McLaren vs Lewis

[DaveKillens]

Why is it assumed the driver decide the strategy? They are just drivers, what are they good at strategy too?

Brian

Actually, yes, almost all drivers have a very good grasp of strategy, and apply it.

But the drivers in Formula One don't need to run through all the possibilities. There are scores of technicians running hundreds of scenarios through simulations, narrowing down what works and what doesn't work. In the end, the engineers wind up with maybe two or three major strategies, and they lay them out before the drivers, explaining projected results, and the pros and cons of each scenario. Then, the drivers ask questions, and make decisions.

[hardingfv32]

Do we have evidence that the drivers pick the strategy? They are drivers... they should implement the strategy as prescribed by management. If they have an idea they can propose it to the management like anyone else on the team. And when the strategy fails, they should keep their mouths shut! You don't see the mechanics complaining about driver caused accident damage.

Brian

[N12ck]

DaveKillens : 'But this time almost all the blame for such a dismal and chaotic showing by Hamilton is his, and his alone.' this is your opinion, and saying this thread is wrong etc,,, is your opinion, i think if we can have a thread critisizing his driving styles, we can have a thread about Calls by Mclaren,

I was not criticising his driving style, I was attempting to make the point that the decision on strategy is one shared between the team and driver, with the driver almost always in the position to make the final decision.

This whole thread was constructed on the premise the team engineers selected the strategy, and Lewis had to ride it out. That is not the truth, and that one part, about it being untrue, is how I get around to mentioning that this thread is wrong, because it's constructed on untruths.

Sorry, about the misunderstanding, i am happy to take it back, i do think there have been some occasions where maybe the best call was not made

[lebesset]

he was quite straight straight about this in one of the interviews , he said

I was given the strategy ,AND I DIDN'T QUERY IT ...so clearly he CAN query it , and also clearly was taking a share of the blame because he didn't

notice the McLaren strategy for button , clearly decided pre-race , try to undercut vettel ; whereas button picked the first stop within that strategy , the team called the exact moment for his second , turned out wrong with the safety car next lap but --- happens

if I understand correctly they put the wrong type of tyre on vettel , and look how that worked out !

[Shrieker]

Why has this topic wandered off and become one about Hamilton's pre-f1 days?

This is a new thread, and was created after the end of the Monaco race. My personal interpretation is this was done by a Hamilton fan in an attempt to pass blame away from his hero, and towards others. But this time almost all the blame for such a dismal and chaotic showing by Hamilton is his, and his alone.

It has been advanced that Lewis was just told what strategy to adopt. That is not true. Drivers are briefed by their engineers, possible strategies are discussed, and the engineers brief the drivers as to the pros and cons of the decisions.

The choice to make just one run in Q3 was Lewis', and his alone.

This decision is a repeat of what happened in China, where Lewis did adopt the exact same strategy, wound up with an extra set of softs, and translated it into a win.

The thing is, Lewis attempted a repeat of China, and Lady Luck bit him on the butt.

To attempt to lay blame for a risky strategy on the engineers is just flat out wrong. They did not make the decision, they laid out possible scenarios, briefed the driver on the pros and cons of each decision, and maybe even made recommendations. But Lewis made the decision, no one else. In fact, his teammate, Button adopted another strategy, one that the other front-runners are currently employing, and parlayed it into a visit to the podium.

If you wish to sincerely lay the blame at the feet of the engineers, then it has to be recognized that they have to take the full credit for Lewis' win at China, because it was this very strategy that got him a win there.

If you wish to criticise someone, go for it, but to invent a scenario that is untrue, wow.

While your distaste for Lewis Hamilton is evident from your previous messages way back, I do agree Lewis has something to blame for their strategy in Q3. I say "something to blame" , because probably the risk of a delay/stop in the Q3 session wasn't emphasized enough by the strategists.

Or maybe I'm totally wrong and it was Lewis who insisted in running a sole lap in Q3. We will never know (or some years later at best).

[DaveKillens]

Wow, and I always thought I liked the guy. Oh well.

I do believe the strategy is sound, but with risks. Hamilton waits until his competitors have made a run in Q3, and posted a time. But Lewis comes out on track with about 5 minutes to go, and since there's not enough time to sit back and watch, his competitors, namely Vettel and Webber, are forced to respond and go back out on track, just in case Lewis sets a time that puts him on the front row. So after it's all over, Lewis has used just one set of softs, while his competitors have used up two sets.

Lewis Hamilton said his qualifying strategy of saving a set of soft tyres helped him win the Chinese Grand Prix.

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2011/04/17/h ... y-key-win/

What's this, is it true that this very same strategy was the one employed in China, where Lewis won? Ahh, history does repeat itself.

Here's another juicy quote directly from Lewis' mouth ... “We are definitely the second quickest team,” he said. “For now, because we are not as fast as them on pure speed, it’s about trying to outsmart them elsewhere.” Yup, part of the China story.
http://www.yallaf1.com/2011/04/19/strat ... -question/

So although some fans go on and on about how important it is to go quick and that it's the only important thing, even Lewis is saying something different, that you also need good strategy and the ability to out-think your opponents.

So far, some fans have harshly criticised this strategy, yet have not offered up any kind of analysis of the pros and cons of such strategy. And yes, it's very good. But as we all now know, risky because if Lewis is unable to rip off that quick qualifying lap, it all goes wrong. And sadly, Massa in the wrong place at the wrong time, and the red flag combined to wreck that plan.

But if he had been able to make it work, then he would have enjoyed that same advantage over his rivals as China, and his odds of winning would have been favorable.

If your competitors have a quicker car, then the only way to beat them is to pull a surprise, do something they are not doing. If you don't, then you will follow them and follow them, but never lead them.

It's a good, but risky strategy. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see that same tactic employed again.

[archiebald]

I really hate it when people like Pierce89 derail other threads for their own agenda.

If you want to have a bash, go and start your own thread.

And DaveKillens, you may be a moderator but you are just as bad. You assume things such as "a fan of Lewis Hamilton's" (I'm not, I said I enjoy watching him race and there is a world of difference) and "the drivers make the decisions" (where is your source for that?)

As an aside I also like watching Alonso race (but really don't like him), Kobayashi (and he's a lovely guy).....get the picture?? I want to see top racers having at it on a Sunday afternoon, giving it every thing they can.

Dave, now I see you have posted again and the following paragraphs answer what you have claimed.

Back on topic, to try to run a single Q3 lap at the end of the session in China has virtually zero risk. The circuit is as wide as an airfield, has plenty of runoff etc so there is very little chance of a red flag.

To do the same thing in Monaco where the tiniest mistake by any of the other 9 drivers screws your weekend is just utter stupidity.

More to the point, tyre preservation in Monaco was never going to be an issue ike it was in China. The teams had three sessions of practise data to understand how well the tyres were holding up.

Why risk your entire Q3 for saving a couple of laps on a fresh set of tyres on a circuit where track position is absolutely key to winning. Even a car on totally shot tyres has a 90% chance of holding off a faster car in Monaco.

Monaco results have very little to do with top speed and the McLaren was anyway a good match for it at Monaco due to the lack of high speed corners. Itis entirely about track position. Hamilton was fastest in Q1 and Q2 so we could expect a very competitive Q3 or even pole if the team had stuck with a sensible strategy.

It strikes me that the team strategists had their book open on the wrong page for Q3 and that is where Lewis's race was destroyed. It was completely wrong for Monaco.

As I was saying, they have done the same historically, Monza 2008 was a perfect example where they thought the rain was going to stop but it just got harder.

China 2007 and a ridiculous strategy on tyres lost Lewis the championship.

I just wanted to find other examples of where the strategy killed his race.

Now I hope we are back on topic, but if anyone else goes off topic again please just lock the thread.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

This whole thread is total idiocy. Its a partial reason why it cannot remain on topic because it really is so unfathomably short sighted.

Mclaren vs Lewis? Really? They want him to fail do they?

A few home truths. Mclaren made Hamilton. Without Mclaren, Lewis Hamilton would not be a World Champion. He would not have won races. He would not have had pole positions.

Hell he would probably may not even have made it into F1. Being talented alone does not guarantee anything in life. McLaren made the difference for Lewis Hamilton to become what he is today, and for this thread to intimate that they are responsible for sabotage or hindering him intentional is beyond a joke.

If Mclaren are at fault for making a mistake, they are still in credit to Hamilton to the tune of a hundred bigger screw ups.

[Shrieker]

To do the same thing in Monaco where the tiniest mistake by any of the other 9 drivers screws your weekend is just utter stupidity.

Lewis was probably going to do 2 runs in quali. He (and the team)waited for other drivers to finish their flying laps and return to the pits to avoid traffic. Ironically, after completing his flying lap, Massa just pitted to change tyres and went right out in Hamilton's path. Lewis caught him up into Massanet and of course got held up. It's a relatively fast corner and a car 30 metres or so up ahead on the road will easily have an impact on aero balance. The rest is history.

A detail that deserves attention is, teams always watch out for where other cars are on the track in qualifying, including Ferrari. I'll go as far as to say that Ferrari knew exactly what they were doing by releasing Massa in Hamilton's path.

[archiebald]

This whole thread is total idiocy. Its a partial reason why it cannot remain on topic because it really is so unfathomably short sighted.

Mclaren vs Lewis? Really? They want him to fail do they?

A few home truths. Mclaren made Hamilton. Without Mclaren, Lewis Hamilton would not be a World Champion. He would not have won races. He would not have had pole positions.

Hell he would probably may not even have made it into F1. Being talented alone does not guarantee anything in life. McLaren made the difference for Lewis Hamilton to become what he is today, and for this thread to intimate that they are responsible for sabotage or hindering him intentional is beyond a joke.

If Mclaren are at fault for making a mistake, they are still in credit to Hamilton to the tune of a hundred bigger screw ups.

CAN'T YOU READ - ARE YOU JUST BEING OBTUSE? WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM.

SHALL I RE-WORD IT?

THE QUESTION WAS AND REMAINS - HOW MANY TIMES IN LEWIS'S F1 CAREER HAVE DOPY STRATEGIES AND FAILURES BY THE TEAM DEPRIVED US OF SEEING HIM RACING AT HIS BEST POTENTIAL. I DIDN'T MENTION ANYTHING ABOUT PRE-F1.

JEEZ.

MODERATORS, IF THERE ARE ANY MORE OFF TOPIC EXCURSIONS THEN PLEASE LOCK THIS THREAD, I SHOULD HAVE REALISED TRYING TO GET SENSIBLE ANSWERS WOULD BE FUTILE.

[Shrieker]

Wow, and I always thought I liked the guy. Oh well.

When was the last time you've seen Lewis take anybody out ?

A resentful Raikkonen, however, was less understanding. "There's not much I can say,” he said. “My race was ruined by Hamilton's mistake. Obviously, anyone can make mistakes, but it's one thing to make a mistake at 200 mph but another to hit a car stopped at a red light.

My pleasure to honor your request. You asked for it, you got it.

Doesn't look by much. Oh well... (For anyone who isn't in the know; the subject being discussed way back in 2010 was whether Hamilton had taken anyone out while trying to overtake. Now that the monaco weekend is done and dusted, thats settled though).

[sAx]

This whole thread is total idiocy. Its a partial reason why it cannot remain on topic because it really is so unfathomably short sighted.

Mclaren vs Lewis? Really? They want him to fail do they?

A few home truths. Mclaren made Hamilton. Without Mclaren, Lewis Hamilton would not be a World Champion. He would not have won races. He would not have had pole positions.

Hell he would probably may not even have made it into F1. Being talented alone does not guarantee anything in life. McLaren made the difference for Lewis Hamilton to become what he is today, and for this thread to intimate that they are responsible for sabotage or hindering him intentional is beyond a joke.

If Mclaren are at fault for making a mistake, they are still in credit to Hamilton to the tune of a hundred bigger screw ups.

How uniquely different is that to any other driver who has driven an F1 car?

Williams made Damon Hill,
Brabham made Piquet Senior
Toleman made Senna
Colin Chapman made Mansell
Benetton made Schumacher
Mclaren made Hakkinen and Coulthard
Enzo made Villeneuve
Renault made Prost

All F1 drivers have received the favour of someone to get to the hallowed position to participate and even more so to become great. The problem for Lewis is that his talent has propelled him straight toward greatness and many find it hard to accept that. He is not the first to step into a top draw F1 seat. I seem to remember a 19yr old Jenson Button pulling it off minus a less than stellar junior career!

sAx

[red748]

There is real validity in this McLaren vs Lewis thread.

Remember when Lewis and Alonso were team mates?

One occasion I recall.....

Lewis got the team radio call...
'Let Alonso through, he's faster'.

Lewis did not follow his teams orders,
and deliberately denied Alonso any chances to pass.

Alonso pitted later in the session, saw Hamilton
queueing behind him and then held Lewis up.

A team like McLaren know Hamilton is somewhat
uncontrollable.

[JohnsonsEvilTwin]

How uniquely different is that to any other driver who has driven an F1 car?

Williams made Damon Hill,
Brabham made Piquet Senior
Toleman made Senna
Colin Chapman made Mansell
Benetton made Schumacher
Mclaren made Hakkinen and Coulthard
Enzo made Villeneuve
Renault made Prost

sAx

From the age of 13?

[Ray]

Who cares how many times McLaren has made strategy mistakes? They are a team, and teams succeed and fail together. Not once did McLaren slag off Lewis when he screwed up and I don't think anyone should do it to McLaren either. People make mistakes, Lewis isn't god, he isn't 'better' than McLaren and he should stick with a team that is as good as McLaren and they should stick with a fantastic driver. If only Lewis could be a little more tactful about his teams mistakes in public we wouldn't have anything to discuss about the inner workings of McLaren.

I think everyone can remember China 2007 where leaving Lewis out on dead rubber caused him to lose the championship in his rookie season.

McLaren leaving him out on worn tires was a stupid call, him driving into a gravel trap at low speed wasn't McLaren's fault. That screwup was directly on the shoulders of Lewis and not the team. I see what you are getting at but it's irrelevant.