Andrew Mah medal 5000 5 years 63 days ago
Bottas got ripped off in Singapore to be told to slow his laptime by 3 seconds just so that Hamilton would come out ahead from the pitstops. "playing the team game".... it's more like the Hamilton show in the Mercedes camp. Bottas could have had a chance to pass Verstappen when he was still fast.
The team has prevented Bottas from challenging for the drivers championship.
M S medal 6367 5 years 61 days ago (Last edited by
M S 5 years 61 days ago)
And you are completely going to ignore the fact that Ferrari robbed Leclerc off the win!???
Most teams use a rule where lead car gets first priority to pit first. So Leclerc was in the lead but Ferrari decided to pit Vettel first and undercut Leclerc and gave advantage to Vettel to get him ahead of Leclerc.
Mercedes pitted Bottas first even though Hamilton was ahead of Bottas. Knowing by pitting Bottas first he would undercut Hamilton and come out ahead, but since the rule is lead car pits first they gave advantage to Hamilton so even though Bottas would have ended up ahead of Hamilton by slowing Bottas down they got Hamilton ahead of Bottas. This way Hamilton is not disadvantaged and they are being fair to both drivers.
It does looks like Bottas was asked to slow down and disadvantaged but if Mercedes stopped Hamilton first as he was ahead of Bottas, Hamilton would have come out ahead of Bottas. Even if Bottas pitted a lap after he would have come out behind Hamilton. Therefore Bottas didn't lose anything.
Ferrari on other hand disadvantaged Leclerc by not giving him first priority to pit first and gave advantage to Vettel buy pitting first and undercut advantage Vettel got handed the win which Leclerc should have had as Leclerc drove the wheels off that Ferrari to take pole position and was in lead of the race until Ferrari decided to pit Vettel first. If Ferrari pitted Leclerc first and Vettel 2nd Leclerc would have come out ahead of Vettel and most probably won his 3rd race.
If Ferrari weren't knowingly giving advantage to Vettel and robbing Leclerc off, why didn't they swap Vettel and Leclerc around?!! Or asked Vettel to slow down knowing he was going to overtake Leclerc while he was in pit?! If they had swapped Leclerc and Vettel around that would have been more fair! As Leclerc didn't do anything wrong to lose the race but only lost as Ferrari disadvantaged him and gave advantage to Vettel. To cheer Vettel up so he can perform better and get out of the slump he is in!
Andrew Mah medal 5000 5 years 61 days ago
The difference being that had LeClerc pitted first it would have released Hamilton and Vettel may have finished 3rd or 4th.
Merc should have pitted Hamilton first if they wanted to be fair to Bottas.
Had they asked Vettel to slow, then he might not have got past Hamilton if he had pitted sooner. Also with the safety cars it was risky trying to swap them on track.
Are you saying that Mercedes did the right thing with the strategy telling Bottas to go slower?
It's Formula One, not Formula Three.
M S medal 6367 5 years 60 days ago
It's called rules of engagement! Both Ferrari and Mercedes operate lead car gets priority to pit first. But Ferrari didn't give Leclerc the option to pit first at all. They just got Vettel in first without telling Leclerc what was going on! They kept Leclerc in dark so they can get Vettel out ahead of him! Leclerc was told to drive slowly in first stint tbh Ferrari, if Leclerc wanted he could have driven faster lap times. Then suddenly Vettel undercuts Leclerc. You can hear on the radio messages how disappointed and betrayed Leclerc felt right after pit stops.
Hamilton asked his engineers for an undercut but Mercedes messed it up on strategy and kept him out as they thought staying out was better strategy. Hamilton was in 2nd place ahead of Bottas who was in 4th place. Mercedes decided to pit Bottas first and not Hamilton so just like Ferrari broke the rule of engagement which is lead car pits first. Now due to time gained with undercut Bottas would have got ahead of Hamilton. Is this fair to Hamilton? Is this Hamilton's fault? Answer to both those questions is NO. So to keep things fair Mercedes ordered Bottas to do slower lap time so Hamilton gets to keep ahead of Bottas! This way Mercedes are fair to both drivers! And not doing what Ferrari did and advantaged 1 driver over another driver!
Andrew Mah medal 5000 5 years 60 days ago
Both teams advantaged one driver over the other based solely on the one who had been with the team longest.
I see now that you love Hamilton.
Johnny Cooper medal 5000 5 years 60 days ago
It was a brilliant tactical move from Ferrari to pit Vettel first imo. That gave Ferrari the chance to undercut Hamilton and get a 1/2 finish. At this point it wasn't clear that Vettel would also get ahead of Leclerq, too.
Later on in the race after they saw that Vettel also got ahead of Leclerq, Ferrari could have ordered/asked to switch positions again. Especially after the last safety car where in the last laps they had a comfortable enough lead back to Verstappen and the Mercedes.
The question Ferrari just had to ask themselves was: what is more beneficial for us? And they decided that it is better to let Vettel win and boost his confidence than turn the win over to Leclerq who would have deserved it from a sportive point of view. That way they hopefully have two drivers in the next races again who are fully motivated and confident instead of only one. And while Charles did deserve the win, the second place will harm him less than the victory was worth for Vettel. The only problem for Ferrari is that they gave valuable championship points for the driver's championship to Vettel instead of Leclerq. And thereby diminished Ferrari's championship hopes, if they still have them for this season.
