2022 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[alexx_88]

I think they have two core issues and none is actually their strategy people directly:
1. It seems they don't have simulation tools as advanced as the other teams. I don't think you can buy these and you need to develop them in-house and integrate them with your simulator and modelling tools. From the speed at which decisions are taken in changing conditions (safety car, VSC, rain etc) it seems to me that RB and Mercedes have a reaction time measured in seconds, whilst Ferrari looks like there's an actual person modeling the new scenario and reacting. This would also make sense given that Italy is not particularly renowned for its software or mathematics strength, whilst UK has top universities in both of those fields as well as really strong software industry.

2. Their desire to protect Sainz. This makes 0 sense. If the first one I can understand as being very tricky to solve, not giving Leclerc all the advantages of being the #1 driver is absolutely stupid. Whenever these are close on track, there should be an instruction to swap the cars over. It's as simple as that in the end and every top team does it. The only moment when you can afford not to do it is when you have such a big performance advantage over the other teams that you're guaranteed to win every race you start.

[f1316]

https://preview.redd.it/5vsbg3t1nye91.p ... 6ac0d880d8

Fastest race pace and we end up 6th. Unbelievable. Never seen anything like what's happening this season with this team. Embarrassing.

This. I’ve been trying to give this team the benefit of the (considerable) doubt this year but now it’s really just ridiculous. Incompetent and, as you said, the best word is embarrassing.

They’ve built a great car so clearly the technical people are strong but race management is abysmal - and one without the other is pointless. Leclerc could win all the remaining 9 races and still not win the title. Appalling and worst of all, they’re not learning,

[LM10]

Is that not a concern though? IF Ferrari were exploiting a loophole with an illegal floor the fact it wasn't bringing a significant advantage despite being developed since early on in the season (pre-season even maybe?) and yet when the FIA say they've got to redesign they're able to design a legal floor which is faster in a much shorter amount of time. What if the FIA hadn't of stepped in, could they have exploited more with the floor or had they reached a plateau and would've never have found this faster floor?

The trolling word gets thrown around too much, I'm really not trying to troll here. Just thinking critically. I know you haven't accused me of trolling but just trying to pre-empt some replies.

I don’t really know what you’re talking about. What concerns? Don’t worry, Ferrari’s chassis people know what they’re doing. Ferrari’s problems clearly aren’t car or car development related.

I would see it as concerning if they design an illegal floor to exploit a loophole but it turns out they're slower because of it and they only got faster because the FIA updated the rules to better enforce what they initially intended.

In fact, they’ve made a step forward with the new floor. So assuming they had an illegal floor before (which has been nothing more than an accusation), their current (surely legal) floor is even better now.

Teams always exploit loopholes. Some are bigger than others. For all we know the floor loophole must have not been a significant one, if it does not make a performance difference. There is a reason Ferrari was not concerned about the TD.

[tpe]

I think they have two core issues and none is actually their strategy people directly:
1. It seems they don't have simulation tools as advanced as the other teams. I don't think you can buy these and you need to develop them in-house and integrate them with your simulator and modelling tools. From the speed at which decisions are taken in changing conditions (safety car, VSC, rain etc) it seems to me that RB and Mercedes have a reaction time measured in seconds, whilst Ferrari looks like there's an actual person modeling the new scenario and reacting. This would also make sense given that Italy is not particularly renowned for its software or mathematics strength, whilst UK has top universities in both of those fields as well as really strong software industry.

2. Their desire to protect Sainz. This makes 0 sense. If the first one I can understand as being very tricky to solve, not giving Leclerc all the advantages of being the #1 driver is absolutely stupid. Whenever these are close on track, there should be an instruction to swap the cars over. It's as simple as that in the end and every top team does it. The only moment when you can afford not to do it is when you have such a big performance advantage over the other teams that you're guaranteed to win every race you start.

Thank you.
I ask the same questions again and again and again...

[dialtone]

I think they have two core issues and none is actually their strategy people directly:
1. It seems they don't have simulation tools as advanced as the other teams. I don't think you can buy these and you need to develop them in-house and integrate them with your simulator and modelling tools. From the speed at which decisions are taken in changing conditions (safety car, VSC, rain etc) it seems to me that RB and Mercedes have a reaction time measured in seconds, whilst Ferrari looks like there's an actual person modeling the new scenario and reacting. This would also make sense given that Italy is not particularly renowned for its software or mathematics strength, whilst UK has top universities in both of those fields as well as really strong software industry.

This point is fine until you end up insulting a whole country...

Ferrari has plenty of people not from italy working there, Rueda is spanish and is the chief strategist, Mekies is French and is race director.

Second, I know a ton of extremely skilled developers and data analysts in Italy, enough to make any team happy, they are both extremely skilled and extremely cheap. I work in Silicon Valley and have teams from north america, south america, europe (dublin) and italy and the italian teams are every bit as good, if not better, than the other teams.

Third, it's total rubbish that Italy is bad about software or mathematics... It speaks more about your ignorance than it does about anything else. What do you think takes to design an F1 car as good as F1-75? cooking skills? Or wine tasting? Man...

[LM10]

I think they have two core issues and none is actually their strategy people directly:
1. It seems they don't have simulation tools as advanced as the other teams. I don't think you can buy these and you need to develop them in-house and integrate them with your simulator and modelling tools. From the speed at which decisions are taken in changing conditions (safety car, VSC, rain etc) it seems to me that RB and Mercedes have a reaction time measured in seconds, whilst Ferrari looks like there's an actual person modeling the new scenario and reacting. This would also make sense given that Italy is not particularly renowned for its software or mathematics strength, whilst UK has top universities in both of those fields as well as really strong software industry.

This point is fine until you end up insulting a whole country...

Ferrari has plenty of people not from italy working there, Rueda is spanish and is the chief strategist, Mekies is French and is race director.

Second, I know a ton of extremely skilled developers and data analysts in Italy, enough to make any team happy, they are both extremely skilled and extremely cheap. I work in Silicon Valley and have teams from north america, south america, europe (dublin) and italy and the italian teams are every bit as good, if not better, than the other teams.

Third, it's total rubbish that Italy is bad about software or mathematics... It speaks more about your ignorance than it does about anything else. What do you think takes to design an F1 car as good as F1-75? cooking skills? Or wine tasting? Man...

[alexx_88]

I think they have two core issues and none is actually their strategy people directly:
1. It seems they don't have simulation tools as advanced as the other teams. I don't think you can buy these and you need to develop them in-house and integrate them with your simulator and modelling tools. From the speed at which decisions are taken in changing conditions (safety car, VSC, rain etc) it seems to me that RB and Mercedes have a reaction time measured in seconds, whilst Ferrari looks like there's an actual person modeling the new scenario and reacting. This would also make sense given that Italy is not particularly renowned for its software or mathematics strength, whilst UK has top universities in both of those fields as well as really strong software industry.

This point is fine until you end up insulting a whole country...

Ferrari has plenty of people not from italy working there, Rueda is spanish and is the chief strategist, Mekies is French and is race director.

Second, I know a ton of extremely skilled developers and data analysts in Italy, enough to make any team happy, they are both extremely skilled and extremely cheap. I work in Silicon Valley and have teams from north america, south america, europe (dublin) and italy and the italian teams are every bit as good, if not better, than the other teams.

Third, it's total rubbish that Italy is bad about software or mathematics... It speaks more about your ignorance than it does about anything else. What do you think takes to design an F1 car as good as F1-75? cooking skills? Or wine tasting? Man...

Look, first of all, not having an industry as strong as another country is not an insult. Secondly, you're using anecdotal evidence which is not useful when looking at this sort of problem.

UK's software industry contributed 7.1% of their gdp, or around 125B pounds, while for Italy it's only 3.2% of GDP, or around 50B euros. So constant currency that would be roughly 3x smaller. It also might not be just about technical ability, but budgets. Maybe ferrari isn't happy to spend as much on simulation tools as RB and Mercedes. This has certainly been a problem in the Alonso days, as they were translating from development based on track testing to CAD and software simulations. This aspect was widely reported back then.

So it's either this explanation or that an otherwise hugely successful operation (Ferrari) can't see that their main problem is apparently one person who's been in his role for 8 years.

And no, there's not a lot of overlap between the skillset required to design a car and the one required to write simulation software. It's not like one is better than the other, it's just a different skillset.

[chrisc90]

Extremely skilled and extremely cheap are 2 things you would never normally see together. Either your extremely skilled, and that comes with a good price tag, or you are extremely cheap and get what you pay for. Never once in my near 32 years of being alive have I seen extremely skilled and extremely cheap go hand in hand with each other. Its just something that doesnt happen ever in life. You pay for what you get and vice versa. The old idiom...buy cheap...buy twice.

On a side note:-
Chill out a bit today/tonight man. You've been a bit 'direct' towards people who have posted genuine questions or responded to your posts. Its almost a different DT we are seeing this evening.

[dialtone]

Extremely skilled and extremely cheap are 2 things you would never normally see together. Either your extremely skilled, and that comes with a good price tag, or you are extremely cheap and get what you pay for. Never once in my near 32 years of being alive have I seen extremely skilled and extremely cheap go hand in hand with each other. Its just something that doesnt happen ever in life. You pay for what you get and vice versa. The old idiom...buy cheap...buy twice.

On a side note:-
Chill out a bit today/tonight man. You've been a bit 'direct' towards people who have posted genuine questions or responded to your posts. Its almost a different DT we are seeing this evening.

When your market for workforce is global the primary force you meet is cost of living in a country. Living in Italy is EXTREMELY cheap compared to living in UK or US.

If you order 2 pizzas for delivery here in silicon valley that will cost you up to $80. If you order 2 pizzas for delivery in Italy you'd be hard pressed to go past $25. The world is full of arbitrages (good deals) where there's a mis-alignment between the cost of living and the skillset of the people in the country. Are you gonna tell me now that Pizza in the US is worth more than 3 times pizza in Italy?

Almost every company in silicon valley, as an example, gives you the ability to move wherever you want in the US, and will adjust your salary based on which state in the US you pick, and further if you choose to go live in a different country.

Only in a very local context high price means higher quality, but even then it's about how you hire the people, if you acquire them individually you negotiate with each one of them, but if it's via consulting/contracting agreements it's completely different.

EDIT: on the chill part: you got irritated because Horner was asked if Ferrari is handing them the win, and we called you troll after you came here to provoke. I think you are right I need to chill though.

[dialtone]

Look, first of all, not having an industry as strong as another country is not an insult. Secondly, you're using anecdotal evidence which is not useful when looking at this sort of problem.

UK's software industry contributed 7.1% of their gdp, or around 125B pounds, while for Italy it's only 3.2% of GDP, or around 50B euros. So constant currency that would be roughly 3x smaller. It also might not be just about technical ability, but budgets. Maybe ferrari isn't happy to spend as much on simulation tools as RB and Mercedes. This has certainly been a problem in the Alonso days, as they were translating from development based on track testing to CAD and software simulations. This aspect was widely reported back then.

So it's either this explanation or that an otherwise hugely successful operation (Ferrari) can't see that their main problem is apparently one person who's been in his role for 8 years.

And no, there's not a lot of overlap between the skillset required to design a car and the one required to write simulation software. It's not like one is better than the other, it's just a different skillset.

Ferrari doesn't need to hire a country, they need to find a small group of skilled individuals. Furthermore most teams buy the software for racing outside.

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-funct ... lp-clients

They don't write it themselves.

[alexx_88]

It's extremely cheap because the income is not as high. Price for local services goes up with income levels as demand increases.

Sorry, but I don't think you understand how ridiculous it is to assume that a generic consulting company, albeit one as big as McKinsey, can create something as specific and competitive as the software for a formula 1 team. And yes, they do write it themselves (at least the final elements that seem to make the biggest difference), you can check linkedin for red bull racing and see what people they employ.

There are other specific niches of software development that are well developed in the UK due to them being essentially the banking hub for Europe until recently. Quant development for example. Anyway, let's agree to disagree, you obviously took this very personal when it wasn't intended. I also supported the exact words I said with actual statistical data and it was not a comment on people's abilities, but on macroeconomic and industry wide indicators

[dialtone]

It's extremely cheap because the income is not as high. Price for local services goes up with income levels as demand increases.

Sorry, but I don't think you understand how ridiculous it is to assume that a generic consulting company, albeit one as big as McKinsey, can create something as specific and competitive as the software for a formula 1 team.

There are other specific niches of software development that are well developed in the UK due to them being essentially the banking hub for Europe until recently. Quant development for example. Anyway, let's agree to disagree, you obviously took this very personal when it wasn't intended. I also supported the exact words I said with actual statistical data and it was not a comment on people's abilities, but on macroeconomic and industry wide indicators

I didn't take it that personal, I moved away from Italy because my job wouldn't give me the salary I wanted. But I don't think your point is relevant. A brand like Ferrari can hire whatever they want in Italy, many people grow up dreaming to work there, and there's plenty of skilled individuals in Italy. The GDP metric, while maybe valid as far as economic composition goes and how easy/hard it would be for a whole sector of an economy to be there, doesn't apply to a single race car brand with a few thousand employees.

EDIT: Your first point about why demand increases or not: language, work law regulation and taxation are a big reason why companies don't work in italy too much, totally different from the people skill. Dublin is heavy with immigrants from all over europe because that's where US companies go to setup shop thanks to low taxes, english language and work law similar to the US. I know because I had to make these decisions for my company.

[pipoloko]

some times I get lost in so many "emotional posts"
Ferrari business is selling cars with Ferrari name, therefore, Ferrari is on top of anybody
why ferrari would prioratize SAI are they going to sell more ferraris in Spain?
i beleive Monaco is a better and larger market than Spain ( even I am Spaniard I have to recognize it)
after the first stop the only beneficiary of the split in laps 19 SAI vs 22 LEC was Leclerc
we may cry because Leclerc did not win the race
yeah ok lets do it.
the most important bad thing was collecting fewer points than RB or MB
the inexplicable for me yet , is why LEC 2nd stint was only 18 laps meanwhile SAI was 29 laps
you don't need a computer, AI to get that question.
what we dont know why the team took such "inexplicable" decision
and I hope there is a good reason
and all the speculation here, looks more like emotional BS!!!!!

[Shal_Leg16]

I think they have two core issues and none is actually their strategy people directly:
1. It seems they don't have simulation tools as advanced as the other teams. I don't think you can buy these and you need to develop them in-house and integrate them with your simulator and modelling tools. From the speed at which decisions are taken in changing conditions (safety car, VSC, rain etc) it seems to me that RB and Mercedes have a reaction time measured in seconds, whilst Ferrari looks like there's an actual person modeling the new scenario and reacting. This would also make sense given that Italy is not particularly renowned for its software or mathematics strength, whilst UK has top universities in both of those fields as well as really strong software industry.

2. Their desire to protect Sainz. This makes 0 sense. If the first one I can understand as being very tricky to solve, not giving Leclerc all the advantages of being the #1 driver is absolutely stupid. Whenever these are close on track, there should be an instruction to swap the cars over. It's as simple as that in the end and every top team does it. The only moment when you can afford not to do it is when you have such a big performance advantage over the other teams that you're guaranteed to win every race you start.

Sainz is becoming a headache. Neither is he completely BS that they can discard him nor is he that good to actually challenge Max/Charles for wins.

i get a feeling while doing strategy Ferrari try to adjust their thought process such that they come up with something for both. and i dont get how a F1 team think like that ?

today we saw how a winning team does its business. Max and Perez both started 10-11 both were chipping in guys 1 by 1. its not like perez was stuck far behind but RB knew if they want to win Max must get the priority. here someone said both were on same strategy, no dount but timing ? whom to pit first ? when to pit whom matters more ....RB have it sorted already and they rearly ever mess Max's timings even if sometimes it has to change Perez's strategy. Timing is just so important , while here in Ferrari they fooking waste 2-4 laps just to dicide whom to be put on what strategy. At Silverstone they leave out the car that was leading at Hungary they call in the guy with more fresher tyres ....like there is no priority no consistency just roll the dice and lets see if we get 6

[mrluke]

The ferrari decision making feels like to relies on modelling too much. It feels like a case of "the computer says this is best" whereas the more agile teams feel like they go from a gut feel. Maybe thats a robust intuition based on the data they have available but if they have a split second to make the call, they make it.

Most commentators and invested spectators tend to be pretty good at making the calls, it doesn't need a super computer to work it out for you.