Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 4 votes

Ferrari 2019: Vettel vs Leclerc, Binotto vs shareholders, expectation vs reality


  • Please log in to reply
4310 replies to this topic

#1901 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 17 April 2019 - 18:33

The interpretation of four years of Vettel-Räikkönen was .... that Ferrari made Räikkönen "defer to" Vettel?

 

 

For real?



Advertisement

#1902 Hela

Hela
  • Member

  • 392 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 17 April 2019 - 19:51

That's my assessment as well.  For the avoidance of doubt, at the end of 2012 I expected that he would be the first driver since Schumacher to equal and then overtake Fangio's WDC total, and I rated him well above Hamilton amongst the drivers who would be entering the 2013 season, with only Alonso marginally ahead.  However, he had his doors blown off that season by an inexperienced Ricciardo, then rediscovered form at Ferrari before having an indifferent season in 2016 against his teammate.  He had a mini-revival in 2017 that ended in Singapore when he make a mistake worthy of Maldonado at his worst.  Since then, he had another burst of form early in 2018, but, having beaten Hamilton at Silverstone with a fantastic drive, he suddenly lost momentum and, since then, has shown indifferent form at best.  I honestly expected him to be up there with Fangio, Senna and Schumacher by the time he retired, and I anticipated he would equal Fangio's 5 WDCs at minimum.  Instead, he has become an inconsistent enigma, and his demeanour in interviews since Melbourne has been very flat. 

 

 I thought Vettel won 2013 :confused: :confused:



#1903 cpbell

cpbell
  • Member

  • 2,086 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 17 April 2019 - 20:36

 I thought Vettel won 2013 :confused: :confused:

Ah yes, sorry... :blush: :stoned:



#1904 cpbell

cpbell
  • Member

  • 2,086 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 17 April 2019 - 20:38

That of course should have been that I expected him to equal Fangio at the end of 2013 but he was beated by Ricciardo the follwing year. :lol: :rolleyes:


Edited by cpbell, 17 April 2019 - 20:38.


#1905 RPM40

RPM40
  • Member

  • 10,876 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 17 April 2019 - 20:40

The interpretation of four years of Vettel-Räikkönen was .... that Ferrari made Räikkönen "defer to" Vettel?

 

 

For real?

he deferred to him by virtue of being Kimi Raikkonen,  in that you put a top driver next to him and his pace will make him a number 2.

 

This is a driver who was more or less on par with Massa. 



#1906 tghik

tghik
  • Member

  • 2,392 posts
  • Joined: April 10

Posted 17 April 2019 - 20:54

I think Vettel is a very good driver. I am not so sure that he is a very good racer. When he can make relatively easy overtakes he is very decisive and gets it done but when it comes to making more marginal overtakes he tends to make far more mistakes then you would expect a driver of his level to make

Maybe he's not the driver of that level :p



#1907 AlexPrime

AlexPrime
  • Member

  • 1,833 posts
  • Joined: September 17

Posted 17 April 2019 - 20:56

he deferred to him by virtue of being Kimi Raikkonen,  in that you put a top driver next to him and his pace will make him a number 2.

 

This is a driver who was more or less on par with Massa. 

Like Ric is with Hulk?  :kiss:



#1908 RPM40

RPM40
  • Member

  • 10,876 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 17 April 2019 - 20:59

Like Ric is with Hulk?  :kiss:

Yes, exactly. Only with a much weaker driver in Massa.

It was fairly easy to compare Vettel to Raikkonen and also Alonso to Raikkonen too, as they were team mates back to back.

#1909 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 26,933 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 17 April 2019 - 21:08

There's a massive difference between what Ferrari did last year and what Mercedes has done since Bottas joined.  Conflating the two suggests either that you've not paid attention to Mercedes' approach or that you're deliberately trying to confuse the two in other poster's minds.

 

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about? What have Mercedes to do with this, apart from being the team who benefited from Ferrari making a mess of last year?



#1910 racerbaz

racerbaz
  • Member

  • 74 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 17 April 2019 - 21:08

Vettel needed Marko to beat Webber.
He got beaten by Riciardo so left Red Bull for Ferrari.
Ferrari feather-beded him because he could beat Kimi.
It;s his 5th year with Ferrari without a championship.
Now he needs Binotto to beat LeClerc ! :stoned:

Edited by PayasYouRace, 17 April 2019 - 22:15.
Please avoid big empty spaces.


#1911 cpbell

cpbell
  • Member

  • 2,086 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 17 April 2019 - 21:31

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about? What have Mercedes to do with this, apart from being the team who benefited from Ferrari making a mess of last year?

Now I re-read it, neither have I...I think I was trying to reply to someone else... :blush:



#1912 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 26,933 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 17 April 2019 - 21:33

Now I re-read it, neither have I...I think I was trying to reply to someone else... :blush:

 

lol no worries.



#1913 SophieB

SophieB
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,302 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 18 April 2019 - 07:16

:up:

 

The board is improved by people just admitting little mistakes and getting gracious responses, it honestly moves the whole thing on and makes it a more pleasant place to be around.

 

Anyway, I thought Jolyon Palmer's latest column was typically thoughtful  and nuanced.  If he's producing all these himself, he has a real gift for writing. Anyway, it's interesting that his take on the team orders thing is that in a real way, it is not helping Vettel.

 

https://www.bbc.co.u...rmula1/47933390

 

In isolation, the China situation is normal in F1. A team has a quicker driver behind, the lead car is dropping back from the cars ahead - albeit slightly in Leclerc's case in China - and they swap the positions in the interests of the team. It happens all the time throughout the season and up and down the grid.

Sometimes, if that lead driver can't make the progress expected, the positions are swapped back in the interest of fairness.

On the radio, Ferrari were clearly unsure what to do once Vettel showed he, too, couldn't match the Mercedes. But ultimately they didn't swap back, and once Verstappen pitted early, they never had the chance again.

All in all, it was an understandable decision from the team, but it ended up in a fairly messy situation because of their constant public backing of Vettel since the start of the season. This highlights these decisions, even if they are made with the best intentions. And it adds to the pressure on Vettel.

Clearly, Vettel is deemed the lead driver at Ferrari. So if he is outperformed by Leclerc - as he was in Bahrain - there will be questions. If he then has team orders to beat his team-mate, there will be even more questions and very uncomfortable ones as well, as he clearly recognised in China.

It speaks volumes that Vettel said he knew, as he passed Leclerc, that he would have some questions to field after the race.

It cannot be healthy for a driver to be thinking of that, rather than about chasing the Mercedes.

It potentially explains his overdriving once ahead of Leclerc. Two lock-ups in three laps cost him a lot of time and meant he couldn't eke out a gap to Leclerc as his other laps had done.

The last couple of years, and the Bahrain Grand Prix, have shown us that Vettel is capable of mistakes under pressure.

Ironically, right now, with the intention of helping Vettel's chances and lightening the load on him, Ferrari may actually be amplifying the pressure on their lead driver.

They seem to have made a rod for their own back by publicly supporting Vettel. Even when the situation merits a position swap, there is criticism of their team orders stance.

A better position for now would be to abandon the overt policy of backing Vettel no matter what, let the drivers race and take each case on its individual merits until one of their drivers has clearly shown superiority in the title chase.

 

It's worth looking at the whole thing, because he places it in a wider context than this, interesting stuff.



#1914 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 31,235 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 18 April 2019 - 07:19

Pretty spot on tbh

#1915 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,823 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 18 April 2019 - 07:27

I assume that if Leclerc couldn't keep up with Mercedes, Ferrari pitwall assumed there is more pace in the car and thought Vettel could go after Bottas. Only after Vettel was released they realized the car wasn't as good they had thought it was...



#1916 Nemo1965

Nemo1965
  • Member

  • 5,511 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 18 April 2019 - 07:30

Interesting view of Palmer because it shows how incredibly tough the management of a F1-team on a personal level is. And to add my five cents: Ferrari have a history of doing that aspect rather badly. I have been following this sport for an idiotic long time and I've read many books about the history of Ferrari that were written way before I was born. And it seems that there is a constant: Ferrari always seem to be able to antagonize their own drivers or muck up the internal relationships in another way. Fangio in the fifties, Surtees in the sixties, Lauda in the seventies, Prost in the nineties... all intelligent, reasonable and rational people who were basically driven out of the team screaming and tearing their hair out of frustration.

 

There are exceptions, of course. There are Ferrari F1-drivers who depart in grace. Jody Scheckter... but perhaps he retired. Michael Schumacher... but perhaps because he retired. And Raikkonen... well, he is Raikkonen. 

 

I don't know the current Ferrari-organisation well enough to analyse it properly, but looking from the outside Ferrari was and still is like a court of the Medici's in Machiavellian times. Factions, daggers, candles and shadows.  :well:



#1917 cpbell

cpbell
  • Member

  • 2,086 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 18 April 2019 - 09:44

Pretty spot on tbh

Indeed, and it endorses the Mercedes approach of waiting until one driver gains a clear advantage over the rest.



#1918 cpbell

cpbell
  • Member

  • 2,086 posts
  • Joined: December 07

Posted 18 April 2019 - 09:46

Interesting view of Palmer because it shows how incredibly tough the management of a F1-team on a personal level is. And to add my five cents: Ferrari have a history of doing that aspect rather badly. I have been following this sport for an idiotic long time and I've read many books about the history of Ferrari that were written way before I was born. And it seems that there is a constant: Ferrari always seem to be able to antagonize their own drivers or muck up the internal relationships in another way. Fangio in the fifties, Surtees in the sixties, Lauda in the seventies, Prost in the nineties... all intelligent, reasonable and rational people who were basically driven out of the team screaming and tearing their hair out of frustration.

 

There are exceptions, of course. There are Ferrari F1-drivers who depart in grace. Jody Scheckter... but perhaps he retired. Michael Schumacher... but perhaps because he retired. And Raikkonen... well, he is Raikkonen. 

 

I don't know the current Ferrari-organisation well enough to analyse it properly, but looking from the outside Ferrari was and still is like a court of the Medici's in Machiavellian times. Factions, daggers, candles and shadows.  :well:

It's an interesting point - for Dragoni in the 1960s, perhaps Camelleri today?



#1919 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 21,925 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 18 April 2019 - 09:51

There are exceptions, of course. There are Ferrari F1-drivers who depart in grace. Jody Scheckter... but perhaps he retired. Michael Schumacher... but perhaps because he retired. And Raikkonen... well, he is Raikkonen. 

 

I'd go with Raikkönen only of those three. Scheckter might have left on good terms (don't know really), but he disgraced himself by other means, i.e. underperfoming terribly.. MS left at the mere hint of some intra-team competition. Only makes more ironic that in hindsight he need not have feared much.

 

Kimi OTOH.... I wouldn't completely dismiss the idea of a 3rd ride at Maranello just yet. :lol:



Advertisement

#1920 peroa

peroa
  • Member

  • 10,281 posts
  • Joined: March 05

Posted 18 April 2019 - 10:02

I'd go with Raikkönen only of those three. Scheckter might have left on good terms (don't know really), but he disgraced himself by other means, i.e. underperfoming terribly.. MS left at the mere hint of some intra-team competition. Only makes more ironic that in hindsight he need not have feared much.

 

Kimi OTOH.... I wouldn't completely dismiss the idea of a 3rd ride at Maranello just yet. :lol:

Never say never again ...



#1921 CountDooku

CountDooku
  • Member

  • 10,137 posts
  • Joined: March 15

Posted 18 April 2019 - 10:35

:up:

 

The board is improved by people just admitting little mistakes and getting gracious responses, it honestly moves the whole thing on and makes it a more pleasant place to be around.

 

Anyway, I thought Jolyon Palmer's latest column was typically thoughtful  and nuanced.  If he's producing all these himself, he has a real gift for writing. Anyway, it's interesting that his take on the team orders thing is that in a real way, it is not helping Vettel.

 

https://www.bbc.co.u...rmula1/47933390

 

 

It's worth looking at the whole thing, because he places it in a wider context than this, interesting stuff.

 

This is exactly my position. An overt #1 driver policy won't do Ferrari or their drivers any favours at the moment.



#1922 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 18 April 2019 - 12:15

I assume that if Leclerc couldn't keep up with Mercedes, Ferrari pitwall assumed there is more pace in the car and thought Vettel could go after Bottas. Only after Vettel was released they realized the car wasn't as good they had thought it was...


The ease with which Vettel followed Leclerc obviously played into that, and one assumes he also made that clear to the pitwall.

 

They missed their shot, even if it was a long shot to begin with. It was a decent idea, done pretty badly.



#1923 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 1,698 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 18 April 2019 - 12:15

Inteesting the declaration of Vettel that he knew that he should answer to the field for the teams orders. Means that he do not want open team orders and was trying to overtake in the track Leclerc but he couldn`t. 

This guy has a problem, want a contract where he have granted #1 tratment but his ego suffer when everybody knew that he beats his team mate not on merit but because of this contract.

Better the next contract instead of #1 treatment include a clause that forbid the team to contract a second driver no less than 0.5" per lao than him.



#1924 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 18 April 2019 - 12:22

"It cannot be healthy for a driver to be thinking of that, rather than about chasing the Mercedes.

It potentially explains his overdriving once ahead of Leclerc. Two lock-ups in three laps cost him a lot of time and meant he couldn't eke out a gap to Leclerc as his other laps had done.

The last couple of years, and the Bahrain Grand Prix, have shown us that Vettel is capable of mistakes under pressure."

 

Not healthy? Please. Drivers aren't stupid, they can drive and think about other things at the same time. That's probably why you hear them comment on race strategies, as well as various other topics, on the radio all the time. Driving F1 cars is not some mythical thing, Alonso even called the post 2013 cars "quite boring".

 

Vettel trying his best to get closer to Bottas when the car and tyres weren't really there can lead to some overly enthusiastic driving. Nothing odd there, either.

 

All humans make mistakes under pressure. Some just do it less often. This is no great revelation. There isn't a champion on the grid who hasn't crashed out in dumb ways.



#1925 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 18 April 2019 - 12:25

There are exceptions, of course. There are Ferrari F1-drivers who depart in grace. Jody Scheckter... but perhaps he retired. Michael Schumacher... but perhaps because he retired. And Raikkonen... well, he is Raikkonen.

 

And Irvine, and Massa, and Räikkönen, and Berger, and Alesi...

 

Barrichello had a bit of a chip on his shoulder when he left a year early, but that's understandable. It's not easy being partnered with Schumacher. Other than that it's mostly been just fine.



#1926 Unicast

Unicast
  • Member

  • 1,189 posts
  • Joined: April 18

Posted 18 April 2019 - 13:48

This is exactly my position. An overt #1 driver policy won't do Ferrari or their drivers any favours at the moment.

 

Ferrari's biggest problem right now is not the driver's policy... it's the fact that the car is not working right under a wide range of conditions, tracks, temperatures, etc...

Until they fix the issues I won't even be bothered with this discussion about drivers, cause honestly it's pointless and just going around the main issue, which is the car's performance vs Mercedes.



#1927 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 1,698 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 18 April 2019 - 14:15

Ferrari's biggest problem right now is not the driver's policy... it's the fact that the car is not working AT MERCEDES LEVEL right under a wide range of conditions, tracks, temperatures, etc...

Until they fix the issues I won't even be bothered with this discussion about drivers, cause honestly it's pointless and just going around the main issue, which is the car's performance vs Mercedes.

 

In order to have a better perspective.



#1928 thefinalapex

thefinalapex
  • Member

  • 734 posts
  • Joined: July 16

Posted 18 April 2019 - 15:48

Inteesting the declaration of Vettel that he knew that he should answer to the field for the teams orders. Means that he do not want open team orders and was trying to overtake in the track Leclerc but he couldn`t.
This guy has a problem, want a contract where he have granted #1 tratment but his ego suffer when everybody knew that he beats his team mate not on merit but because of this contract.
Better the next contract instead of #1 treatment include a clause that forbid the team to contract a second driver no less than 0.5" per lao than him.


Everything you mentioned is speculative at best. You read way too much in what he said/meant.

#1929 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 18 April 2019 - 16:06

MS left at the mere hint of some intra-team competition.

 

Right, because that's totally what Schumacher said about his decision. One doesn't have to like Schumacher, but why make this stuff up? Was Brawn scared of Räikkönen, too? Todt just didn't care for Finns? Lots of people left after a while and achieving all they could have hoped for. That's normal.

 

Never mind that Schumacher maintained great relations with the team afterwards, was helping out with tests, and immediately said yes to partnering Räikkönen when Massa got injured. In a year with a completely different formula from the one he last raced to boot.



#1930 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 31,235 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 18 April 2019 - 16:35

Not healthy? Please. Drivers aren't stupid, they can drive and think about other things at the same time. That's probably why you hear them comment on race strategies, as well as various other topics, on the radio all the time. Driving F1 cars is not some mythical thing, Alonso even called the post 2013 cars "quite boring".

Vettel trying his best to get closer to Bottas when the car and tyres weren't really there can lead to some overly enthusiastic driving. Nothing odd there, either.

All humans make mistakes under pressure. Some just do it less often. This is no great revelation. There isn't a champion on the grid who hasn't crashed out in dumb ways.

I mean okay, but people were saying last year that Vettel needs 100 % support and **** like that (I dont really buy it, but hey)

Drivers arent stupid, sure, but some are a load more sensitive than others, or so some think.

All Palmer did is outlining a scenario where Ferrari supporting Vettel in the hope that he unlocks his potential can lead to what they wanted to prevent by giving him support, whether it's actually going to happen? Nobody knows.

Right, because that's totally what Schumacher said about his decision. One doesn't have to like Schumacher, but why make this stuff up? Was Brawn scared of Räikkönen, too? Todt just didn't care for Finns? Lots of people left after a while and achieving all they could have hoped for. That's normal.

Never mind that Schumacher maintained great relations with the team afterwards, was helping out with tests, and immediately said yes to partnering Räikkönen when Massa got injured. In a year with a completely different formula from the one he last raced to boot.

Well, it was quite obvious that he didnt really want to retire. A fool was capable to see that. Whether Ferrari adviced him to go so that they can build Kimi up for the future, or whether he left to not ruin Massa's career, or whether he didnt want to face Kimi (who was a incredible driver back then) is something we can only speculate about.

#1931 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 11,823 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 18 April 2019 - 16:41


Well, it was quite obvious that he didnt really want to retire. 

 

What makes you think that? MS was quite old by that time (37) and obviously by that age after a long career you start to get a bit tired.



#1932 Enzoluis

Enzoluis
  • Member

  • 1,698 posts
  • Joined: August 00

Posted 18 April 2019 - 16:44

Everything you mentioned is speculative at best. You read way too much in what he said/meant.

 

Palmer`s article is less speculative? There are in this thread some posts less speculative?



#1933 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 31,235 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 18 April 2019 - 17:04

What makes you think that? MS was quite old by that time (37) and obviously by that age after a long career you start to get a bit tired.

In his biography he claimed that he retired to not ruin Massa's career - which is something I dont quite buy btw - but this alone tells you that he actually didnt want to retire.

Then there was also the whole stuff in Monza which felt weird with the entire stuff about Luca announcing it before Schumacher did (which fits well to the rumour that he signed Kimi to win a power struggle vs Todt, and that Schumacher only wanted to continue with Massa alongside him).

I mean it's not like it's a terrible thing. I reckon if Vettel or Hamilton are 35+, so anyway considering retirement, and their team signs the next big thing that they would maybe also retire rather now, cause you dont really have anything to gain from this.

So yeah, nobody made this up, it's all stuff that has been reported before, whether you chose to follow the fluffy official version or be open to a possibly more complex version, which understandably would never be admitted is up to everyone. With Ferrari's history I'd guess that it's all a bit more complex.

#1934 thefinalapex

thefinalapex
  • Member

  • 734 posts
  • Joined: July 16

Posted 18 April 2019 - 19:10

Palmer`s article is less speculative? There are in this thread some posts less speculative?

 

I think you missed my point but lets get back on topic. Lets just see how this driver pairing will develop, i think it will get explosive if it continues to be mismanaged.



#1935 Nonesuch

Nonesuch
  • Member

  • 15,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 19 April 2019 - 08:00

All Palmer did is outlining a scenario where Ferrari supporting Vettel in the hope that he unlocks his potential can lead to what they wanted to prevent by giving him support, whether it's actually going to happen? Nobody knows.


That Vettel had a specific outcome is not necessarily because of The Most Obvious Thing we all got from the broadcast. It could be, but there are tons of other explanations.

Vettel could be the biggest ass on the grid and think nothing of Leclerc or what anyone thinks about Ferrari's strategy, and he still wouldn't have been able to catch Bottas.
 
Many factors go into it, and all drivers can have perfect races and still they can't all win.
 

Well, it was quite obvious that he didnt really want to retire. A fool was capable to see that.

 
Classy! :up:



#1936 sabjit

sabjit
  • Member

  • 1,735 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 19 April 2019 - 09:42

1) Of course, both Mercedes and Ferrari prefer to win the WDC instead of the WCC if they had to choose only one of them. It's much, much better PR. As I said, nobody remembers Ferrari winning the WCC in 82,83 and 99 - everybody just remembers their 20 years without a drivers title. So yes, they're trying to maximise points of their drivers to win the WDC.

 

 

I have friends who work for Merc. They take WCC over WDC anytime of the day. Their pay bonuses and everything are linked to WCC position and results. Their only interest in the WDC is to help keep Lewis Hamilton in the car.



#1937 DeKnyff

DeKnyff
  • Member

  • 1,530 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 19 April 2019 - 10:04

I have friends who work for Merc. They take WCC over WDC anytime of the day. Their pay bonuses and everything are linked to WCC position and results. Their only interest in the WDC is to help keep Lewis Hamilton in the car.

That's because WCC has an economical meaning: the better the WCC position, the higher the income from FOM and therefore, the higher the bonus. However, from a sporting point if view, WDC is the real deal. As pointed out, Ferrari won the constructors championship in 1982, 1983, 1999 and 2008 and nobody cares, the only worth remembering thing is that Rosberg Sr., Piquet, Häkkinen or Hamilton won the world championship. I don't remember seeing the Ferrari garage jumping with joy after Lewis crossed the line in Brazil 2008.



#1938 motorhead

motorhead
  • Member

  • 1,335 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 19 April 2019 - 10:32

Binotto wanted to replace Maurizio, I wonder if he thinks the same way now. The pressure to perform better must be enormous atm



#1939 sabjit

sabjit
  • Member

  • 1,735 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 19 April 2019 - 10:46

That's because WCC has an economical meaning: the better the WCC position, the higher the income from FOM and therefore, the higher the bonus. However, from a sporting point if view, WDC is the real deal. As pointed out, Ferrari won the constructors championship in 1982, 1983, 1999 and 2008 and nobody cares, the only worth remembering thing is that Rosberg Sr., Piquet, Häkkinen or Hamilton won the world championship. I don't remember seeing the Ferrari garage jumping with joy after Lewis crossed the line in Brazil 2008.

 

 

First hand account is at Brackley when Lewis won the WDC Mexico, nobody was smiling as they had a rubbish race and they still hadn't wrapped up the WCC yet which was still in jeopardy at that point. Apparently the marketing department burst into the room wanting to film a celebration video but they turned around when they saw how grumpy everyone was.

 

Ferrari have a different approach to Merc entirely, they care more about WDC than WCC and would sacrifice the latter to achieve the former if given the choice. Merc I can tell you now wouldn't, they think of the WDC a nice bonus to motivate their drivers.

 

You are right that from a fans point of view we care about the WDC more and I personally don't really have an interest in who wins the WCC. I'm just saying this is not necessarily how all teams think and that some teams think differently.

From what I know, Brackley couldn't care less about the WDC. Its not their focus in any way.

 

Be mindful that you cant project your own view on the two championships onto how the teams think.



Advertisement

#1940 kosmos

kosmos
  • Member

  • 10,673 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 19 April 2019 - 10:48

Binotto wanted to replace Maurizio, I wonder if he thinks the same way now. The pressure to perform better must be enormous atm

 

 

I'm sure he was aware of the challenge and the pressure, I doubt he is regretting anything but I'm sure he didn't expect the pressure from the media and fans regarding his drivers.



#1941 DeKnyff

DeKnyff
  • Member

  • 1,530 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 19 April 2019 - 11:14

First hand account is at Brackley when Lewis won the WDC Mexico, nobody was smiling as they had a rubbish race and they still hadn't wrapped up the WCC yet which was still in jeopardy at that point. Apparently the marketing department burst into the room wanting to film a celebration video but they turned around when they saw how grumpy everyone was.

 

Ferrari have a different approach to Merc entirely, they care more about WDC than WCC and would sacrifice the latter to achieve the former if given the choice. Merc I can tell you now wouldn't, they think of the WDC a nice bonus to motivate their drivers.

 

You are right that from a fans point of view we care about the WDC more and I personally don't really have an interest in who wins the WCC. I'm just saying this is not necessarily how all teams think and that some teams think differently.

From what I know, Brackley couldn't care less about the WDC. Its not their focus in any way.

 

Be mindful that you cant project your own view on the two championships onto how the teams think.

Or you could be projecting how some financially-interested guys see the things...

 

I seriously doubt that the day Mercedes decided to purchase Brawn and go into F1 with their own team, they were thinking about winning WCC and not caring at all about WDC. WCC is merely an administrative way to sort teams for money allocations, which can explain why people whose personal revenue depends on it are deeply concerned.

 

Ferrari (the team with most titles in History) doesn't care a lot about WCC, it says it all.



#1942 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 31,235 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 19 April 2019 - 11:42

First hand account is at Brackley when Lewis won the WDC Mexico, nobody was smiling as they had a rubbish race and they still hadn't wrapped up the WCC yet which was still in jeopardy at that point. Apparently the marketing department burst into the room wanting to film a celebration video but they turned around when they saw how grumpy everyone was.

Ferrari have a different approach to Merc entirely, they care more about WDC than WCC and would sacrifice the latter to achieve the former if given the choice. Merc I can tell you now wouldn't, they think of the WDC a nice bonus to motivate their drivers.

You are right that from a fans point of view we care about the WDC more and I personally don't really have an interest in who wins the WCC. I'm just saying this is not necessarily how all teams think and that some teams think differently.
From what I know, Brackley couldn't care less about the WDC. Its not their focus in any way.

Be mindful that you cant project your own view on the two championships onto how the teams think.

It might be like that for the engineers/mechanics at Mercedes (it certainly is), but for the ones in charge the WDC is certainly way more important than the WCC. The marketing value of a WDC outweights the prize money of the WCC considerably.

As for Mexico: I reckon it had a lot to do with Mercedes' performance on that day. Not even Hamilton was that happy and by all respect he certainly cares more for the WDC than the WCC.

#1943 RPM40

RPM40
  • Member

  • 10,876 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 21 April 2019 - 22:48

The other interesting question is if Vettel is even as good as he was in the v8 era. He certainly seems to lack that fine throttle control in these cars that leads to frequent spins. The V8 cars really lacked torque and were nothing like the current cars in terms of power delivery, the fine throttle manipulation wasn't quite as important and when the downforce built you could slam the throttle down.



#1944 Astandahl

Astandahl
  • Member

  • 351 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 22 April 2019 - 00:06

The other interesting question is if Vettel is even as good as he was in the v8 era. He certainly seems to lack that fine throttle control in these cars that leads to frequent spins. The V8 cars really lacked torque and were nothing like the current cars in terms of power delivery, the fine throttle manipulation wasn't quite as important and when the downforce built you could slam the throttle down.

In 2017 he was perfect. I still think that he lost interest in this sport and his driving just to get paid. Something happened last year.



#1945 RPM40

RPM40
  • Member

  • 10,876 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 22 April 2019 - 01:33

In 2017 he was perfect. 

 

257408.jpg



#1946 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 26,933 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 22 April 2019 - 01:54

He has a point though, anyone suggesting Vettel can not drive these cars as well as anyone is just conveniently ignoring several entire seasons.



#1947 RPM40

RPM40
  • Member

  • 10,876 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 22 April 2019 - 03:31

He has a point though, anyone suggesting Vettel can not drive these cars as well as anyone is just conveniently ignoring several entire seasons.

 

I disagree, I think he's fundamentally shown he can't drive them as well as Hamilton. 



#1948 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 26,933 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 22 April 2019 - 04:04

I disagree, I think he's fundamentally shown he can't drive them as well as Hamilton. 

 

That's a bar to set isn't it? Or maybe just an easy a goalpost to move ;)

 

Noone in the current field is as good as Hamilton in these cars. No way.



#1949 RPM40

RPM40
  • Member

  • 10,876 posts
  • Joined: October 15

Posted 22 April 2019 - 04:13

That's a bar to set isn't it? Or maybe just an easy a goalpost to move ;)

Noone in the current field is as good as Hamilton in these cars. No way.


Fair enough, to be fair you said as good “anyone”. Better than most is probably more accurate

#1950 baddog

baddog
  • Member

  • 26,933 posts
  • Joined: June 99

Posted 22 April 2019 - 05:00

Fair enough, to be fair you said as good “anyone”. Better than most is probably more accurate

 

Yeah I guess you know what I meant. Right up there with the very top level.