What is in the article still doesn't match what you are claiming - essentially that Wolff and Lowe don't want to let them race. This is not true.
As for the variable strategies - yes, they have given the 2nd driver the choice of an alternative strategy last year, but IMO the situation last year or on certain tracks was different. First of all - the gap to any competitor was larger last year and secondly, not every race track offers the same possibilities. Last year, the 'alternative' strategy was often a different middle stint - i.e. leading car usually on OOP, the alternative strategy being a OPO (to give the 2nd car a better chance at the end with an offset in the middle stint).
In Mexico this was pretty much out of the question since there wasn't enough data available (due to wet/slippery surface in the practice sessions so very limited data). In Brazil, I think Hamilton simply came too late with his request for an alternative strategy. If he wanted it - the time to go on it was before the first pit stops. But from what I recall, both Mercedes were already on a OPP strategy (which then turned into a OPPP). Not much room for an alternative strategy there, unless Hamilton would have gone onto a OPO (which at the time was still going to be a 2 stop, but the Ferraris stopped quite early, so if Hamilton had stayed out longer, he would dropped behind the Ferrari, or at least that's what the team feared).
I honestly don't think it's a big deal. Yes, as a Hamilton supporter, I would have loved to see him on some alternative strategy, but quite frankly, if he somehow would have lucked into a better strategy than Rosberg, I'd be furious as Rosberg. He might not have been quicker in the race, but he did out qualify Hamilton on Saturday and as the leading car on track, he earned the right for the better strategy. IMO, had the roles been reserved and Hamilton in front, I wouldn't have wanted it any differently as well.
I think both drivers being on the same strategy is fairest and let them dice it out on track in equal conditions when both are driving for the same positions. That's IMO the only way you can go if equality is your goal as a team and you don't want any controversy post race if it goes well vs. bad for the other type situation.
Having said that, I understand Hamilton's frustration too. He felt he was quicker but couldn't attempt anything on this track - as was the case last year - and he was willing to take a gamble on what was essentially going to be the worse strategy but attempt (the impossible to) make it work due to driving faster. Even if chances are it wouldn't have worked out anyway. But I guess, as close as it was - he should have been quicker on Saturday and even if sometimes, it doesn't turn out like that - some tracks just don't lend themselves well for overtakes when you're in an identical car. But that was never going to be a surprise - it was the same last year...
Not for nothing, Rosberg's Championship is the only thing that lends credibility to Hamilton's recent success. Otherwise, he'd just be the guy who's had the best car. — bhall II