
Macca Commercial Strategy Error!
#1
Posted 13 May 2007 - 09:54
They have admitted to putting the lighter fuel load in the car which is quickest in Q2. Therefore which ever driver appears to have the best set-up gets the better strategy choice - it makes sense (especially at a track like Barcelona).
So why when Lewis posted the quicker time in Q2 did he end up with the (supposedly) heavier fuel load? He has been slightly quicker than Alonso most of the weekend yet seems to have been disadvantaged by the poorer race strategy.
The obvious answer is ITS ALONSO's HOME RACE. Imagine how much of commercial dream it would have been for Alonso to be sitting on pole come Sunday morning - in the best position to win the race from. How much would Macca make from merchandise sales! I know they will still make loads but the extra bonus of pole would have created a perfect commercial aspect for them.
But would they really risk a race win for a bit of good PR????
Lewis' comments after qualy about the expected fuel loads makes me think he was rubbing it in a bit. He was basically saying - look i have the quicker car but I’ve got more fuel. I could have had my car on pole but I had to let Alonso have it.
Now the fact Alonso didn't get pole - and even worse both Macca's start on the dirty side of the grid the whole thing seems to have backfired.
So would they have done it? Would they risk it?
Advertisement
#2
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:00
#3
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:11
Therefore it's Lewis's choice.
#4
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:16
#5
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:23
I dont understand why a team would have a silly rule like that
#6
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:26

Anyone would want to be on pole in their Home Grand Prix.. with all those thousands of fans supporting you in the stadium. Alonso did it last time.. and still could win the race becoz he had a faster car.
He can win today too.. but he has to have a faster car.. which i suppose he doesn't and added to that he's running on fumes.. So i cannot rule out a Ferrari 1/2 today.. on the condition that the Ferrari drivers don't goof up


Forza Ferrari



#7
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:26
Originally posted by F1Fund
yeah agreed, but I can't see at a track like this you would choose to have a heavier fuel load. I guess we will have to wait and see if it pays off but I can't think it will - not from fourth on the grid anyway.
I feel by the way Lewis could not hold back telling ITV him and Alonso were on different strategies i.e. I'm heavier, shows he is slightly frustraed at not being given the optimum strategy choice. Giving out this sort of info is not the done thing.
#8
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:27
Originally posted by Schumeister
I feel by the way Lewis could not hold back telling ITV him and Alonso were on different strategies i.e. I'm heavier, shows he is slightly frustraed at not being given the optimum strategy choice. Giving out this sort of info is not the done thing.
He could have a lighter car at Silverstone.. I don't understand why he is so pissed off!

#9
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:30
Originally posted by ferrarifanatic
He could have a lighter car at Silverstone.. I don't understand why he is so pissed off!![]()
Because if he had the lighter car he probably (maybe!) could have got it on pole and be set for his first win.
#10
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:31
Originally posted by naiboz
And whats to stop the second driver choosing the same fuel load?
I dont understand why a team would have a silly rule like that
because they need to decide who gets to stop first
#11
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:31
#12
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:32
Originally posted by naiboz
And whats to stop the second driver choosing the same fuel load?
I dont understand why a team would have a silly rule like that
Its something to do with the new safety car rules as well. They need the car's to have a pit stop gap of about 2 laps to avoid any issues in a 'car park' situation if there was a safety car.
#13
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:33
Because they can't obviously pit on the same lap.Originally posted by naiboz
And whats to stop the second driver choosing the same fuel load?
Well, there has to be some kind of rule, how else would they choose when to pit, rock, paper and siccors?I dont understand why a team would have a silly rule like that
#14
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:34
Originally posted by F1Fund
Because if he had the lighter car he probably (maybe!) could have got it on pole and be set for his first win.
Winning your home grand prix is much sweeter.. for a confirmation ask Massa
#15
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:36
Originally posted by ferrarifanatic
Winning your home grand prix is much sweeter.. for a confirmation ask Massa
Yes I can imagine winning your home race is sweet. But wouldn't leading the championship in you first season be sweeter

#16
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:40
Originally posted by ferrarifanatic
He could have a lighter car at Silverstone.. I don't understand why he is so pissed off!![]()
As great as it may be to be on pole for your home Grand Prix, i dont think as a driver you would sacrafice a possible pole at another circuit. Come Silverstone Hamilton may struggle with the car you take your chances when you have got them, there is WDC at stake here.
With every race that evolves it does appear that Mclaren is supporting Alonso as Number 1 driver and Hamilton is being treated as Number 2, just by the way the decissions appear to be falling Alonso's way all the time.
#17
Posted 13 May 2007 - 10:58
Secondly, I wouldn't for a second believe that a team like Mclaren would sacrifice even the slightest percentage of their winning possibilities so as to gain short-term publicity.
#18
Posted 13 May 2007 - 11:02

#19
Posted 13 May 2007 - 11:05
I do understand the reasoning behind that, but I question the practical value of it.Originally posted by F1Fund
Its something to do with the new safety car rules as well. They need the car's to have a pit stop gap of about 2 laps to avoid any issues in a 'car park' situation if there was a safety car.
We've had 3 races and not an issue with a closed pit so far. This year so far shows that qualifying position is very important. If a team compromises their drivers chances in qualifying for the possibility of avoiding a perceived (and so far not proven) disadvantage if there's an SC car within the pit stop window, then I don't know if that is the smart thing to do.
Advertisement
#20
Posted 13 May 2007 - 11:05
Originally posted by Hellenic tifosi
Why do you consider a "light" car a better strategic option? First of all, let's see actually how heavy each car is.
Secondly, I wouldn't for a second believe that a team like Mclaren would sacrifice even the slightest percentage of their winning possibilities so as to gain short-term publicity.
A light car on this circuit is the best option as it is very difficult to over take here (all circuits are difficult this is one of the worst) the teams are so close in terms a race pace over taking in the pits will also be difficult.
I don't think Mclaren has sacrificed there chances of winning, just that they gave the optimum strategy to Alonso, when it should of gone to Hamilton...again
#21
Posted 13 May 2007 - 11:08
Hamilton is imppresive, less so his cheerleaders.