but i need to know an answer to this question , force india did it last race ,RB and mercedes did it this race . is this the normal for all the teams in all races ?
Edited by benzine, 25 March 2013 - 12:12.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:11
Edited by benzine, 25 March 2013 - 12:12.
Advertisement
Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:15
Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:38
When the team has a limited amount of engines and gearboxes,it makes sense to conserve them.
I'd say that unless there is a serious chance for more points, most teams order their drivers to back off at the end of the race.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:43
I the team feel that they can gain another place from another team, then they will probably try to get their fastest driver to go for it. If this is not the situation, though, the TEAM will end up with exactly the same amount of points, so there's no sense in taking any risks with either that race or (in terms of engine and gearbox limitations) future races. Of course, from the drivers point of view they want to maximise their own points tally, not just the teams.sorry another topic about teamorders
but i need to know an answer to this question , force india did it last race ,RB and mercedes did it this race . is this the normal for all the teams in all races ?
Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:45
Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:48
Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:50
Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:59
Not for all teams in all races, no. In fact, Malaysia was a peculiar one for the two leading teams; Ross Brawn stated it very clearly in one of his conversations with Rosberg: "a massive gap to the front and a massive gap to the back". Or, in other words, the RB and Merc drivers found themselves in a situation in which they were not under threat from any other team, just racing their teammate. At this point, a team director has two options: let his drivers race each other, and in the process risk an incident of some sort (or, as stated above, just putting additional wear on the engines and other mechanical parts), or call it a day and ask his two cars to come back home safe and relaxed.sorry another topic about teamorders
but i need to know an answer to this question , force india did it last race ,RB and mercedes did it this race . is this the normal for all the teams in all races ?
Posted 25 March 2013 - 13:08
Edited by LiJu914, 25 March 2013 - 13:09.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 13:10
I'm not convinced. I do think that, given the particular circumstances where the TEAM will not gain anything by letting drivers race, all teams now will make it clear to their drivers that they cannot race each other the final stop. All teams are focused on the WCC because that's where the money is.Not for all teams in all races, no. In fact, Malaysia was a peculiar one for the two leading teams; Ross Brawn stated it very clearly in one of his conversations with Rosberg: "a massive gap to the front and a massive gap to the back". Or, in other words, the RB and Merc drivers found themselves in a situation in which they were not under threat from any other team, just racing their teammate. At this point, a team director has two options: let his drivers race each other, and in the process risk an incident of some sort (or, as stated above, just putting additional wear on the engines and other mechanical parts), or call it a day and ask his two cars to come back home safe and relaxed.
If you focus just on the WCC, the second option makes 100% sense. Obviously, when you look at the WDC it is a different story. I'd say that it being so soon in the season, it is likely that the team directors thought that it was too soon to decide which of his drivers would be better placed for WDC towards year end, and that the WCC points were far more important. If you want to look at it in a different way, the team directors would be taking the stance that his two drivers had two-thirds of the GP to see who performed better, and that the risk of the additional fight was not worth it for the team.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 13:13
Because they're cowards.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 13:15
Even if the money is on the WCC, teams do care about the WDC too, even if only because it tends to get even more visibility (and sponsors like that). You will see how in future races drivers will not be asked to hold positions if under pressure from a third driver (for example, had Alonso been catching up on the two RB or the two Mercs), and even how they will be asked to support their teammates if the team believes that it is the right bet for the WDC.I'm not convinced. I do think that, given the particular circumstances where the TEAM will not gain anything by letting drivers race, all teams now will make it clear to their drivers that they cannot race each other the final stop. All teams are focused on the WCC because that's where the money is.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 13:15
Because they're cowards.
I guess that does sum up team stragegy quite neatly.i am convinvced
end thread
Posted 25 March 2013 - 13:25
Posted 25 March 2013 - 13:40
Posted 25 March 2013 - 14:32
It´s a reminiscense from the time when every try to pass a car on a similar pace was a huge risk.Nowadays if your drivers give each other some basic respect this agreement is not necesary at all.
It doesn´t make sense any more, but it keeps being done. A bit like the Q3 guys having to start on the tyres they qualified on.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 14:37
The problem right there. Teams, even those who claim they let their drivers race, do not want to see Turkey 2010.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 14:44
Sure, but current F1 gives a perfectly fair chance to fight for position with a car slightly slower without having to expect anything bad happening. I don´t think this is necesary anymore, as I said, if you have two guys who can race wheel to wheel giving each other some room. Webber is a reckless defender and Vettel has made some mistakes in the past racing closely, but even this pair should be OK to go racing. Yesterday they were as hard on each other as you´ll see, and both scaped unhurt.
Edited by KnucklesAgain, 25 March 2013 - 14:46.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 14:45
Advertisement
Posted 25 March 2013 - 14:47
Yesterday they did, at other times they didn't. I still think it's a considerable risk to the team, one incident per season is enough to lose both championships.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 14:50
Posted 25 March 2013 - 15:51
Posted 25 March 2013 - 16:11
Posted 25 March 2013 - 16:40
Posted 25 March 2013 - 16:45
Even setting the babying aside, and consider the worst case scenario, Vettel has made them a multitude of 43 points more money than Webber.A championship point is worth a lot of money. An F1 team is not there to stroke the ego's of there drivers but to make money and continue racing.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 19:31
Posted 25 March 2013 - 20:49
Even setting the babying aside, and consider the worst case scenario, Vettel has made them a multitude of 43 points more money than Webber.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 22:02
Partially habit, i guess.
A few years ago due to the absence of DRS (and cheese-tyres) all positions were pretty much settled after the last round of pit-stops. So there was usually little need to have a no holds barred fight between teammates, as it normally wouldn´t lead to a different result anyway - except for a collision perhaps.
Today however, the closing stages of the race are often enough a crucial part for the overall results of the race.
That´s the main reason, why i think today´s "hold position"-orders, with still a whole stint to go, are much more questionable than in the past.
Posted 25 March 2013 - 23:03
A championship point is worth a lot of money. An F1 team is not there to stroke the ego's of there drivers but to make money and continue racing.