2019 Formula One World ChampionshipFormula 1
- Thread starter mustafur
- 197 comments
- 10,896 views
- 414
- Hofuf
- Fishylocked
I started to to think that having Leclerc in Ferrari might not be the right thing for the team best interest, and they will end up losing lots of points. Not that he doesn't deserve it, he's absolutely very fast, but I still think that having two top drivers that are closer together and fighting for it in a tight battle with other teams is a no go. Similar to Max & Ric or Lewis & Alonso. The right approach is what Mercedes are having. A clear faster driver and a "wingman" that is not challenging the faster driver regularly but reliable. Sadly.... There's a big "hate" campaign around Ferrari and Vettel, and I believe Leclerc will be used to ignite a fire there....
- 3,016
- Osaka
- CWM_NoirAntares
But the lead driver-wingman dynamic's been Ferrari's modus operandi ever since. The only reason why this suddenly seems so bad now is because Ferrari themselves have brought and hyped Leclerc up on his way to F1, but now that he's gotten a Ferrari seat, they've still given him the short stick.
In Ferrari's eyes, "We've already made it clear Seb's our main man, so why are you complaining that team orders are helping him and not Charles?"
The hate surrounding Seb is probably because he just can't stop making mistakes. Mercedes could've blown the championship wide open with the Austria double DNF, but Seb can't even cruise to victory in Germany. People have grown tired of watching him challenge and just trip over himself.
- 414
- Hofuf
- Fishylocked
The reality is that even with all of those mistakes that after Italy where he was 30 points behind and the championship is still open with 8-9 rounds to go, the car was just not there at all. The hate towards him is too microscoped and far from subjective. Germany was everyone's crash really. He locked up in wet track with slick tyres in a very tight corner. There's also the fact ( and rarely mintioned) that he lost lots of points because of others for example in China and Lewis's better luck. So no... The mistakes are factor but he didn’t lose out because of it alone.
I think it's because of the tyres and T13(?). At least with the Merc vs Ferrari battle the Ferrari was so bad in the corners that it didn't matter how much grunt it had, it couldn't make up the delta on the straights alone.
What about Lewis and Nico?
The problem is Ferrari's approach, they backed Vettel from pre-season and due to this pressure (or whatever) Vettel has failed to deliver on multiple occasions this season after only three races.
If they had let Leclerc pit in both Austalia and China (after ruining his race) he would have two more points for fastest laps, meaning Ferrari would have gotten every fastest lap point this season and Leclerc would be leading their number 1 driver.
- 414
- Hofuf
- Fishylocked
What about Nico and Lewis? Merc was too far ahead during their time that even if they took points from each other, the team will usually get the maximum results.
As for Ferrari .... I'm sorry but what exactly Vettel had failed to deliver ? We had three races and Ferrari were nowhere near Mercedes in two of them! But he was the quicker Ferrari in those races. Bahrain was the only exception as he was struggling with the car as reported which could explain the big deficit. Also Leclerc failed to get the fastest lap in China in a fresher tyres than Vettel later in the race with less fuel, which was vettel's until Gasly took fresh softs in the last lap.
And on backing Vettel... There was a report last year that Vettel has hit his theoeatical lap time in qualifying 13 times where Leclerc was one of the worst, so technically Vettel has extracted the best of his car more than anyone else, so I guess it was realistic move from Ferrari to back him.
Last edited:
Pre-hybrid era, they issued team orders to Nico and only had to once.
In the hybrid era they had a good margin to the rest of the field but the on track fighting still comes with risks as we saw at Spain and Spa.
Australia - Leclerc wasn't allowed to pass Vettel despite being much faster.
Bahrain - Leclerc was not only much much faster, but Vettel managed to spin all by himself and loose a straightforward podium.
China - Leclerc got the jump on Vettel. Was (at the time fairly) told to cede the position to Vettel who was then unable to pull away, not only that he then locked up a bunch of times causing more issues for Leclerc as he became stuck behind him. ref And then Ferrari ruined his race with the ol'Kimi strat
A 4x WDC managed to get more out of a car developed for him, than a rookie?
I understand why Ferrari have backed Vettel, it was the smart choice, put Leclerc in his place and give Vettel the backing and support he needs. But Ferrari's managing of it has been poor and has only lead to more issues. As it stands, they came to Australia looking to have the best car and after the 3rd round Max has more points than either of their drivers and Mercedes has had the best possible start to the season.
Last year Ferrari had, on balance, the best package for most of the season and they lost both Drivers and Constructors titles. Now they look to be loosing 3rd place in the drivers standings to a Red Bull driver.
Last edited:
- 414
- Hofuf
- Fishylocked
Again.. you're not being subjective and microscoping every bit of Vettel to make things much worse than they are.
In Australia : Vettel was quicker until his pace dropped significantly and unexplainable by 3-4 sec a lap in middle of the race. You would assume that they were managing some issues with cooling or something, no one knows the full extent of the problem but clearly not driver input, so you can't just say that Leclerc was faster because he was more than 10 sec behind before that.
China : It made since to swap them as Vettel appeared marginally quicker. He made couple of locks a bit which lost them time but after that Leclerc was unable to stay with the DRS as Vettel was, but you would also assume that vettel's tyres took a bit of a beating after following a car in a close proximity and with couple of locks, but nevertheless, even if you review the analysis of the race as whole, vettel's times remain a bit quicker even in 2nd & 3rd stints. But I agree, the team managing the strategies was poor.
BTW... Leclerc made mistakes in Australia and China's qualifying, he ran of the track and almost took out both cars in the first corner at the first race.
Leclerc is no rookie. And it's hard to develop a car around someone while undergoing technical changes. Besides, Max was thrown in a Red bull in the middle of a season and managed to win and be at least level with Ric. So there's no 4 WDC excuses. There's a lot of simulation and a lot of testing before the first race.
Last year, he was a rookie.
You're comparing Vettel's performances to Leclerc's, from last year.
That's a bad thing?
I'm pointing out how he's been letting himself down. Last season Vettel should probably have won the title. He had everything, the best a team mate willing to be a second driver and a team based around him. He failed, and Lewis just out-drove him. It should have caused Seb to take stock and look at what and how Lewis achieved what he did. He clearly thinks he can beat Lewis as the team do, yet so far he's been struggling to match his team mate and the team have worked to take points off Leclerc.
- 84,366
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
Had Ferrari allowed Leclerc to pass Vettel in Australia, there's a good chance he'd have not been vulnerable to Verstappen re-passing him and may even have finished third. If Ferrari hadn't told Leclerc to cede position to Vettel in China, and then given him pitstop priority as the lead car, he wouldn't have been vulnerable to Verstappen passing him. Chances are this would only have swapped the two Ferraris in terms of finishing position, but a 3-4 was on the cards.
That would have given Leclerc 10 more points (5th to 3rd twice), and Ferrari 5 more points (4-5 to 3-5, 3-5 to 3-4), which would see Ferrari have the third-placed driver and hold a 26-point lead over Red Bull in the constructors table. Prioritising Vettel is hurting Ferrari.
That would have given Leclerc 10 more points (5th to 3rd twice), and Ferrari 5 more points (4-5 to 3-5, 3-5 to 3-4), which would see Ferrari have the third-placed driver and hold a 26-point lead over Red Bull in the constructors table. Prioritising Vettel is hurting Ferrari.
- 3,016
- Osaka
- CWM_NoirAntares
You gotta wonder what they think is more important, more points or losing face to the press...
If Ferrari maximized their points potential and your scenario played out, they'd be under fire for doing the opposite of what they said in pre-season about supporting Vettel.
I don't know a lot about Italian media but Ferrari looks like they're trying to appease the Italian press too hard that they can't focus on building a car that can actually justify their pre-season hype.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
- 1,561
- United States
It was a pretty boring race, and I feel Leclerc definitely got the short end of the stick. I was hoping to see more competition between Merc and the other teams...so it looks like we may not get a repeat of last year.
One thing which was intriguing me after the first race: we know both Vettel and Hamilton tend to be unreliable at best when their teammate becomes fast. I was actually hoping Bottas/Leclerc would perform a bit better (and they might still) just to add some drama to the season. Now that Hamilton has a couple wins he may be in the zone. Vettel is probably stressing a bit.
I hope the season doesn't become a runaway victory for Hamilton (I really like the guy but it makes for a less interesting season). Ricciardo did a pretty good job slotting in quietly like a ninja into the "best of the rest".
It is cringe-inducing watching Williams. I'd almost rather they pull the damn cars than drive around 3-4 seconds off the pace.
One thing which was intriguing me after the first race: we know both Vettel and Hamilton tend to be unreliable at best when their teammate becomes fast. I was actually hoping Bottas/Leclerc would perform a bit better (and they might still) just to add some drama to the season. Now that Hamilton has a couple wins he may be in the zone. Vettel is probably stressing a bit.
I hope the season doesn't become a runaway victory for Hamilton (I really like the guy but it makes for a less interesting season). Ricciardo did a pretty good job slotting in quietly like a ninja into the "best of the rest".
It is cringe-inducing watching Williams. I'd almost rather they pull the damn cars than drive around 3-4 seconds off the pace.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
- 2,735
- Columbus, Ohio
Not to mention their new sponsor might be juuuuuuuust a bit upset if they didn't run the remaining 9/10ths of the calendar.
Just a bit.
- 28,505
- Bratvegas
- GTP_Liquid
It happened to Brabham, it happened to Lotus, it happened to Tyrrell.
Now it's happened to Williams. It's hard for those of us of a generation unable to remember the above three teams as front runners but it's an inevitable certainty that a top front running private team will eventually drift to the back of the grid. McLaren are or have been on the way too.
Now it's happened to Williams. It's hard for those of us of a generation unable to remember the above three teams as front runners but it's an inevitable certainty that a top front running private team will eventually drift to the back of the grid. McLaren are or have been on the way too.
- 9,401
- Western Sydney
- mustafur
The good thing for Williams is they have the finances to stay in F1 Still, they are just managed by monkeys, their current Budget is comparable to Renault, the best bet for the team is if it gets bought out and they sack basically everyone and start again, there has been a rott in that team for sometime and the breif period of success at the start of the Turbo era hid that.
- 23,800
- Philippines
Lucked into a good chassis concept for the turbo Merc engine.
Spent the next few years going (ever-so-predictably) backwards back through the field.
I don't understand how anyone can be optimistic about this team anymore. Or could be optimistic about it after Bottas (wisely) jumped ship.
- 9,401
- Western Sydney
- mustafur
It's argubly been a problem since the BMW era, they had the best engine at the time by a country mile but inferior engineering and packaging to their rivals at the time ensured they got nothing, ultimately the partnership ended when BMW lost faith in Williams building a decent car.
Webber also made some comments about the team in his book about what seemed to be a hiring policy based on loyalty rather then Skill.
- 3,016
- Osaka
- CWM_NoirAntares
It was a Mercedes engine gave them a bit of a boost in the first two years of the hybrid era, and it's probably going to be Mercedes that eventually buys them out to be a B-team.
I'd rather have another BMW-Williams where a manufacturer comes in and uses them as a base, but with the reality of low manufacturer interest in F1, the alternative of a Merc B-team is miles better than where they are now.
- 645
- United States
- bkfountain
- fozzie bear
What would that achieve though?
They have a championship winning team that, even when it hasn't got the best car is still good enough as a whole to win the title. Why bother with a smaller team when they can just supply them engines and win the title as-is?
With Red Bull it kinda makes sense, because they where an outsider team that slowly built up to success over the years. Mercedes came into F1 with 2014 as the goal and have been massively successful, having a smaller weaker team doesn't really do them any good. On the flip side Red Bull having Toro Rosso can use them (in theory) to work on differing designs and concepts and see how they work etc
- 3,016
- Osaka
- CWM_NoirAntares
I want to believe it but at the same time I highly doubt it. Surely someone like Paddy Lowe would be able to notice that and do something about the engineering practices at the very least, given that he came to Williams as the former technical director of a Mercedes team that had just won three straight titles.
- 4,066
- United States
