Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, 2014

Rosberg claims ‘psychological edge’ over Hamilton

F1 Fanatic Round-upPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Nico Rosberg, Mercedes, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, 2014In the round-up: Nico Rosberg says he’s gained a psychological advantage over team mate Lewis Hamilton by breaking his string of race wins.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Nico Rosberg: I have edge over Lewis Hamilton in Formula One title race (The Guardian)

“It was really important to bring [Hamilton’s] run [of wins] to an end because psychology is a big part of sports. If you have those results behind you, like I do now, it gives you that little bit extra, that little bit of an edge, so it does help.”

Tax tribunal turns down McLaren ‘spy fine’ claim (Reuters)

“McLaren have lost a claim that a record 32 million pound fine the Formula One team paid after a 2007 spying controversy should be tax deductible.”

Daniel Ricciardo will inspire team mate Sebastian Vettel to retaliate, says Mark Webber (The Sydney Morning Herald)

“I think Seb’s grabbed my car this year in terms of reliability.”

Lotus employee sacked for ‘gay tweet’ (The Telegraph)

“Lotus F1 team dismissed a social media guru after he tweeted a picture of in support of gay athletes just before the opening ceremony of the Russian Winter Olympics, for fear it could damage the team’s financial interests.”

Ferrari ‘needs more integration’ (Autosport)

Marco Mattiacci: “We are working very much on that area. We have to be more reactive, and we have to be more integrated.”

F1 Board Shake-Up As Fund Manager Quits (Sky)

“Mr Caldwell was instrumental in the acquisition in 2012 of a 20.9% stake in F1’s parent in a deal which valued the group at around $9bn (£5.3bn) including its debts.”

From Zeltweg to the Red Bull Ring (ESPN)

“The infrastructure, such as it was, also left a lot to be desired, even by the standards of the day. The timing beam failed, leaving officials to use stopwatches. The resulting times, when finally published an hour or so after practice had finished, did not always correspond with those recorded by experienced members of the Grand Prix teams.”


Comment of the day

Picking a winner for the latest Caption Competition was one of the trickiest yet – I laughed all the way through your nine pages of comments. Among my favourites were those from (deep breath) Oli Peacock, Mclarengal, Oscar Jones, Cyberaxiom, Schooner, Celler and Matt W.

But my favourite was this simple one from David Bretz (@Cynical):

Pastor Maldonado, Lotus, Circuit Gilles Villeneuve, 2014

“I think I’ll just crash here for now.”

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Titch, Jin and Jack_Hider!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Reg Parnell won the non-championship Crystal Palace trophy 60 years ago today. The event was run over two heats and a final, and Parnell won at the wheel of a Ferrari 625.

Image © Daimler/Hoch Zwei

92 comments on “Rosberg claims ‘psychological edge’ over Hamilton”

  1. Psychological edge? Really Nico? If memory serves me right, you’ve only beaten Hamilton on track once this season – Monaco. Australia was a non-contest as Hamilton barely lasted the formation lap, and in Canada I believe he overtook you for the lead in the second round of pits, no?
    Of course it must feel great being in the lead, but this reeks of bravado more than him genuinely believing he has some sort of “psychological” edge, since when the two have actually raced, 5 out of 6 times he’s been found wanting…

    1. At the hairpin on his last proper lap, Hamilton went too deep, meaning they approached the final chicane about level. Was that Hamilton out-braking himself, or was it a symptom of the brake failure which was literally just around the corner?

      1. Lewis ran wide at the hairpin was the start of the brake problem, FOM had a rear facing thermal image on the OnBoard channel & this showed something come out of the brake duct:

        He went straght at the final corner because that was when his brakes failed completely.

      2. When he ran wide at the hairpin you could already see smoke coming out of the right rear brake, they were gone at that point already.

        1. What could be seen from the thermal cam seemed normal, though indicative of high break stress, nevertheless, I have seen a lot worse, without failures.

          We don’t know at what point they failed or how, but it seems like they did not suffer absolute failure at all, just that they were overheating and running over optimal temperatures, and wearing too much to be safe till the end of the race, given the high braking demands of Montreal, and the brake bias Lewis was running.

          We saw other drivers manage similar problems. Given Mercedes engine and brake problems plus how the race was panning out, I’am still amazed how Rosberg managed to hold on to 2nd place.

    2. It’s all good what you write and we can have a discussion about it. But then, you scroll down and see twits from Hamilton….no, sorry, there are no discussion.

    3. It’s important to remember that the only times during a race this year that Rosberg was genuinely faster, Hamilton still won.

    4. Sounds like all the mind games are starting there too!

    5. If you read only the clip, it’s clear Nico is only saying that he stemmed his own psychological slide by stopping Hamilton’s run of wins, not that he has an edge on Hamilton. I like both of these guys, for different reasons, as competitors. But whereas Hamilton goes too far sometimes with this mouth, Nico doesn’t go far enough. One still get’s the impression that Nico is still sort of cowering under Hamilton’s edge in pace, because he scrupulously avoids confronting Hamilton’s comments, as if out of fear.

  2. “Drivers were not told who they transported, mobiles were not allowed”

    Is Schumacher the loot in a heist movie movie or something?

    1. A heist movie movie being a movie about the making of a heist movie I suppose…

      1. Not another heist movie.

    2. Yeah, the drivers could really not have guessed who it would be… Or are there so many other celebrities in Grenoble hospital that are Swiss residents?

  3. With that points lead Nico, of course your going to beleive that!
    And look at that photo of Lewis taking a selfie, he looks rattled lol

    1. That skinny selfie is funny by with the follow up pic of him cutting up cake !

  4. Let the race start soon, please. Rosberg talking psychological advantage, Hamilton busy showing off his tats. I prefer my F1 drama on the track.

    1. Can’t agree more :)

  5. Not a fan of the Lewis selfies, but if I was one of the fastest drivers in the world making that amount of money, I’d probably do much sillier things than just selfies.

    On another note, I love the caption; simple and effective.

    1. The contrast of him touting his weight loss, and then eating cake in the next tweet, is interesting. I’m sure that cake was made with Splenda and apple sauce, and that he hit the treadmill for 1 hour after.

      I also find it slightly troubling to see a very fit, very slim young guy lose almost a stone in a short period like this. It has to be mostly muscle and fluid. That can’t be so healthy.

  6. Winning comment for the caption competition is a pure genius! :)
    I mean, it’s like it was always there. It’s so simple and just the right amount of mean. :)

  7. At least (for the pic we can see) it looks like Hamilton will never lose the North :P

    Seriously, Nico’s saying he has the edge is a way to try to have the edge, not actually having it (not until we can see the real stuff on Sunday).

    1. @omarr-pepper I think you have something there, but then if NR feels psychologically a tad ahead so be it. I think he is right to point out that breaking LH’s win streak was important because if he hadn’t, everyone would be saying NR would be psychologically destroyed and would never catch LH. People were already saying it before Monaco…that if he didn’t prevail there he’d be screwed because Canada was LH’s to lose. Yet let’s not forget NR did get pole in Canada fair and square.

      I think this could be a bit of bravado, a bit of head play, and NR may actually believe it, and it can’t be proven as to whether he has some kind of edge right now or not, but if NR is taking a positive out of breaking LH’s momentum, I don’t blame him. Both drivers will need every little thing they can to sway things their way.

      I think NR is level headed enough to know that the edge he speaks of can also reverse in LH’s favour with a couple of wins and a big closing of the points gap. As I said above, if LH had made it 6 straight, folks would already have written NR off and metaphorically handed LH the WDC already, and given NR little chance in spite of half the season remaining, so I can’t blame NR for accenting the change that has occurred since Monaco. But he still has to support his claim by pouncing if indeed he truly does have an edge, and I think most will have to see it to believe it.

      1. I think Rosberg is just trying to rattle Lewis by saying he’s got him on the run.

        The reality of the situation is that Rosberg needs Hamilton’s car to fail to beat him on track fair and square. So far this is the form, it may change buy I doubt it.

  8. Is F1F on tapatalk, or any other iphone app?

    1. @brunes No there isn’t an F1 Fanatic app at the moment.

      1. Thank you for the reply!

  9. “Lotus F1 team dismissed a social media guru after he tweeted a picture of in support of gay athletes just before the opening ceremony of the Russian Winter Olympics, for fear it could damage the team’s financial interests.”

    No qualms here with Lotus’ decision.

    1. Ok Lotus you gutless sellout wimps , how about basic human rights over you beloved want for russian cash ,
      Bah ,
      So why dont they sack maldonado ?
      How much damage to financial interests haz he done lately ?

      1. Uhm ,
        Slight over reaction
        Let me rephrase ,

        “I dont agree”

        1. Whether you agree or not is moot, the fact is Lotus have a duty to their stakeholders to do the right thing for their business, and the point of business is to make money. Let’s say the offending tweet cost Lotus a sponsor that would have kept 300 people in jobs, are Lotus duty bound to promoting gay rights over the demise of their company and the livelihoods of 300+ people?

  10. Lewis will see that Mercedes add and start claiming they prefer Nico over him!!!

  11. How can support of gay athletes be seen as gross misconduct? I understand they don’t want to upset their sponsors but this is horrible.

    1. Yosi (@yoshif8tures)
      19th June 2014, 2:20

      No it’s unprofessional. He did it off his own bat and it’s his own stupid fault he got fired. Surprised he didn’t get fired for the rabbit tweet.

      1. @yoshif8tures maybe the rabbits won him a memo, the gay support was seen “offensive” by Lotus board and then he got fired for many mistakes, even when he wants to make us believe it was just for the last one.

        1. @omarr-pepper I agree with you there. What we have to remind ourselves here is that we hear only one side of the story (from a disgruntled (ex-)employee no less). He says he’s been fired for that tweet, but somewhere I doubt that. I don’t know how well employees are protected in the UK, but where I come from that single tweet would never be enough to get him fired. Perhaps get him a stern talking to, but not to be fired.

        2. Yosi (@yoshif8tures)
          19th June 2014, 7:27

          Exactly. His actions on twitter after being fired would hardly make another team consider hiring him. It’d more likely turn them the opposite way and be more robotic.

      2. The rabbit tweet was amazing. I’m so glad that Lotus allowed him to go on as long as he did.

      3. Agreed it his own fault for getting fired. Using lotus account to make it seem like his opinion is the opinion of the company he work. It really is unprofessional.

        1. The whole point of the Lotus twitter feed was being a bit risqué and outrageous for marketing purposes, so he generally did exactly what he was expected to I assume.

          1. Apparently not according to Lotus, seeing as it’s their brand and name that’s attached to it then they can moderate when they see fit. From the grammatical errors in the post re his firing, I would suggest he was intoxicated when he made the post. Not the hallmarks of a ‘Brand Director’ for an internationally known brand.

          2. “Not the hallmarks of a ‘Brand Director’ for an internationally known brand.”

            Seeing as he’d been fired he had no reason to exhibit the correct hallmarks, did he?

        2. @amiranuar

          Using Lotus account to make it seem like his opinion is the opinion of the company he work.

          I don’t see how what he did can be construed as that. Unless you’re claiming he was putting forward an opinion that homosexuality is acceptable, which misrepresented Lotus because they are homophobes. I’d like to think they aren’t and they’ve just botched this one.

          1. Generally I agree with you – staying quiet about homophobia is tantamount to approving it. But in this case, there is a delicate situation where one of their sponsors of from the country being criticized. As such it’s not unreasonable to be careful about the way you make any kind of statement. The nature of the tweet was clearly designed to be confrontational, which was not his decision to make.

            His sentiments may have been noble, but this was a terrible lack of judgement, especially after being reprimanded over the rabbit tweet.

            I non F1 friend of mine commented that he things the sacking was totally justified, but given the subject Lotus were never going to come out looking good.

          2. @keithcollantine what i meant is he was using lotus official twitter most people will assume it came form lotus itself.

            As to lotus stand on homosexuality i guess they would rather not be on any side as they as a entity represent it sponsor as well.

          3. @amiranuar

            As to lotus stand on homosexuality i guess they would rather not be on any side

            I suspect their hiring policies say differently.

          4. @keithcollantine Whatever position Lotus take on homosexuals, it doesn’t belong on their twitter feed. Especially not if it is not a message from the company but from one man. This time it would be ‘pro’ homosexuals but keep in mind some people are not. What if he tweeted something that was against homosexuals. Which is also a personal opinion and neither of them might be the companies stance on the matter.

    2. I support equal rights for the LGBT community. However, I think it’s premature to judge the situation as long as we hear only 1 side of the story.
      From experience I learned that these things are never really black/white – sometimes people’s jobs depend on appeasing sponsors, so it’s a lot more in the grey area than it actually should be in this day and age – but it still is.

  12. “It was really important to bring [Hamilton’s] run [of wins] to an end because psychology is a big part of sports. If you have those results behind you, like I do now, it gives you that little bit extra, that little bit of an edge, so it does help.”

    Nico says that ending Lewis’s win streak has given him a psychological help, he doesn’t say anywhere that he’s psychologically superior to Hamilton.

    1. @kingshark I’m assuming this is about the headline because I can’t see what else it might be in reference to.

      Rosberg said that Hamilton had a psychological edge because of his string of wins (“psychology is a big part of sports”). He then claims to have the same advantage at the moment because of his recent successes (“it gives you that little bit extra, that little bit of an edge”).

      So Rosberg is saying he has a psychological edge over Hamilton at the moment because of his better results recently.

      1. @keithcollantine Though he did use the words “psychological edge”, he did not use them in that combination or that meaning, like in your (and Guardian’s) title.

        There is a big difference between what he said and what the title says, the title says that Rosberg claims that he is in a stronger position psychologically than Lewis, but what he actually said was that the recent results have helped HIM psychologically.

        It would be fair to speculate of who has the psychological edge or argue that it is Nico, or even suggest he was implying it, however saying that “Rosberg claims ‘psychological edge’ over Hamilton” is flat out factually incorrect.

        Though a lot of good things can be said about your work, and often is, your titles sometimes are factually incorrect and a bit sensationalist, it’s not the first time people have pointed this out and I hope you will take that into consideration.

        I think F1 Fanatics don’t need that sort of thing to be attracted to read the articles, but either way, quality journalism ethics has to take priority.

        1. You are splitting hairs, we all know why Rosberg would go to press with a comment like this. It’s gamesmanship designed to make Hamilton feel daunted by Rosberg riding the crest of a wave.

        2. @mateuss “Rosberg claims ‘psychological edge’ over Hamilton” is flat out factually incorrect”

          But he did claim he has the psychological edge. He mentioned pyschology first, then the full quote after that was “If you have those results behind you, like I do now, it gives you that little bit extra, that little bit of an edge, so it does help.” Headlines have to be short and attention grabbing, but i don’t think this one is missleading, you always have to read the full article to know the context.

          Maybe it would have been more complete if the title was “Rosberg claims he CURRENTLY has pyschological edge over Hamilton”, but that’s not exactly catchy ;)

          1. @mateuss

            the title says that Rosberg claims that he is in a stronger position psychologically than Lewis

            And Rosberg did say that as I have already explained.

            it’s not the first time people have pointed this out

            I’m aware of that and on no occasion have I been convinced there has been anything more to it than a small number of people misreading a headline or projecting a false assumption onto it, as has been the case here.

            And that doesn’t just go for F1 Fanatic – over and over again on other websites I see people leaping to conclusions about the content of an article based on the headline and then complaining that their assumptions weren’t met.

  13. Again with your loose interpretations, Keith

    I get it, yellow journalism is click bate, It just seems out of context with the site.

    1. Mmm… Maybe you would have preferred this headline:
      “Breaking Hamilton’s win streak gave psychological reassurance to Nico, so that makes him feel he has the edge over Lewis now”
      …. *sighing out of breath* oh and don’t forget the subtitle “F1 Fanatic Round Up”
      Try to create a headline with less than 8 words, it’s hard.

    2. @alebelly74 I don’t know what you’re referring to, as you haven’t bothered to specify.

      1. I think their were some liberties taken with the ‘Psychological Edge’ headline and its inference.

    3. @alebelly74 perhaps you’d prefer to keep to just reading the formula 1 website for your professional F1 related stories?
      I’m happy with F1F just the way it is, I can safely read articles about Schumacher’s health that aren’t trumped up, or read about what happened between Perez and Massa at the end of the Canadian GP from both points of view. Oh wait, balanced approach to journalism, plus non-sensationalist stories, maybe F1F is more professional than you give it credit for.

      1. @dragoll no, no, no, sorry to give that impression, this site is an essential resource for me

        1. Why would yellow journalism be an essential source?

  14. Psychological edge? Oh yeah, that’s why you made a mistake during Q3 at Monaco. That’s why you locked up during the race, taking the escape route and gaining an advantage, keeping the lead.

    1. Rosberg’s “mistake” in Q3 in Monaco won him the race..

      I think what Rosberg will depend on pushing the boundaries like this, F1 is rarely actually a straight fight between too racers, there’s always a psycholgical, mechanical, political edge to gain.
      Schumacher and Prost were masters of gaining this edge, I think Rosberg knows he needs that edge against Hamilton and he’s got the intelligence and mental strength to pull it off.
      That’s what will make this a titanic battle, with shades of Senna Vs. Prost about it.

    2. perhaps I should point to the WDC points table.

      1. Sure, point to it and you’ll see an table of numbers only. Do they tell the full story of the WDC so far? Nope, I don’t think so.

        Hamilton has two mechanical DNFs. Both of which we could say that at least a 3rd can be secured. That’s 30 points lost. I’m not even talking about Rosberg’s little incident in Monaco or him locking up in Canada. Granted, Hamilton has lost it under pressure before (qualifying in Canda), but who was it that made more mistakes than him? That’s right, Rosberg. Psychological edge? No, sweetie…

        Rosberg: 140
        Hamilton: 118 (+30) = 148

        You want to point to the WDC table?

        My view on the race in Canada was that if Rosberg did not floor the pedal through the run-off and gain an advantage (which he did, 6 tenths of a second), Hamilton would have taken the lead, giving him cleaner air, thus having a better chance of cooling the brakes down. That would have prevented his brake failure, giving him the win, or 2nd, or even 3rd. Those are valuable points lost.

        Then again, there are no ‘ifs’ in motorsports… Just my thoughts. ;)

    3. I dare say if ROS wins the WDC we’ll hear a lot more about sad Hamilton fans and Monaco.

  15. Epic caption!

  16. I love how Hamilton tweets about his weight loss, to tweet about having a cake only hours later!

    1. It’s either a masterpiece of unintentional comedy or Rosberg weighs a bit more than him and Hamilton is making sure he knows it.

      1. Lol, I guess the question is, can Lewis have his cake and eat it too? Perhaps Nico will now feel a psychological edge by sending his friend red velvet cake on a frequent basis. Meanwhile I notice Nico is being very secretive about HIS favourite cake.

      2. @keithcollantine Actually it’s more than that. It shows that he trains so hard that he can lose weight while eating cakes ;)

        Actually it’s nothing impossible. I can prove it, since I’m training a lot while also never restricting my diet off an occasional cake and more than occasional beer. No weight gain detected for many many years… Which serves to prove that you can have your proverbial cake and eat it, provided you don’t eat too much of it of course

  17. It is worth reading some of Stephane Samson’s replies to other tweeters. He repeatedly states that the tweet was “the whole comms department decision”, not his personal opinion. He also claims that all his salaries at Lotus “were paid late and that a few are still outstanding”.

    Lotus’ arguments sound weird, to say the least. Their lawyers now call the “rabbit” tweet “seriously unprofessional” (even though it still has not been deleted) but it has been retweeted 18,829 times, which probably makes it one of the most popular F1-related tweets ever. But that is not the main point.

    I strongly believe that the dismissal of Samson is outrageous but I actually agree that Lotus’ employees should not fight for human rights. FIA and FOM should do it.

    When FIFA fight against racism, no one claims that they are “doing politics”. No one claims that anti-racism statements “could cause serious reputational and financial damage to our client”. People accept that racism is a bad thing, period. FIA should have the same attitude towards homophobia.

    It is true that homophobia is a more divisive topic than racism. However, article 3 of FIFA statutes now clearly states that “Discrimination of any kind against a Country, private person or group of people on account of race, skin colour, […] sexual orientation or any other reason is strictly prohibited and punishable by suspension or expulsion.” A similar statement by FIA is long overdue.

    1. @girts

      Their lawyers now call the “rabbit” tweet “seriously unprofessional” (even though it still has not been deleted)

      I wondered if that was the case. It rather torpedoes Lotus’s argument.

      1. It’s still there.

    2. This is a great post @girts, and I totally agree with everything you’ve said.

      It’s a sad day when principles such as the freedom of sexuality are so aggressively dismissed simply in order to generate cash. Lotus may not be homophobes, but by their actions they’ve demonstrated that they’re willing to associate themselves with people who are, simply for the money it will bring in.

    3. I am glad to see you comment on this @girts as your opinion was the one I first thought of when this came up. Whilst I completely agree with your post I hope that Lotus dismissed Samson due to unprofessionalism on a number of matters rather than this one incident in isolation. I personally never found the Lotus tweets to be all that funny and, without sounding like the dullest man on the planet, thought the rabbit tweet was a joke too far.

      Perhaps the board at Lotus think that with the teams finances in disarray, a wholly uncompetitive car and a driver who is making headlines for crashing that a juvenile and unprofessional twitter account makes them out to be a great deal less competent than they are. Maybe that is over-analysing and making excuses but if I was running Lotus I could accept a few jokes with a quick car and a top driver but would worry about my brands image when losing on all fronts.

  18. “Psychological Edge” Hahaha!
    We’ll just have to wait and see on that one.

    Perhaps Nico meant “Car Reliability Edge”.

    1. No I think he meant ‘mistake outcome edge’ :-)

  19. I’m unsure how serious Webber was being when he said that but I think Vettel has Vettel’s car in terms of reliability…

    Meanwhile, I’m unsure what ‘psychological edge’ Rosberg has over Hamilton, because in qualifying, races and laps led he is behind the Brit.

    1. It’s a fairly tongue-in-cheek remark – although when you look at the statistics between 2009 and 2013, both drivers were equally unlucky with their cars, it was fairly accepted that during both 2011 and 2013, Mark’s car failed to finish more often for various reasons – often because Seb was running up front and had less stress on his car or traffic to contend with.

  20. Rosberg mainly he is telling all this for himself to hear it.. you know if you repeat something in a mirror constantly for many times eventually you believe it.

    Fact is Hamilton is fastest in all aspects and even if he is some points behind after 3-4 races this gap will be minimised again.

    I say all this and i am not Hamilton fan but i cannot say anything about his excelent driving this year.

    What i wonder with merc’s brake failure is .. the software department doesnt have alarm trigger system for any part that is going above limits? the brake failure didnt happent exactly after the MGU-K failure.. i mean there was a total 1 lap for sure after that for hamilton but noone seemed to bother watching the discs temperature…. this is for me an area that merc’s need to watch closely.

    1. I don’t think there was really much time to react…

      The MGU-K failure was unanticipated and happened at a pretty bad time in the race for the team, right around the pitstop window. As no energy was being collected off the rears, the brakes had to suddenly work much much harder.

      Couple this with a general lower feel caused by the brake-by-wire system (the drivers had to re-learn the brakes), smaller brake discs (because they don’t *usually* need to be big, because the MGU-K does some of the work) AND Canada being one of the absolute worst tracks for braking from speed.

      Mercedes *should* have called off the racing battle between their guys immediately, but they were likely concentrating on getting Hamilton’s pit stop sorted AND trying to resolve the issue with resetting the MGU-K.

      1. And Hamilton being both a heavy braker and rear biased.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.