's the deal? They didn't slow down that much did they? Hamilton was brushing the walls right up to the end but there was no way he could pass on track with McLaren still getting a 1-2 (barring team orders for Hamilton :D ).
As for the strategy change from 1 Stop to "the quicker 2-stop"... well it's all what if when maybe.
Fact is: Alonso was fastest in Qualy, took fastest lap in the "race", and in control despite Trulli throughout.
If there's any investigation they should look into Trulli holding up Alonso under blues, costing him a full 6 seconds the first time around.
If FIA want to penalize McLaren they should dock a minute off both of their cars' times :p :p
http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/16/16_3_166.gif

[raphael123]

You know, Alonso's car wears number 1 because HE IS THE WDC!.... and do you know why LH's car wears number 2? because ALONSO IS THE WDC! If the idea was that his team mate is the wdc then everybody misunderstood him, if not then he spoke without thinking

Now...
1. In 3 laps LH wouldn't have got in front of FA
2. If McLaren had decided to go on with the one stop strategy LH would have spent more time during his first and only pitstop.
3. Alonso, in a lighter car would have been able to build up a confortable lead... 25 seconds should have been sufficient.
4. FA would have won anyway and the British press would have said that McLaren lost the race for LH with a poor strategy

someone talked something about facts.... here are some:
Alonso dominated every session this week end (except one)
LH's race wasn't that perfect... He admitted that he brushed the walls a few times.
FIA is a group of idiots.
The British press invented Beckham.
Ioan can't stand RD.
Ioan hates FA.
The thread was planned before the race.
These are facts... what some imagine are nothing but dreams.
pretending that 90% of the members can't understand the facts... that's arrogance and lack of common sense.

Is there any need for you to be so antagonizing? It's as if your filled with anger waiting to release it all....maybe a message board isn't the right place.

Especially when I agree with everything you've said. Alonso was a worthy winner. There's no doubt in my mind Alonso would have won that race whatever Hamilton's strategy. What I disagree with, is Lewis wasn't even given the opportunity to try and win!! They gave him a heavy fuel load in qualifying allowing Alonso to grab pole, and then pitted him early when he had fuel, meaning there was no chance he could mount a proper challenge!

Your arguement that Alonso would have won anyway, is no different to the likes Schumacher fans use when they say Schumacher would have beaten Rubens over the course of a season anyway. Was that acceptable to you back then? I doubt it!!

I'm sorry, but what McLaren did, is ALMOST as bad as what Ferrari use to do. I say almost, because they haven't quite reached the stage Ferrari were doing.

At least, when I critizise Ferrari, I'm not scared to admit and critizise a team I actually like when they do the same. Your denial is almost as bad as Ioan and Garry Walker.

[Valve Bounce]

Reading on RD his comments, it was decided that Alonso could win because he got pole position. That's why the FIA is investigating them.

At the post-race press conference Dennis admitted he "virtually had to decide in advance" which driver would win because of the challenging nature of the tight street circuit.

Really can somebody be that stupid? to say that out loud.

Very stupid - I just wonder whether the bookmakers can sue him. It's equivalent to admitting that he fixed the race where there is betting going on the placegetters.

[donKey jote]

he did say virtually, allegedly :p :

[raphael123]

Telling them not to race each other on track because they can take each other out is OK by me. But getting away Hamilton's chance to try to earn a position during pit stops is what I question here, and that only because they pretend it wasn't an influence on the outcome of the race.

But didn't you defend Ferrari over doing much worse things?

At least be consistent.

[Ian McC]

Reading this you can see why McLaren were right to be cautious

http://www.crash.net/news_View~cid~1~id~148685.htm

Seeems like people taking what is common sense and twisting it to their own views, nothing new really on this forum.

[Valve Bounce]

Reading this you can see why McLaren were right to be cautious

http://www.crash.net/news_View~cid~1~id~148685.htm

Seeems like people taking what is common sense and twisting it to their own views, nothing new really on this forum.


Can we have a link to the Hamilton interview or is this the only reference.

However, driving at Monaco and accepting kisses from the armco can have dire consequences.

Basically, I think Ron Dennis should have just kept his mouth shut.

[Big Ben]

Is there any need for you to be so antagonizing? It's as if your filled with anger waiting to release it all....maybe a message board isn't the right place.

Especially when I agree with everything you've said. Alonso was a worthy winner. There's no doubt in my mind Alonso would have won that race whatever Hamilton's strategy. What I disagree with, is Lewis wasn't even given the opportunity to try and win!! They gave him a heavy fuel load in qualifying allowing Alonso to grab pole, and then pitted him early when he had fuel, meaning there was no chance he could mount a proper challenge!

Your arguement that Alonso would have won anyway, is no different to the likes Schumacher fans use when they say Schumacher would have beaten Rubens over the course of a season anyway. Was that acceptable to you back then? I doubt it!!

I'm sorry, but what McLaren did, is ALMOST as bad as what Ferrari use to do. I say almost, because they haven't quite reached the stage Ferrari were doing.

At least, when I critizise Ferrari, I'm not scared to admit and critizise a team I actually like when they do the same. Your denial is almost as bad as Ioan and Garry Walker.

do you compare this to RB waiting for MS on the finishing line? or with JT being ready to beat RB because he won...?
The real result of this team strategy change was that LH finished with an increased gap. I think the one stop strategy was more like an option if the SC came in.
And for your information... I m not against teams having a no 1 driver in certain circumstances... The difference is that at Ferrari things were decided before the championship began.

[mstillhere]

i don't get it, they would not have passed each other on the track, they called off the "fight" betwen the drivers when it was obivous a 1-2 for the team was on the cards.

the drivers were obviously told not to try and race on teh track, and not too take each other off in the 1st corner, all this seems to be common sense management, especialy at Monaco, the most prestigious and most difficult to overtake at, oh, and when your rival team have one car struggling down the field, and it will be your teams 150th race win.

i will be stunned if the FIA do anything off the back of their "investigation", but if they don't i'll eagerly wait the "FIA favour McLaren" thread that will inevitabley follow ;)

i also expect different strategy at other races, where its not an insane idea to let your drivers race each other into the wall.

What do you think would happen on this forum instead if the FIA would find McLaren at fault? I can see already hundreds, thousands of threads reading "FIA favour Ferrari again".

[Valve Bounce]

What do you think would happen on this forum instead if the FIA would find McLaren at fault? I can see already hundreds, thousands of threads reading "FIA favour Ferrari again".


Or more to the point: FIA kicks Ron Dennis's ass!! :p :

[Hawkmoon]

Ron Dennis gave his definition:
McLaren's strategy on Sunday was designed to earn the best possible result for the Team, not any one driver.

If strategy is being considered a "team order", then F1 will become a farce because strategy is central to every race for every team, has the potential to benefit one driver over another, and so every team should be investigated by the FIA :rolleyes:

That's Ron mixing semantics and Ronspeak. Strategy and orders are not as far apart as Ron would have us believe. Strategies are carried out through the execution of orders, are they not?

A couple of things puzzle me.

Why did Hamilton qualify so much heavier than Alonso when pole is all important at Monaco? Hamilton claims he was 6 laps heavier, which I doubt, but he was at least 3 laps heavier.

Why did Hamilton concede the first corner so quickly to Alonso? He slotted stright in behind the Spaniard and effectively acted as Alonso's rear gunner into turn 1. That's not the way Hamilton has started the other races where he has been quite aggressive off the line and done well as a result.

McLaren claim that they pitted Hamilton early because they feared a safety car. Why didn't they do the same for Alonso? Why was a safety car any more likely at the time of Hamilton's first stop than it was at any other point in the race?

I think Hamilton knew that the race was going to be Alonso's before the start but figured that if he jumped him in the pits there was little the team could do about it short of telling him to let Alonso pass. That's why he was grumbling about being called into the pits early after the race.

Ain't conspiracy theories fun! ;)

[Valve Bounce]

That's Ron mixing semantics and Ronspeak. Strategy and orders are not as far apart as Ron would have us believe. Strategies are carried out through the execution of orders, are they not?

A couple of things puzzle me.

Why did Hamilton qualify so much heavier than Alonso when pole is all important at Monaco? Hamilton claims he was 6 laps heavier, which I doubt, but he was at least 3 laps heavier.

Why did Hamilton concede the first corner so quickly to Alonso? He slotted stright in behind the Spaniard and effectively acted as Alonso's rear gunner into turn 1. That's not the way Hamilton has started the other races where he has been quite aggressive off the line and done well as a result.

McLaren claim that they pitted Hamilton early because they feared a safety car. Why didn't they do the same for Alonso? Why was a safety car any more likely at the time of Hamilton's first stop than it was at any other point in the race?

I think Hamilton knew that the race was going to be Alonso's before the start but figured that if he jumped him in the pits there was little the team could do about it short of telling him to let Alonso pass. That's why he was grumbling about being called into the pits early after the race.

Ain't conspiracy theories fun! ;)

I think Ron Dennis explained that: Alonso was on a two stop strategy whereas Lewis was on a twoone stop strategy. This was in case the safety car came out which would have nullified the large gap that Alonso had built up over Massa, permitting Massa to catch up. Now if then Massa was on a one stop strategy, he would have passed Alonso when the latter did his second stop. But by running Lewis long initially, this gave him the option of having lewis ahead of anyone else on a one stop if the safety car came out, with the worst scenario a 1 and 3 for Mackalaren.

However, I feel that Ron should have just kept his mouth shut as he was not obliged to answer to anyone about his tactics at the time. Now he has to answer to the FIA, and that will cause all sorts of innuendos.

[JAC]

Well before anyone accuses Ron Dennis of not allowing his drivers to race eachother remember that this is the same Ron Dennis who employed both
Senna and Prost at McLaren in the late '80's..Now that was some serious
inter-team rivalry, and often at the risk of losing races and championships..

This whole situation has been hyped up by the notoriously sensationalist British media, jumping up and down in the midst of Lewis-mania.
The 'hold-station' rule has been used by teams for decades..It's not team orders, its common sense..

They'll be allowed to race eachother and Lewis will get his chance...just not at Monaco..it all which makes complete sense to me

[jas123f1]

They'll be allowed to race eachother and Lewis will get his chance...just not at Monaco..it all which makes complete sense to me

Yes - it makes - and same time there is a little thing we should notice: team orders are not allowed – or are the? I think also that English newspapers like to see that Ron D give a guarantee for Hamilton that he is allowed to race without team orders in the future. That’s the main reason to all noise, I think.. ;)

[ArrowsFA1]

Strategy and orders are not as far apart as Ron would have us believe. Strategies are carried out through the execution of orders, are they not?
That's exactly the problem, and something I mentioned earlier. We're in an absurd situation where a team discussion regarding strategy in the motorhome on Saturday is considered by some to be a form of team orders.

Incidentally, and something that seems to have been missed, the FIA are not investigating McLaren regarding team orders. The FIA are looking at whether they brought the sport into disrepute under Article 151c of the International Sporting Code. This is the same article that was used to penalise Ferrari in 2002 as there was no rule regarding team orders available to the FIA at that time.

[DimitraF1]

Remove The Constructors Points From Monaco From Mclaren!!! Team Orders Are Not Allowed!!! Ron Dennis Says That He Give Team Orders!!!

[Big Ben]

Why did Hamilton concede the first corner so quickly to Alonso? He slotted stright in behind the Spaniard and effectively acted as Alonso's rear gunner into turn 1. That's not the way Hamilton has started the other races where he has been quite aggressive off the line and done well as a result.

McLaren claim that they pitted Hamilton early because they feared a safety car. Why didn't they do the same for Alonso? Why was a safety car any more likely at the time of Hamilton's first stop than it was at any other point in the race?



To that first question I´d say:
1. The first corner is to the right.
2. Because he was heavier.
3. Because it was much easier to lose a position to FM on the inside than to win one on the exterior.

To SC strategy... I thought the idea was that LH´s strategy could become a one stop strategy if SC was deployed...

[Big Ben]

The only way LH could have get in front of Alonso was through pit stop strategy... so giving a strategy to FA to lose the race and one to LH to win it would have been what? fair competition?

[F1boat]

Remove The Constructors Points From Monaco From Mclaren!!! Team Orders Are Not Allowed!!! Ron Dennis Says That He Give Team Orders!!!

Would you be happy if Ferrari takes the lead after punshment to rival team? :(

[Valve Bounce]

The only way LH could have get in front of Alonso was through pit stop strategy... so giving a strategy to FA to lose the race and one to LH to win it would have been what? fair competition?


Of course, there is always the suspicion that had Lewis Hamilton been loaded with the same amount of fule as Alonso during quals, he just might have been on pole.

But, of course, this is all conjecture.

[Mickey T]

People seem to forget the results of every other quick car that ran a one-stop strategy.

BMW ran both their boys on one-stoppers, and admitted it made the wrong call and that Kubica could have been third on a two-stopper.

a two-stop strategy was clearly the way to go and, after the hedged bet about a safety car - largely to nullify the chance of massa sneaking in front of alonso - it made sense to swing hamilton around to two.

simple.

and if you saw the condition of lewis's rear tyres at the end of the race compared to fernando's, you'd really understand how little chance he had of overtaking on track...

[DimitraF1]

F1BOAT yes for sure,the deserve to be punished

[jens]

I think that there are all the possibilities to see a replay of the Senna-Prost team-mate battle between Alonso and Hamilton. First signs of a possible confrontation could already be seen. Alonso should feel enormous pressure from his young team-mate and he might fear that in the long run Dennis might start preferring his compatriot Hamilton. Lewis, on the other hand, is showing his strength already on the debut season and surely in the long run he wouldn't be satisfied with "other strategies". Alonso is an extrovert and if he doesn't like something, he'll surely express it. Hamilton has an attractive driving style reminding a bit of Senna and it was a pleasure to see him powersliding at Monaco. It was evident that he gave absolutely everything to win the Monaco Grand Prix. Ron has to be careful not to lose one of his drivers in the next few years. I doubt that FA-LH driver pairing lasts longer than three seasons.

[Ranger]

F1BOAT yes for sure,the deserve to be punished
I suppose you don't remember what Ferrari did pretty much most of last year then, because it was pretty much on par with what McLaren did at this race.

I don't see why McLaren should be punished by a rule that has never been put in place at any time since its inception in 2002, considering how many times other teams have done it.

Orders are part of racing, and with about $400million per team involved, if you don't like it, tough titties!

[Ranger]

I think that there are all the possibilities to see a replay of the Senna-Prost team-mate battle between Alonso and Hamilton. First signs of a possible confrontation could already be seen. Alonso should feel enormous pressure from his young team-mate and he might fear that in the long run Dennis might start preferring his compatriot Hamilton.

Yep... After the Oz GP I was thinking this for myself.

http://www.planetf1.com/story/0,18954,3213_2153965,00.html

Now supposing this article isn't rubbish you can be sure the two drivers aren't soft with each other on track... or off track for that matter.

[Big Ben]

Of course, there is always the suspicion that had Lewis Hamilton been loaded with the same amount of fule as Alonso during quals, he just might have been on pole.

But, of course, this is all conjecture.

Maybe... maybe not
Maybe they ve decided to give that strategy to FA based on the fact that he has been quicker all week end... maybe not.
I like them both so I really don´t care that much who wins as long as it is a McLaren... but this week-end FA was better and deserved the win.

[ArrowsFA1]

The final paragraph in this article (http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns19208.html) makes a very good point:


It is a shame that what is a cracking good season in F1 could be tainted by rules which are so vague as to be useless - unless someone wants to use them.

[OTA]

Absolutely right Arrows, it's been a while since two top drivers in the same team are able to fight it out, but of course F1 is not a sport, and drivers are usesless idiots who follow instructions from shady business leaders. Indeed I beleive the whole deal was planned by Vodafone to gain a few points in market share in Spain.

When there's a fight there's a winner and FA was the winner this time. God bless drivers for taking so much rubbish from any body who thinks he might have a point, and God bless FA and LH for being so bloddy good.

Cheers
David

[Valve Bounce]

The final paragraph in this article (http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns19208.html) makes a very good point:

So does the second last paragraph: It is common practice for teams to have their drivers hold station after the final pit stops. This avoids the risk of collisions and over-stressing the cars for no purpose.

Especially at Monaco seeing that overtaking is virtually impossible, and the armco is unforgiving.

[Flat.tyres]

Lewis failed to pass Alonso because his pit-stop was forward three laps, if he stayed those three laps out, he could have passed Alonso. He didn't failed, the opportunity was taken away.

Of course it makes sense that Ron Dennis is preventing a crash because they are heading for a 1-2. But you can't collide into each other in a pit-stop, safest way to let teammates battle each other.

Lewis took a long time to dial himself into this race. I dont know if that was intentional or because he knew the strategy was to let Alonso win. it doesnt matter because the team brought home a 1-2 which was good for McLaren but Lewis is obviously frustrated. he's a hard charger and thinks he has the edge which in all honesty, he probably has.

so, why bring him in if he has 5 odd laps of fuel? I think because of the way he was chucking it around during Alonsos stop. perhaps Ron thought discretion was better than the opportunity of losing a car.

all in all, I'm not overly concerned. Lewis is getting faster. On the same fuel, he would have been on pole. His standing in the team is rising past Alonsos but he has to keep his head.

Lewis "The Dream" Hamilton needs to keep in check with reality if he wants the WDC this year and not let it run away from him.

[F1boat]

Lewis Hamilton for me showed a disgusting part of himself, a la Alonso last year in China. When a team have made you hero right from obscurity, one should be grateful and never risk teams' reputation. Alonso, on the other hand, this season showed respect to McLaren, even when things weren't going well to him.
In the end, Lewis is very, very young.

[wedge]

Apparantly Lewis had an extra 4 laps of fuel in the second stint. Instead, McLaren bring him in a lap after Alonso???

[F1boat]

Because of the threat of a safety car caution.

[wedge]

How would RD known there was going to be SC in the coming laps?

It's a poor excuse and everyone knows it. You don't change strategy like that unless you have something physically react to eg. SC actually appearing on the race track, rain, changing from 2-stopper to 1-stopper.

And what does constitute as racing to the second/last pit-stop? Alonso's last pitstop of Lewis? Alonso's second stop when he does an extremely slow outlap - nearly 4s off the pace, just when Lewis is told to come in? No wonder Lewis reacted the way he did. I'm sure he could've made the difference with the extra fuel laps.

[Caroline]

After all the discussion, it leaves the non F1 fan feeling very confused and more that a little disgruntled. We know that team orders aren't allowed, but 'holding station' is common practice. We know that Monaco is a tricky dangerous place to race, let alone pass. It just makes the sport look bad. That's what gets to me.

[ArrowsFA1]

How would RD known there was going to be SC in the coming laps?
As Ron said the safety car has been deployed four times in the previous five Monaco GPs. It is just one of many factors all the teams would have considered when deciding on their strategy for the race.

He didn't know but their was a high probability of it appearing. As it turned out it didn't, but hindsight doesn't stop it being factored into the strategy.

[wedge]

Still a crap excuse. They could've brought Lewis earlier in his 1st stop, but they never. So why 2/3rd into the race when the SC is more probable in the first half of the race?

[Big Ben]

all in all, I'm not overly concerned. Lewis is getting faster. On the same fuel, he would have been on pole. His standing in the team is rising past Alonsos but he has to keep his head.

Now that you have decided that what's the point of discussing anything? LH would have got the pole and there's nothing more to add to that. That's all folks!

[OTA]

And may I ask why RD would favour FA? For many of you it seems pretty obvious that LH was the better man so what are the reasons behind RD to favour the slow spaniard over the quick brit?

Load of crap if I may. FA will be crowned WDC for a 3rd time in a row, and some of you will still say he was lucky or favoured by his team or I don't know what. It's funny because I don't remember Alonso losing many races he's been leading and whoever thinks that he was going to get passed by LH is dreaming.

Cheers
David

[F1MAN2007]

Maybe I am blind, but I didn't see in the race where really Lewis was close to overtake FA? And all of them were seemed still pushing hard untill the last 5 laps?!

We are saying strategies used, whatever was, who knows what would have happened if they would have not called Lewis to pit earlier as it was planned? Maybe he would have won the race or he would cought in the traffic and loose eben the 2nd position.

Some peoples don't understand the startegy with the SC. But the time Lewis have called to pit already Sutil was stopped after kissing the wall (if I am not mistaken) and there was big probability of the SC, which would have been a good news for Lewis to win the race following the strategy.

But the SC not deployed, it turned in the hand of FA.

I understand the decision of RD, Mclaren was on pace in Monaco and no one can deny this, so what would people saying if he didn't slow down the drivers and one of them (or both) make mistake and loose the win after such dominance all the week end?!

Lewis kissed the wall more than 5 times in pushing hard to catch FA. I think it was fair to RD to ask the drivers to slow down and hold the position for 1-2 instead taking the risk to loose one driver out or all of them fighting between themeselves.

Alonso won the Pole position, the fastest lap and the race. Whatever goona come out from FIA or at the end of this year, Fernando Alonso proved last week the reason why he is a WC. He proved that in front of the MS (the legend now?!) for 2 seasons and don't see what is wrong if he is repeating the same thing with the Rockie.

I don't remember very well which race, but last year Felippe Massa had to hold behind MS not attacking him, which was a possiblity, and just was blocking the monkeys (from Lewis) behind him not to push and put pressure on MS. The FIA didn't investigate that? Or is because it was a Ferrari case?!

I think the orders to the drivers before the race from RD was : " don't take unecessarly risk in the first corner..." Which means, Lewis to block Massa (which he did very well) then after the first corner the battle was open between Lewis and Alonso untill the first stop where you have to review the strategy and how the race is going on and have to take a decision, particuraly when you are 1-2 and outpace everyone there.

If it was Fenando 2nd and Lewis 1st before the first stop, I don't think that RD would ask Lewis to slow down for Alonso. I think the most important to the team was 1-2 and bring the cars in one piece at home nothing else whoever is 1 or 2.

But the Kid, had in his head that this is his first win after all media were saying so and the Kid thaught it was true?! But he forget that he is a second driver and I think always there some responsabilities as second driver than first driver. This is the case in World Rally Championship and team orders it is something normal when you are looking for both titles. Why F1 may be special? Maybe not openly, but I believe always it will be secret team orders whatever they can investigate.

[wedge]

Lewis would never have overtaken Alonso but likely to have pit-passed him with the extra laps onboard.

Lewis admitted he kissed the barriers - that's how you drive around Monaco! There a saying that if you don't brush the armco and if you can still read the brand name of the tyres - you weren't quick enough!

I think the question is whether Alonso affected Ron's decisions? Afterall, there were rumours Alonso didn't want Lewis testing at Barcelona before the Spanish GP. Just how ruthless is Alonso?

[truefan72]

This is a disgraceful act by RD to deny a fair and blanced fight for the race win. It says more about Alonso than it does about Hamilton. The guy was leading the WDC coming into the race and was second on the pole, after the second stint he was closing up on FA quickly and at one point looked clear to pass him, before "team orders came into play"

I am disgusted and annoyed. Smame RD, Shame McClaren, Shame Alonso for not wanting a fair fight, shame LH for not standing up and defying orders. Even now more than ever I will support LH in his quest to win the WDC in his rookie year.

I can see possibler sanctions coming from this action that might hurt both drivers and the team,.

The biggest and most stupid thing of all was RD opening his mouth and putting the entire team in jeopardy. That to me is unforgivable and proves yet again that RD thinks he's the main attraction of the team.

Until I heard of this, I assumed FA just had a better race than Hamilton, Now I am not sure about anything to date.

[ClarkFan]

Good lord, how long have you all been following F1?

Did you know that Phil Hill pulled over in the closing laps in Morocco in 1958 to let Mike Hawthorn into 2nd place so Hawthorn could win the World Championship? Shameful! Did you know that Lorenzo Bandini pulled over in Mexico City in 1964 to let John Surtees win the championship? Shocking! Or that Gilles Villeneuve held position behind Jody Sheckter at Monza in 1979 to that Sheckter could clinch the championship over Villeneuve? Scandalous!

Team orders have always been part of F1, back to 1950 when Fangio held position behind Farina to let Farina win the first World Championship. The only difference today is that the FIA overreacted to the spectacle at Austria in 2002, harrumphed indignantly and "banned" team orders. Like hell they did. They just drove them underground, and set off the kind of wild speculation you see in this thread. It would have been far better to just hit Ferrari with a sizable fine for botching the execution of team orders and just let it go at that.

Let's get this straight. Every team uses team orders, whether it is a preset #1-#2 pecking order or "hold position." (Remember, it was Pironi's violation of a "hold position" situation that set off the events leading to Villeneuve's death.) No team owner wants to see his drivers take each other out (Remember the JPM-RS clashes at Williams?) or break a car racing a teammate, and the only way to ensure that the lead driver takes it easy on his car is to make "hold position" good through pit stops.

Don't get so excited over a non-event.... :rolleyes:

ClarkFan

[Roamy]

very good clarkfan - my only problem was that the old man should have suspended pironi for a couple of races.

[F1boat]

Lewis would never have overtaken Alonso but likely to have pit-passed him with the extra laps onboard.

Lewis admitted he kissed the barriers - that's how you drive around Monaco! There a saying that if you don't brush the armco and if you can still read the brand name of the tyres - you weren't quick enough!

I think the question is whether Alonso affected Ron's decisions? Afterall, there were rumours Alonso didn't want Lewis testing at Barcelona before the Spanish GP. Just how ruthless is Alonso?

Not as ruthless as an arrogant cheeky kid, who badmouths the team who have taken him out of obscurity.

[wmcot]

I really don't think this is a big deal or at all unusual as far as racing goes. What I do see happening is rifts opening all over the place. There are certainly signs of differences widening between FA and LH, LH and RD, the British press (backing LH) and RD, McLaren fans and LH fans, etc. I doubt that LH will be satisfied with remaining "number 2" for very long. At the same time, I can't see FA sharing equality with LH or being 2nd to him, either. One of the drivers will leave ASAP if things continue as they are.

I can't really fault RD for his remarks since he just verbalized what has been common knowledge in F1 for years.

On the other hand, LH probably shouldn't have said the, "I have number 2 on my car so I am the number 2 driver" remark (at least I'm sure RD wishes he hadn't.) But, at the same time, it is nice to hear drivers saying what they think. It will be interesting to see if there are repercussions toward LH from within the team.

[tinchote]

As Ron said the safety car has been deployed four times in the previous five Monaco GPs. It is just one of many factors all the teams would have considered when deciding on their strategy for the race.

He didn't know but their was a high probability of it appearing. As it turned out it didn't, but hindsight doesn't stop it being factored into the strategy.

Come on, Arrows, show me one other example of a team bringing in just one of their cars earlier because of "the risk of a SC". What if the SC was in the lap after LH pitted? Extremely poor excuses on RD's part.

[N. Jones]

I keep reading in the press that all of the teams tell their drivers near the end of the race to hold station so the team can claim maximum points. If that is what happened here then what is the problem??

[TMorel]

NJones.
If that's what happened then there wouldn't be a problem.
It seems to me though that some quarters think Lewis wasn't given the chance to be beaten by Fernando in a clean fight from the start.

If - and it's a big IF - Lewis was running heavy on fuel and they took away his chance of using the advantage of those extra laps then yeah, I can see why there'd be the uproar there is.
Regardless of whether Fernando would have still beaten him as most rightly claim, they still should have let him do his extra laps if only to show him that yeah, his strategy was wrong that day because y'know what, he might MIGHT have snuck it off him.
They'd probably got enough of a gap to Massa that he wouldn't have been at risk had the strategedy not worked and even if there was a risk of the Ferrari snatching it, if they were happy to have 1st & 3rd (which is the claim with this safetycar excuse) then they'd have been no worse off.

[El Sween]

Yawn..... Is this over yet?

[Timber]

Maybe I am blind, but I didn't see in the race where really Lewis was close to overtake FA? And all of them were seemed still pushing hard untill the last 5 laps?!

We are saying strategies used, whatever was, who knows what would have happened if they would have not called Lewis to pit earlier as it was planned? Maybe he would have won the race or he would cought in the traffic and loose eben the 2nd position.

Some peoples don't understand the startegy with the SC. But the time Lewis have called to pit already Sutil was stopped after kissing the wall (if I am not mistaken) and there was big probability of the SC, which would have been a good news for Lewis to win the race following the strategy.

But the SC not deployed, it turned in the hand of FA.

I understand the decision of RD, Mclaren was on pace in Monaco and no one can deny this, so what would people saying if he didn't slow down the drivers and one of them (or both) make mistake and loose the win after such dominance all the week end?!

Lewis kissed the wall more than 5 times in pushing hard to catch FA. I think it was fair to RD to ask the drivers to slow down and hold the position for 1-2 instead taking the risk to loose one driver out or all of them fighting between themeselves.

Alonso won the Pole position, the fastest lap and the race. Whatever goona come out from FIA or at the end of this year, Fernando Alonso proved last week the reason why he is a WC. He proved that in front of the MS (the legend now?!) for 2 seasons and don't see what is wrong if he is repeating the same thing with the Rockie.

I don't remember very well which race, but last year Felippe Massa had to hold behind MS not attacking him, which was a possiblity, and just was blocking the monkeys (from Lewis) behind him not to push and put pressure on MS. The FIA didn't investigate that? Or is because it was a Ferrari case?!

I think the orders to the drivers before the race from RD was : " don't take unecessarly risk in the first corner..." Which means, Lewis to block Massa (which he did very well) then after the first corner the battle was open between Lewis and Alonso untill the first stop where you have to review the strategy and how the race is going on and have to take a decision, particuraly when you are 1-2 and outpace everyone there.

If it was Fenando 2nd and Lewis 1st before the first stop, I don't think that RD would ask Lewis to slow down for Alonso. I think the most important to the team was 1-2 and bring the cars in one piece at home nothing else whoever is 1 or 2.

But the Kid, had in his head that this is his first win after all media were saying so and the Kid thaught it was true?! But he forget that he is a second driver and I think always there some responsabilities as second driver than first driver. This is the case in World Rally Championship and team orders it is something normal when you are looking for both titles. Why F1 may be special? Maybe not openly, but I believe always it will be secret team orders whatever they can investigate.
i could not have said it any better !!!!

[Valve Bounce]

NJones.
If that's what happened then there wouldn't be a problem.
It seems to me though that some quarters think Lewis wasn't given the chance to be beaten by Fernando in a clean fight from the start.

If - and it's a big IF - Lewis was running heavy on fuel and they took away his chance of using the advantage of those extra laps then yeah, I can see why there'd be the uproar there is.
Regardless of whether Fernando would have still beaten him as most rightly claim, they still should have let him do his extra laps if only to show him that yeah, his strategy was wrong that day because y'know what, he might MIGHT have snuck it off him.
They'd probably got enough of a gap to Massa that he wouldn't have been at risk had the strategedy not worked and even if there was a risk of the Ferrari snatching it, if they were happy to have 1st & 3rd (which is the claim with this safetycar excuse) then they'd have been no worse off.

Maybe, just maybe here: if Mackalaren wanted to change over to a two stop strategy (and I don't know the full intricacies here) then it was appropriate to bring him in then as he didn't look like making up the necessary time on Alonso. If we can get a full analysis to show the advantages, then I could understand it more. :confused:

[Hawkmoon]

The only way these types of discussions will be put to bed is FIA scrapping the ridiculous "no team orders" rule. It's patently absurd and never should have been instigated in the first place, regardless of Austria 2002.

But, since the rule does exist, and since many people took great delight in taking shots at Ferrari for team orders, we may as well enjoy taking shots at McLaren when they use team orders (or team "strategies" in Ronspeak ;) ).

I think many here are looking too closely at the Monaco result. If you pull back and look at the season so far as a whole you get a clearer picture of what McLaren are doing.

McLaren have qualified Hamilton heavier 4 times in 5 races. Hamilton has therefore qualified behind Alonso 4 times in 5 races. The only time Hamilton has been lighter in qualifying, and thus ahead on the grid, was in Bahrain. I don't think it's a coincidence that Bahrain is the only race that Hamilton has beaten Alonso on the track (Alonso's tangle with Massa in Spain put him behind Hamilton and clouds the result).

I think McLaren's team "strategies" are being executed on Saturdays, not Sundays. Why else would they consistently make Hamilton qualify heavier? Particularly at a place like Monaco? I think Hamilton is definently McLaren's No. 2. He either doesn't know it or doesn't like it.

Don't believe me? Let's look at the first pit stops of both drivers so far.

Australia: Alonso - lap 22, Hamilton lap 23
Malaysia: Alonso - lap 18, Hamilton lap 20
Bahrain: Hamilton - lap 19, Alonso lap 22
Spain: Alonso - lap 19, Hamilton - lap 22
Monaco: Alonso - lap 26, Hamilton - lap 29

It looks to me like McLaren have made a conscious effort to keep Hamilton behind Alonso in qualifying. There's also no way that Hamilton was switched form a 1 stopper to a two stopper in Monaco. The one stoppers came in from around lap 40 to lap 45. Hamilton pitted on lap 29. If they switched him then they dragged him in 10 to 15 laps early. Not ony that, Hamilton managed to qualify 1 tenth behind Alonso with 15 or more laps of fuel onboard. I don't think so.

I think Hamilton's speed has caught McLaren out. They knew he was quick but I don't think they expected him to be as quick as Alonso. You can bet that Alonso believes he's the No.1. I wonder what Hamilton believes?

[wedge]

Good lord, how long have you all been following F1?

Did you know that Phil Hill pulled over in the closing laps in Morocco in 1958 to let Mike Hawthorn into 2nd place so Hawthorn could win the World Championship? Shameful! Did you know that Lorenzo Bandini pulled over in Mexico City in 1964 to let John Surtees win the championship? Shocking! Or that Gilles Villeneuve held position behind Jody Sheckter at Monza in 1979 to that Sheckter could clinch the championship over Villeneuve? Scandalous!

Team orders have always been part of F1, back to 1950 when Fangio held position behind Farina to let Farina win the first World Championship. The only difference today is that the FIA overreacted to the spectacle at Austria in 2002, harrumphed indignantly and "banned" team orders. Like hell they did. They just drove them underground, and set off the kind of wild speculation you see in this thread. It would have been far better to just hit Ferrari with a sizable fine for botching the execution of team orders and just let it go at that.

Let's get this straight. Every team uses team orders, whether it is a preset #1-#2 pecking order or "hold position." (Remember, it was Pironi's violation of a "hold position" situation that set off the events leading to Villeneuve's death.) No team owner wants to see his drivers take each other out (Remember the JPM-RS clashes at Williams?) or break a car racing a teammate, and the only way to ensure that the lead driver takes it easy on his car is to make "hold position" good through pit stops.

Don't get so excited over a non-event.... :rolleyes:

ClarkFan

Yes, no doubt I agree with you there.

Whats so intriguing is that its Senna vs. Prost all over again!

Just who currently holds the balance in power? How did Ron make such a decision?

Ones of the reasons Prost left McLaren was that felt undermined by Honda because they favoured Senna.

At the start of the 1988 season Prost proposed to Senna that (at some races) whoever lead into the first corner at the start of the race should go to win the race. But at the 1989 San Marino GP the race was restarted (due to Berger's horrific crash), Senna found a loophole in the gentleman's agreement and overtook Prost on the restart! That was when they became well and truly bitter enemies.

[Valve Bounce]

I think Hamilton's speed has caught McLaren out. They knew he was quick but I don't think they expected him to be as quick as Alonso. You can bet that Alonso believes he's the No.1. I wonder what Hamilton believes?

I think you are 100% correct. I don't think that Ron wants one of his cars to be pushed to the limit if the two are going to score well.
I am quite sure that, Hamilton having been nursed through the years by Mackalaren in the lower formulae is being groomed for the future. He has youth and age on his side.

As I posted earlier, there was no way that Ron was going to risk his cars battling with each other, especially at Monaco with the armco looking on.

And I don't blame Ron Dennis at all! Which other team principal would have done it differently if they were in the same situation? The only difference here is that Ron Dennis didn't keep his big mouth shut.

[race aficionado]

What's the difference between TEAM ORDERS & TEAM STRATEGY????

[tinchote]

And I don't blame Ron Dennis at all! Which other team principal would have done it differently if they were in the same situation? The only difference here is that Ron Dennis didn't keep his big mouth shut.

The only difference is that RD has publicly criticized Ferrari for using team orders. So it is fairly hypocritical (as usual) of him to say that they are reasonable sometimes.

[Valve Bounce]

What's the difference between TEAM ORDERS & TEAM STRATEGY????


Not that much. All this was stirred up by Ferraris blatant tactics during Austria 2002 which embarrased both Ferrari and SchM afterwards.

But I would go as far as to say that Ron Dennis was hypocritical - only extremely stupid in what he says and should shut up about.

[Chaparral66]

What's the difference between TEAM ORDERS & TEAM STRATEGY????

Not much.

You know, I understand "team strategy", but if I'm paying the kind of money to see an F1 race up close, and personal, last thing I want to see is a $50 million (minimum) freight train procession. Remember the battles between teammates Alain Prost and the late great Ayerton Senna? They may have wrecked some expensive equipment, but that was real drama and the equivalent of racing combat, wasn't it?

[JAC]

Its a shame so many people on this thread have been sucked in by the British media hype..
I would love to see what these people would do in RD's position..
let them race eachother at Monaco and possible take eachother out? Thus losing the lead in both championships?
Monaco is a unique circuit, overtaking is extremely risky...especially when both drivers are in the same car and leading so comfortably...The golden rule in F1 is to not take out your team mate..This is nothing new..
They will be free to race eachother at other circuits so for gods sake chill out people!

The funny thing is that up until Monaco the hype was that RD was favouring Hamilton...the guy can't win whatever decision he makes it seems

[JAC]

Not much.

You know, I understand "team strategy", but if I'm paying the kind of money to see an F1 race up close, and personal, last thing I want to see is a $50 million (minimum) freight train procession. Remember the battles between teammates Alain Prost and the late great Ayerton Senna? They may have wrecked some expensive equipment, but that was real drama and the equivalent of racing combat, wasn't it?

Point taken Chapparal but maybe we should ask Stirling Moss what he thought of team orders when his team mate was Fangio?
My point being this type of thing has been happening since the dawn of F1 time.. ;)

[harsha]

Which other Boss wouldn't have done that at this stage??? i get the feeling that Hamilton's second pit stop was almost like a splash and dash...telling their drvers to back off after the second round of pitstops was a wise thing to do,what would you have a 1-2 or risk losing both the cars???

[Valve Bounce]

Right now, Ron's team is sitting on 76 points, 20 points more than his nearest competitor Ferrari. I think this says it all.

[wmcot]

I think McLaren's team "strategies" are being executed on Saturdays, not Sundays. Why else would they consistently make Hamilton qualify heavier? Particularly at a place like Monaco? I think Hamilton is definently McLaren's No. 2. He either doesn't know it or doesn't like it.

Don't believe me? Let's look at the first pit stops of both drivers so far.

Australia: Alonso - lap 22, Hamilton lap 23
Malaysia: Alonso - lap 18, Hamilton lap 20
Bahrain: Hamilton - lap 19, Alonso lap 22
Spain: Alonso - lap 19, Hamilton - lap 22
Monaco: Alonso - lap 26, Hamilton - lap 29

It looks to me like McLaren have made a conscious effort to keep Hamilton behind Alonso in qualifying. There's also no way that Hamilton was switched form a 1 stopper to a two stopper in Monaco. The one stoppers came in from around lap 40 to lap 45. Hamilton pitted on lap 29. If they switched him then they dragged him in 10 to 15 laps early. Not ony that, Hamilton managed to qualify 1 tenth behind Alonso with 15 or more laps of fuel onboard. I don't think so.

I think Hamilton's speed has caught McLaren out. They knew he was quick but I don't think they expected him to be as quick as Alonso. You can bet that Alonso believes he's the No.1. I wonder what Hamilton believes?

Good job with the research! I didn't think much of the investigation, but your data really makes a statement! I bet there is more to do with contracts than competition between the drivers...could be interesting

[ArrowsFA1]

Come on, Arrows, show me one other example of a team bringing in just one of their cars earlier because of "the risk of a SC".
I haven't seen another team owner be so open about what their Monaco strategy was as Ron so I have no idea what other teams were doing.

One consequence of this is that teams are very unlikely to make any comment about their race strategy before or after the races for fear of being investigated by the FIA. That will make the sport even more secretive than it already is.

It's all about consequences. Whatever the rights or wrongs of Austria '02 we are still suffering the consequences of what happened in the aftermath of Ferrari's decision. The team orders rule that was introduced was made so vague as to be unworkable, and yet acts as a tool for fans and the FIA to use as they see fit.

[OTA]

I case you haven't heard it, Mac decides strategies based on Q2. Whoever is faster get the right to chose strategies.

Cheers
David

[Valve Bounce]

I case you haven't heard it, Mac decides strategies based on Q2. Whoever is faster get the right to chose strategies.

Cheers
David

LINK PLEASE!!

[leopard]

What's the difference between TEAM ORDERS & TEAM STRATEGY????
Team order is only a part or implementation of Team Strategy

[Valve Bounce]

Team order is only a part or implementation of Team Strategy

I agree!

[leopard]

I gave only one condition, so I can't blame you for agreeing me. :D

[ArrowsFA1]

Look out :eek: The Daily Mail is on the case now!!

Bernie Ecclestone has called for McLaren to receive the most severe punishment in Formula One history if they are found to have "fixed" the Monaco Grand Prix. The sport's supremo, while careful not to prejudge the governing FIA's investigation into Sunday's controversial race, believes the British constructors could even be thrown out of the championship if they issued "team orders".
Link (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/sport/motorsport.html?in_article_id=458536&in_page_id=1954)

[jens]

This shows once again, how crap (sorry, but I really can't stand that rule) those new safety car rules are. Teams don't have courage to implement the strategy that seems the most suitable one, but to bring drivers earlier in the fear of SC.

And I would have called Hamilton in right after Alonso too for his final stop, because if SC had appeared and I hadn't called him in before, then LH would have lost all the advantage and after pitstop he may have dropped behind... several 'other' drivers (bye-bye 1-2 finish). And Heidfeld is also a good example of a ruined strategy in the fear of SC.

[leopard]

I can only suggest RD to be more careful about moment applying that strategy, wait until Takuma Sato passing the pit lane when Hamilton is leaving the pit out slowly. :D

As you said Arrows, such regulation is unavoidably vague, because it was a strategy that I believe every team in position of RD at Monaco, or ferrari in Austria 02, tends to do the same.

All depend on how beautiful the team playing it, choose the right moment whether or not this strategy applicable and make it polite.

[F1MAN2007]

We know that the FIA is under the influence and the pressure of the British Media because all the Newspapers are talking about this. And sometimes you can not understand how the FIA works.

Why they didn't investigate the crash between Alonso and Massa in Barcelona while they were fighting in the first corner? For me, whoever may be in fault in that crash, but it was clear that the safety in the first corner is under treat.

Something has to be done to increase the safety as long as we can see this time the first corner is becoming one of the factor to decide for a race, everything remain equal, . Why Lewis didn't attack straight away his team mate in the first corner instead fighting to block Massa? This is logic, I don't see reason to fight with your team mate while your objective is maximum points for the team. If the kid belive on this like he said in the interviews, why then he is mourning that he is 2nd driver?

He is a driver loaded by his boss since long time ago when he was still in shadow, so he has to follow and comply the instructions or strategies of his boss (as anyone here would have to follow and comply the instructions or strategies of his boss) and if he is not happy, time for him to find a seat somewhere else.

I agree with the Guys who said that everything was fine unless the big mouth of Ron and the arrogant Rockie. If they could shut up a little bit their mouths, they would be sleeping easily today.

Becoming on the startegy, If I remember very well, FA during the press conference said that :"... the only moment I was scared during this race, is the moment the SC was going to intervene..." That means, he knew that he gonna loose the race and the advantage was for the Kid. The probability of the SC was high as long as Sutil was caught on the wall. I think this is the reason the Mac Called straight away the Kid and convert him into 2 pit stops strategy so he could have won the race. But the SC was not deployed and the kid had to hold the position then.

Imagine you are RD, and you give a green light to your drivers to fight each others when you are 1-2, and by the pressure one of them (or both)end up his race in the barrier just 5 or 10 laps to finish while the close monky (according to the arrogant kid) is more than 50 secs behind, how would you handle this situation in front of your Big Boss, sponsors, etc ?

Remember also the spirit you would have created between drivers inside the team allowing one to push out the other driver? Not only loosing the maximum points for both titles, also it would be very difficult to reconcile and manager both drivers in the future which will end up with poor result for the team.

Massa played his role very well last year and helping his team to score as much as possible point for manufacturer championship, why the kid is thinking for himself before the interest of the team which he ows all he is today? If the manufacturer title was already done and assured for Mac, then the best of them to win. But still a long way to go and Mac didn't win any single race last year, so the kid has to cool down and help at least his team to build up a comfortable gap for the title, then the battle after.

Ron experienced this kind of situation where Montoya pushed out Kimmi last year, and I think he is in better position to know what to do and not have the same kind of problem. Time for them will come where they could fight without risk, but not yet.

One said : " The F1 is a business 7/7 only 2 hours on sunday is a sport"

[Valve Bounce]

Why they didn't investigate the crash between Alonso and Massa in Barcelona while they were fighting in the first corner? For me, whoever may be in fault in that crash, but it was clear that the safety in the first corner is under treat.




Sorry to contradict, but there was no crash between Alonso and Massa in any race this year. Maybe you were thinking of DC and some other guy.

[F1MAN2007]

Sorry to contradict, but there was no crash between Alonso and Massa in any race this year. Maybe you were thinking of DC and some other guy.

Sorry for my poor english, I meant fight between Alonso and Massa in Spain GP this year.

[Valve Bounce]

Sorry for my poor english, I meant fight between Alonso and Massa in Spain GP this year.

Maybe they should investigate DC's crash, don't you think?

[ArrowsFA1]

Having studied the radio traffic between Vodafone McLaren Mercedes (McLaren) and its drivers, together with the FIA observer’s report and data from the team, it is clear that McLaren’s actions during the 2007 Monaco Grand Prix were entirely legitimate and no further action is necessary.

The facts
1. A two-stop strategy is the optimum at Monaco unless the safety car is deployed, in which case one-stop can sometimes be better.
2. The safety car has been deployed during four of the past five Monaco Grands Prix.
3. Under current rules the choice between a one-stop and two-stop strategy must be made before the final qualifying period.
4. It is clear from FIA measurements taken after qualifying that McLaren fuelled Hamilton for five more laps than Alonso.
5. This allowed Hamilton the option of a one-stop strategy should the safety car have come out during his first stint.
6. The safety car was not deployed.
7. The McLaren was significantly faster at Monaco than any other car.

Background
The primary objective of any team is for one of their drivers to win. If this can be achieved they will try to ensure their other car finishes second.
With no safety car during Alonso’s first stint, there was a small but finite risk that it would come out during the five laps before Hamilton had to refuel. This would have put him behind the field and at a significant disadvantage to any car on a full (as opposed to optional) one-stop strategy. The latter cars would be expected to refuel around lap 40 – ie after the safety car had pitted if it came out during Hamilton’s extra laps.
For similar reasons Hamilton was called in early for his second pit stop, thus assuring his second place, with or without a safety car.
Had the car in front of Hamilton not been his team-mate, McLaren might (probably would) have decided to risk the safety car and let Hamilton run for as long as his fuel load allowed in the hope that he would come out of the pits in the lead after one of his pit stops. There is, however, no obligation on them to take this risk in order to overtake their own car. Indeed it would be foolish to do so.
It is standard procedure for a team to tell its drivers to slow down when they have a substantial lead. This is in order to minimise the risk of technical or other problems. It is also standard practice and entirely reasonable to ask the drivers not to put each other at risk.

McLaren were able to pursue an optimum team strategy because they had a substantial advantage over all other cars. They did nothing which could be described as interfering with the race result.

http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Releases/FIA_Sport/2007/May/300507-01.html

[F1boat]

Having studied the radio traffic between Vodafone McLaren Mercedes (McLaren) and its drivers, together with the FIA observer’s report and data from the team, it is clear that McLaren’s actions during the 2007 Monaco Grand Prix were entirely legitimate and no further action is necessary.

The facts
1. A two-stop strategy is the optimum at Monaco unless the safety car is deployed, in which case one-stop can sometimes be better.
2. The safety car has been deployed during four of the past five Monaco Grands Prix.
3. Under current rules the choice between a one-stop and two-stop strategy must be made before the final qualifying period.
4. It is clear from FIA measurements taken after qualifying that McLaren fuelled Hamilton for five more laps than Alonso.
5. This allowed Hamilton the option of a one-stop strategy should the safety car have come out during his first stint.
6. The safety car was not deployed.
7. The McLaren was significantly faster at Monaco than any other car.

Background
The primary objective of any team is for one of their drivers to win. If this can be achieved they will try to ensure their other car finishes second.
With no safety car during Alonso’s first stint, there was a small but finite risk that it would come out during the five laps before Hamilton had to refuel. This would have put him behind the field and at a significant disadvantage to any car on a full (as opposed to optional) one-stop strategy. The latter cars would be expected to refuel around lap 40 – ie after the safety car had pitted if it came out during Hamilton’s extra laps.
For similar reasons Hamilton was called in early for his second pit stop, thus assuring his second place, with or without a safety car.
Had the car in front of Hamilton not been his team-mate, McLaren might (probably would) have decided to risk the safety car and let Hamilton run for as long as his fuel load allowed in the hope that he would come out of the pits in the lead after one of his pit stops. There is, however, no obligation on them to take this risk in order to overtake their own car. Indeed it would be foolish to do so.
It is standard procedure for a team to tell its drivers to slow down when they have a substantial lead. This is in order to minimise the risk of technical or other problems. It is also standard practice and entirely reasonable to ask the drivers not to put each other at risk.

McLaren were able to pursue an optimum team strategy because they had a substantial advantage over all other cars. They did nothing which could be described as interfering with the race result.

http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Releases/FIA_Sport/2007/May/300507-01.html


I congratulate FIA!

[Daika]

End of story. It bugs me that Hamilton was heavier than Alonso, therefor unable to challenge for pole, therefor stuck behind Alonso given the nature of Monaco. Perhaps Ron Dennis could apply this rule next year: the driver who qualifies with more fuell gets the best strategy.

[gm99]

A very reasonable verdict - not what I expected of the FIA, to be honest ;)

[seppefan]

A very reasonable verdict - not what I expected of the FIA, to be honest ;)

I am amazed. For once the FIA get it right. Strange for them.

[seppefan]

Racehound (http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/member.php?u=97893) http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/images/statusicon/user_offline.gif vbmenu_register("postmenu_276030", true);

Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11

:p aper: ecclestones comments on the monaco saga
so ecclestone says McLaren could be excluded from the championship.......you can see how this devious little s* is trying to stir up trouble with these ill-judged and totally ludicrous comments........and who is he to be pre-empting the fia(sco) into what sanctions to take?????......i didnt relize he was head of the fia(sco) nowadays....

[Somebody]

End of story. It bugs me that Hamilton was heavier than Alonso, therefor [sic] unable to challenge for pole, therefor [sic] stuck behind Alonso given the nature of Monaco.
Actually, more fuel (within the limits of an X-stop strategy) is generally considered to be preferable for race day since it gives more options. Hamilton just didn't have the pace in his extra laps (if you were watching the live timing, you'd have seen that Alonso, tank full of lead, was almost matching running-on-fumes Hamilton).

It's one of the things MSchu was a master of - staying out longer than his opponent, blitzing them in the intervening laps when they had cold tyres and a full tank, and coming out ahead after the pit stops when he'd been behind beforehand. Hamilton couldn't even nearly do that on Sunday, so with nothing to gain and a lot to lose in the outside chance of a SC, why leave him out?


Perhaps Ron Dennis could apply this rule next year: the driver who qualifies with more fuell [sic] gets the best strategy.
And... um.... do you have any idea of the rules concerning fuel? If you make it through to Q3 (Top 10 on the grid) your fuel load - and thus, most of your strategy for the first stint - has to be fixed before you do a lap in Q3. And in Q1 and Q2, you're running with as little fuel as you can get away with - anything more just slows you down then. So that sentence is nonsense.

[Daika]

And... um.... do you have any idea of the rules concerning fuel? If you make it through to Q3 (Top 10 on the grid) your fuel load - and thus, most of your strategy for the first stint - has to be fixed before you do a lap in Q3. And in Q1 and Q2, you're running with as little fuel as you can get away with - anything more just slows you down then. So that sentence is nonsense.

Hamilton got 5 more laps of fuel. It is not a act of God, that he got more fuel than Alonso, it is calcultated. They know the amount of fuel they will be having at the end of Q3. Seems to me Alonso wanted to get pole and qualified lighter than Hamilton at all cause, 5 laps of more fuel is alot.
Schumacher must have won 30 races or so just by pitting later than his rival, at least his teammate.

[trumperZ06]

:dozey: This has been...

Much Ado... about Nothing !!!

Team orders have been, currently are, and will be used in Formula 1 !!!

Formula 1 now is.... BIG BUSINESS !!!

The sporting side of F-1 is propaganda...

simply a lure to get fans in front of the T V .

;) Team orders are likely to get a lot more interesting/complicated...

Now that we both an " A " and " B " team entered.

The first time one manufacturer/constructor's "B" team blatantly blocks another contender, to insure his "A" team finishes first...

expect all HELL to break loose.

Cya @ the Track,

:s mokin: Trumper

[Caroline]

Seems a sensible enough decision. Armed with more information than any of us were privy to, they have hopefully ended this debacle. :)

[Somebody]

Hamilton got 5 more laps of fuel. It is not a act of God, that he got more fuel than Alonso, it is calcultated [sic]. They know the amount of fuel they will be having at the end of Q3. Seems to me Alonso wanted to get pole and qualified lighter than Hamilton at all cause [sic], 5 laps of [sic] more fuel is alot [sic].
Schumacher must have won 30 races or so just by pitting later than his rival, at least his teammate.
Yes, all quite true.

Still doesn't make "Perhaps Ron Dennis could apply this rule next year: the driver who qualifies with more fuell [sic] gets the best strategy." make more sense. Most of the strategy is fixed before the cars are fueled - and, arguably, getting more fuel IS a better strategy.

Hamilton hedged his bets. By the time he was called in, it was clear this was a mistake compared to Alonso's decisive choice.

[Daika]

Yes, all quite true.

Still doesn't make "Perhaps Ron Dennis could apply this rule next year: the driver who qualifies with more fuell [sic] gets the best strategy." make more sense. Most of the strategy is fixed before the cars are fueled - and, arguably, getting more fuel IS a better strategy.

Hamilton hedged his bets. By the time he was called in, it was clear this was a mistake compared to Alonso's decisive choice.

I believe that Hamilton could have overtaken Alonso in the (5 or less) laps that he could have stayed out. Hamilton didn't have the optimum strategy, that went to Alonso.

[F1boat]

IMO Alonso owned Hamilton in Monaco and the Hamilton-mania should quiet a bit.

[Big Ben]

we all should move to the FIA favoring McLaren thread now :) :) :)

[Ian McC]

we all should move to the FIA favoring McLaren thread now :) :) :)


Anyone want to place a bet on who starts that?

[Ian McC]

Well the FIA have seen sense, Berni can get back in his (little) box and we can move onto the next race :)

[Schnell]

The whole thing was a publicity stunt, the media fell for it, and so did most of the public. The Marketing boys are rubbing their hands together!

[keysersoze]

I usually find Bernie's perspective on things rather interesting, but he didn't seem to be taking this team orders thing in its proper context here. I'm surprised he could say something so obviously, uh, stupid.

[F1MAN2007]

Having studied the radio traffic between Vodafone McLaren Mercedes (McLaren) and its drivers, together with the FIA observer’s report and data from the team, it is clear that McLaren’s actions during the 2007 Monaco Grand Prix were entirely legitimate and no further action is necessary.

The facts
1. A two-stop strategy is the optimum at Monaco unless the safety car is deployed, in which case one-stop can sometimes be better.
2. The safety car has been deployed during four of the past five Monaco Grands Prix.
3. Under current rules the choice between a one-stop and two-stop strategy must be made before the final qualifying period.
4. It is clear from FIA measurements taken after qualifying that McLaren fuelled Hamilton for five more laps than Alonso.
5. This allowed Hamilton the option of a one-stop strategy should the safety car have come out during his first stint.
6. The safety car was not deployed.
7. The McLaren was significantly faster at Monaco than any other car.

Background
The primary objective of any team is for one of their drivers to win. If this can be achieved they will try to ensure their other car finishes second.
With no safety car during Alonso’s first stint, there was a small but finite risk that it would come out during the five laps before Hamilton had to refuel. This would have put him behind the field and at a significant disadvantage to any car on a full (as opposed to optional) one-stop strategy. The latter cars would be expected to refuel around lap 40 – ie after the safety car had pitted if it came out during Hamilton’s extra laps.
For similar reasons Hamilton was called in early for his second pit stop, thus assuring his second place, with or without a safety car.
Had the car in front of Hamilton not been his team-mate, McLaren might (probably would) have decided to risk the safety car and let Hamilton run for as long as his fuel load allowed in the hope that he would come out of the pits in the lead after one of his pit stops. There is, however, no obligation on them to take this risk in order to overtake their own car. Indeed it would be foolish to do so.
It is standard procedure for a team to tell its drivers to slow down when they have a substantial lead. This is in order to minimise the risk of technical or other problems. It is also standard practice and entirely reasonable to ask the drivers not to put each other at risk.

McLaren were able to pursue an optimum team strategy because they had a substantial advantage over all other cars. They did nothing which could be described as interfering with the race result.

http://www.fia.com/mediacentre/Press_Releases/FIA_Sport/2007/May/300507-01.html

I didn't expect something like this from FIA!!! :rolleyes: :bounce:

[Somebody]

I believe that Hamilton could have overtaken Alonso in the (5 or less) laps that he could have stayed out.
No, he couldn't. I was sitting with the Live Timing in front of me at the point in question, and Alonso was very nearly matching him - Hamilton needed to gain between half a second and three-quarters of a second a lap on Alonso to make it work - he was nowhere near that. He just couldn't do it.

[tinchote]

Great, so now we know that McLaren cares so much about LH that they didn't want to risk his race in case there was a safety car, and they don't have the same "care" with FA :rolleyes:

[Racehound]

I think Ron Dennis explained that: Alonso was on a two stop strategy whereas Lewis was on a twoone stop strategy. This was in case the safety car came out which would have nullified the large gap that Alonso had built up over Massa, permitting Massa to catch up. Now if then Massa was on a one stop strategy, he would have passed Alonso when the latter did his second stop. But by running Lewis long initially, this gave him the option of having lewis ahead of anyone else on a one stop if the safety car came out, with the worst scenario a 1 and 3 for Mackalaren.

However, I feel that Ron should have just kept his mouth shut as he was not obliged to answer to anyone about his tactics at the time. Now he has to answer to the FIA, and that will cause all sorts of innuendos.
ahhhhhhhhhhh.........now its all clear to me......right.....Lewboy was on a twoone stop strategy!!!!.....i`m such a twot when it comes to details.......arent innuendos Italian suppositorys?????

[Valve Bounce]

I was going to congratulate Arrows on a very well written post and say that I agree with him totally. :)

Then I found out it was an FIA press release :(

duh!!

[Chaparral66]

Point taken Chapparal but maybe we should ask Stirling Moss what he thought of team orders when his team mate was Fangio?
My point being this type of thing has been happening since the dawn of F1 time.. ;)

You're right, of course, but it seemed to me that it was handled a lot better, not so blatant as it was in 2002 with Barricello and Schumacher. And different teams had a pecking order and other teams let their drivers settle it on the racetrack. obviously, I would prefer the latter, while trying not to wreck the equipment. Easier said than done, yes I know...

[N. Jones]

Finally - my two cents:

Ron had them hold station at the track that 90% of the people on this forum says is too boring because there is no passing.

Since ALL teams in F1 look for positive results Ron did what any team would do - he told his drivers to stay put and not risk a move on the narrow-est track in F1.

So what exactly was wrong with that??

[Valve Bounce]

You're right, of course, but it seemed to me that it was handled a lot better, not so blatant as it was in 2002 with Barricello and Schumacher. And different teams had a pecking order and other teams let their drivers settle it on the racetrack. obviously, I would prefer the latter, while trying not to wreck the equipment. Easier said than done, yes I know...


To put your statement in context, we would require the following scenario: Lewis Hamilton leading the race into the final bend and then slowing down to permit Alonso through into first place.

Basically, there is no way of letting the drivers settle it on the track at Monaco if the car running second is lapping faster than the leading car bercause the following would occur:

1) One of the cars would blow up,

2) One of the cars would run into the armco

3) The more likely scenario - both cars would crash into each other and the armco.

[Chaparral66]

To put your statement in context, we would require the following scenario: Lewis Hamilton leading the race into the final bend and then slowing down to permit Alonso through into first place.

Basically, there is no way of letting the drivers settle it on the track at Monaco if the car running second is lapping faster than the leading car bercause the following would occur:

1) One of the cars would blow up,

2) One of the cars would run into the armco

3) The more likely scenario - both cars would crash into each other and the armco.


Now hold your horses here, Valve, the Barricello-Schumacher incident was just one example, not the sole means by which the entire concept of team orders should be measured by. As we have acknowledged, team orders has been around since the start of Formula 1. It's just that back then, the quality of the show was a consideration and it was handled in a much more subtle manner, most of the time. Besides, entirely because of the farce between Rubens and Schuey in 2002, you are likely never to see something like that on McLaren or any other team again. And yes, it's hard to pass at Monaco but shouldn't stop a driver from pressuring his opponent, hoping for him to make a mistake at a point where he can sfaely get by. Rare, yes, but we've all seen it happen.

[Valve Bounce]

Now hold your horses here, Valve, the Barricello-Schumacher incident was just one example, not the sole means by which the entire concept of team orders should be measured by. As we have acknowledged, team orders has been around since the start of Formula 1. It's just that back then, the quality of the show was a consideration and it was handled in a much more subtle manner, most of the time. Besides, entirely because of the farce between Rubens and Schuey in 2002, you are likely never to see something like that on McLaren or any other team again. And yes, it's hard to pass at Monaco but shouldn't stop a driver from pressuring his opponent, hoping for him to make a mistake at a point where he can sfaely get by. Rare, yes, but we've all seen it happen.

You are right. There have been team orders from way back, and Mercedes even instructed their 4 drivers to finish in echelon in the correct order. I am sure that if we delved into the history of each year's races, we would find examples where we could at elast suspect something fishy was going on.

Nobody denies that. And few really felt uncomfortable about it.

Then along came Austria 2002 which made nearly every F1 loving enthusiast feel sick because it was so blatant and seemingly unfair. Then all sorts of lies came out afterwards to try to justify that. In the same way, when DC was told to let Mika win, many of us were not all that happy either.

But going back to Monaco, sure a car can safely get past by pressuring the car ahead to crash into the armco - point here is that Ron Dennis didn't want to see Lewis Hamilton pressure Alonso into the armco. :eek: I'm sure if it was bunsen in the lead, ............................

[wmcot]

It's all just good business by RD - qualify LH heavier (and therefore slower) in all races than FA. FA wins the WDC and his value goes up. Sell FA's contract at the end of the season and next year LH can run at his full potential as number 1 driver at McLaren!

Make money, get a WDC this year, sell the expensive driver, keep a (cheaper) driver who can win the WDC in the future!

[ioan]

I suppose you don't remember what Ferrari did pretty much most of last year then, because it was pretty much on par with what McLaren did at this race.

WHAT A LOAD OF BULL!
Last year when Felipe was the fastest one he was allowed to beat MS. So I don't know where do you come from with that one? :rolleyes:

[ioan]

Because of the threat of a safety car caution.

And how did they determine that?!

[ioan]

As Ron said the safety car has been deployed four times in the previous five Monaco GPs. It is just one of many factors all the teams would have considered when deciding on their strategy for the race.

He didn't know but their was a high probability of it appearing. As it turned out it didn't, but hindsight doesn't stop it being factored into the strategy.

The probability it was as high as that for the whole GP, why being that concerned only when LH had 3 more laps of fuel on board?

RD didn't give squat about SC or not, Alonso is their bet because they don't trust Hamilton for WDC this year even if he is the better driver.

[ioan]

The facts
1. A two-stop strategy is the optimum at Monaco unless the safety car is deployed, in which case one-stop can sometimes be better.
2. The safety car has been deployed during four of the past five Monaco Grands Prix.


So all the FIA did was to copy and paste what Ron told them. Nice job.

At least they acknowledged that LH had fuel for 5 more laps. But that makes it even ore controversial.

I start figuring out how things work in F1. One team is dominating for a few seasons, rules get changed. Another team starts dominating, against rules get changed. After the new changes another team is expected to dominate the series, but if it doesn't really come of like they wanted, they can still to do many things to help a better placed team out to beat the one they don't favor.

This way all the fans will be happy some day and the money will continue to flow.

Next year they will chose between BMW, Williams an RedBull.

[Valve Bounce]

ioan, Please unlax a little. There is a lot of truth in what you say, but there is a milder way to present it so that we can agree with you. Don't let anyone stir you for the sake of stirring you, OK?

[OTA]

I tell you how this works. Alonso jumped in a Minardi and the Minardi worked much better than expected. He jumped into a Renault and the reno when from mid field to undisputed world champion. He left and went back to Pre-Alonso results. He jumped into the Mac and went from a top, but not quite, to dominate.
And in the proccess he beated the driver with the best resume in history, and whoever else got in the way. And now he is up and teamed with the best driver to arrive to the circus since FA. That's motor racing at the very top and so far this season it's all even. Nothing more, nothing else.
Now if you want to make it about a few laps in a grand prix he clearly won, be my guest. FA has done thousands of laps around all the tracks and we yet have to see a beaten Fernando. Just one objective data, since Malasia 2005 he has been the leader of the standings at all times except for less of a hanfull of races in wich he has been 2 points behind.
Team orders? of course Fernando claps and the team gets to work or have you forgot who's the boss. LH could be boss one day, but in order to do so he has to get over FA, and that's it's going to be bloody difficult. The good thing about this year is that someone is able to challegenge him and the team is giving him an scrupulous fair shot at it.

Cheers
David

[Mickey T]

The probability it was as high as that for the whole GP, why being that concerned only when LH had 3 more laps of fuel on board?


it's fairly obvious if you think about it.

Fact: the two-stop strategy was the considerably quicker strategy at monaco. all things being equal, it always is

fact: this remains the case even if it's a converted one-stop strategy

Fact: the reason LH was on a one-stop strategy was simply to hedge bets to ensure that circumstances did not conspire to rob McLaren of a win at a circuit at which it had by far the fastest car

Fact: the decision to pit LH came AFTER all possible threats to a McLaren victory had already shown their hands and pitted for the first of their two stops

fact: adherence to a one-stop strategy would have raised concerns on wear rates of the super-soft tyre option. as it was, LH's rear tyres were slicks after the race, while alonso's were fine

Fact: Once the other two-stop threats had been neutralised and the team had covered the safety-car eventuality, it was logical to switch LH to a two-stop strategy

Fact: the only other team of consequence that competed with and remained on a one-stop strategy (BMW) wishes it hadn't

Fact: LH admitted to hitting the walls five or six times. a smart team manager tells his driver to cool it under those circumstances

Fact: it is not possible to overtake at Monaco without a) the lead driver making a monumental error, b) the following driver operating a car that is about four seconds a lap quicker or c) the explicit compliance of the lead driver. None of these things stars seemed likely to align

Fact: LH may or may not have been peeved. Whatever. This is the reality of life inside a professional motorsport organisation. I've had it, and i daresay everybody who's ever driven in a two-car team has had it. Reluctantly, you realise that, in the case of F1, you are just the highest-profile one of 600-700 personnel working to achieve wins for the TEAM and you accept these things

Conjecture: I don't for a minute think the team was favouring FA over LH or any conspiracy rubbish like that. it's just the way the cards fell

Conjecture: can you imagine in any other era of dominance by one team that that team would not have been prepared to do the same thing? Mercedes did it with Moss and Fangio, Ferrari drivers have even handed cars over to their team leaders to win championships, Lotus held back Petersen to prevent possible problems for Andretti, Brabham did it for Piquet, Ferrari held back Villeneuve to help Scheckter to his title and Ferrari sure as hell did it with Schumacher and Rubens.

While they've had their glitches, McLaren and Williams have been the teams least likely. The Prost/Lauda and Prost/Senna battles provide plenty of evidence of this, while Williams have lost more than one championship (the year of Mansell's blown tyre in Adelaide stands out) because they allowed their drivers to take points off each other, only for another driver to sneak through.

This is all a non-issue. Let it go.

[ArrowsFA1]

ioan, for someone who has "nothing against what they did" you certainly appear to have a great deal against McLaren's perfectly legitimate win in Monaco.

Many people here make the assumption that had both McLaren's raced flat out to the flag then Hamilton would have won. It's a view that the British media have placed great emphasis on in the tone of their reports, and it's a view that has affected much of this "controversy".

Maybe he would have. But then again, maybe he would have stuffed it into the barriers (or Alonso) trying.

Why should any team be compelled to run that risk when they are running 1-2? That would have been the effect of the FIA ruling against McLaren in this case.

As the FIA ruling says: there is "no obligation on them to take this risk in order to overtake their own car. Indeed it would be foolish to do so. It is standard procedure for a team to tell its drivers to slow down when they have a substantial lead. This is in order to minimise the risk of technical or other problems. It is also standard practice and entirely reasonable to ask the drivers not to put each other at risk."

The FIA made the only ruling they could have done in these circumstances. In doing so they have added a little clarification to what "team orders" are or are not, and have established a precedent if this question arises again.

[Valve Bounce]

Good post Mickey. Nice to see you here. Your post covered the situation very clearly for me. Thanks.

[Flat.tyres]

spot on Arrows

anyone that has been following Lewis for more than 5 races know he is a very skillfull and gutsy racer that doesnt believe it cant be done.

I get the impression that Lewis would have beaten Alonso in those 5 laps or crashed trying.

Ron did the right thing by removing the potential for cock-up from lewis's mind. bit like putting an old head on young shoulders.

great strategy from ron. Lewis is 2 points behind instead of potentially 10 and theres a long way to go. Ask kimi how tough it is to close up a double figure gap.

[ioan]

i don't know why i bother doing this for somebody with a closed-loop mindset, but here goes...

And what warranted a personal attack here?
For not wanting to understand my reasoning you are as close-looped as possible too, but wait you need to be open minded to see that!

[donKey jote]

thanks for that Mickey :up:

may I add another conjecture: had it been FA who was on the flexible 1-stop, started from P2 and been almost as fast as his teammate in P1 but also a bit too furious, many of those crying foul wouldn't have even fussed.

fact: one of the most perfect and controlled drives I've seen from FA in a long time. He was able to respond to LH when he felt like it, despite LH being quite "on the edge" in his pushes.

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/16/16_3_166.gif

[samuratt]

Nothing more to add here. Everything is said and done! :P

First of all, I didn't think that Lewis was robbed of anything. Maybe at the start of the qualy when the team decided to put him more fuel on board. Apart from that i think that Lewis would have crashed rather than passing Alonso, cause he could build a gap from Lewis any time he wanted too.

Another fact that i would like to point out is that when Lewis had the lighter car and Alonso was heavier the difference of their laptimes was just 0'1 sec.

And to sum up, had Trulli seen Fernando coming at the right time; Lewis, no matter the satrategy, would have never seen again Fernando's rear over the race.

Alonso simply mastered the race while Hamilton provided us (at least to me) with a very exciting and heart braking race, cause he was really racing flat-out throught the streets of Monaco.
cheers :D

[Robinho]

one thing of note, the FIA confirmed that Lewis was 5 laps (count 'em) in qually, which makes his performance there all the more impressive. and they confirmed that he was covered for a 1 stopper in the event of a safety car, but brought in early to minimise the chance of getting caught out by one either.

[ioan]

one thing of note, the FIA confirmed that Lewis was 5 laps (count 'em) in qually, which makes his performance there all the more impressive. and they confirmed that he was covered for a 1 stopper in the event of a safety car, but brought in early to minimise the chance of getting caught out by one either.

But never questioned why a SC was more of a concern in lap 26 than in lap 22 for example!

And yes Hamilton was the fastest one given the fuel amount he carried in qualifying. An impressive rookie indeed.

[Valve Bounce]

anyone that has been following Lewis for more than 5 races know he is a very skillfull and gutsy racer that doesnt believe it cant be done.

I get the impression that Lewis would have beaten Alonso in those 5 laps or crashed trying.

Ron did the right thing by removing the potential for cock-up from lewis's mind. bit like putting an old head on young shoulders.

.

From what I understand of the race, Lewis Hamilton was driving very raggedly towards the end of the race and Ron probably saved the armco from some damage.

[Chaparral66]

You are right. There have been team orders from way back, and Mercedes even instructed their 4 drivers to finish in echelon in the correct order. I am sure that if we delved into the history of each year's races, we would find examples where we could at elast suspect something fishy was going on.

Nobody denies that. And few really felt uncomfortable about it.

Then along came Austria 2002 which made nearly every F1 loving enthusiast feel sick because it was so blatant and seemingly unfair. Then all sorts of lies came out afterwards to try to justify that. In the same way, when DC was told to let Mika win, many of us were not all that happy either.

But going back to Monaco, sure a car can safely get past by pressuring the car ahead to crash into the armco - point here is that Ron Dennis didn't want to see Lewis Hamilton pressure Alonso into the armco. :eek: I'm sure if it was bunsen in the lead, ............................

Dude, I was talking about pressuring the driver ahead into making a mistake, not pressuring him into wrecking. Yikes. It is possible to make a mistake at Monaco withou crashing; and if we can agree that both Alonso and Hamilton are excellent drivers, we should be able to agree that a pass doesn't necessarily mean a crash has to happen. Of course Dennis didn't want his drivers to wreck, and while I'm not crazy about ordering the drivers to hold position, I can understand it to a degree about being better to be safe than sorry. However, I have faith that these two drivers are more than capable as was Michael Schumacher and (if memory serves) David Coultard in a close battle at Monaco a few years back.

[Big Ben]

But never questioned why a SC was more of a concern in lap 26 than in lap 22 for example!

And yes Hamilton was the fastest one given the fuel amount he carried in qualifying. An impressive rookie indeed.

FIA (surprisingly) explained the whole thing very well... To understand it you have to want it.

He was fast indeed with the fuel he carried but not the fastest with the same amount of fuel (Q2)... and though this is not a fact for you... FA set the fastest during the race too.

[truefan72]

I honestly think that if they had come down on McL and strictly followed the lettrer of their rules, versus a loose interpretation they chose, hey would have effectively ruined the 2007 season and the all the excitement it has brought to date. A fair compromise would have been a moterary fine and a one-race ban on Ron Dennis for unsportsmanlike conduct, with threat for further and more severe punishemnt if such actions would occur again.

Just because they made a ruling doesn't mean they are right. I stopped counting the number of times they made a ruling in favor of Ferrari when they were cleary in the wrong. ( I guess in ther minds for the benefit of the "game")

[BeansBeansBeans]

I can't really add anything to what Mickey T said :up:

[aryan]

Now if only we had more people like Mickey T (http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/member.php?u=87926) here, or if posted a bit more frequently :)

[ShiftingGears]

Ron Dennis wouldn't have minded if this was McLaren back in 1988, but it isn't. There are 2 teams in this WDC/WCC fight and in this day and age of GP racing you can't reasonably run the risk of your drivers binning it when you'd just be handing points to Ferrari which nowadays are hard points to recover.

When/If McLaren hit the point where only a McLaren driver can win the title this year then you won't hear such "orders". Maybe thats a strategy Williams should have used in 1986.

[Ranger]

Ron Dennis wouldn't have minded if this was McLaren back in 1988, but it isn't. There are 2 teams in this WDC/WCC fight and in this day and age of GP racing you can't reasonably run the risk of your drivers binning it when you'd just be handing points to Ferrari which nowadays are hard points to recover.

When/If McLaren hit the point where only a McLaren driver can win the title this year then you won't hear such "orders". Maybe thats a strategy Williams should have used in 1986.

[Valve Bounce]

Let's be honest here. If SchM had been leading and Massa was right on his hammer at Monaco, do you really believe that Ferrari would not have issued the same orders?

Ron Dennis did the sensible thing, and we have all sorts of very wise men watching from their armchairs saying that he should be doing something else.

[Chaparral66]

Let's be honest here. If SchM had been leading and Massa was right on his hammer at Monaco, do you really believe that Ferrari would not have issued the same orders?

Ron Dennis did the sensible thing, and we have all sorts of very wise men watching from their armchairs saying that he should be doing something else.

Don't know about anyone else, but my feeling is you can tell your two drivers not to wreck each other and still let them race, even at Monaco. I'm not really questioning Dennis' motivation, just saying an alternative is available and achievable, given the talent level of the two McLaren drivers.

[PSfan]

it's fairly obvious if you think about it.

Fact: the two-stop strategy was the considerably quicker strategy at monaco. all things being equal, it always is

That's why 10 (11 had Hamilton stuck with a 1 stopper...) out of the cars that finished choose a 1 stop strategy... guess they wanted McLeran to Win



fact: this remains the case even if it's a converted one-stop strategy

I have no problem with them switching to a 2 stopper, but hold off until you reach your pit window to make your first stop... They would have looked all manner of foolish had the safety car came out a lap after Hamiltons first stop



Fact: the reason LH was on a one-stop strategy was simply to hedge bets to ensure that circumstances did not conspire to rob McLaren of a win at a circuit at which it had by far the fastest car

Alot of teams are claiming the new safety car rules make it neccesary for their 2 drivers to be on different strategies... It still confuses me, cause either way, I think 1 of the drivers of a team will get screwed during a safety car.


Fact: the decision to pit LH came AFTER all possible threats to a McLaren victory had already shown their hands and pitted for the first of their two stops

I think having LH and FA on vastly different strategies was the incentive to have the drivers agree not to race each other on track. Once they took away Hamiltons 1 stopper, they took away any chance he had for the win.


fact: adherence to a one-stop strategy would have raised concerns on wear rates of the super-soft tyre option. as it was, LH's rear tyres were slicks after the race, while alonso's were fine

10 other cars managed to handle a 1 stopper. and generally the better/faster cars are often the gentler on tires.



Fact: Once the other two-stop threats had been neutralised and the team had covered the safety-car eventuality, it was logical to switch LH to a two-stop strategy

It was logical to switch him to a one stopper because it also eliminated the threat of him beating Alonso. At that point in the race, I see no harm in having Hamilton finish his 1 stop strategy, which would have still seen him finish 2nd (if it is indeed the slower way to go... he wouldn't have lost enough ground with it to let Massa catch him)


Fact: the only other team of consequence that competed with and remained on a one-stop strategy (BMW) wishes it hadn't

At best BMW would have been able to have their cars finish 1 position higher each, and that is a long shot! starting 7th and 8th and finishing 5th and 6th isn't to shabby at Monaco, giving the top 4 cars finished where they started, I find it VERY hard to imagine BMW are dissapointed with their 1 stoppers.

And I imagine Scott Speed would have finished in the points had he gone with a 2 stopper as well???


Fact: LH admitted to hitting the walls five or six times. a smart team manager tells his driver to cool it under those circumstances

His brushes with the wall I believe came on his last stint. And that doesn't mean that he was pushing to hard, many drivers have claimed to have basically went into "cruise control mode" and while driving conservative to make it to the finish, had a mental lapse that caused them to crash...


Fact: it is not possible to overtake at Monaco without a) the lead driver making a monumental error, b) the following driver operating a car that is about four seconds a lap quicker or c) the explicit compliance of the lead driver. None of these things stars seemed likely to align

And thats why you have your drivers on different strategies... so they don't race each other...


Fact: LH may or may not have been peeved. Whatever. This is the reality of life inside a professional motorsport organisation. I've had it, and i daresay everybody who's ever driven in a two-car team has had it. Reluctantly, you realise that, in the case of F1, you are just the highest-profile one of 600-700 personnel working to achieve wins for the TEAM and you accept these things

He was peeved after Alonso's first win, and probably more after this one.


Conjecture: I don't for a minute think the team was favouring FA over LH or any conspiracy rubbish like that. it's just the way the cards fell

And pit strategies...

[Valve Bounce]

Don't know about anyone else, but my feeling is you can tell your two drivers not to wreck each other and still let them race, even at Monaco. I'm not really questioning Dennis' motivation, just saying an alternative is available and achievable, given the talent level of the two McLaren drivers.


I think that's what Ron Dennis did. However, for two drivers to really race each other at Monaco in evenly matched cars, with the car behind absolutely intent on passing, then you got an open instruction for harikiri using the armco as the instrument.

[Valve Bounce]

Now if only we had more people like Mickey T (http://www.motorsportforums.com/forums/member.php?u=87926) here, or if posted a bit more frequently :)


People like Mickey T, schnell, and webslinger who have a direct connection with people involved in F1 are sometimes reluctant to come here because there are some who like to argue with and insult them just to prove they are smarter than those who are directly involved with people in F1.

[ioan]

That's why 10 (11 had Hamilton stuck with a 1 stopper...) out of the cars that finished choose a 1 stop strategy... guess they wanted McLeran to Win

I have no problem with them switching to a 2 stopper, but hold off until you reach your pit window to make your first stop... They would have looked all manner of foolish had the safety car came out a lap after Hamiltons first stop

Alot of teams are claiming the new safety car rules make it neccesary for their 2 drivers to be on different strategies... It still confuses me, cause either way, I think 1 of the drivers of a team will get screwed during a safety car.

I think having LH and FA on vastly different strategies was the incentive to have the drivers agree not to race each other on track. Once they took away Hamiltons 1 stopper, they took away any chance he had for the win.

10 other cars managed to handle a 1 stopper. and generally the better/faster cars are often the gentler on tires.

It was logical to switch him to a one stopper because it also eliminated the threat of him beating Alonso. At that point in the race, I see no harm in having Hamilton finish his 1 stop strategy, which would have still seen him finish 2nd (if it is indeed the slower way to go... he wouldn't have lost enough ground with it to let Massa catch him)

At best BMW would have been able to have their cars finish 1 position higher each, and that is a long shot! starting 7th and 8th and finishing 5th and 6th isn't to shabby at Monaco, giving the top 4 cars finished where they started, I find it VERY hard to imagine BMW are dissapointed with their 1 stoppers.

And I imagine Scott Speed would have finished in the points had he gone with a 2 stopper as well???

His brushes with the wall I believe came on his last stint. And that doesn't mean that he was pushing to hard, many drivers have claimed to have basically went into "cruise control mode" and while driving conservative to make it to the finish, had a mental lapse that caused them to crash...

And thats why you have your drivers on different strategies... so they don't race each other...

He was peeved after Alonso's first win, and probably more after this one.

And pit strategies...

Very good points but there's no use fighting with the windmills PSfan. ;)

[Roamy]

From what I understand of the race, Lewis Hamilton was driving very raggedly towards the end of the race and Ron probably saved the armco from some damage.

I think this sums it up quite well. Also there is no way LH would pass FA at Monaco. As far as pressuring into a mistake no chance either as Monaco is the safest place to block.

good call valve

[PSfan]

I think this sums it up quite well. Also there is no way LH would pass FA at Monaco. As far as pressuring into a mistake no chance either as Monaco is the safest place to block.

good call valve

I don't think it was any order by Ron Dennis that would have saved the armco's The order not to battle on the track was clearly given before the race even started so I don't think Hamilton was out to try to pass, or even presure Alonso on track at any time during the race. Watch the start in slow motion and you can clearly see Hamilton duck behind Alonso before even 1 full second has passed from when the lights go out! In fact I bet if you had an overhead view, I bet some of Hamiltons tires actually go over Alonso's starting grid spot!!!

I may not have liked what Ferrari had going with MS and his various team mates, but at least there was a certain level of transperancy in it. Ervine/Barrichello/Massa all knew they where clearly #2 drivers and where there to help MS to titles... What I believe is happening at McLeran this year is that Alonso is getting the favourable treatment, while at the same time they are trying to convince Lewis that it isn't the case. I find this scenario much more appalling.

I still think that Hamilton was running ragged towards the end of the race is more to do with the fact that he probably isn't accustomed to driving conservative to the finish and hasn't yet found the happy medium of driving slow enough to conserve the car, but fast enough not to loose concentration/motivation...

[ioan]

A few seasons ago MS and DC spent the whole last sting of the Monaco GP fighting for 1st place and they didn't even come close to an accident.

What I like in this thread is to see all those who were accusing Ferrari for team orders defending McLaren against team orders accusations! :rolleyes:
What a bunch! :D :p :

And there is Haug saying that McLaren drivers will always have the right to fight each other! Man, April 1st was 2 months ago!

http://www.f1-live.com/f1/en/headlines/news/detail/070604094629.shtml