Letting your teammate pass

[tinchote]

(I posted a couple threads to try to have some clear air from the conspiracy theories. So please, if you are here just willing to bash the FIA and/or support your favourite conspiracy theory, please do that in any of the other threads. Thank you)

Before starting, let me say that I consider KR a very deserving WDC (although taking into account that both FA and LH finished 1 point behind, the same could have been said of any of those two).

Now, after years of reading posts and posts in these forums bashing the supposed Ferrari policy of priorizing one driver, this time I cannot find a single post saying that KR is an undeserving WDC because he won by being let pass by his teammate.

Quite contradictory, the posters' attitude, I think :mark:

So, is it wrong or not to win the WDC by being let pass by your teammate?

[Simmo666]

I don't think in that situation it would be too much of a problem. The last race, with the teammate completely out of the equation, and it actually only occurring in the pitlane where Kimi put in some fantastically quick lap times made it fine.

If it was for the title, midway through the season (if it was so dominated like 2002 (I think)) then it would probably be less accepted as it would be so unnecessary.

Team orders have become so much more out in the open and expected that it's less of a surprise any more, but today really, they weren't exactly blatent, if they did even occur.

[ClarkFan]

(I posted a couple threads to try to have some clear air from the conspiracy theories. So please, if you are here just willing to bash the FIA and/or support your favourite conspiracy theory, please do that in any of the other threads. Thank you)

Before starting, let me say that I consider KR a very deserving WDC (although taking into account that both FA and LH finished 1 point behind, the same could have been said of any of those two).

Now, after years of reading posts and posts in these forums bashing the supposed Ferrari policy of priorizing one driver, this time I cannot find a single post saying that KR is an undeserving WDC because he won by being let pass by his teammate.

Quite contradictory, the posters' attitude, I think :mark:

So, is it wrong or not to win the WDC by being let pass by your teammate?

Tin, if it is wrong you have to eliminate a number of champions. Especially if you add in the time a faster teammate opted not to pass when he could done so, which is really much the same thing. You would start with World Championship #1, when Fangio followed team orders to let Farina with the title. Hawthorn in 1958 and Surtees in 1964 are ones that come to my mind immediately, but I am sure there a a number of other cases.

I would not consider any of those championships tainted in any way. Same with Raikkonen - a long winded way to agree with you.

ClarkFan

P.S. Just for the record, if I ran a F1 team, that team would have a designated #1 driver. F1 drivers suffer the same type of testosterone overdose as prize bulls and tend to gore each other if there isn't an established order (see Montoya and RS running each other off the road for Williams, not to mention this chaos at McLaren in 1989 and 2007). Designating a #1 just limits the damage to the herd, er team, from the internal competition. :s

[tinchote]

Tin, if it is wrong you have to eliminate a number of champions. Especially if you add in the time a faster teammate opted not to pass when he could done so, which is really much the same thing. You would start with World Championship #1, when Fangio followed team orders to let Farina with the title. Hawthorn in 1958 and Surtees in 1964 are ones that come to my mind immediately, but I am sure there a a number of other cases.

I would not consider any of those championships tainted in any way. Same with Raikkonen - a long winded way to agree with you.

ClarkFan

P.S. Just for the record, if I ran a F1 team, that team would have a designated #1 driver. F1 drivers suffer the same type of testosterone overdose as prize bulls and tend to gore each other if there isn't an established order (see Montoya and RS running each other off the road for Williams, not to mention this chaos at McLaren in 1989 and 2007). Designating a #1 just limits the damage to the herd, er team, from the internal competition. :s

Oh, maybe I didn't make my opinion clear. Personally, I have nothing against that. Particularly in a situation like today. It's just that there has been so much talk here about team orders, etc., etc., that I felt tempted to post this thread.

[jso1985]

I never bashed Ferrari or any other team for team orders like the one we saw today, in the end they are just pursuing what they need.

now Austria 2002 was totally different, a big farce, and that's where my bashing come in

[ClarkFan]

Oh, maybe I didn't make my opinion clear. Personally, I have nothing against that. Particularly in a situation like today. It's just that there has been so much talk here about team orders, etc., etc., that I felt tempted to post this thread.

Oh, you were quite clear - I just rambled around and agreed with you in a confusing way.

I would even argue that it is OK for teams to decide signficantly earlier in the year to favor the driver with the better shot at winning. The team goal is to win the championship within the team (IMO, of course). Drivers are paid by the team, and should work for the team goals or find alternative employment (very much IMO here).

ClarkFan

[N. Jones]

(I posted a couple threads to try to have some clear air from the conspiracy theories. So please, if you are here just willing to bash the FIA and/or support your favourite conspiracy theory, please do that in any of the other threads. Thank you)

Before starting, let me say that I consider KR a very deserving WDC (although taking into account that both FA and LH finished 1 point behind, the same could have been said of any of those two).

Now, after years of reading posts and posts in these forums bashing the supposed Ferrari policy of priorizing one driver, this time I cannot find a single post saying that KR is an undeserving WDC because he won by being let pass by his teammate.

Quite contradictory, the posters' attitude, I think :mark:

So, is it wrong or not to win the WDC by being let pass by your teammate?

It is wrong (while I must admit to rooting for KR) as I cannot stand team orders of any kind.

[Valve Bounce]

It would have been totally stupid for Massa to win and deny his team mate the championship.
However, I think Ferrari should give Massa a brand new top of the line bright red Ferrari as a present this Christmas.

[PSfan]

[i]

Now, after years of reading posts and posts in these forums bashing the supposed Ferrari policy of priorizing one driver, this time I cannot find a single post saying that KR is an undeserving WDC because he won by being let pass by his teammate.


WHAT?!? Guess you ain't lookin hard enuff


For the record, I Don't feel anyone deserves the title of 2007 wdc. The whole stepney thing has damaged the championship beyond repair. Had the FIA punished the McLeran drivers to some extent (like perhaps stripping them of their points the earned while Stepney was still employed by Ferrari (once suspended he could no longer give out race strategy...) Then at least the Ferrari boys would have had a good fight for the title, but once Ferrari told Massa to pit to let Kimi by, then that battle was also tarnished.



As posted in the "Who would you rather have as WC?"

[markabilly]

Ferrari did exactly WHAT Mac should have done...if they had been willing to acccept freddie as a number one....as he was hired to be.......see my other post on the other thread about mac to appeal stewart's decision

If they had done it, they would have a wdc AND a WCC right now....but no, LH and poppa got to mouthing off about a pit stop/paddle mess in Q at one race....and the rest is history-----add in those points FA lost there by being moved back five places, and just assuming he finished second, and you have a different WDC as we speak

[tinchote]

WHAT?!? Guess you ain't lookin hard enuff



As posted in the "Who would you rather have as WC?"

My bad :D

[Rollo]

I think that this fits in a whole wider category of stuff that should be legal.

If there is a car in front of you, I think that that driver should have the right to protect that position on track by all means necessary. This includes blocking and weaving if need be. The basic principle is that if you can not get around the car ahead, then you do not deserve to be there.

This also follows for teammates. A top Formula One team probably costs over half a billion squid a year to run now. If you've paid for two cars then quite honestly I don't see anything wrong with letting one past if need be or having one driver act as tail gunner.

Of course the usual rules of blue flags should apply, if you do happen to be a lap down, then you're technically not part of the argument raging behind and should move out of the way.

[janneppi]

(

So, is it wrong or not to win the WDC by being let pass by your teammate?
I understand why it's done, but think it cheapens the race. For me, this race Massa had the goods to win it or atleast give a good fight, it took a bit out of Kimi's otherwise well deserved WDC.

Maybe next year it will be a real fight to the end.

[Tazio]

Until relatively recently the WCC was cosidered objective #1 WDC #2
That began to change, exactly when, I really don't know.
But today in the Era-Celeb much more prestige is placed on the WDC.
There are some very logical reasons for this( the dispersment of advertisers money garranties costructors success. the more success the more exposier). This is satisfactory because it satisfies the consrcter most basic need solvency, then prosperity. Many people today as always live athletic, and competitive success completely vicariously through heroes projected through an ever expanding electronic media. Many young people say 12 to 30 years old don't even know if they ever had any real athletic talent, because their Idea of compitition begins, and ends in front of a monitor playing a video or watching a sporting event from a resourse of hundreds of choices. This is evident by the increasing numbers in the area of chidhood obeasity. Take this and add it to the number of people who have gotten to the age where actual physical competition, as much as they do and or try when you are between 40 & 65 physical competition puts in jeopardy your livelyhood as injurys are much more common, and the duration much, longer. But us in this catagory have include team orders of the type like letting your teammate by, but not purposely impeding a rival The teams and drivers sign a contract that states team orders are expected, and promoted when advantages to the team, and it’s drivers. Easier said than donealso dicovered the play station, and have accesst o almost unlimited telivision events T.V. has personalized the players in a way that it never did when I was younger.
So,
The idea of team orders is a question within a paradox. The only way to do away with team orders is to one driver teams. Or one car teams with multiple drivers. We already have that in motor sport, but for a slightly different reason. I believe that the formula for Formula one should include team orders of the type like letting your teammate by, but not purposely impeding a rival The teams and drivers sign a contract that states team orders are expected, and promoted when advantages to the team, and it’s drivers. Easier said than done.

[GP-M3]

I find Simmo's comments right-on! Well said. The only thing I thought possible at all, is Ferrari called Massa in a lap early, to give Kimi an extra lap, but aside from that (IF they even did that) that it was really well played and sporting. Massa said he could have driven faster, but so did Kimi, but with both of them working together, they were able to save their tires, so it was a good team effort.

Once again Massa proves he is a great qualifier, and is excellent when he can run ahead without much pressure. Kimi however is a great racer, and the only one to have won a (two) races this year, not from the front row.

Next year I think when they design the car from the get go, having known Kimi first hand, it will be a great season for him, and we will see the true difference.


I don't think in that situation it would be too much of a problem. The last race, with the teammate completely out of the equation, and it actually only occurring in the pitlane where Kimi put in some fantastically quick lap times made it fine.

If it was for the title, midway through the season (if it was so dominated like 2002 (I think)) then it would probably be less accepted as it would be so unnecessary.

Team orders have become so much more out in the open and expected that it's less of a surprise any more, but today really, they weren't exactly blatent, if they did even occur.

[DonnieDarco]

(I posted a couple threads to try to have some clear air from the conspiracy theories. So please, if you are here just willing to bash the FIA and/or support your favourite conspiracy theory, please do that in any of the other threads. Thank you)

Before starting, let me say that I consider KR a very deserving WDC (although taking into account that both FA and LH finished 1 point behind, the same could have been said of any of those two).

Now, after years of reading posts and posts in these forums bashing the supposed Ferrari policy of priorizing one driver, this time I cannot find a single post saying that KR is an undeserving WDC because he won by being let pass by his teammate.

Quite contradictory, the posters' attitude, I think :mark:

So, is it wrong or not to win the WDC by being let pass by your teammate?

At the end of the season and when one of the two has no chance to be world champion, I think it's the right thing to do.

It's definitely NOT the right thing to do however, when its only the 6th race of the season, and both drivers have a shot. And that's why Ferrari got lambasted.

This year since MS has gone, I've liked the team a heck of a lot more to be honest, and I won't be the only one :D

[CaptainRaiden]

Even though Kimi thanked Massa during the post race press conference, I honestly and truly don't think Massa did any "Huge" favor for Kimi. If anything, Kimi won it on outright pace than anything.

Let's look at it this way. When Massa went into the pits for his second stop, he was only 1.4 seconds ahead of Kimi. After which Kimi had 2 extra laps, where he banged in two stupendously fast laps to atleast take a second out of Massa's time and negate the track advantage. After which, his pitstop was about half a second faster than Massa as well, and voila, he came out on track "JUST" ahead of Massa.

I don't think Massa lifted off the accelerator or had a slower pitstop. If they wanted to do that, they would have done it during the first round of pitstops as well. Also, this is not the first time that Kimi has beaten Massa during the pit-stops. Remember Magny Cours anyone? Kimi was clearly the fastest guy on the track, as is demonstrated by his fastest lap. I don't see how this looks anything like Massa helped him. Just because it was Massa's home race, and it's the most probable answer? That's bull.

In my humble opinion, I don't buy that at all. I believe Kimi won this race himself. Even if you think he was let through, at least it wasn't on the last lap just inches before the finish line in the middle of the season. I think Kimi won this race fair and square.

[Tazio]

Until relatively recently the WCC was considered objective number one. WDC number two.
That began to change, exactly when, I really don't know.
But today in the Era-Celeb much more prestige is placed on the WDC.
There are some very logical reasons for this (the dispersment of advertisers money guaranties constructors success. the more success the more exposure). This is satisfactory because it satisfies the constructer most basic need solvency, then prosperity. Many people today as always live athletic and competitive success completely vicariously through heroes projected through an ever expanding electronic media. Many young people say 12 to 30 years old don't even know if they ever had any real athletic talent, because their Idea of competition begins, and ends in front of a monitor playing a video or watching a sporting event from a resource of hundreds of choices. This is evident by the increasing numbers in the area of childhood obesity. Take this and add it to the number of people who have gotten to the age where actual physical competition, as much as they do and or try when you are between 40 & 65 physical competition puts in jeopardy your livelihood as injuries are much more common, and the duration much, longer. But us in this category have also discovered the play station, and have access to almost unlimited television events T.V. has personalized the players in a way that it never did when I was younger.

So the idea of team orders is a question within a paradox. The only way to do away with team orders is to have one driver teams. Or one car teams with multiple drivers. We already have that in motor sport, but for a slightly different reason. I believe that the formula for Formula one should include team orders of the type like letting your teammate by, but not purposely impeding a rival The teams and drivers sign a contract that states team orders are expected, and promoted, when advantages to the team, and it’s drivers. This is easier said than done.

Boy I really screwed up that post i think this might make more sense.( but dont bet on it!

[markabilly]

Boy I really screwed up that post i think this might make more sense.( but dont bet on it!

??????????????


Actually the other one made more sense than this one,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,


You and Kimi just need to stop drinkin and just celebrate...that is all.... :D

[acorn]

If there is a car in front of you, I think that that driver should have the right to protect that position on track by all means necessary. This includes blocking and weaving if need be. The basic principle is that if you can not get around the car ahead, then you do not deserve to be there.

by that logic the guy trying to pass should also be able to use ALL means possible including those which may be questionable. poor track design also means these blocking rules need to be there.


This also follows for teammates. A top Formula One team probably costs over half a billion squid a year to run now. If you've paid for two cars then quite honestly I don't see anything wrong with letting one past if need be or having one driver act as tail gunner.

so what your saying is we have team racing. so why have a driver championship as well as a constructor championship if the driver champion is there because if team orders?


Of course the usual rules of blue flags should apply, if you do happen to be a lap down, then you're technically not part of the argument raging behind and should move out of the way.

why? if as stated above you want team racing and it's ok to defend your(or your teams) position then it must be ok to block the opposition even if you're a lap down.

kimi would not have won the championship if ferrari had equal driver status.
the first corner block was always going to happen and kimi was supposed to go around the outside but couldn't get the drive(he twitched).

if i were brazilian and had enough money to buy a car it wouldn't be a ferrari because of the way the brazilian co drivers have been treated by them in not allowing them to win their home race.

[airshifter]

I really don't like team orders of any type, even though I wanted Kimi to win the title.

I think the basic problem I have is that there are often situations where using team orders can be abused to favor one driver over the entire season. I wouldn't have a problem if they were only used in situations were the drivers were very close on track already, and allowing one to pass would prevent a possible racing incident between the two drivers.

Kimi had race pace over Massa, as evidenced by his blistering lap after Massas first pit. If they didn't allow team orders, he may have been able to pass on track. The problem with that is you now put both your cars and drivers in a position to damage both cars and take them out of the race. But I would imagine that with Felipe wanting to win his home race, and Kimi wanting the WDC that Ferrari would want to protect their interests and prevent that.



I personally think Kimi could have passed him on track anyway. He stayed back in clean air without pushing, just as Felipe did after Kimi passed.

[jens]

The funny thing is that although teams still use team orders, but as they carry them out 'concealedly', then FIA finds it hard to punish the teams. So although team orders are theoretically forbidden, the rule itself is practically useless.

And as teams manage to accomplish team orders so "secretly", then it's fun that even some posters here believe that Räikkönen won the race on merit. :p :

[Storm]

janneppi, They probably never saw Massa lock up in 1 corner (where he had been flawless till then) and lose about 1.5 seconds ;)


[i]So, is it wrong or not to win the WDC by being let pass by your teammate?
To answer this one, I think most of us agreed that team-orders have been part of F1 and we did not mind too much when a guy was allowed to pass his team-mate at the end of season or when the title is on the line!

But NOT in the 5th (or 6th) race of the season when he is already leading the standings (April 2002) :(