F1 2025 - Previous Rounds

[Vader]

To me it still feels like Lando wanted to see what Oscar’s side did first, he knows Oscar has pretty much said all he cares about is finishing before him.
That’s why imo Lando suggested for Oscar to go first to cover Leclerc even though it wasn’t needed.
Lando also covered himself by saying that he didn’t want to be undercut, he wanted his cake and to eat it too.
“I want all the benefits of pitting first, whilst getting the benefits of pitting second”

Lando didn't suggest it to cover Leclerc. That was a fiction concocted by the Sky broadcast crew.

Lando wanted Oscar to go first in case there was a safety car, which would have given Oscar a gain and allowed him to overtake Lando.

Leclerc was never a threat to Oscar's position, unless Oscar had a horrible pit stop (as Lando did). At the rate he was closing, he wouldn't have threatened Oscar's position for another 10 laps - and there were only 8 laps remaining in the race.

Lando was entirely within his rights to ensure that he wasn't undercut by Oscar - and the team would have been right to ask Oscar to redress in the extremely unlikely case that this happened. In the end, Lando copped a slow pit stop, which had nothing to do with undercutting.

 

[RWnBluey]

He agreed to come in second as long as they prevented the undercut (which can be clearly heard on the team radio as Norris is coming out of pit lane - advising Oscar that they don't start racing until Lando comes out of the pits, in front). The reason for it doesn't matter, that was the agreement.

Now, whether that was what had previously been agreed to is up for debate (and it seems like maybe it wasn't). Hence Oscar's comments about needing to debrief about it after the race.

Can we please stop misusing the term “undercut”? An undercut is a deliberate strategy to create a tyre offset and pass the car ahead. What happened in Monza wasn’t that at all. A slow pit stop is simply (say it with me) a racing incident. Lando would’ve come out behind Oscar regardless of whether he stopped first or second. The pit sequence had zero relevance to the outcome.

And on these supposed “agreements” - if McLaren were so intent on honouring their no-undercut deal (which, as just established, didn’t even apply), then where was the consistency with slow stops being “a part of racing” which, based off Oscar’s comments, was previously agreed upon by the team. That “agreement” suddenly didn’t count.

Here’s the reality - Lando got preference and chose the second stop. The team wanted him in first, but he told them to pit Oscar instead. It was never about covering Leclerc. Lando wanted to box second to protect himself if a safety car dropped between stops. It was a gamble - one that didn’t pay off.

He wanted all of the upside and none of the downside, and when the downside came, McLaren decided to invoke “fairness,” which was complete nonsense. As Toto put it after the race, they’ve now set a precedent that will be very hard to undo.

 

[Carn The Berries]

You're aware Oscar legally had to pit at some stage..?
He was on 97% race length tires - why should he forever be waiting while Lando plays the strategy game (strategy being he gets to hedge his bet both ways)

Any time Oscar has the lead in the future, he should simply not pit until final few laps- and demand Lando not be allowed to pit until he chooses when he wants to do.

- that is literally what occurred

He didn't HAVE to wait for Lando to do anything. After the issues they had earlier in the season with split strategies, he made a conscious CHOICE to match Lando's strategy so that there weren't any surprises.

There was nothing stopping him coming in early and going onto a fresh set of hard tyres. He CHOSE not to. As it turns out, that may have actual been a better strategy, Max made up plenty of time in his early laps after he came in.

My goodness the mental gymnastics in this thread is unbelievable.

 

[Carn The Berries]

Can we please stop misusing the term “undercut”? An undercut is a deliberate strategy to create a tyre offset and pass the car ahead. What happened in Monza wasn’t that at all. A slow pit stop is simply (say it with me) a racing incident. Lando would’ve come out behind Oscar regardless of whether he stopped first or second. The pit sequence had zero relevance to the outcome.

And on these supposed “agreements” - if McLaren were so intent on honouring their no-undercut deal (which, as just established, didn’t even apply), then where was the consistency with slow stops being “a part of racing” which, based off Oscar’s comments, was previously agreed upon by the team. That “agreement” suddenly didn’t count.

Here’s the reality - Lando got preference and chose the second stop. The team wanted him in first, but he told them to pit Oscar instead. It was never about covering Leclerc. Lando wanted to box second to protect himself if a safety car dropped between stops. It was a gamble - one that didn’t pay off.

He wanted all of the upside and none of the downside, and when the downside came, McLaren decided to invoke “fairness,” which was complete nonsense. As Toto put it after the race, they’ve now set a precedent that will be very hard to undo.

I'm not disputing that at all, and clearly that is something that Oscar wanted to clarify after the race.

Whether or not the slow pit stop fit the technical definition of undercut or not is irrelevant. The team clearly believed that they had assured Lando that the pit order wouldn't impact his on-track position, they then made the call that the slow pit stop compromised that assurance.

As I have already said, whether that was the agreement before the race seems to be a matter of contention. In Oscar's mind it clearly wasn't.

 

[RWnBluey]

I'm not disputing that at all, and clearly that is something that Oscar wanted to clarify after the race.

Whether or not the slow pit stop fit the technical definition of undercut or not is irrelevant. The team clearly believed that they had assured Lando that the pit order wouldn't impact his on-track position, they then made the call that the slow pit stop compromised that assurance.

As I have already said, whether that was the agreement before the race seems to be a matter of contention. In Oscar's mind it clearly wasn't.

“Whether or not the slow pit stop fit the technical definition of undercut or not is irrelevant”
- It absolutely is relevant. You, for some reason, just choose not to see it.

“assured Lando that the pit order wouldn't impact his on-track position” - as pointed out in my previous post the pit order didn’t, in fact, impact his on-track position at all.

 

[FR0GGY]

Lando didn't suggest it to cover Leclerc. That was a fiction concocted by the Sky broadcast crew.

Lando wanted Oscar to go first in case there was a safety car, which would have given Oscar a gain and allowed him to overtake Lando.

Leclerc was never a threat to Oscar's position, unless Oscar had a horrible pit stop (as Lando did). At the rate he was closing, he wouldn't have threatened Oscar's position for another 10 laps - and there were only 8 laps remaining in the race.

Lando was entirely within his rights to ensure that he wasn't undercut by Oscar - and the team would have been right to ask Oscar to redress in the extremely unlikely case that this happened. In the end, Lando copped a slow pit stop, which had nothing to do with undercutting.

I’m not sure he gets to ask for no undercut if he chooses to go second.
That doesn’t seem fair to me, if you are ahead you get the benefit of first choice strategy but you don’t get all the benefits surely.
(I’m not talking about the redressing here)

 

[Vader]

I’m not sure he gets to ask for no undercut if he chooses to go second.
That doesn’t seem fair to me, if you are ahead you get the benefit of first choice strategy but you don’t get all the benefits surely.
(I’m not talking about the redressing here)

He had a 3.5 second lead, and would never have been undercut anyway. The tyre degradation on that track was so low that the improvement from running on new tyres just wasn't that great.

Lando wanted to have his cake and eat it too. The team wants the WDC to be decided on track and not by team strategy, hence why any undercuts now have to be redressed. But what happened on Sunday night was not an undercut situation.

 

[Forward Press]

Have we ever had nearly 900 posts for an Italian GP thread before?

I know the Ricciardo win would have had a few but this is something else - heated discussion two days later.

 

[Forward Press]

He had a 3.5 second lead, and would never have been undercut anyway. The tyre degradation on that track was so low that the improvement from running on new tyres just wasn't that great.

Lando wanted to have his cake and eat it too. The team wants the WDC to be decided on track and not by team strategy, hence why any undercuts now have to be redressed. But what happened on Sunday night was not an undercut situation.

True - but this is their redress for what they believe is an unfair situation. It's not an undercut by the common meaning of the term (ie pitting first to take advantage of fresher tires for at least a lap in the hope of leapfrogging the car in front), but the effect was the same - the car behind now in front of the car ahead after they pitted a lap earlier. So McLaren thought that Lando didn't 'deserve' to be overtaken due to their own faulty wheel gun, hence the swap.

For the record, I think the swap should not have been made and it creates yet another precedent that might put McLaren in a pickle again if a similar scenario arises later. Slow pit stops are a part of F1 imo, just like your engine blowing up or a puncture or a safety car at the right (or wrong) time - that's racing.

Similar, Oscar made the error in Silverstone this year under safety car, he should live with it and McLaren correctly did not order a swap. And in another context, McLaren made an error in strategy and Lando should not have been ordered to give P1 to Oscar in Hungary last year. Maybe it's just me.

 

[Forward Press]

All those are very good examples that left a bitter taste in the mouth for fans, but this situation is in a league of its own. A pit stop error is part of racing, and is where races are won or lost. That’s the sport. So to 1) deny fans the drama that unfolds from that kind of mistake, and much more importantly 2) strip a championship leader of vital points to the direct rival – without even improving the team’s overall result (don't start on Leclerc, he was never in the picture) – is indeed outrageous. Again, seen nothing quite like it. Of course it's a team sport, but this was embarrassing and has set a dangerous precedent.

And yes i'll concede the fact a young Aussie vying for his first championsip makes it harder to take, but i can assure you i'd feel the same regardless who it was.

Hey, don't get me wrong, also left a bitter taste in my mouth and the fact it involves an Australian driver probably elevated it, but the Schumacher/Barrichello and Hakkinen/Coulthard swaps rankled a lot of fans at the time. The former led to a ban on team orders the next season. Heck, US Grand Prix 2005 is probably the most controversial modern race by far.

However, F1 today is far bigger than 20 years ago, hence the magnification of this swap on the internet. If those P1 swaps or US GP 2005 occurred today we'd get more furious reactions on social media. In the context of the history of F1, this is not special.

 

[FR0GGY]

He had a 3.5 second lead, and would never have been undercut anyway. The tyre degradation on that track was so low that the improvement from running on new tyres just wasn't that great.

Lando wanted to have his cake and eat it too. The team wants the WDC to be decided on track and not by team strategy, hence why any undercuts now have to be redressed. But what happened on Sunday night was not an undercut situation.

I’m not suggesting it was an undercut situation, I brought it up because Lando was clear he didn’t want that to occur.

Well mate if you don’t want that, pit first.

 

[jb04]

Have we ever had nearly 900 posts for an Italian GP thread before?

I know the Ricciardo win would have had a few but this is something else - heated discussion two days later.

It's definitely a good chat, and there's a few layers to it beyond the position switch form team orders.

From a higher level I think there's more to be said about whether McLaren is overstepping with their team orders throughout this season and even 2024, influencing results from the pit wall. I don't think its at the level where team orders should be banned (again), but this is hurtling towards a situation where a WDC can be decided on the pit wall instead of on the track. Could you imagine that?

I am glad the F1 community at large is clowning on McLaren for this - I saw a tweet from Damon Hill wondering out loud whether he should give back a race win earned from a Prost engine failure.

 

[Forward Press]

It's definitely a good chat, and there's a few layers to it beyond the position switch form team orders.

From a higher level I think there's more to be said about whether McLaren is overstepping with their team orders throughout this season and even 2024, influencing results from the pit wall. I don't think its at the level where team orders should be banned (again), but this is hurtling towards a situation where a WDC can be decided on the pit wall instead of on the track. Could you imagine that?

I am glad the F1 community at large is clowning on McLaren for this - I saw a tweet from Damon Hill wondering out loud whether he should give back a race win earned from a Prost engine failure.

McLaren are lucky they have a (metaphorical) rocketship for a car because if they were in the pack chasing for wins, podiums and titles these team orders would leave them exposed and jeopardise both drivers and satisfying neither. If the points gap for the WDC is close in Abu Dhabi (with the WCC long secured), there is no way Lando or Oscar will follow orders and I don't blame them.

I don't think team orders should ever be banned, just that McLaren are shooting themselves in the foot and are only getting away with it because they have a clearly superior car.

 

[Bedi]

Hey, don't get me wrong, also left a bitter taste in my mouth and the fact it involves an Australian driver probably elevated it, but the Schumacher/Barrichello and Hakkinen/Coulthard swaps rankled a lot of fans at the time. The former led to a ban on team orders the next season. Heck, US Grand Prix 2005 is probably the most controversial modern race by far.

However, F1 today is far bigger than 20 years ago, hence the magnification of this swap on the internet. If those P1 swaps or US GP 2005 occurred today we'd get more furious reactions on social media. In the context of the history of F1, this is not special.

On the last point i feel like it is given we've reached the pointy end of a championship that's very much in the balance.

 

[99 Problems]

This is such a rare occurrence that I’m not sure how either side of the argument is so confident on what the right thing to do was. Two teammates fighting for a championship so far ahead of the pack that no one else’s results matter on the run home. One driver is comfortably leading the other for 90% of the race before an error from the pit crew changes the order. It’s not for a race win and there’s a big gap to the next car so there’s no risk in swapping back the order.

I genuinely think McLaren do want to let the drivers settle this fight and given that is was their mistake that caused the problem, they asked Oscar to swap back. I wouldn’t be surprised if the fact the biggest moment of the season so far was a mechanical failure to Lando the week before also played some part in the decision even subconsciously. Imagine how we’d feel if Oscar had a 24 point swing against him in a week through no driver error.

I’m not sure what was the right decision but I don’t think it was the most outrageously unfair team order of all time to swap back positions.

 

[samFFC]

Can we please stop misusing the term “undercut”? An undercut is a deliberate strategy to create a tyre offset and pass the car ahead. What happened in Monza wasn’t that at all. A slow pit stop is simply (say it with me) a racing incident. Lando would’ve come out behind Oscar regardless of whether he stopped first or second. The pit sequence had zero relevance to the outcome.

And on these supposed “agreements” - if McLaren were so intent on honouring their no-undercut deal (which, as just established, didn’t even apply), then where was the consistency with slow stops being “a part of racing” which, based off Oscar’s comments, was previously agreed upon by the team. That “agreement” suddenly didn’t count.

Here’s the reality - Lando got preference and chose the second stop. The team wanted him in first, but he told them to pit Oscar instead. It was never about covering Leclerc. Lando wanted to box second to protect himself if a safety car dropped between stops. It was a gamble - one that didn’t pay off.

He wanted all of the upside and none of the downside, and when the downside came, McLaren decided to invoke “fairness,” which was complete nonsense. As Toto put it after the race, they’ve now set a precedent that will be very hard to undo.

Well said.
Not to mention, if Lando had taken the 1st stop, and had a slow stop, I think it would've been easier (and/or less infuriating) if Oscar was asked to switch places, once he had a clean pit and came out ahead of Lando.

 

[TheEscapeClub]

I’m not suggesting it was an undercut situation, I brought it up because Lando was clear he didn’t want that to occur.

Well mate if you don’t want that, pit first.

Lando actually said he would pit first if there was no chance of an undercut, but they assured him there wouldn't be.

No such assurances were giving about shit pit stops though.

 

[FR0GGY]

Now they are saying McLaren broke Piastri’s contract

McLaren 'Broke Oscar Piastri Contract Clause' With Lando Norris Swap at Italian GP

McLaren's decision to swap Oscar Piastri and Lando Norris during the Italian GP could have ramifications beyond this year's Drivers' Championship.

www.sportbible.com

 

[jb04]

Now they are saying McLaren broke Piastri’s contract

McLaren 'Broke Oscar Piastri Contract Clause' With Lando Norris Swap at Italian GP

McLaren's decision to swap Oscar Piastri and Lando Norris during the Italian GP could have ramifications beyond this year's Drivers' Championship.

www.sportbible.com

I like to imagine this is the sort of thing discussed in the debrief, and after the steam stopped coming out of Webber's ears.

But, "they" in this instance is Jacques Villeneuve, so pinch of salt.

 

[Gunf]

MCL are so lucky Max doesn't have the car to be anywhere near them for the whole season if he did due to them being dumb as dogshit he would walk the WDC in.

 

[Duck Farmer]

Lando wanted Oscar to go first in case there was a safety car, which would have given Oscar a gain and allowed him to overtake Lando.

That's the bit that's inconsistent for me. Apparently McLaren would've allowed Oscar to stay ahead of Lando by having a faster pit stop under a safety car but not allow him to stay ahead if Lando has a slower pit stop due to a pit crew error. Both are racing incidents outside of Lando's control but one is OK and the other isn't. What's the difference?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Now they are saying McLaren broke Piastri’s contract

McLaren 'Broke Oscar Piastri Contract Clause' With Lando Norris Swap at Italian GP

McLaren's decision to swap Oscar Piastri and Lando Norris during the Italian GP could have ramifications beyond this year's Drivers' Championship.

www.sportbible.com

Music to the ears of Red Bull...

 

[nohairandfair]

Lando actually said he would pit first if there was no chance of an undercut, but they assured him there wouldn't be.

No such assurances were giving about shit pit stops though.

He didn't say that.

 

[FR0GGY]

Music to the ears of Red Bull...

Piastri would be stupid to go to another team also as the 2nd driver.
Only be if max left which would probably be because the car has turned to shit.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Piastri would be stupid to go to another team also as the 2nd driver.
Only be if max left which would probably be because the car has turned to shit.

I'm not suggesting he is going to leave the best car, but silly for McLaren to give him a possible out.