Sebastian Vettel, Ferrari, Monaco, 2017

Hamilton: Ferrari have given Vettel number one status over Raikkonen

F1 Fanatic Round-upPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

In the round-up: Lewis Hamilton believes his championship rival Sebastian Vettel has number one status at Ferrari.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Comment of the day

Fernando Alonso’s Indianapolis 500 adventure didn’t have the end he was hoping for but he gave as good as he got:

If nothing else, it’s been wonderful seeing Alonso contending again.

I want him to do IndyCar full time now, it’s criminal seeing him toiling at the back of F1 grid. I’d much rather see him at Detroit next week.
JackySteeg

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Chris, Hughes, Silverkeg and Danny11!

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

  • Denny Hulme won the Oulton Park Gold Cup today in 1972 for McLaren.

160 comments on “Hamilton: Ferrari have given Vettel number one status over Raikkonen”

  1. It’s clear to me – and I’m sure to everyone else – that Hamilton (who enjoys undisputed Number One status at McLaren) is hoping to stir up trouble in the Ferrari camp. And that he’s being joined in this endeavor by the British F1 press.

    Very diplomatic by Haas.

    1. Yep, exactly. Just psychological games from Hamilton. Kimi came in when he wanted to, as evidenced by the fact that he came on the radio asking if they shouldn’t be having a pitstop soon *before* he came into the pits. Sad for him that it was the wrong strategy, but he still had a great weekend and should be proud. Meanwhile, Lewis is the pot calling the kettle team-ordered.

      1. Hamilton will get more and more talkative the more Vettel outperforms him. We should get popcorn.

        1. We should get popcorn.

          Make mine salted.
          Hamilton shadow boxes with nonsensical statements each time he loses to someone, especially Vettel. Maybe something in that nose stud of his addling his mind.

    2. Am I the only one to recall earlier this season Bottas being asked to trade 2nd for 3rd in favour of Lewis. Last year Nico being asked to let Lewis through at Monaco. 2013 in China Nico being told not to overtake a slower Lewis.

      Number 1 status or not Vettel does not wait for team orders. He goes for it if there is a gap the size of a bicycle.

    3. I think Hamilton is pushing Mercedes to give him number one status, rather than trying to spark trouble at Ferrari.

      The Scuderia’s long history of team orders is enough to know they’ll be unapologetic and explicit if necessary, but it won’t be, because Vettel is clearly the quicker driver

      1. The best way to get number one status is to beat your own team mate enough that you don’t have to ask for it as in Hamilton’s case twice this year.

    4. Sky has to protect their narrative

      1. David Croft is so biased it’s unbelievable. He spent the entire second half of the race crying about Ferrari’s so-called team orders yet it’s perfectly OK when Hamilton benefits from them in Bahrain and Spain.

    5. Well, it’s Ferrari. They always had a clear number one and number two drivers and there is no surprise there. At the same time I think this one is on Kimi. He should have pushed like crazy after his pit stop. He had six laps of relatively clean air and he should have been doing qualifying lap after qualifying lap there, knowing that Vettel was probably doing the same.

      1. @maroonjack – How can Kimi coming out of the pits right behind Button and all the other backmarkers be considered to be clean air? He spent the next 5 laps trying to clear them while they are all fighting their own battles and meanwhile Vettel was doing fast laps in clean air on the faster tire.

        1. @bullmello Everyone had to deal with backmarkers, including Vettel. But Raikkonen had 14 seconds of clean air behind Ricciardo, and when Daniel pitted Kimi had only Seb in front. That’s as clean air as you can get after your first stop. Vettel was on a faster, but older tyres. Kimi had fresh rubber and yet he lost over 4 seconds in 6 laps.

          1. Kimi came out into traffic, he should have pushed for 4 laps, like Seb did, before coming in.

            I’m thinking Ferrari did it on purpose, knowing it’ll give Seb the chance to get past Kimi.

            On sky Ted mentioned everyone in the pit lane was talking about the over cut before the race. It was well known by all the undercut was not the way to go. If they wanted Kimi to win they’d have pitted Seb into traffic first.

          2. @9chris9

            “Kimi came out into traffic”

            No, he didn’t

        2. “How can Kimi coming out of the pits right behind Button and all the other backmarkers be considered to be clean air? ”

          Because that didn’t happened?

      2. @maroonjack

        Well, it’s Ferrari. They always had a clear number one and number two drivers

        Myth

        1. @kingshark Fair enough. I probably should have said “since 1975”.

          1. @maroonjack
            Still a myth.

            Who was number 1 between Raikkonen and Massa exactly?

            It’s not Ferrari’s fault that Massa and Kimi lack the natural talent and ability to compete with Alonso and Vettel.

    6. FreddyVictor
      29th May 2017, 7:23

      yep, a feeble attempt to try stir things up @ Ferrari
      Pretty sure Kimi is way above this kind of thing
      Seb was clearly faster and would have won pretty much whatever pit-stop strategy was used
      Kimi had every chance to win

      I see the BBC – courtesy of Andrew Benson (!) – is reporting the GP result as ‘controversial’
      He obviously still thinks team orders are outlawed
      I don’t recall anything similar last year when Mercedes asked Rosberg to let LuLu thru

      1. If they wanted Kimi to win they’d have pitted Seb into traffic first

        .

        If they had pitted Seb first, he would have have been far closer to the lead than Raikkonen was when those in front started to go in. Note how much faster Vettel was on the SS tyres compared with Raikkonen. Even the SC could not help the latter and Vettel simply went away again.

        But the real issue if Ferrari had pitted Vettel first would have been Ricciardo. He would have done exactly as he did but would have been in P2 and not P3 when he came out of his pit stop. He would have quickly closed down on Raikkonen who would have been a tad slower (than when he actually pitted in the race) on the old US tyres by then and the latter would almost certainly been undercut into P3 by Ricciardo when he finally went in for his pit stop.

        And you can guess what slime like Oliver Brown would have written in their report for pitting Vettel first.

    7. Psychology is part of other sports too. In boxing there is the pre-bout taunting, at football there is the crowd yelling at the players, etc. So what?

    8. It’s clear to me – and I’m sure to everyone else – that Hamilton (who enjoys undisputed Number One status at McLaren) is hoping to stir up trouble in the Ferrari camp. And that he’s being joined in this endeavor by theBritish F1 press.

      Hamilton’s quote is a shameless case of the pot and kettle analogy considering the number of times he has benefited from team orders and lucky victories himself. Even in the last race, events turned out to help him.

      While Ferrari are a team who have enforced unfair team orders in the past (the infamous “Fernando is faster than you”), they did NOT do so yesterday in Monaco. They called the lead driver (who was beginning to lose time to his teammate & rivals) in first for a tyre change, a practice followed by most teams. Then Vettel had to work had to get the overcut, which he did superbly and without any outside help.

      As for the hypocrisy of some of the British F1 press, Oliver Brown is the worst of the lot. His columns are full of outright lies and supposedly analytical trash. A fortnight ago he hailed Hamilton’s tad lucky win in Spain with comments of “Hero Hamilton” “King of Spain” etc. This morning he alludes to “team orders” by Ferrari which they never issued.

      1. It’s obvious to me that neither Mercedes in Spain, nor Ferrari in Monaco issued team orders. Here it was just a strategic call to pit one driver 3 or 4 laps earlier than necessary for the other driver to build an advantage. It’s a different matter altogether, that in my opinion Kimi allowed Seb to build that advantage. Every driver is able to put his foot down and turn the engine up for a few laps. That’s what Seb did and Kimi failed to do after his stop. He needed a two tenths each lap and I think in a race trim it was possible to achieve.

      2. @loup-garou Yes but most newspaper ‘journalists’ are pundits and offer ‘opinions’ not news. Just like us…They often get it wrong. Just like us.

        It’s all part of the entertainment. Enjoy..

        1. Yes but most newspaper ‘journalists’ are pundits and offer ‘opinions’ not news. Just like us…

          True, but some of these ‘Pundits’ like Oliver Brown are particularly loathsome.

    9. SevenFiftySeven
      29th May 2017, 9:40

      Well put, Fireblade. And by doing so, they’re framing the story like so:

      Instead of being frank and openly acknowledging that Lewis is the preferred guy at Mercedes (which we have all seen play out in 2 races), the B press are pressuring Mercedes to fully favor Lewis from here on in. It’s a classic case of blaming someone else of what you’re doing, and then using that false premise to justify your case. If Lewis personally wanted to unsettle Ferrari with his comments, that is fine. If he wants to be a home boy and play along with the B press, do note how the B press had made Button a bigger story than him this weekend, only to fall back to criticizing Ferrari (because that sells in the UK) when the Button angle didn’t work for them. Now they are such great sympathizers of Raikonnen (because he has huge number of fans), while eagerly accepting another Finn (Bottas) as a worthy number 2 who is even more eager to swap position. Funny logic and moral standpoint, no?

      Interesting to note Mercedes, itself, hasn’t said much about this, if at all. They want Bottas and Lewis to both finish 1-2 to maximize WCC points. They won’t mind telling Bottas to let Lewis by if he finds himself ahead of Lewis when Lewis is relatively close behind. Mercedes, however, cannot afford to have Bottas finish low down the order. Which is why there is a push at Mercedes to help Bottas catch up through data sharing and optimizing both cars to hopefully stay ahead of the Ferraris. Since this is in the interest of the team, and not individual drivers, one or both drivers can find themselves struggling. This is what happened to Lewis at Monaco. So, how do they arrive at those setups. They let the drivers optimize the cars to their liking and see how things are. But, what if they are slow compared to their rivals? What do you do? The engineers do some number crunching and come with setups that should, in theory, make the cars fast enough to compete with their rivals. Usually, these things come with caveats; them being: narrow window of operation. So, you’ve got to drive in a certain way, get the tires in a narrow window of operational temperatures, take slightly different lines, have a little understeer or oversteer, stress the engine (but not go beyond), etc, etc, etc. Sometimes it works; sometimes it goes horribly wrong, and your car is twitching, there’s no grip and quite a lot of odd things start happening that completely bewilders the drivers (Grosjean is a case in point). Of course, at the shallow end, we hear it and read it as ‘one driver over complaining’ lol. Ladies and gentlemen, Mercedes is struggling.

      Great job, Ferrari! My heart goes to Kimi. That qualifying run was great. Race day is more than just one lap, and Seb was much faster. Whatever the B press says, Kimi is smart enough to know that he narrowly missed coming out on front at Monaco.

      1. I Agree with your sentiments,and its clear that the car is fast and that something is not jelling at Mercedes at the moment.Its also obvious that Bottas dosent have the race pace.Also the inconsistency of Lewis performance at the fualt of setup,2 in 3 races is worrying to me…I feel that Totto being or was Bottas manager,is willing to put his finger on the scale to make sure that Bottas is not beaten badly by Lewis so as not to damage his future prospects.
        This migh be the Button Mclaren Witmarsh senario all over again especially in 2010 and 2012 where the team were willing loose races and lewis the driver tittle to save face for Button and to pretend the two driver equal.

        Lets not forget that Totto is ruthless, he maneuvered both Brawn and Paddy out of the way so he can have all the controll…and when Lewis held back Rosberg last year he Totto viciously attacked Lewis in the media,with his anarchy line….so it wouldnt surprise me if Totto is willing to loose Lewis the drivers title by getting Botas up and running and get some 1 ,2 at the tail end and win the constructors….Its only Rosberg shock retirement that qualsh Tottos media campanyne against Lewis,so getting Bottas to perform on par with Lewis could also affect Lewis negotiating position come next year…so yea I think Lewis up and down performance might be down to Totto fingers on the scale,com on the week the media relegated Bottas to number 2 Lewis struggles.

    10. I don’t think Hamilton really hopes to stir up trouble inside Ferrari @fireblade, @gweilo8888 et all.

      I do think he might be pushing his own team a bit to make HIM their clear no.1, as with the points gap he would surely happily have Bottas be his support crew. I hope and expect Mercedes not to though.

      Sure, after the stop it quickly became clear that pitting when they did was not the best strategy for Kimi, Bottas nor Verstappen. But I really don’t think these teams were trying to arrange anything apart from trying to get ahead, or avoid dropping behind others. Otherwise, why would Mercedes have pitted Bottas – clearly at the time they thought it was the way to react to Max stopping. And they had no interest whatsoever to make him drop behind anyone, as Hamilton was certainly not going to profit from it.

      1. That might be true @bascb, were it not for the fact that he is already the clear number one. Team orders have already been applied in his favor and against Bottas multiple times.

        1. welll, yeah, off course Vettel does have no. 1 status within Ferrari. But it did not change the outcome of the last race @gweilo8888. And Hamilton saying so won’t do anything for either Seb, nor Kimi, nor for anyone in the team, apart from the PR person who now has to make a statement that they were not doctoring the outcome actively.

          1. knoxploration
            31st May 2017, 7:44

            No, Vettel does not have number one status, at least not at this point in the season. If Kimi hadn’t come in when *he* chose to (note the radio call from him *before* he came in asking if he shouldn’t be coming in soon), he could have won. I firmly believe Ferrari intended to allow him to do so.

            It is Hamilton who has already had team orders applied in his favor, not Vettel.

    11. Psyops are so 2016!

    12. @Fireblade: Mercedes instead of Mclaren :p
      @Spactus: Half the world is against little Lewis, and that isn’t fair… Grow up, man. Toto can do a lot, but I don’t see him take a wrench to “aid” setup. By these accusations you prove one point: Math isn’t your strongest point.
      My opinion: Vet is the preferred n°1 @ Ferrari, because he proves to be consistently faster, but here the cards were stacked and reshuffeled by Verstappen pitting early, and setting a very fast 2 sector on his outlap, which alarmed Merc/Botas to do the same. Having 2 cars up front, the first one losing too much time passing backmarkers (compare RAI to RIC times) forced Ferrari to consider bringing in one car, to be safe in case of a SC, while preventing being passed in the pits by a fast closing RIC. VET wasn’t an option, because RIC was too close already (Due to RAI losing time to get in the Blue flag window) so they did the only logical thing: bringing in RAI. What they couldn’t , and no-one could predict was what VET would do in clear air. The answer is: He put in a few “Hammertime-laps” which gave him an oportunity. He had the speed, and couldn’t come in anyway: RIC was a possible threat. Once the threat of RIC was taken away, he came in too, to consolidate the position.
      In the end: RAI lost the race by losing too much time clearing backmarkers before his stop, because he would’ve been in free air hadn’t he lost those 4.5s

  2. Just as well you’d never find Hamilton pushing the team to favour his interests over a teammate, like what definitely didn’t happen a few races ago, or taking number 1 status during the last race of last year, or doing any politicking at all….

    1. And Kvyat giving out about other drivers wrecking his race with irresponsible moves… Who’s next? Sauber complaining about bad contracts? Flavio complaining about race fixing? Bernie complaining about people who don’t think about sustainability?

      1. :-)))))

      2. Haha! :)

  3. Kvyat – pot, kettle!

  4. Perez has a history around this track. In 2013 in the McLaren he collided with Kimi, after nearly taking out Alonso (and being rewarded for it) earlier on in the race, and last year (or was it 2015) he collided with a McLaren on the opening lap. He is always to desperate to make bad moves work.

    This year he threw away what was pretty much a guaranteed points finish for nothing, which is a massive shame.

    1. @strontium, on the other hand, it’s a more entertaining approach than his usual tyre-saving cruise mode.

    2. Two bad races, but last year he was great for podium

    3. Perez vs Kimi was a fair move back in 2013, Kimi changed his line at the last minute, and that was before a corner. This one against Kvyat, was never going to work because there is just no room for two cars going at a normal pace. It can only work if one driver has a problem, and is going at half the speed for that corner.

      1. Perez move against Kimi in 2013 was as hopeless as the one against Kvyat. Both Kimi and Kvyat were well ahead of Perez when Perez tried a hopeless move just wishing the lead driver would vanish in the air.

        You can check the video from 2013 crash and see that Kimi was in racing line just turning in and Perez just sticks the car in a place where crash is imminent. Likewise, a desperate move against Kvyat.

    4. @strontium – The move on Kvyat didn’t really have a chance, Perez tried to force it. I saw it argued that Kvyat should have given Perez room. Ask Vandoorne how that works out when you give room and end up in the armco.

      Agreed that Perez blew sure points on a move with nearly impossible odds of success.

  5. Well, duh… Was Lewis born yesterday?! you didn’t need to take this race into consideration to come up with that conclusion, did you?

    1. Lewis might be right, and most likely he is, definitely not a conclusion he should have made over this last race. Regardless if we go and check which driver has benefited the most out of team orders this season it is most likely Hamilton, so he should have kept his mouth shut on this one.

      Lets see if someone at Ferrari responds and engages with him, I don’t think they will.

      1. Personally I think this is just LH doing what he has done before, trying to garner sympathy from his following. Ferrari is favouring SV ‘clearly’ so don’t boo me if I get a favourable call again…it just us having no choice because of Ferrari’s behaviour. I’m innocent.

        He hasn’t talked to his team about it and doesn’t plan to? This is where the credibility of his comment falls apart. Everyone else in the paddock is talking about Ferrari’s strength and how that seems to be falling toward SV…what’s Ferrari going to do with Kimi… which then forces Merc ‘s hand to react… yet LH has no plans on discussing this with his team? All the while it is more important than ever for them to work as a team?

        What happened to his wishes for his God given natural talents to be left alone while his teammate’s are left to fend for themselves, sans data sharing? Oh I know what happened…they have found themselves no longer dominant, Bottas sometimes with the better setup.

        Now they’re playing catch-up, so don’t blame LH if the team decides to favour him…he has always wanted to share data and he didn’t even want to or plan to talk to them about favouritism… This is the same bloke who won the 2015 WDC, declared his job done, wished the season was over, party mode now, and then found himself on his hind foot to Nico yet STILL cried for special treatment to get by Nico, while he hadn’t earned it on those weekends. The team wisely didn’t oblige him.

        They will now though…they have no choice. Everyone knows it. LH…stop trying to pretend you don’t and that it’s all Ferrari’s fault. Ferrari are reacting to you getting favouritism already this season.

  6. I don’t think this is huge news or surprising that Ferrari will favour Vettel or have been. They know how important it is to take advantage where they can because innevitably I’m sure Lewis will come back pretty strong and Ferrari won’t be immune to failures. You could argue that Ferrari are smart in doing this, but is it fair on Raikkonen? I don’t think that matters. Ferrari will always do a Ferrari and back a number 1 driver like it or not

    1. There were no team ordered at Ferrari today. Kimi was leading the race so got first choice on when to pit. He *asked* to pit before he did so, so he clearly wanted to then. It turned out to be the wrong strategy. Vettel beat him fair and square and then (as he often does) Kimi got demoralized and gave up.

      1. Don’t bother these people with pesky facts, they’re enjoying their outrage.

        Next week they’ll be back complaining that Mercedes did not order Bottas out of Hamilton’s way quickly enough again.

        1. Never said they actually did it. Just a bit of food for thought.

        2. None of them seem to remember Vettel had to overtake Raikkonen in China and lost precious seconds behind him because of that while the very next race Bottas kept getting ordered to stay out of Hamilton’s way whenever he came anywhere close to him.

          1. Exactly!! And Bottas was asked to move over TWICE in Bahrain in the same situation: that the faster driver wanted to chase for the win. Not to mention that they asked Bottas to block Vettel in Spain (and hence compromise his own race) to let Hamilton win!

      2. @gweilo8888

        He *asked* to pit before he did so.

        Not quite…
        Question: “So to be clear, were you asking for the stop or did they call it?”
        Kimi Raikkonen: “No, I was called in and that’s about it.”

        1. That doesn’t change a thing though. If Raikkonen wanted to win he should have built a gap to Vettel (and the rest) to protect himself from both the under and overcut. At no point in the race did he show the pace needed to do just that.

          1. If Raikkonen wanted to win he should have built a gap to Vettel (and the rest) to protect himself from both the under and overcut. At no point in the race did he show the pace needed to do just that.

            Exactly. He was vulnerable to both the overcut and undercut.

    2. I think it’s fair. Kimi hasn’t shown a performance worthy of backing up for quite some time.

  7. COTD, does it really matter in what series Fernando’s engine fails again ?

    1. @hohum It does when he’s fighting for victory when it fails and his team-mate wins the race with the same engine

  8. “clearly this corner is no place to overtake” might confirm Button’s belief WER didn’t see him, because he wasn’t even looking.

    1. He didnt need to look because there is no way two cars can go through there side by side. Button only got a sniff because the car ahead of Wehrlein forced him to go slightly slower.

      1. @OOliver Yes he did need to look . There were a few successful moves into that corner throughout the years. Hulkenberg overtook Magnussen into there just a few years ago. I’m not saying the crash was Wehrelein’s fault but he should indeed look into his mirrors. Also, judging by your comment on Perez’s move at Rascasse as well, you don’t seem to understand the concept of overtaking at Monaco. At no corner of Monaco it’s possible to overtake without some degree of cooperation and special awareness from the other driver. Yet, there were numerous successful moves over the years at corners like the Hairpin(Sutil overtook 3 cars in 1 race including Alonso there in 2013), Portier, Rasscasse, Tabac and Mirabeau. I’m not even talking about the Nouvelle chicane or Ste Devote. Every overtaking attempt at Monaco is at best 50% chance of success/50% chance of crashing with your non-cooperative opponent. At these 2 cases(Button and Perez) the attacking drivers were at fault, because the moves were with even less of a chance of success than normal. But this doesn’t mean the drivers defending should not look into the mirrors because the think it’s not possible to overtake at some corner, that’s just the wrong approach you’re advocating for.

        1. and one earlier that day in the Renault race

  9. Haas’s comment is typically american, where socialism is a bad word. He forgot F1 is mostly European sport where people are not brainwashed into thinking socialism is a bad bad thing.

    1. well i’m european & i think socialism isn’t exactly a great thing, certainly not the wonderful rose garden its proponents like to peddle it as.

      i’m plenty old enough to remember what things were like when we had a more socialist society. sadly many of the young kids that are so in favor of socialist today have no memory of those dark days. those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it afterall.

      1. “If a man is not a socialist by the time he is 20, he has no heart. If he is not a conservative by the time he is 40, he has no brain.” – Winston Churchill. And I’m suffering the wonderful socialism in a country that’s falling appart.

        1. actually it goes “if he is a socialist by the time he is 40”

      2. I think the “young kids” you refer to look at the world that’s been left behind for them and are desperately worried. They may not have all the answers (as generation after generation after generation before them didn’t) but they can clearly see that what we are doing now is failing huge percentages of the population. Brexit was the most recent kick in the teeth for the “young kids” from the older generation.

        1. Wow, really sucks for those kids who need to buy a passport to travel to other European countries.

        2. Except by total votes, MORE older people voted to remain than leave. Don’t believe the narrative from certain sections of the media on that line, it’s far more nuanced and doesn’t match the data. Apathy did for the younger end of the voting populace.

          Gene Haas is right though, socialism’s historical legacy is a race to mediocrity!

          1. “More older people voted to remain than leave.”

            Do you have a source for that ‘data’?

          2. When there is plenty to go round, having people paid more for long service (as Haas advocates and F1 has done since 1998) isn’t a real problem, though jealousy can be and often is invoked. However, that’s not really the case here. F1’s just turning the corner from a long descent that took it within $300 m (annual profit) of the threshold for giving “golden handshakes” to Ferrari, McLaren and Red Bull/Toro Rosso (as I understand it, they’re allowed to leave, and be paid for it, if profits for F1 ever fall below $750 m). There’s a recession on the horizon, which will probably hit F1 too rapidly to change financial structures in response. Liberty appears to have its eye on the CCB monies… …possibly for the small teams, but as likely to bolster its own profits and ability to avoid the “golden handshake” situation.

            Haas, as a team dependent on the biggest recipient of CCB money (Ferrari), may be looking to protect its engine supply partner here. Or it may be being a pragmatist. But what it’s endorsing is not a switch from a socialist direction to a democratic one. It’s endorsing a switch from a socialist direction to the more heirarchical one that was failing F1 already. I can see why Haas might have concerns about the notion that “equal monies fixes everything”, but there is something that does need fixing in a landscape of reducing general incomes in the medium term. (Short-term profits, for the next 1-2 years, are likely to go up whatever is decided about financial structure, and long-term profits (beyond about 5 years) depend on a lot of factors, most of which we don’t know yet as they won’t become clear until the recession approaches F1).

            @ju88sy If the “by total votes” was true, there would be no Brexit, since it was only the “older” people who voted more to leave than remain by percentage in the first place. Mathematically, there has to have been more votes to leave than remain in the older segment, unless you are arguing that the younger segment voted to leave more than remain by a rather larger percentage (which does not appear to be your argument and is empatically not true – 55% of under-40s voted to remain and the 40-49 range was finely balanced).

    2. Thank you for pointing out the article. I found it rather confusing. Don’t give out too much money to the lessor teams, but I am happy to get the money. ? I fail to see how that is linked to socialism.

    3. Well if you can’t afford bread, you can always eat cake.
      I wonder why in America they run a spec series. Why try and make racing equal for everyone. Why not allow team with more money to out spend the smaller teams and modify their cars as they wish.
      There is no “ism” that is flawed. It is man that has the flaw.

    4. It’s worth to mind, that Haas needs to rub Ferrari’s back, so that might play into it.
      Compared to other mid-tier/low-tier teams, Haas makes money elsewhere, and can afford to run their F1-project with a deficit, whereas some of the other teams can’t, as that focus so much more on just F1.

    5. How is it typically American when quite a few of the US’ largest sports are far more “socialist” (never mind the impracticality of applying these labels to sports) than most large European sports?

      It’s just Haas’ view. It might even explain why he’s in F1 and not in Indycar.

    6. the “stars” always earn more money… this is the normal way. the ferrari is biggest star team of the f1.

  10. I don’t think it really matters if the team see him as #1 or not because I think Vettel is just plain faster than Kimi at this point in there career’s.

    Even looking at Monaco this weekend while Kimi did grab the pole; in the race Vettel was faster by some margin. He was catching Kimi before the pit stop, He was significantly faster than Kimi had been when Kimi pitted & was faster still after his own stop & was over 10 seconds ahead when the SC came out.

  11. AntoineDeParis (@antoine-de-paris)
    29th May 2017, 0:41

    Lewis, what’s the next step? Your father in the paddock again?

    1. I hear Nicole will be giving a concert at a circuit this year lol. I think that might be the next step.

    2. In the interest of keeping the competition fair Hamilton might want to give Vettel some pointers on how to best use a Finnish driver to aid his own championship campaign. He has some experience with that, after all.

  12. Neil (@neilosjames)
    29th May 2017, 0:51

    Everyone has been saying and thinking that Vettel is Ferrari’s chosen contender since… early 2015, actually. Although in their defence, it’s not like he’s had any sort of regular on-track competition for that role.

    1. In a way that is true, but quite often no attention is paid to Kimi during the races that you will think he was being forced on the team.

    2. Got to agree with you.

      I feel Kimi has no one but himself to blame for yesterday’s result. He’s had a race winning car from the 1st race of the season, and has only taken away 1 podium so far. He’s been unable to maintain strong form throughout the race weekend. Usually he drops the ball in qualifying, but yesterday he dropped the ball on race day.

      It’s a hard fact that Ferrari supports only one driver, and we all knew that even before the season started. Given that Kimi had less half the points of Sebastian going in to Monaco, it was obvious that Ferrari had already focused all their efforts on maximising Vettel’s WDC hopes. Kimi could have helped himself by pulling away from Seb and creating a large enough lead , that despite a less favourable strategy, he would still come out in front. Ferrari could have timed his pitstop slightly earlier or slightly later if they wanted him to keep the lead, but instead they timed it that he encountered traffic on his outlaps and gave Sebastian clean air to increase the gap. It’s fairly obvious that a team with the best strategists on the pitwall did account for Button and Wehrlein impeding his run as soon as he got out. It’s absolutely ignorant of us to think that they gave Kimi the optimal strategy. There is no way this kind of rookie mistake would be made with Vettel.

      I don’t see why people are surprised with this result though. When I saw Vettel close the gap to 1 second just before Kimi got a sudden pit message, I knew right then that they were going to swap positions. When I saw Kimi exit the pits with a Sauber in front, it just confirmed it. While I do feel bad for Kimi, I think he needed to up his game if Ferrari were to take him seriously. Unfortunately, the time to up his game expired as early as Barcelona.

      Vettel always takes preferential treatment when the championship is at stake and Ferrari always back 1 driver for a WDC, so I think we should expect more of the same as the season goes on. I just hope that this treatment given to Kimi backfires in some way to Ferrari. It would be great to see the relationship between Seb and him breakdown which would negatively affects Vettel’s WDC challenge. It would definitely spice up the season.

      1. @todfod

        “but instead they timed it that he encountered traffic on his outlaps and gave Sebastian clean air to increase the gap.”

        Not quite. Vettel hit traffic as well but his traffic pitted. So unless you’re saying Ferrari knew exactly when other teams were gonna pit their drivers your comment is complete rubbish. Again.

        “There is no way this kind of rookie mistake would be made with Vettel.”

        Like the strategic masterpieces they pulled last year and in Spain you mean?

        “Kimi could have helped himself by pulling away from Seb and creating a large enough lead”
        Is all you had to say and is all that there is to say.

        1. Like the strategic masterpieces they pulled last year and in Spain you mean?

          Let’s not even get started on the bad pit calls in the Kimi vs Vettel department. It’s a no contest.

      2. Ferrari’s questionable strategic decisions have been one of the main talking points of their campaign this year. It’s hardly something new, or restricted to Räikkönen.

        1. @CashNotClass: Ferrari’s strategies were fairly solid, this year. Don’t make the mistake to talk with hindsight…
          Every race upto now I’ve tried to place myself in the different teams strategy department, and more often than not, Ferrari did what I had as a first or second option. Same goes for Redbull and TorroRosso, but Mercedes and Williams seem to have a different set of logics.
          To be honest, I have less data on speed differences between tyres, so afterwards I had to agree even more…
          It’s easy to say VET would profit from an overcut, After it happened, but to do so before was tricky…

  13. Didn’t Hamilton make a statement that there won’t be any mind games between him and Vettel after the win in the last race?
    And now he says this.

    Frankly, I don’t mind these statements. The bromance between the two while it lasted was good but if things do get unpleasant, it will only spice up the championship.

    1. From his point of view he’s not playing mind games, he’s just telling the truth as it is that Ferrari is playing unfair against him by not letting their drivers fight while he has to fight Bottas. Same way, from his point of view the fact that Bottas had to let him through before was definitely not a case of Mercedes favoring him, because they had good reasons to give that order at that time.

      While this may sound like gratuitous Hamilton bashing, it’s actually just a human thing – all of us have been guilty of doing this repeatedly, and F1 drivers are no exception. We’re really good at rationalizing ourselves as the good guy and the others as the bad guys out to get us, justifying our own actions because we felt we had good reasons while condemning the same action by others by attributing them bad reasons. Unless someone we trust calls us out on it and forces us to confront our own hypocrisy it’s really hard to even notice how frequently we are of doing this.

    2. I’m glad the mind games have started. I didn’t expect any two championship contenders to maintain a bromance for long anyways, so I’m glad they got the niceties out of the way and we can start with psychological warfare till the end of the season.

      I’m really hoping for a war in the media that carries on to the race track. One racing incident between the two started it at Barcelona, and I’m sure the next one will increase the tension.

      1. I’m really hoping for a war in the media that carries on to the race track.

        I’m sure you are, since the media are completely in the tank for your favorite driver. Maybe the combination of Mercedes and the press can carry Hamilton to another title.

        1. Who’s my favourite driver?

          Maybe it could be that I just like psychological warfare and trash talk between the 2 championship contenders instead of the usual PR drivel.

          Maybe it’s nothing to do with bias/favouritism/conspiracies/the illuminati or whatever else you think my motives are?

    3. You’d think Hamilton would have learned by now mind games don’t work on Vettel. He tried it in 2010, 2012 and 2013. And in each of those years Vettel won the championship and Hamilton lost contention sooner and sooner.

    4. Just my opinion; I think he’s just offering up an observation. Not that much a criticism as a critique.

      He did, after all, go on to say that (paraphrasing here) that it may turn out that he may have to give Bottas the upper hand before the season is over.

      I’ve been watching F1 for almost 40 years; but I do believe ALL of these drivers know F1 better than I do. I don’t see mind games here. Not yet, at least.

      My 2 cents…

  14. Is he saying Ricciardo is now given number one status over Verstappen too??

    Was he also saying Verstappen and Raikkonen were given number one status over Ricciardo and Vettel after Spain last year too because their strategy turned out to be the better one??

  15. Indianapolis is a bogey circuit for Fernando (no matter F1 or indycar). He has never finished a race ahead of his teammate there. Even yesterday, he was behind his teammates and below his starting position throughout the race before his retirement.

    1. Strange, as I saw him leading for a good few laps as well as having the fastest average lap speed of the race. He may have been in a lower position than his starting position for a few laps, but, at the time was climbing back through the order again.

    2. I watched the whole race and your statement @Sumedh is simply not true. He was in front of his starting position most of the time including leading the 2nd most laps of anyone(27). He was fighting at the front with Hunter-Reay and Rossi and way in front of Sato. He was shuffled back when some slower cars(+Castroneves) got lucky with the pitstops, but he was coming back strong, up to 6th, with enough laps left to fight for the win, when his engine failed. So he was just unlucky that his engine was one of the 3(out of 18) Honda engines that blew up.

      So basically the same as on the road course 2001-2007. Always very fast but just unlucky in terms of results(agree with you on that)

    3. Someone who just saw the race results without actually watching the race. Don’t comment on something you don’t know.

    4. Oh dear.

    5. Yeah this statement is just incorrect. Though I’m not sure he could’ve won, Alonso had a great 500 before the engine went. Hails to Sato though, he was fantastic!

    6. My apologies for the second statement. I read a headline which said that Alonso spent most of the race in 8th place and his teammates were ahead of him.

      But the fact that Alonso is jinxed at Indianapolis still stands.

  16. Well, two times Bottas comes on top of LH this year. Hamilton is 2nd in the WDC standings but, if (…yes, I now luck was part of his quali result this time, but if) this bad trend for Lewis keeps happening (being his fault or not) and if Bottas keeps coming on top, Mercedes will need to reafirm a clear Nº 1 policy, as in Barhain, before LH feels “conspiracies” are going on against him. And remember also that Bottas is far in the points because his engine blew up in Spain.

  17. I’d never watched the Indy 500 before yesterday, and frankly, if Alonso wasnt racing I would not have tuned in. I’ve followed Indycar sporadically over the years, I cant say that I’ve actually sat and watched a full race until now.

    On the broadcasting side, F1 can learn much from Indycar. The packaging of the event for the consumption of general audience is top notch, it sells the sport really well. The high brow nature of the F1 broadcast may appeal to the hardcore fan, but you have to say that it doesnt really help the casual viewer. I’m not saying the Indycar broadcast “dumbs it down”, but it does get down to the basics a little more. Perhaps F1 needs to take this approach in order to attract newer audiences?

    I thoroughly enjoyed the 500. Alonso was brilliant, he was mixing it with seasoned veterans as if he’d been racing ovals his whole life. Shame that he couldn’t get to the end. There was little doubt that he would have been attacking for the lead at the end if he was still in the race.

    All in all, it was a win win for everyone (F1, Indycar and Alonso) except for Honda. This was meant to be a PR stunt for both Mclaren and Honda, and unfortunately, they’ve fallen flat on their faces!

    1. @jaymenon10 Honda fallen flat on their faces by winning the race? For 3rd time in 4 years at that? By occupying 6 of the top 8 places at the finish, and 14 out of the top 17 in qualy?

      Honda’s performance at Indy is way superior to Chevy. Mclaren Honda can only dream that Honda makes fast but a bit fragile engines for F1 as well, they’s take it with both hands. 3 engines failing out of 18 is a price definitely worth paying for killer performance.

      So I’m sure Honda and Mclaren will be satisfied with the PR side as well, even if Alonso’s engine failed. They proved beyond doubt that Honda can run at the front and even dominate

      1. Fernando in the blown honda is as big news as Sato’s indy win.

  18. Hamilton: “But who knows, it might go the other way – I might need to give Valtteri the upper hand.”

    That won’t happen since he’s comfortably ahead

  19. Lewis, sometimes it’s better not to talk if you don’t want to look like the biggest hypocrite. It’s not Ferrari who employs a clear #1 status.

    1. @lancelot

      It’s not Ferrari who employs a clear #1 status

      Yes it is. In fact there isn’t a team in the paddock that makes it more obvious than Ferrari.

      I really don’t think you can call Lewis a hypocrite regarding #1 driver status considering he lost the last WDC to his teammate last year. Maybe you weren’t watching Formula 1 since 2014, because it looked to me like Mercedes let their drivers race each other throughout a season over the past 3 seasons.

      A lot of people, including myself thought Mercedes had employed a clear No.1 driver status by hiring Valterri, but I’m proved wrong by seeing how he’s performing against Lewis, and the amount of focus given to Valterri during race weekends. Kimi on the other hand, is treated like he doesn’t really matter.

      This is just mind games from Lewis, but to call him a hypocrite is a bit of a stretch. I’m not a huge fan of Lewis, but he’s really raced his teammates in each of his seasons in Formula 1 without taking preferential treatment, which is something Vettel cannot boast of.

      1. Even Spain this year

        1. Or Bahrain.

          Yep, Hamilton really races Bottas hard. LMAO.

          1. I don’t think either of you understand the difference between maximising a team result and maximising a driver result.

      2. AntoineDeParis (@antoine-de-paris)
        29th May 2017, 9:55

        @todfod

        a funny poster you are lmao
        keep up the good work

        1. @antoine-de-paris

          Do you usually have a point or just go around trolling people?

      3. Dude… a no.2 status implies to let the no.1 driver get in front… AND NOT RACE SLOWER THAN IT’S POSSIBLE AND NOT BOTHER THE NO.1 DRIVER!! So, of course BOT is giving everything he can and it’s ridiculous to say that because he’s performing better than expected against HAM it’ means he’s not a no.2. We’ve all seen 3 times (2 times in a single race!!!) that he’s a no.2, letting HAM get in front without any fight. Actually, I think this was part of the “unspoken deal” to give him a Mercedes car: do not bother HAM in your 1st year with this team! Who thinks it’s a must to have some sort of written contract regarding no.1 and no.2 status is a child. If doesn’t respect the team wishes, it’s simple… he’ll go back to Williams. I think BOT will want to let HAM get the main laurels this year, take few victories and pole positions, many podiums… rather than racing a Williams for P10!

        1. Actually, I think this was part of the “unspoken deal” to give him a Mercedes car: do not bother HAM in your 1st year with this team! Who thinks it’s a must to have some sort of written contract regarding no.1 and no.2 status is a child

          Maybe backing some of these ridiculous statements with facts would help.

          As mentioned, Bottas moved over for Hamilton when he had no chance of challenging Sebastian for the win… Raikonnen was given a poor strategy to make sure the Ferrari 1-2 was in the order that Ferrari would have liked.

          1. Bottas moved over for Hamilton when he had no chance of challenging Sebastian for the win… Raikonnen was given a poor strategy to make sure the Ferrari 1-2 was in the order that Ferrari would have liked.

            Maybe backing some of these ridiculous statements with facts would help.

          2. So what are you trying to say? Bottas had the pace in Bahrain and Barcelona to win the race? Do you even watch F1?

      4. Vettel is Ferrari’s lead driver and Hamilton is Mercedes. Why wouldn’t it be, these guys have proven over the years to be the best bet for a championship challenge.

        Between Ferrari aiding Vettel’s race a bit and Mercedes having a driver (Bottas) so scared of challenging Hamilton that he’d rather crash into Räikkönen and Verstappen as in Spain I’ll take the first any day.

  20. Hamilton’s comments are laughable if you look at what else has happened this season.
    China – Vettel had to muscle his way past Raikkonen. Clearly no team orders
    Bahrain – Bottas clearly moves aside for Hamilton. Very clear team orders
    Spain – Again, Bottas moves aside for Hamilton, and later sacrifices his optimal strategy to hold Vettel up.

    If there’s any team that has a clear number 1, it’s Mercedes. If what we saw in Monaco was team orders, if only came about in response to what Mercedes are doing.
    Unfortunately, what we saw between the 2 Ferraris in Monaco wasn’t team orders. It was just Vettel being plain faster than Raikkonen, which out him in a position to win the race. Simple as.

    1. Disagree completely. I think you’re confusing the best result for the team with the best result for a particular driver.

      China -I actually wondered why Ferrari didn’t let Seb through past Kimi as they were on different strategies, and weren’t exactly racing each other. Maybe the 2nd race of the season was a little to soon to ask Kimi to get out of the way or maybe because Kimi was doing his best to get past Ricciardo in front of him. However, I do agree that Ferrari didn’t impose team orders on this one occasion.

      Bahrain – Bottas was massively off the pace and was struggling throughout the race. There wasn’t a chance in hell that he would have challenged Seb, but Lewis did have a chance. Mercedes asked Bottas to move over because if Lewis could beat Vettel, it would be the best result for the TEAM.

      Spain – Again Bottas was off the pace and wasn’t even racing for the win. Bottas had a large enough gap to Ricciardo behind him, so they could use him to hold up Sebastian without compromising Bottas’ race position. Again, it was ideal from a TEAM perspective to get Lewis the win.

      Monaco – Both Vettel and Raikonnen were racing for the win, with little or no threat from behind. The team would have a 1-2 result regardless of the finishing order of the drivers.. but they chose to pit Raikonnen at a terrible time and hand the advantage to Sebastian to run in clean air. If you think that a brilliant team of strategists came up with this idea as an optimal strategy to keep the lead driver in the lead, then you’ve got to be kidding yourself. They should have pitted Kimi earlier when he started losing pace relative to Sebastian, and they should have given him enough lead time to get in hot laps before he pitted. Instead, Kimi casually ask about when to pit and they ask him to come in on that particular lap. What a sham.

      1. Your anti-Vettel animus and pro-Hamilton bias is blinding you.

        they chose to pit Raikonnen at a terrible time and hand the advantage to Sebastian to run in clean air.

        No part of that is correct. They chose to pit Raikonnen in response to the pit stops of Red Bull and Mercedes – who, thanks to Kimi’s slowness and backing up of the field, were still in with a shot at first or second. Red Bull executed exactly what you are saying was a strategy intended to get their trailing driver ahead, and as a result of pitting their leading driver (Verstappen) first, ended up elevating Ricciardo into third place.

        Strangely enough, I don’t see anybody claiming with a straight face that this action on their part shows that Ricciardo is the “clear number one driver at Red Bull” and Verstappen is the “clear number two”, even though the logic of the argument is exactly the same in both cases.

        1. Man.. Let’s just agree to disagree.

          I believe if the roles were reversed (Vettel leading with a rapid Kimi behind), Ferrari would have pulled out all the stops to make sure Vettel remained in front. With Kimi… they just didn’t do their best.

          Maybe it’s bias or maybe I’m a lunatic, but I just don’t think they did everything they could.

      2. You’re so wrong and biased, mate, it’s clearly no use arguing with you.

      3. They should have pitted Kimi earlier when he started losing pace relative to Sebastian, and they should have given him enough lead time to get in hot laps before he pitted.

        I agree man, 34 laps of clear air and no safety cars wasn’t enough.

        1. @david-a

          I agree man, 34 laps of clear air and no safety cars wasn’t enough.

          He was told to pit on lap 34, not 32 or 33 when the Mercs and Red Bulls pitted.

    2. Xeque-mate!…

  21. Haas, thumbs up.

    Takuma Sato, great job.
    Max Chilton you punched above your weight.
    Alonso, a bit more luck you’d be fighting for the win.

  22. Agree with Haas, F1 should not be Socialism.
    F1 should be like the American Dream where the paper boy can work his up to own the newspaper, and where only hard work determines your success.
    Away with these archaic and aristocratic like rules where the established parties are privileged.

    Yes Spicer Haas is right; but not sure if his commander in chief agrees with what he really said.

  23. Mercedes are sliding this year and Hamilton will be unloading a mouthful but it’s very potty and kettleish.

    As a fan of Kimi, Vettel was much faster IMHO. You don’t need live timing, visually you could see the difference but if you can’t then it’s just pure prejudice and self denial.

    Alonso’s Indy drive was definitely credible and worth watching.

    Not easy to be a pure racing fan. Too much fanboys spewing controversies.

  24. Lol, having watched at the Replay now, I just grimase at Hamilton statement.

    Kimi was given priority on strategy, it was his race to loose. Pit stop was ok, no hasitations, he was called in when he inquired, why are they not pitting, and finally… If Kimi was comftably faster and far infront of Vettel none of this would happen.

    What team orders? Team orders were last year, team orders were twice this year.

    Hamilton just fails to match his talent with any class. Perhaps he is trying to push his team in to more team orders. I bet behind closed doors he is pushing hard.

    Meanwhile Vettel and Kimi are crushing them with a 1-2.

  25. Hamilton is getting boring with his usual statements, you are getting spanked by Vettel and can’t even control your teammate pal. I know it’s not easy to accept Vettel will be 5 x World Champion.

  26. The moves are successful after the fact.
    It takes very good timing and a bit of good fortune which were not available this weekend. The cars are a lot wider now. Turning into a corner starts a bit much later in Monaco, to get more clearance, which gives the illusion of a gap.

  27. Anyone noticed Vasseur in Renault’s pits? Sitting alongside Prost, what is the situation there now? Didn’t they parted ways completely?

  28. vettel was simply faster, if he come earlier, it would be the problem. what should he do? drive slower? but no simple overtaking, what happened more times between hamilton and bottas. the mercedes supported much more hamilton, than the ferrari vettel.

  29. Hamilton is going ridiculous as usual…

    At least at Ferrari we still didn’t see Raikkonen set aside and letting pass Vettel without the minimum resistance…

    Lewis Prima Dona Hamilton strikes again…

  30. So far it’s clear that only Mercedes used team orders.If Ferrari did or didn’t do something to put Vettel in front is debatable.In China Vettel lost time chasing Kimi so that doesn’t really support Ham’s statements considering he benefited from quite a few team orders this year.

    1. There were no team orders to me.
      In fact the pitstops were 0.3s different, not such a big deal as some want to point out.
      Sebastian was in control the whole race. He sat 2 secs behind Kimi on the early laps, he closed the gap to within one second before the pit, and when Kimmi pitted, he produced the two fastest laps of the race.
      He created a gap from then on, and after the SC.
      He just had the pace all weekend, only beaten on qualy.

  31. I can see why Ferrari are doing what they have always done which is to favour one driver over the other. It’s been their policy for years so it should not come as any surprise.

    However, in this situation, with Kimi having his first pole for 9 years, I think it might have been more wise of Ferrari to give both drivers the best possible chance of winning. It would have been quite good publicity for them for Kimi to win a race after all this time and it may have helped the team in the long run. Seb may need to rely on Kimi’s assistance at some point later in the season and it may not be forthcoming! Especially if Kimi thinks his contract is not going to be renewed.

    I can see though that if they had not given Seb every advantage, there would have been a section of the media and fans who would have said this was foolish by Ferrari in view of Hamilton’s position and the drivers title race.

    1. yes, they gave the chance to both drivers. vettel should go slower, or what?

    2. “I can see though that if they had not given Seb every advantage, there would have been a section of the media and fans who would have said this was foolish by Ferrari in view of Hamilton’s position and the drivers title race.”

      They did not “give Seb every advantage”. if you want to see what giving a driver “every advantage” over his teammate looks like, you simply have to look at the position Hamilton enjoys within Mercedes. When Ferrari start treating Raikkonen the way Mercedes treats Bottas you can say that they are giving Vettel every advantage.

      Not only do we NOT see reporters demanding that Mercedes explain and defend their pro-Hamilton actions, we see the exact opposite – we see reporters fretting that Mercedes are not favoring Hamilton even more than they have been. The press are acting as part of Team Hamilton, not as impartial providers of information.

    3. Hmmm what did Kimi do 30+ laps on 1st place not enough time to make gap on Vettel. He had it all in his hands and he fail.

      1. My view is in no way biased to Hamilton. Despite what some people see as the Hamilton bias in the press I think it is clear to most neutral observers that Ferrari are giving an advantage to Seb even if it not “every advantage”. Some people think there is no advantage being given to Seb but I think this is clearly not the case.

        Not that I blame Ferrari for this in the circumstances. I just think they may come to regret it later on.

        1. I think it is clear to most neutral observers that Ferrari are giving an advantage to Seb even if it not “every advantage”.

          It must be a very subtle and cunning advantage, given that people who feel this way have such difficulty in pointing out exactly how the advantage is being conferred.

          Just curious – are you equally concerned that Mercedes might later on come to regret giving Hamilton an advantage over Bottas?

  32. When Hammy starts getting beaten he gets nasty and starts taking cheap shots at his rival. He was so angry with Rosberg that he was still taking nasty shots at him in this years pre-season.

    Ferrari have let their drivers race fair and square all year. Out of Ferrari and Mercedes, the only team that has issued team orders is Mercedes. Multiple times they’ve forced Bottas to move over for Hamilton. Clearly Hamilton is being favoured at Mercedes.

    Hamilton TWICE needed team orders pass Bottas in Bahrain.

    Hamilton won in Spain because Bottas sacrificed his own strategy by holding up Vettel for several laps with aggressive blocking. You would have thought Bottas was fighting Vettel for the win the way he was desperately trying to stay ahead of Vettel, not out of sequence on a different strategy.

    If Hamilton is going to claim that Ferrari favoured Vettel with strategy in Monaco, then let’s not forget that Hamilton was favoured on strategy in Bahrain despite trailing Bottas on track — as well issued team orders TWICE telling Bottas to move over for their team leader.

    1. The simple question to ask concerning the comparison of Bahrain and Monaco is, was the leading driver’s race compromised by team orders/strategy?
      Was Botta’s race in Bahrain , or even I Spain, compromised in any way by moving over for Hamilton?
      Was RAI’s race compromised by the team strategy in Monaco?
      If you can truthfully answer these questions, I guess you’d be ok.

      1. “The simple question to ask concerning the comparison of Bahrain and Monaco is, was the leading driver’s race compromised by team orders/strategy?”

        That’s irrelevant. It’s about championship points. Bottas is (was) in a championship fight with Hamilton until the team made it clear he was to be Hammy’s lackey.

        1. So, let me rephrase the question. Had Botta’s championship points been compromised by team orders in any of the races this year?
          The same question goes for RAI in Monaco.
          While you ponder these, bear in mind that Botta’s race pace was slow in Bahrain and he would have been overtaken by Lewis in a faster car with faster tires. He was only asked to move over so as not to delay Lewis. That’s seems to be obvious to most people.

          1. And what about Bahrain when Hamilton was saying he will give back 2nd place if he don’t overtake Vettel?

          2. While you ponder these, bear in mind that Botta’s race pace was slow in Bahrain and he would have been overtaken by Lewis in a faster car with faster tires. He was only asked to move over so as not to delay Lewis. That’s seems to be obvious to most people.

            If Hammy can get close enough to Bottas, then he can pass him.

            Hammy needed Mercedes management interference to pass Bottas TWICE. Also, was given the superior tyre strategy to Bottas despite Bottas leading Hammy.

            Hammy is quick to accept team interference when it suits him, but less keen when it helps his teammate.

            As Hammy said in Hungry 2014 regarding team orders: “I was in the same race as him. If I’d let him past he’d have had the opportunity to pull away. I was very, very shocked that the team would ask me to do that to be able to better his position. I wasn’t going to ease off and lose ground to Fernando [Alonso] or Daniel [Ricciardo] to let him overtake. I can’t express the pain I feel over the issues I’ve had in the last couple of races. It’s very, very difficult to swallow.”

            This wasn’t even for direct position. Hamilton had blown his racing by spinning off and scraping the barriers, but refused to move over for his teammate who was on a completely different strategy. It cost Rosberg and Mercedes the chance of winning that day.

            What’s changed?

  33. In Bahrain Hamilton ask team to get team order for Bottas so he can try catch Vettel for 1st place, but if he fail he will back 2nd place to Bottas. Well that didn’t happen one more great play from Hamilton. You can watch on sky f1 report
    https://youtu.be/qSNkZjKp3TY

  34. I fail to understand all the hype around this subject. Hamilton should look into his own troubled weekend, he was clearly beaten by his teammate (and no.2 driver, clearly no doubt about that). Looks like he wants to throw dust in everybody’s eyes not to see what is clearly there to be seen, when Hamilton is under pressure he makes mistakes, and he always finds a way to point the blame somewhere else. Stop blaming the word around and take a good look in the mirror, it may save your season, this would be my advice to Hamilton.

    1. I meant world around

  35. I find something fishy about the results but I might be wrong.

    The thing is Ferrari have been extremely hungry and have been waiting for a Championship title for a decade and they will do anything to keep Sergio Marchionne happy and calm. We all heard the man speak about how unhappy he is that Ferrari were number two and number three in some of the seasons.

    The development battle this year between the Mercs and the Ferraris are close. We will have no idea if Ferrari can keep up with the Mercs updates later during the season, so they are not taking any chances.

    In the weekend Ferrari seems to balance the car and manage the tyres better than the Mercs and Mercs seem to be better in terms of strategy overall.

    So my guess is Ferrari are not taking any chances, they want to win at any costs. Team orders are nothing new in F1. This time they might have done it with a natural touch , who knows !

  36. Congrats to Jenson “Block me in the pits, I flip you on track!” Button – F1’s new (old) bad boy!

    You make never serve it, but you’ll always have a 3 place grid penalty in our hearts.

  37. Not so long ago Lewis Hamilton claimed that he relished the prospect of going toe to toe with Sebastian Vettel. Vying for a championship with a man, who, in an F1 career as long as Hamilton’s, has already claimed four world titles.
    Before I am skinned alive by those who claim that Vettel can only win driving the best car, look at Hamilton’s machine since the start of the 2014 season. This is the first season in three years where the threat to Lewis has come from outside Mercedes, from a team and driver that are very capable.
    Hamilton is a fantastic driver, I don’t deny that. However, Hamilton has looked far from comfortable this season. In Valteri Bottas, many expected a man who would be no challenge at all to the triple world champion. The young Finn, with true professionism and class, has already won a grands prix and beat Lewis in Monaco in qualifying. This coming off the back of losing the championship last year to Nico Rosberg, a driver who many ranked as inferior in terms of talent to Lewis.
    Did Ferrari want Vettel to win Monaco? Of course they did, anyway that would advance him in front of Lewis Hamilton to the tune of a full race win in points. You would have to be crazy to think otherwise. But Vettel won due to the laps he ran prior to pitting, this is what made the difference and this is how he beat Kimi Raikkonen. Much like Schumacher could back in the day, Sebastian drove the laps at the lap times required to beat his team mate.
    It was hard not to feel sorry of Raikkonen. He drove fantastic all weekend and should take heart from that performance. If Ferrari were questioning the Finn’s hunger and desire behind the wheel, they got their answer at Monaco. That was the Kimi from 2005, not the Kimi of more recent years. If that persists, Ferrari will be smiling from ear to ear, and Hamilton may have more that just one red car to worry about.

  38. Mr. Hamilton gfys.

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.
If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.