Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 8 votes

Lotus team orders, example of how not to do it


  • Please log in to reply
199 replies to this topic

#151 Wolfie

Wolfie
  • Member

  • 1,330 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 08 July 2013 - 13:17

devoted attention? They only replaced his chassis for god's sake. O.o That's bullshit mate. They actually didn't do a **** to help him for few races, then just changes chassis, and tried to improve setups. Even Lopez and Allison said that they hit the sweet spot with kimi more often than with Gro, and it has nothing to do with developing car after that, to help Grosjean. He just found some good setup after long time.


Didn't they do more than just 'change' the chassis? Last seasom RG studied Kimi's data with his engineers and to my understanding the intention was for RG learning Kimi's driving style. Kimi usually drove the donkey-car on Fridays, testing the DDRS that wasn't even going to be used that season and he often had to find his race setups on Saturday. RG often got the new parts before Kimi so they were treated equally, at least not in favor of Kimi.

They built the car based on Kimi's feedback/input, but not to favor Kimi - it was in favor of both drivers.

This season RG had problems adapting to the car and because of that they built RG a completely new chassis which suited RG's driving style, in other words they stopped teaching him Kimi's driving style. It was a very fair thing from Lotus to do.

Kimi has never been driver #1 officially, except when it comes to his PR-value - and this has been stated by both EB and RG - while both state that they are on equal terms as drivers. And it's pretty obvious also that media-wise Kimi is the team's #1, didn't RG say that the team is riding on Kimi's name? But it has nothing to do with Lotus giving him that PR-status, he is a brand no matter in which team he is.

EB has flashed the 'chance' of Kimi becoming their driver #1, but that's all there is to it - a chance.

EB was very vocal after Malaysia GP when commenting about RBR, he said that he would never tolerate any of his drivers ignore team orders.

RG was given the team order three times before he obeyed.

Lap 52

Lotus: Kimi is coming behind you very fast on soft tires. Don't hold him up.
RG: I don't understand anything.
Lotus: Okay Romain. Kimi is behind you on soft tires and he is very fast. Don't hold him up.

RG didn't react.

Lap 55 the same order was repeated for the 3rd time

Lotus: Kimi is behind you on soft tires and he is very fast. Don't hold him up.
RG: can you confirm to me if Kimi is faster?
Lotus: Yes, confirmed, yes.

After this RG let Kimi past.


That's the reason why I'm all for Lotus dropping team orders in the future. They are either given or obeyed when it's too late and in both cases reflect negatively on the team as a whole.

Their lesson should be 'Seize the moment'

Edited by Wolfie, 09 July 2013 - 06:42.


Advertisement

#152 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 08 July 2013 - 13:23

Precisely what we are discussing, since here is where you apply the double standards: you always find a justification for Lotus's TO, so you can claim that they don't go beyond the limit; but you don't apply the same understanding to Ferrari. :)


You´re wrong pressuming everyone acts like you do. :down:

What Ferrari did in USA 12 was wrong for me, what Ferrari did in Brazil 12 is OK for me. What Lotus did yeasterday was right for me, and what Mercedes did yesterday was right for me. On the other hand what Mercedes did in Malaysia was wrong for me. What I suspect McLaren did in Canada 2005 was wrong for me, while the Renault team order in Canada 2005 was right for me.

I have my view on what´s acceptable on the team orders topic, and it doesn´t change depending on who´s involved. Shame you can´t do the same and judge the events objectively, because you´d realize yesterday events were perfectly OK and nothing close to what Ferrari has done recently sometimes.

Edited by Skinnyguy, 08 July 2013 - 13:25.


#153 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 12,029 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 08 July 2013 - 13:47

I don't get this "he's on a different strategy and faster" on the final stint. THey are running to the flag. One strategy might be to get track position and gamble you don't lose the position, the other one is to give away track position and HOPE you pass the cars that will, of course, be slower if you catch them.

Lotus have compromised RG's stint by pitting him VERY early. His tyres were OK, he was pitted to give Kimi free air, make Vettel react and also pit..then hope Kimi can put the softs late and charge. Why does RG need to sacrifice the 2nd time his position? So that Kimi can chase Vettel? Well he did and didn't pass him -> he should have given the position back if that was the case.

I am ok for team orders as long as you state loud and clear who's who. "kimi is faster than you" requires a reply "good for him". This is racing, track position is crucial. Give the order "move out", but the argument that he's faster should not mean anything

#154 ardbeg

ardbeg
  • Member

  • 2,876 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 08 July 2013 - 13:50

I don't get this "he's on a different strategy and faster" on the final stint.

Jesus. Have a look at the championship standings and you'll understand. You think F1 is some kind of charity project?

#155 Vesuvius

Vesuvius
  • Member

  • 14,150 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2013 - 13:52

I don't get this "he's on a different strategy and faster" on the final stint. THey are running to the flag. One strategy might be to get track position and gamble you don't lose the position, the other one is to give away track position and HOPE you pass the cars that will, of course, be slower if you catch them.

Lotus have compromised RG's stint by pitting him VERY early. His tyres were OK, he was pitted to give Kimi free air, make Vettel react and also pit..then hope Kimi can put the softs late and charge. Why does RG need to sacrifice the 2nd time his position? So that Kimi can chase Vettel? Well he did and didn't pass him -> he should have given the position back if that was the case.

I am ok for team orders as long as you state loud and clear who's who. "kimi is faster than you" requires a reply "good for him". This is racing, track position is crucial. Give the order "move out", but the argument that he's faster should not mean anything


Kimi is fighting for the title not Romain, in the end Kimi was over a second faster/ lap than Grosjean so he was the only one able to challenge Vettel for the win in the end.everyone with brains would have made the team order switch in Lotus situation.

Edited by Vesuvius, 08 July 2013 - 13:54.


#156 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 08 July 2013 - 13:56

I don't get this "he's on a different strategy and faster" on the final stint. THey are running to the flag. One strategy might be to get track position and gamble you don't lose the position, the other one is to give away track position and HOPE you pass the cars that will, of course, be slower if you catch them.

Lotus have compromised RG's stint by pitting him VERY early. His tyres were OK, he was pitted to give Kimi free air, make Vettel react and also pit..then hope Kimi can put the softs late and charge. Why does RG need to sacrifice the 2nd time his position? So that Kimi can chase Vettel? Well he did and didn't pass him -> he should have given the position back if that was the case.

I am ok for team orders as long as you state loud and clear who's who. "kimi is faster than you" requires a reply "good for him". This is racing, track position is crucial. Give the order "move out", but the argument that he's faster should not mean anything


They didn´t move Romain out because his teammate was faster. They did it because Räikkönen had a chance to pass Vettel while Romain´s chances (the undercut attempt and Vettel´s outlap on cold tyres) had gone.

And you got wrong the reason why they pitted Romain. That pit stop was not just a bait, that´s the standard strategy to get a win, the most obvious way to attack Vettel was an undercut attempt, that´s how you make passes on the pits nowadays. If you´re stuck behind someone, you try an early pitstop for an undercut. With Kimi they tried the alternative way, that´s what you have to do with two competitors on good positions, try different things.



#157 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 08 July 2013 - 14:00

Jesus. Have a look at the championship standings and you'll understand. You think F1 is some kind of charity project?


Forget about the championship for a second. Isolate the race, and by that time even if it was two Force India driver in that position the switch was the only reasonable thing to do by then to get the best result. The guy behind had a chance to try a pass, the guy ahead didn´t.

So it´s not only this, which I´m sure certainly counts too to an extent:

Kimi is fighting for the title not Romain


But it´s more like this is the main reason to make that switch.

in the end Kimi was over a second faster/ lap than Grosjean so he was the only one able to challenge Vettel for the win in the end.everyone with brains would have made the team order switch in Lotus situation.



#158 Orrelto

Orrelto
  • Member

  • 153 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 08 July 2013 - 14:15

.

Lap 52

Lotus: Kimi is coming behind you very fast on soft tires. Don't hold him up.
RG: I don't understand anything.
Lotus: Okay Romain. Kimi is behind you on soft tires and he is very fast. Don't hold him up.

RG didn't react.

Lap 55 the same order was repeated for the 3rd time

Lotus: Kimi is behind you on soft tires and he is very fast. Don't hold him up.
RG: can you confirm to me if Kimi is faster?
Lotus: Yes, confirmed, yes.

After this RG let Kimi past.

So for three laps Grosjean disobeyed team orders and robbed Lotus a chance of fighting for the win. That's bloody brilliant.


#159 yr

yr
  • Member

  • 6,007 posts
  • Joined: December 98

Posted 08 July 2013 - 14:16

I don't get this "he's on a different strategy and faster" on the final stint.


If it were like German 2010, where Massa was leading and Alonso was behind and Massa got the call: "Fernando is faster than you" then it wouldnt (and it didnt) make sense at all. BTW I am sure you were disgusted back then :lol:

Last race was a different though, as Kimi and Romain werent in positions 1-2 by the time orders were given, there was a chance that Kimi who was faster with faster tyres could have challenge for win. So, unlike 2010, there was something to gain for team by switching the positions.

Advertisement

#160 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 12,029 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 08 July 2013 - 14:16

They didn´t move Romain out because his teammate was faster. They did it because Räikkönen had a chance to pass Vettel while Romain´s chances (the undercut attempt and Vettel´s outlap on cold tyres) had gone.

then they should stop the hypocrisy of the "x is faster" message. Tell it as it is


And you got wrong the reason why they pitted Romain. That pit stop was not just a bait, that´s the standard strategy to get a win, the most obvious way to attack Vettel was an undercut attempt, that´s how you make passes on the pits nowadays. If you´re stuck behind someone, you try an early pitstop for an undercut. With Kimi they tried the alternative way, that´s what you have to do with two competitors on good positions, try different things.

Do you think so? :)
I would have waited for a few more laps.....if Vettel wouldn't stop I'd stop and put the softer compound...that would have made him react and I would have had a lap on softs compared to his (older by now) inlap on mediums. Vettel also had to chose between soft and medium and Lotus is better at managing the softer compound.

#161 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 08 July 2013 - 14:29

then they should stop the hypocrisy of the "x is faster" message. Tell it as it is


Indeed :up: I´ve said the same here. It´s pointless as there´s no need for that.

Anyway the message yesterday was "don´t hold him up". That´s perfectly clear, they´re not trying to sell us that "we´ve just informed the driver, he made his decission". They directly told Romain that if Kimi arrived to him in his faster tyres he couldn´t cost him time.


Do you think so? :)
I would have waited for a few more laps.....if Vettel wouldn't stop I'd stop and put the softer compound...that would have made him react and I would have had a lap on softs compared to his (older by now) inlap on mediums. Vettel also had to chose between soft and medium and Lotus is better at managing the softer compound.


You can´t wait. If you can´t pass a car on track on equally aged tyres, you won´t pass him with tyres one or two laps newer.

And if you can´t pass on track, your best option is an undercut. To try an undercut you must make sure you pit earlier than the other guy. You can´t wait to see what he does, or your chance is gone. Once he pits, you´re done. He´ll open more gap than he had before with his faster outlap, and the only thing you´ll gain is one less lap in your last set of tyres. And that won´t be enough give you a chance to pass.


#162 discover23

discover23
  • Member

  • 9,302 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 08 July 2013 - 14:32

No one disagrees that Kimi is the no. 1 driver. And no, Kimi only recieved new parts in Malaysia, and that goes for the whole season. Grosjean also recieved a front wing before Kimi did, and he had the new slimline bodywork last week.

Yeah Kimi is the preferred driver, I dont think it is exactly a difficult decision or mind blowing revolution, Grosjean has scored less then 30% of Kimi's points so far for the season, according to the 2nd driver teammate ratio, he has scored the least against his teammate, then the 2nd drivers at Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes. If you have a problem with Grosjean being a second driver then it must really be hard for you to see what is happening at Red Bull, Ferrari and Mercedes. :lol:

no problem at all with Kimi being # 1 driver - It should be that way.. some people here still deny this.

#163 discover23

discover23
  • Member

  • 9,302 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 08 July 2013 - 14:34

Team was very much behind Romain in the beginning of the season, trying to fin out why he was struggling. They even replaced the chassi of his car.

read Allison's quotes after Malaysia and how he said Romain had been disadvantaged with respect to parts.. I am just echoing what the team said.. Don't shoot the messenger.

#164 David M. Kane

David M. Kane
  • Member

  • 5,402 posts
  • Joined: December 00

Posted 08 July 2013 - 14:40

Romain didn't make the strategy mistake, the Team did. Romain's day will be here soon. :up:

#165 Vesuvius

Vesuvius
  • Member

  • 14,150 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 08 July 2013 - 14:43

read Allison's quotes after Malaysia and how he said Romain had been disadvantaged with respect to parts.. I am just echoing what the team said.. Don't shoot the messenger.


Yup he was but only for that malaysian race he didn't have all the updates Kimi had and that did disadvantage him a little but later on the season both have had updates...either same or different ones.

#166 discover23

discover23
  • Member

  • 9,302 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 08 July 2013 - 14:47

Forget about the championship for a second. Isolate the race, and by that time even if it was two Force India driver in that position the switch was the only reasonable thing to do by then to get the best result.

disagree 100% with this.. The pace was dictated by Vettel. He was holding both Romain and Kimi.. It was just too difficult to overtake (as we saw with Kimi) because their difference in lap time was less than a second.

track position was key here and other smaller teams would always be fighting against each other in these last stints of the race regardless of what strategies they are on.

#167 ardbeg

ardbeg
  • Member

  • 2,876 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 08 July 2013 - 14:55

Forget about the championship for a second.

There is many reasons, but the WDC is reason enough so I picked that one since he did not understand.


#168 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 08 July 2013 - 15:13

disagree 100% with this.. The pace was dictated by Vettel. He was holding both Romain and Kimi.. It was just too difficult to overtake (as we saw with Kimi) because their difference in lap time was less than a second.


Uh? Why you disagree to then expose an argument that supports my view? That´s exactly why you have to try the undercut :wave:

Because on track you can´t pass, you MUST try the undercut. And you haveto do it because once you´re ahead, your slighltly older tyres won´t be enough to drop you behind again. And if on the other hand you don´t try it and you keep behind, your slightly newer tyres won´t be enough to get you ahead.

track position was key here and other smaller teams would always be fighting against each other in these last stints of the race regardless of what strategies they are on.


Smaller teams are considered smaller becuase the lack a fast car, not because they lack a brain inside the skull. :wave: Any team without WDC options will pull a switch if that gives them later a realistic chance to win.



#169 Mila

Mila
  • Member

  • 8,564 posts
  • Joined: December 99

Posted 08 July 2013 - 16:16

I'm not sure how Lotus could have done it better. Bear in mind that they were racing SV and FA, so they surely weighed the odds of KR gaining a win versus those of RG losing a podium spot. That is, when he let KR though looked prudent, seeing that losing time to FA by backing-off in order to let KR though a lap or two earlier would have jeopardized Lotus' third place. As for the win, it was apparent that RG wasn't going to do anything about SV over the closing laps, so why not let his teammate through?

Edited by Mila, 08 July 2013 - 16:18.


#170 Fontainebleau

Fontainebleau
  • RC Forum Host

  • 2,270 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 08 July 2013 - 16:34

You´re wrong pressuming everyone acts like you do. :down:

What Ferrari did in USA 12 was wrong for me, what Ferrari did in Brazil 12 is OK for me. What Lotus did yeasterday was right for me, and what Mercedes did yesterday was right for me. On the other hand what Mercedes did in Malaysia was wrong for me. What I suspect McLaren did in Canada 2005 was wrong for me, while the Renault team order in Canada 2005 was right for me.

I have my view on what´s acceptable on the team orders topic, and it doesn´t change depending on who´s involved. Shame you can´t do the same and judge the events objectively, because you´d realize yesterday events were perfectly OK and nothing close to what Ferrari has done recently sometimes.

Yes, sure. I assume MarileneRiddle can't judge objectively either, and you are the only one to be correct. Have fun.


#171 Skinnyguy

Skinnyguy
  • Member

  • 4,391 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 08 July 2013 - 16:51

Yes, sure. I assume MarileneRiddle can't judge objectively either, and you are the only one to be correct. Have fun.


I don´t know about that. But I know I can do it. And no, I´m not the only one with that ability.

I´ve deemed unfair team orders favouring my favourite driver, and I´ve deemed fair team orders going against my favourite driver´s interests too. I´m able to judge the events regardless of who´s involved. Hope everyone would be able to do such a thing... but sadly some are too busy looking at the drivers involved. Look at the noise and the baiting after this, and the lack of it after Mercedes did exactly the same move -allowing through a teammate on better strategy-. Says a lot really.

#172 jokuvaan

jokuvaan
  • Member

  • 4,091 posts
  • Joined: February 05

Posted 08 July 2013 - 16:57

RG was informed at lap 53 that Kimi is coming faster behind with soft tyres and GR responded saying he doesnt understand. Then he got the same message repeated.

On lap 55. he was informed again and this time he moved over.

Personally I think that if RG had moved over already at lap 53, Kimi might had a chance with Vettel. Overall I remember that Kimi's race went all downhill from the early pitstop.

#173 Oho

Oho
  • Member

  • 11,808 posts
  • Joined: November 98

Posted 09 July 2013 - 14:34

What I suspect McLaren did in Canada 2005 was wrong for me, while the Renault team order in Canada 2005 was right for me.


They did nothing, Montoya simply drove past pit entrance arguing with his engineer trying to get through the message McLaren wanted to double pit. All the crap about stacking is, well crap, as McLaren duo had almost 25 seconds on everyone else and thus plenty time to stop both cars and et them out ahead any rival completeing a stop in the mean time.

#174 Music Lover

Music Lover
  • Member

  • 1,120 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 10 July 2013 - 08:39

All these endless moaning about unfair treatment; team order, strategy or upgrades :drunk:

F1 is about money and i's a TEAM business. The team earn money by collecting points (and successful teams then also get good sponsors) --> the team try maximizing results and points. --> the team support BOTH drivers as much as they can.

Is it SO difficult to understand that the teams let the faster driver passing the slower driver when the team can get more points doing so?
Also, it's not about favoring a SPECIAL person (Kimi, Vettel, Alonso) - NO the team favor the driver collecting most points.

I'm sure that Ferrari would focus on Massa if he outscore Alonso, same with Lotus&Gro and RB&Webber.
The trouble is, they are NOT COLLECTING POINTS AS THEIR TEAM MATES.

And as I previously said, I have no issues with team orders, regardless team and year. It's a team sport not a driver sport.

To Gro, Massa and Webber I say, START DELIVERING!
I'm sure their main issue isn't about team orders, it's them realizing they are not as good as Kimi, Vettel and Alonso!!

Finally, the teams have supported Gro, Massa and Webber with, according to me, endless patience - nothing to complain about imho as they sitting in the top three cars and despite that doesn't deliver NEARLY as much points as their team mates.
I'm sure there are a lot of drivers in low/mid field teams thinking "if only I got to drive that car, sure I would be doing a better job..."



#175 rmpugh

rmpugh
  • Member

  • 292 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 11 July 2013 - 21:42

All these endless moaning about unfair treatment; team order, strategy or upgrades :drunk:

F1 is about money and i's a TEAM business. The team earn money by collecting points (and successful teams then also get good sponsors) --> the team try maximizing results and points. --> the team support BOTH drivers as much as they can.

Is it SO difficult to understand that the teams let the faster driver passing the slower driver when the team can get more points doing so?
Also, it's not about favoring a SPECIAL person (Kimi, Vettel, Alonso) - NO the team favor the driver collecting most points.

I'm sure that Ferrari would focus on Massa if he outscore Alonso, same with Lotus&Gro and RB&Webber.
The trouble is, they are NOT COLLECTING POINTS AS THEIR TEAM MATES.

And as I previously said, I have no issues with team orders, regardless team and year. It's a team sport not a driver sport.

To Gro, Massa and Webber I say, START DELIVERING!
I'm sure their main issue isn't about team orders, it's them realizing they are not as good as Kimi, Vettel and Alonso!!

Finally, the teams have supported Gro, Massa and Webber with, according to me, endless patience - nothing to complain about imho as they sitting in the top three cars and despite that doesn't deliver NEARLY as much points as their team mates.
I'm sure there are a lot of drivers in low/mid field teams thinking "if only I got to drive that car, sure I would be doing a better job..."


BMW in 2008 had a choice. They had a 1 - 2 no matter what, but they chose to employ team orders to allow Kubica win, and Heidfeld 2nd. Whilst Nick was slightly behind in points at that point, he had also beaten Kubica for the previous 2 years. So, why blindly trust a guy who has been trailing for 2 years, and only just managed to edge ahead in the early stages do that? The answer is hype. Don't get me wrong, Alonso is much better than Massa, as is Vettel better than Webber, but some people just have hype despite being beaten all the time. Kimi was beaten by Massa in their time together. As was Kubica by Heidfeld. All of this tends to be forgotten by the hype.

Romain is at least as fast as Kimi, as evidenced by the fact that Romain has had to let Kimi past in the last couple of races. If Kimi were faster, he wouldn't need help race after race.

Some drivers are clearly better than team mates. Fernando and Vettel are among them. Kimi and Kubica, are however, built entirely on hype.

I really dislike Vettel BTW, but still believe that Seb will destroy Kimi in the same team.


#176 TheThirdTenor1

TheThirdTenor1
  • Member

  • 882 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 11 July 2013 - 21:49

BMW in 2008 had a choice. They had a 1 - 2 no matter what, but they chose to employ team orders to allow Kubica win, and Heidfeld 2nd. Whilst Nick was slightly behind in points at that point, he had also beaten Kubica for the previous 2 years. So, why blindly trust a guy who has been trailing for 2 years, and only just managed to edge ahead in the early stages do that? The answer is hype.


Kubica was on a different strategy...





#177 skywing

skywing
  • Member

  • 706 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 11 July 2013 - 22:01

Romain is at least as fast as Kimi

Oh yes absolutely. As evidenced by the fact that Romain has scored a whopping third of Kimi's points this year. Which is even less than Massa and Webber who are being "trounced" by their teammates.



#178 rmpugh

rmpugh
  • Member

  • 292 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 11 July 2013 - 22:01

Kubica was on a different strategy...


Yep. Kubica was on the winning strategy. BMW had the choice which driver would win. They knew it would be a 1 2, and decided that hyped up golden boy should win. Either way it would have been a 1 2.

#179 rmpugh

rmpugh
  • Member

  • 292 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 11 July 2013 - 22:03

Oh yes absolutely. As evidenced by the fact that Romain has scored a whopping third of Kimi's points this year. Which is even less than Massa and Webber who are being "trounced" by their teammates.


It's sort of hard to outscore a team mate when you keep being told to let him past despite being faster.

Advertisement

#180 TheThirdTenor1

TheThirdTenor1
  • Member

  • 882 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 11 July 2013 - 22:12

Yep. Kubica was on the winning strategy. BMW had the choice which driver would win. They knew it would be a 1 2, and decided that hyped up golden boy should win. Either way it would have been a 1 2.


Kubica could only make his strategy a "winning strategy" by passing the 1 stopping Heidfeld. BMW had the choice between a 1-2 with Kubica in front or a 1-3/4 with Heidfeld in front. They chose the former for obvious reasons.

#181 rmpugh

rmpugh
  • Member

  • 292 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 11 July 2013 - 22:25

Kubica could only make his strategy a "winning strategy" by passing the 1 stopping Heidfeld. BMW had the choice between a 1-2 with Kubica in front or a 1-3/4 with Heidfeld in front. They chose the former for obvious reasons.


Codswallop. Kubica ended up a full pit stop ahead of DC in 3rd. BMW just decided which BMW driver would be on top. If Kubica was so quick, let him pass his team mate when he can, rather than do it by telling Heidfeld that his team mate is going to win because he is more hyped. No matter what, BMW would have had a 1 2. The only thing that BMW did with team orders was to decide that Kubica would be the one to win.

#182 TheThirdTenor1

TheThirdTenor1
  • Member

  • 882 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 11 July 2013 - 22:42

Codswallop. Kubica ended up a full pit stop ahead of DC in 3rd. BMW just decided which BMW driver would be on top. If Kubica was so quick, let him pass his team mate when he can, rather than do it by telling Heidfeld that his team mate is going to win because he is more hyped. No matter what, BMW would have had a 1 2. The only thing that BMW did with team orders was to decide that Kubica would be the one to win.


You don't know what you're talking about.

Alonso was right behind Heidfeld. According to Alonso, when he made his 2nd stop, he would have ended up outside the points (http://www.f1technical.net/news/9382).

If Kubica had not passed Heidfeld (and ended up in the same position that Alonso found himself in) then there is no way BMW would have had a 1-2.

I'm right, you're wrong.



#183 Music Lover

Music Lover
  • Member

  • 1,120 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 12 July 2013 - 08:07

BMW in 2008 had a choice. They had a 1 - 2 no matter what, but they chose to employ team orders to allow Kubica win, and Heidfeld 2nd. Whilst Nick was slightly behind in points at that point, he had also beaten Kubica for the previous 2 years. So, why blindly trust a guy who has been trailing for 2 years, and only just managed to edge ahead in the early stages do that? The answer is hype. Don't get me wrong, Alonso is much better than Massa, as is Vettel better than Webber, but some people just have hype despite being beaten all the time. Kimi was beaten by Massa in their time together. As was Kubica by Heidfeld. All of this tends to be forgotten by the hype.

Romain is at least as fast as Kimi, as evidenced by the fact that Romain has had to let Kimi past in the last couple of races. If Kimi were faster, he wouldn't need help race after race.

Some drivers are clearly better than team mates. Fernando and Vettel are among them. Kimi and Kubica, are however, built entirely on hype.

I really dislike Vettel BTW, but still believe that Seb will destroy Kimi in the same team.

I have no interest discussing Kub vs Hei nor Rai vs Mas as this thread is about Lotus team orders but it should be VERY easy to understand that Kub and Rai are better drivers.
Both Kimi and Massa are available 2014, yet RB and Lotus want Kimi driving for them! RB clearly said they want the best drivers in the team and it has to be a better driver than they currently have.

Back to this thread topic, if you study the last race you should notice that Kimi after cleared the Mercs was fast catching Gro = Kimi faster.
Also, after Kimi passed Gro in the last stint, Kimi created a big gap to Gro. If Gro was faster why was he not in Kimis gearbox finishing the race?
And have you missed that Kimi said there was no need for team orders as he was to pass him anyway?

btw, I thing these figures create the hype :wave: (more info in Rai vs Rom thread)
- points in F1 table
- Autosport Standings
- Autosport (Formerly Castrol) World Driver Rankings, F1 Series




#184 intelligentsia

intelligentsia
  • Member

  • 2,407 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 12 July 2013 - 11:45

Romain is at least as fast as Kimi, as evidenced by the fact that Romain has had to let Kimi past in the last couple of races. If Kimi were faster, he wouldn't need help race after race.


Nope Kimi has been a victim for Lotus's strategies for these pass two races. Especially in Silverstone.


British GP

First stint:

Kimi: Grosjean:

1:46.556 1:47.561
1:40.300 1:41.195
1:39.236 1:39.413
1:38.953 1:39.163
1:39.252 1:39.261
1:39.204 1:39.804
1:39.291 1:39.468
1:39.747 1:41.129
1:40.145 PIT

Grosjean simply had nowhere near the pace of Kimi, he didn't do one faster lap then Kimi in the first stint. But Lotus pits Grosjean early to undercut Alonso. While at the same time they keep Kimi out while his tyres and times were wearing off, and other people were posting much better times after they had pitted. When they finally did pit Kimi inevitability landed up behind Alonso and Grosjean, and lost two positions through no fault of his own. That is when they instructed Grosjean to let Kimi pass. If Grosjean was that fast he would have stayed right behind Kimi throughout the second stint, but he didn't, he quickly fell back.



German GP:

Kimi: Grosjean:

1:41.100 1:41.977
1:38.718 1:38.553
1:37.509 1:37.592
1:38.082 1:37.867
1:37.863 1:38.019
1:38.134 1:38.124
1:37.515 1:37.598
PIT------ 1:37.743


They both had very similar pace as they were both stuck directly behind Lewis. They pitted Kimi early to cover for Lewis, but the new medium tyres where not as fast as the soft tyres, and Kimi was placed directly into traffic. Kimi was placed behind Alonso, Button, Riccardo, Hulkenberg, Rosberg and Lewis. Grosjean had 5 laps in clean air on much faster tyres, and when he finally pitted he landed up behind Vettel in clear air. As soon as Kimi got pass the traffic he started to close the gap to Vettel and Grosjean before the safety car.


In both races Kimi has simply gotten the wrong strategies. Grosjean did a great job in Germany and he was very fast, but if Kimi was given the right strategies right from the start then Grosjean would not have been in front of him. It was good to see Grosjean doing that well the team can use the points in the constructors championship, but one or two races for half a season doesn't say much.

Edited by intelligentsia, 13 July 2013 - 04:05.


#185 rmpugh

rmpugh
  • Member

  • 292 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 13 July 2013 - 01:08

Nope Kimi has been a victim for Lotus's strategies for these pass two races. Especially in Silverstone.


British GP

First stint:

Kimi: Grosjean:

1:46.556 1:47.561
1:40.300 1:41.195
1:39.236 1:39.413
1:38.953 1:39.163
1:39.252 1:39.261
1:39.204 1:39.804
1:39.291 1:39.468
1:39.747 1:41.129
1:40.145 PIT

Grosjean simply had nowhere near the pace of Kimi, he didn't do one faster lap then Kimi in the first stint. But Lotus pits Grosjean early to undercut Alonso. While at the same time they keep Kimi out while his tyres and times were wearing off, and other people were posting much better times after they had pitted. When they finally did pit Kimi he inevitability landed up behind Alonso and Grosjean, and lost two positions through no fault of his own. That is when they instructed Grosjean to let Kimi pass. If Grosjean was that fast he would have stayed right behind Kimi throughout the second stint, but he didn't, he quickly fell back.



German GP:

Kimi: Grosjean:

1:41.100 1:41.977
1:38.718 1:38.553
1:37.509 1:37.592
1:38.082 1:37.867
1:37.863 1:38.019
1:38.134 1:38.124
1:37.515 1:37.598
PIT------ 1:37.743


They both had very similar pace as they were both stuck directly behind Lewis. They pitted Kimi early to cover for Lewis, but the new medium tyres where not as fast as the soft tyres, and Kimi was placed directly into traffic. Kimi was placed behind Alonso, Button, Riccardo, Hulkenberg, Rosberg and Lewis. Grosjean had 5 laps in clean air on much faster tyres, and when he finally pitted he landed up behind Vettel in clear air. As soon as Kimi got pass the traffic he started to close the gap to Vettel and Grosjean before the safety car.


In both races Kimi has simply gotten the wrong strategies. Grosjean did a great job in Germany and he was very fast, but if Kimi was given the right strategies right from the start then Grosjean would not have been in front of him. It was good to see Grosjean doing that well the team can use the points in the constructors championship, but one or two races for half a season doesn't say much.


LOL, Romain was stuck behind Kimi in the first stint. No matter what, you will claim strategy when Romain is faster, and talent when Kimi is faster. Fact remains that for the last 2 races, Kimi has needed Romain to move aside to be ahead. What about 2008/2009? Did Felipe just have a better strategy? LOL


#186 discover23

discover23
  • Member

  • 9,302 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 13 July 2013 - 02:13

Also, after Kimi passed Gro in the last stint, Kimi created a big gap to Gro. If Gro was faster why was he not in Kimis gearbox finishing the race?

Maybe because Kimi had fresher soft tires.

#187 ardbeg

ardbeg
  • Member

  • 2,876 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 13 July 2013 - 02:20

Kimi has needed Romain to move aside to be ahead.

Has there been a race where Romain has been in a position to get team orders? No, first stint in Germany does not count since Hamilton dictated the pace.

Edited by ardbeg, 13 July 2013 - 02:22.


#188 intelligentsia

intelligentsia
  • Member

  • 2,407 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 13 July 2013 - 04:02

LOL, Romain was stuck behind Kimi in the first stint. No matter what, you will claim strategy when Romain is faster, and talent when Kimi is faster. Fact remains that for the last 2 races, Kimi has needed Romain to move aside to be ahead. What about 2008/2009? Did Felipe just have a better strategy? LOL


I said both Kimi and Grosjean was stuck directly behind Lewis. Kimi was 0.7 away from Lewis and Grosjean was 0.811 seconds away from Kimi just before Kimi pitted. Lewis was in fact dictating both Kimi and Grosjean's pace, they would likely have been able to go faster then Lewis. The only fact is the actual lap times, and the actual lap shows that Kimi was given a wrong strategy in both races, had Kimi gotten a decent strategy in the first stint then Grosjean would not have been in front of him.


#189 Music Lover

Music Lover
  • Member

  • 1,120 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 13 July 2013 - 05:30

Maybe because Kimi had fresher soft tires.

Sure but Kimi created that advantage by himself.

And it's rather convenient for you to left out some other of my quote, like this

if you study the last race you should notice that Kimi after cleared the Mercs was fast catching Gro = Kimi faster.

Kimi was faster than Gro despite OLDER tires in stint 2.


Regardless how you try spinning it, Kimi was faster in the race.


#190 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 26,207 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 13 July 2013 - 08:00

The situation at Lotus is pretty similar to Ferrari, like FA, KR is faster and the better prospect in any given race 9 out of 10 times. And both Ferrari and Lotus act accordingly by preferring their better driver whenever possible.

The only thing that causes confusion over this simple situation is people who can't acknowledge it for dear life cause they spend years damning Alonso for benefitting from such a team strategy.

Now Raikönnen enjoys the same priviliges for some time for everyone to see, how very, very unfortunate... :drunk:

Consequently, that's what fuels this topic: vain attempts to argue soemthing similar into something completely different. Amusing for a short time, then turning into infinite boredom pretty fast. :yawnface:

#191 motorhead

motorhead
  • Member

  • 1,563 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 13 July 2013 - 08:41

RG is the most nurtured guy in F1, it is almost unbelievable. If he wasn´t a frenchman in a french team he would have been gone after last year. No other team would have taken him...

Edited by motorhead, 13 July 2013 - 08:41.


#192 autosportfan

autosportfan
  • Member

  • 593 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 13 July 2013 - 08:50

LOL, Romain was stuck behind Kimi in the first stint. No matter what, you will claim strategy when Romain is faster, and talent when Kimi is faster. Fact remains that for the last 2 races, Kimi has needed Romain to move aside to be ahead. What about 2008/2009? Did Felipe just have a better strategy? LOL



This is not important. If Lotus really wants Kimi to stay for next season then they should prioritize his weekend at all times given that their strategy capabilities are quite poor.

Kimi would find it harder at RBR but if Lotus also treats him like an equal driver with RG then he should leave or retire. Let RG develop the car and become the number one ace for Lotus for 2014 - I'm sure he would do well ...... NOT.









#193 ardbeg

ardbeg
  • Member

  • 2,876 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 13 July 2013 - 13:13

It brought a smile on my face when I heard the radio message "I'm faster than Kimi!" on lap... 5? That Kimi was stuck behind Hamilton must have been clear for Grosjean to see, so it must have been just that he had waited so long to say those words that he just could not help himself.

I think it would be healthier for the team if they cleared up the roles for the drivers, the roles for the rest of the season. Unless they want a Webber/Vettel situation

Edited by ardbeg, 13 July 2013 - 13:13.


#194 grunge

grunge
  • Member

  • 5,393 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 13 July 2013 - 20:34

Couldnt agree more with the OP..This was one of the most idiotic pieces of Race strategy ive seen in F1..and not for the first time either..We saw Lotus pull off something similar as recent as last weekend..At times it makes me wonder if Lotus actually thought all this out and genuinely got it all wrong or if they are doing this on purpose..Im not one for conspiracy theories but with the whole RB signing bit,it makes you wonder.

And No,Lotus didnt make Grosjean surrender anything considering the following points

1.That place switch wouldnt have been needed in the first place had Lotus not mugged up the strategy for KR..this is no way he was going to rejoin the track behind RG if they wouldve given him the same strategy as RG..Once in clean air after the first pit stop round with Hamilton pitting,KR was lapping quicker than anyone else,gaining time on the early stoppers..I have no idea why Lotus made him stop at that point when his Laptimes were equal/faster than the lead group of Vettel,Hamilton and Grosjean....They shouldve either made him stop around the same time as Grosjean undercutting Alonso or waited more if they had decided to leave him on track to make up time.
The strategy was almost theatrical with him coming out behind both Mercs and that made him lost heaps of time..Lopez/Boullier himself said after the race that it was that phase ''where they lost the race''.

2.Even without telling RG to move over,KR wouldve had him anyway..The latter was on fresher tires and was much quicker in that phase of the race..this is made obvious by the fact that he finished 5.8 secs ahead of RG in the end..He wouldve taken a lap or two longer without the Frenchman's assistance..and ruined his tires.

3.For those saying he was holding back RG in the first stint, that was not the case..Lap times posted above show that KR was the faster of the two..If one is to say that Grosjean's pace was hindered by KR ahead,then surely the same principle applies to KR as he was trapped behing Hamilton and once realizing he wasnt getting through,he fell back a little trying to save his tires.








#195 Wolfie

Wolfie
  • Member

  • 1,330 posts
  • Joined: March 09

Posted 13 July 2013 - 20:35

It brought a smile on my face when I heard the radio message "I'm faster than Kimi!" on lap... 5? That Kimi was stuck behind Hamilton must have been clear for Grosjean to see, so it must have been just that he had waited so long to say those words that he just could not help himself.

I think it would be healthier for the team if they cleared up the roles for the drivers, the roles for the rest of the season. Unless they want a Webber/Vettel situation


I doubt they will have any roles to clear up, RG did say after Germany that they are not putting all eggs in one basket, Lopez told TS after Germany that they want maximum points and it doesn't matter who finishes first, they would had given Kimi the same team order they gave RG if roles were reversed.

Lopez also said that he believes Kimi has 20-25 % chances of winning the WDC and he didn't say anywhere that they would be doing their everything for it.

When taking into account that they hadn't paid Kimi his salary from the beginning of this year due to their financial problems - and Kimi getting bonuses if he wins - they might be thinking more about those costs at the expense of the title hunt.

I would love to see Kimi going to Red Bull, losing to a 3 (maybe even 4) x WDC is nothing to be ashamed of :up:

Basically I'm tired of second guessing all the Lotus-strategies since they leave too much room for speculation :down:

#196 grunge

grunge
  • Member

  • 5,393 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 13 July 2013 - 20:42

The situation at Lotus is pretty similar to Ferrari, like FA, KR is faster and the better prospect in any given race 9 out of 10 times. And both Ferrari and Lotus act accordingly by preferring their better driver whenever possible.

The only thing that causes confusion over this simple situation is people who can't acknowledge it for dear life cause they spend years damning Alonso for benefitting from such a team strategy.

Now Raikönnen enjoys the same priviliges for some time for everyone to see, how very, very unfortunate... :drunk:

Consequently, that's what fuels this topic: vain attempts to argue soemthing similar into something completely different. Amusing for a short time, then turning into infinite boredom pretty fast. :yawnface:

Although agreed with all the points above,the topic here is not whether team orders are ok or not..its more on ''how not to employ team orders''.....If lotus had half the brains that the strategy guys at Ferrari/RB have,this wouldnt have been an issue at all.That would be akin to Ferrari making Alonso fall back behind Massa due to a moronic strategy (while the Spaniard should be the clear priority) and then making the latter move over for him at the end of the race.


#197 MikeTekRacing

MikeTekRacing
  • Member

  • 12,029 posts
  • Joined: October 04

Posted 13 July 2013 - 21:08

.....
And No,Lotus didnt make Grosjean surrender anything considering the following points

1.That place switch wouldnt have been needed in the first place had Lotus not mugged up the strategy for KR..this is no way he was going to rejoin the track behind RG if they wouldve given him the same strategy as RG..
....

2.Even without telling RG to move over,KR wouldve had him anyway..
.....

1. they made a mistake on Kimi's strategy. That's part of racing, RG doesn't have to move over to make it even
2. would have...who knows?

#198 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 26,207 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 14 July 2013 - 07:20

Although agreed with all the points above,the topic here is not whether team orders are ok or not..its more on ''how not to employ team orders''.....If lotus had half the brains that the strategy guys at Ferrari/RB have,this wouldnt have been an issue at all.That would be akin to Ferrari making Alonso fall back behind Massa due to a moronic strategy (while the Spaniard should be the clear priority) and then making the latter move over for him at the end of the race.


I agree that Lotus, at this point, does appear worse than Ferrari or RB at maximizing their strategies. Then again, RB's / Ferraris execution isn't always perfect either.

#199 Music Lover

Music Lover
  • Member

  • 1,120 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 14 July 2013 - 12:26

1. they made a mistake on Kimi's strategy. That's part of racing, RG doesn't have to move over to make it even
2. would have...who knows?

1. No but Kimi was clearly faster, look for yourself! Stupid if Gro should fight Kimi when Gro tried half the race overtaking Vettel without success. Smarter to let Kimi try.
2. Kimi knows and he said so. That should be enough, but as previously said Kimi was faster and when he was close enough enabling DRS is was just a formality passing Gro. Even if Gro should have tried defending, he had no cards to play.

Advertisement

#200 assist1

assist1
  • New Member

  • 10 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 18 July 2013 - 06:50

Lotus's implementation of team orders was unbelievably moronic for reasons I don't think anyone in this thread has really nailed. They told Grosjean 'do not hold Kimi up' which is very very different than telling him to let Kimi past, and it probably cost them the race, because Kimi was clearly held up for about 4 laps as he struggled to get close enough to be obviously held up, and resulted in wasting his tyres and laps away. I found it unbelievable that whoever was on the radio was not capable of giving a clear and direct order rather than the vague sloppy attempt. Just pure incompetence and weakness. I was almost shouting 'tell him to move out of the god damn way, your not telling him anything that way'.


RG was informed at lap 53 that Kimi is coming faster behind with soft tyres and GR responded saying he doesnt understand. Then he got the same message repeated.

On lap 55. he was informed again and this time he moved over.

Personally I think that if RG had moved over already at lap 53, Kimi might had a chance with Vettel. Overall I remember that Kimi's race went all downhill from the early pitstop.


When was Grojean expected to conclude he was holding Kimi up? When Kimi was 1 second behind or 2 seconds? See it opened up a can of worms. What they needed to say was 'let Kimi past right now. Very simple, and they failed terribly. Does anyone know who gave the order?

Edited by assist1, 18 July 2013 - 06:56.