2021 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix - Yas Marina, Dec 10 - 12

[e30ernest]

I think the error was not to redflag it as soon as it happened, that, and that Mercedes played much too safe of a strategy considering their options, I looked a lot at the F1-tempo graphs of how Lewis car performed during quali and race (and Maxes car), and the last lap especially, I'd suggest you also look at it, I'm amazed how he could do what he did on nearly spent hards, talent, of course, but that car had plenty more to give not just in quali, but also in the first part of the race, and they chose not to use it, because it seemed they have it covered, Max was barely making a dent in the 17sec lead with new hards vs 25lap old ones, that tells a lot

I read your original post about the strategy (just so many messages to sift through so I hadn't been able to react to it), but I do think while your reasoning is sound, you are basing your strategy with the benefit of hindsight. During the moment, Mercedes' strategy was perfectly fine. In fact, despite the first VSC, they were able to maintain a good gap to Max.

Even what you state here (running conservatively), when you are on the lead like that at the end of the season with your car and its components having as much mileage as they would have running conservatively and just fast enough to maintain a gap is good. You minimize your risk, you ensure your machinery will make it to the end, and you give your opponent just enough hope to try to catch you and burn out their tires.

They were on route to win. They just got absolutely unlucky with Latifi's crash along with the absurd implementation of the SC towards the end.

If they knew Masi was going to do that with the SC, I guarantee you they would have stopped. If they knew what we knew now, they would have gone faster. But that's the benefit of hindsight.

[kenshi_blind]

If you believe for a second that, that race would've been restarted the exact way it had been, when Lewis would've been on new soft/meds in 2nd place, and MV on very used hards, I have a bridge to sell you

You're making a ridiculous argument that's contradicted by what happened this year. If Verstapen was the chosen one then:
1. Lewis would've received a much bigger penalty for Silverstone
2. Verstapen would've been allowed to keep the first place from the overtake in Jeddah.
3. Lewis would've been asked to give the place back after the first lap incident on Sunday.

If we're in the realm of stupid conspiracy theories, Max would've had a better story considering the above than Lewis

the fact that you managed to write these points with a straight face is

[DiogoBrand]

So many posters do not seem to get that this is not about Lewis v Max or Horner V Woolf, and it does not matter who was leading and who was 5 cars back, or what happened during the season.
The whole nub of this is that a race and championship was decided on the whim of an official who had written rules and procedures and he decided to ignore them for a lap of TV excitement.

We all know Merc is not going to get anywhere and now way is the race or championship going to be changed but the procedure has to be.
This time it was RBR and Max gaining at the expense of Merc and Lewis, if it happens again to could equally well be Mclaren and Ferrari in those roles, or any other team.

The only possible outcome is Massi will be 'promoted' to a different job and a new set of procedures and rules will be introduced for next year on.

Please understand this is not a driver and team v another driver and team this is fundamental to the fairness of sport for the future.

Perfect description.
The only way to disagree with you is if I'm biased towards or against one driver or team.

[Ryar]

If you believe for a second that, that race would've been restarted the exact way it had been, when Lewis would've been on new soft/meds in 2nd place, and MV on very used hards, I have a bridge to sell you

You're making a ridiculous argument that's contradicted by what happened this year. If Verstapen was the chosen one then:
1. Lewis would've received a much bigger penalty for Silverstone
2. Verstapen would've been allowed to keep the first place from the overtake in Jeddah.
3. Lewis would've been asked to give the place back after the first lap incident on Sunday.

If we're in the realm of stupid conspiracy theories, Max would've had a better story considering the above than Lewis

the fact that you managed to write these points with a straight face is

One only need a cross face to write conspiracy theories about Masi's decision.

[DrDejan]

I agree in that it was the wrong decision (and have stated so), and anyway whatever the decision Masi was making, he should not have reverted it within half a lap (although I'd be masi-vely ...dissapointed... had he stuck with no overtaking of backmarkers). Lewis deserved to win the race. But things transpired as they did, and errors are made in sports. What I think is 'wrong' is the narrative that the title was handed in a singular event omitting the whole rest of the season, or that it was somehow an intentional biased decision, and that the championship has a fake winner because of it. If the incident had not happened and Lewis was crowned champion, I'd also argue that, in the end, the championship was influenced by stewarding decisions that played into Mercedes hands early season. But I don't expect myself to call Hamilton a fake champion or call for an overturn of the result because FIA decisions influenced the outcome. I'd call the championship tainted, as I do now. But it won't change the outcome.

And yeah, I want to see Hamilton with more titles than Schumacher, too. But I guess it's too late to overturn '94

Yeah I do not think it was done with intent (Massi intentionally rigging the championship) too. It was a sincere effort to make the end of the season exciting, but it was done in a very ham-fisted way.

I understand where you are coming from regarding treating the season as a whole vs seeing the result of the season based on this last race. However, that's what this race was set up to be. It was marketed as such and it was treated as such. Also, since this is the last race of the season which had the 2 main rivals tied, it was the race where the winner took all and therefore had the biggest impact of the season.

Masi made “lapped cars will not overtake the safety car” decision which in hindsight was the most aligned with the regulations. Why he changed his mind? What condition has changed? Did he get a call from above? Did he change it to please a certain team principal or to be against another?
To sport observers it’s important to understand if the game was fair or rigged. And, more importantly if the sport allows for fair competition.
To me, the last lap decision was biased and promoted uneven playing field. And I’m not talking about Max and Lewis. I’m talking about Ricciardo, Sainz and others not getting the same opportunity to race as someone else. And this is not a lonely example. It happened throughout the season when other drivers were penalized for actions that were allowed to the title competitors.

[DChemTech]

That would create suspicion. Therefore they had a Mercedes powered car do it for them.

Yeah...maybe Toto asked for it as Verstappen was catching Hamilton, and Toto thought that the race would be stopped !
At the end of the day, it was serious mismanagement of Mercedes that caused the problem. They were out thunk ! if they mirrored RBR, they would have won.

How could they mirror redbull and not lost track position?

That was a gamble they had to make. At the VSC stage, they could afford to lose track position with the overspeed they had, although I can imagine they wanted to avoid a direct duel, and they were clearly quick enough to stay ahead were it not for the SC in the end.

In the SC stage, well, there were in essence 4 scenarios:
- Both stay out, LH likely to win (despite older tires, Hamilton was lapping at similar pace)
- MV goes in, LH stays out. MV win if restart, LH win if not.
- LH goes in, MV stays out. LH win if restart, MV win if not.
- Both go in, LH likely to win on newer tires.

The only scenario in my view where losing track position was a big risk was if the race was not restarted - if it was restarted and MV had track position by staying out while LH changed tires, LH should be able to overtake. And I believe that the chance of no restart was limited given the desires to finish it on track. So, I think it was the wrong call to go for track position: the only scenario where I expect it would have been decisive (LH goes in, MV stays out, no restart) was unlikely to happen.

[Big Tea]

So many posters do not seem to get that this is not about Lewis v Max or Horner V Woolf, and it does not matter who was leading and who was 5 cars back, or what happened during the season.
The whole nub of this is that a race and championship was decided on the whim of an official who had written rules and procedures and he decided to ignore them for a lap of TV excitement.

We all know Merc is not going to get anywhere and now way is the race or championship going to be changed but the procedure has to be.
This time it was RBR and Max gaining at the expense of Merc and Lewis, if it happens again to could equally well be Mclaren and Ferrari in those roles, or any other team.

The only possible outcome is Massi will be 'promoted' to a different job and a new set of procedures and rules will be introduced for next year on.

Please understand this is not a driver and team v another driver and team this is fundamental to the fairness of sport for the future.

Perfect description.
The only way to disagree with you is if I'm biased towards or against one driver or team.

But even those who are have to realise that it could easily be the other way around next time.
Teams have to know the expected outcome to plan the race.

[KeiKo403]

Edit: We made it, 150! Eat that Silverstone!

Ironically we’ve beaten that threads page record due to a number Max fans continuing to bring it up.
Max won, RedBull sang the song.
Some Max fans can obviously see the race ended in uncompetitive fashion and again (some, not all) Max fans are now bringing up old incidents such as Silverstone to justify why Max should remain champion regardless of how the last race was [mis]conducted.

@DChemTech I’m not saying this is you

[holeindalip]

Doesn’t rule 15.3 allow the ability to be manipulated by external sources even outside of the teams screaming in his ear. What were the betting odds for this past weekend?

[cooken]

That would create suspicion. Therefore they had a Mercedes powered car do it for them.

Yeah...maybe Toto asked for it as Verstappen was catching Hamilton, and Toto thought that the race would be stopped !
At the end of the day, it was serious mismanagement of Mercedes that caused the problem. They were out thunk ! if they mirrored RBR, they would have won.

Please elaborate on how they would have won by mirroring RB.

Also, any strategy decision made by Merc OR RB, have NOTHING to do with the race director flouting the rules. Frankly this is a bit troubling coming from a mod.

[saviour stivala]

The position car/driver number 44 found itself in was all of Mercedes team chose, they had all the chance to mirror RBR and pit car /driver number 44, but they chose not too (we would have lost track pisitions) is what numberr 44 was told when he asked why they didn't called him in. RBR took the risk, Mercedes did not.

[Tom145145]

Yeah...maybe Toto asked for it as Verstappen was catching Hamilton, and Toto thought that the race would be stopped !
At the end of the day, it was serious mismanagement of Mercedes that caused the problem. They were out thunk ! if they mirrored RBR, they would have won.

How could they mirror redbull and not lost track position?

That was a gamble they had to make. At the VSC stage, they could afford to lose track position with the overspeed they had, although I can imagine they wanted to avoid a direct duel, and they were clearly quick enough to stay ahead were it not for the SC in the end.

In the SC stage, well, there were in essence 4 scenarios:
- Both stay out, LH likely to win (despite older tires, Hamilton was lapping at similar pace)
- MV goes in, LH stays out. MV win if restart, LH win if not.
- LH goes in, MV stays out. LH win if restart, MV win if not.
- Both go in, LH likely to win on newer tires.

The only scenario in my view where losing track position was a big risk was if the race was not restarted - if it was restarted and MV had track position by staying out while LH changed tires, LH should be able to overtake. And I believe that the chance of no restart was limited given the desires to finish it on track. So, I think it was the wrong call to go for track position: the only scenario where I expect it would have been decisive (LH goes in, MV stays out, no restart) was unlikely to happen.

Max will always do the opposite so we can discount 2 option for consideration. If Lewis pitted I don’t think any backmarkers would’ve gotten in the way of the top 2, but there would be lapped cars to move normally. This works if you can be certain the race will resume, which in normal circumstances it won’t that late in a race with that type of accident. I can see your logic and I don’t disagree with the scenarios, but they are not all equal in probability. If you add the likelihood of either backmarker traffic for max or ending under the SC the best bet was not to pit.

[Big Tea]

How could they mirror redbull and not lost track position?

That was a gamble they had to make. At the VSC stage, they could afford to lose track position with the overspeed they had, although I can imagine they wanted to avoid a direct duel, and they were clearly quick enough to stay ahead were it not for the SC in the end.

In the SC stage, well, there were in essence 4 scenarios:
- Both stay out, LH likely to win (despite older tires, Hamilton was lapping at similar pace)
- MV goes in, LH stays out. MV win if restart, LH win if not.
- LH goes in, MV stays out. LH win if restart, MV win if not.
- Both go in, LH likely to win on newer tires.

The only scenario in my view where losing track position was a big risk was if the race was not restarted - if it was restarted and MV had track position by staying out while LH changed tires, LH should be able to overtake. And I believe that the chance of no restart was limited given the desires to finish it on track. So, I think it was the wrong call to go for track position: the only scenario where I expect it would have been decisive (LH goes in, MV stays out, no restart) was unlikely to happen.

Max will always do the opposite so we can discount 2 option for consideration. If Lewis pitted I don’t think any backmarkers would’ve gotten in the way of the top 2, but there would be lapped cars to move normally. This works if you can be certain the race will resume, which in normal circumstances it won’t that late in a race with that type of accident. I can see your logic and I don’t disagree with the scenarios, but they are not all equal in probability. If you add the likelihood of either backmarker traffic for max or ending under the SC the best bet was not to pit.

There is still the fact that if both cars go out, Max wins. So with Hamilton chasing down Max he would have to take far more care to be sure he has a clean and clear overtake and get well out of harms way for following corners or Max could take a 50/50 (or even 95/5 ) dive and not be bothered about the outcome. A much harder job than reeling him in
(NO I am not saying Max WOULD play dirty, just that it has to be considered by both cars)

[barten]

So many posters do not seem to get that this is not about Lewis v Max or Horner V Woolf, and it does not matter who was leading and who was 5 cars back, or what happened during the season.
The whole nub of this is that a race and championship was decided on the whim of an official who had written rules and procedures and he decided to ignore them for a lap of TV excitement.

We all know Merc is not going to get anywhere and now way is the race or championship going to be changed but the procedure has to be.
This time it was RBR and Max gaining at the expense of Merc and Lewis, if it happens again to could equally well be Mclaren and Ferrari in those roles, or any other team.

The only possible outcome is Massi will be 'promoted' to a different job and a new set of procedures and rules will be introduced for next year on.

Please understand this is not a driver and team v another driver and team this is fundamental to the fairness of sport for the future.

Exactly. I used to watch F1 with my dad during the Schumacher years, but lost interest when he retired. Netflix got me to realize what a great sport it is with components of technincal innovation, people management, and drivers that perform at incredible levels each weekend. This season was so close that every inch on and off the track mattered. So I am not surprised that (as in any other sport) refereeing has the potential to decide a championship. However, I am very disappointed by the fact that with how race control is organized right now, the main goal of the race director is to put on a "show". For this to be a proper competition (and not some expensive/fancy version of WWE), rules and penalties must be applied consistently, even if that means that a race possibly ends without a spectacle.

We've had enough "show" this year (flexi-wings, 51G, El Plan, Turbo Engine). What we need is a bit more focus on the sport. If then the title fight is not interesting enough, why not spend more time on the rest of the field? There is plenty of stuff missed by the cameras this year.

[DChemTech]

How could they mirror redbull and not lost track position?

That was a gamble they had to make. At the VSC stage, they could afford to lose track position with the overspeed they had, although I can imagine they wanted to avoid a direct duel, and they were clearly quick enough to stay ahead were it not for the SC in the end.

In the SC stage, well, there were in essence 4 scenarios:
- Both stay out, LH likely to win (despite older tires, Hamilton was lapping at similar pace)
- MV goes in, LH stays out. MV win if restart, LH win if not.
- LH goes in, MV stays out. LH win if restart, MV win if not.
- Both go in, LH likely to win on newer tires.

The only scenario in my view where losing track position was a big risk was if the race was not restarted - if it was restarted and MV had track position by staying out while LH changed tires, LH should be able to overtake. And I believe that the chance of no restart was limited given the desires to finish it on track. So, I think it was the wrong call to go for track position: the only scenario where I expect it would have been decisive (LH goes in, MV stays out, no restart) was unlikely to happen.

Max will always do the opposite so we can discount 2 option for consideration. If Lewis pitted I don’t think any backmarkers would’ve gotten in the way of the top 2, but there would be lapped cars to move normally. This works if you can be certain the race will resume, which in normal circumstances it won’t that late in a race with that type of accident. I can see your logic and I don’t disagree with the scenarios, but they are not all equal in probability. If you add the likelihood of either backmarker traffic for max or ending under the SC the best bet was not to pit.

Indeed, the decisive aspect was, will the race restart or will it not. Based on what was at stake and the tendency of 'let them race', it was my full expectation at the time the incident happened that they would restart, at least provided it was possible to clean the track in the given timespan. That was the gamble that teams had to make, and yes, it was more difficult for MB than RB due to their lead position, that's without doubt.
But as to the often-seen remark "Please elaborate on how they would have won by mirroring RB.", well, my answer would be that in case of a restart they were likely to win if they'd pitted regardless of what RB did - the uncertainty was in the restart taking place, not in whether or not they had track position if it did. Track position was not king on this track, at least not in a Mercedes.