2023 Scuderia Ferrari F1 Team

[Andres125sx]

BTW, there´s any precedent of a F1 team providing TOs to favour the driver with fewer points in the table?

[Kyo]

BTW, there´s any precedent of a F1 team providing TOs to favour the driver with fewer points in the table?

Carlos was barely faster and more so not constantly throughout the race so an overtake wouldn't have likely happened unless some risk would be involved. I fully understand the team not letting Carlos by as he would have hardly gotten anything better out of the race and given the troublesome races they had, I fully understand them wanting to tell the drivers to not fight and slow each other down.

Hold position orders are rather common, no? Their whole strategy on the first half of the race quite depended on them pulling away cleanly and likewise on the second part by keeping a gap from Perez.

[Farnborough]

BTW, there´s any precedent of a F1 team providing TOs to favour the driver with fewer points in the table?

Carlos was barely faster and more so not constantly throughout the race so an overtake wouldn't have likely happened unless some risk would be involved. I fully understand the team not letting Carlos by as he would have hardly gotten anything better out of the race and given the troublesome races they had, I fully understand them wanting to tell the drivers to not fight and slow each other down.

Hold position orders are rather common, no? Their whole strategy on the first half of the race quite depended on them pulling away cleanly and likewise on the second part by keeping a gap from Perez.

Currently they haven't the luxury of a teammate battle, right to hold station whichever way round the two drivers were on track.
However the decisions were made (drivers or strat) they had got themselves into very good position for championship points and ultimately to stabilise their in race performance.
Right decision to "take" that result without raising risk, then move on to next race in understanding their current updates.
Good results overall considering the last few races.

[Vanja #66]

Hold position orders are rather common, no? Their whole strategy on the first half of the race quite depended on them pulling away cleanly and likewise on the second part by keeping a gap from Perez.

Not to mention Ferrari also denied Leclerc privilege last year even when he was leading WCC and Sainz was way down in the standings - going so far to gift him the win at Silverstone.

[AR3-GP]

BTW, there´s any precedent of a F1 team providing TOs to favour the driver with fewer points in the table?

Yes. Silverstone 2022 and Brazil 2022 at Ferrari to favor Sainz.

[Xyz22]

The fact that Leclerc had the same pace of Sainz (in some moments slightly slower, in others slightly quicker) with this car and in a track like Canada (Lec doesn't like it very much) highlights how you good he would be in the right conditions (which are required to compete for the WDC as we saw last year with the F1 75 pre TD).

Before the race, i thought Sainz would have been way quicker than him.

[Andres125sx]

BTW, there´s any precedent of a F1 team providing TOs to favour the driver with fewer points in the table?

Yes. Silverstone 2022 and Brazil 2022 at Ferrari to favor Sainz.

What race did you watch at Silverstone in 2022?

The only TO was to let Lecrerc pass, not the other way around

Then at the restart Sainz took the lead again as he was faster than Lecrerc, who dropped back and even got passed by Hamilton and Perez

Final result: Sainz p1, Lecrerc p4

Are you suggesting Ferrari should have renounced to victory to favour Lecrerc and finish Lecrerc P3 and Sainz p4 instead of P1 and p4?

[AR3-GP]

BTW, there´s any precedent of a F1 team providing TOs to favour the driver with fewer points in the table?

Yes. Silverstone 2022 and Brazil 2022 at Ferrari to favor Sainz.

What race did you watch at Silverstone in 2022?

The only TO was to let Lecrerc pass, not the other way around

Leclerc wasted several laps of race time behind Sainz before he was released. This time loss likely created the situation where he was unable to pit at the final safety car which cost him the win.

[Vanja #66]

Leclerc wasted several laps of race time behind Sainz before he was released. This time loss likely created the situation where he was unable to pit at the final safety car which cost him the win.

Not several, full 20 laps. After passing Sainz, he opened up a 4.5s gap in around 5-6 laps. The wall then messed up the call not to pit him, even though there was an opportunity and they had enough time - thus gifting the win to Sainz. Leclerc then fought hard to keep at least P2 and blocked Perez and Hamilton from making progress for 3-4 laps, allowing Sainz to open up a safe enough gap and get his win.

[Andres125sx]

So now NOT providing TOs, is providing TOs?

The only TO in that race was to let Charles pass, saying in that race Ferrari did provide TOs to favour Sainz is plain false

I posted the highlights video few posts above, please check before replying

Yes Lecrerc opened a gap in some laps, but then a SC ruined the gap. Racing. Then Sainz did pass Lecrerc, and also built a gap in few laps. Racing. Then Lewis and Perez did pass Lecrerc. Racing.

That is NOT providing TOs to favour the driver with fewer points, actually they provided one TO, and it was to favour Lecrerc!

If later in the race, Sainz was faster and earned the victory, that was just racing too, same as Ferrari messing up with strategy calls, but that is different to providing TOs


Looks like some people assume Ferrari must favour Lecrerc, so if they do not favour him, take that as favouring Sainz, but those are completely different things!

[Andres125sx]

But be relaxed, Canada proved Ferrari will favour Lecrerc even if he's not leading the table.

That is quite unusual in F1, but Ferrari is Ferrari, they should know what they're doing (pun intended )

[space wadet]

Can we at least all agree to spell the drivers' names correctly in this thread? It's "Leclerc" not "Lecrerc". There are only two drivers, why are there so many instances of misspellings? It shouldn't be this hard. (The other one is "Sainz", btw). It's hard to take anyone's opinion seriously if they can't/won't even get basic things like the team's own drivers' names right in the team thread.

[Vanja #66]

So now NOT providing TOs, is providing TOs?

Team told Leclerc to hold position, there was an order that was enforced for 20 laps which slowed Leclerc down and Sainz benefitted from it in the end (unlike Leclerc now in Canada who had the same pace as Sainz). Please stop inventing stories

[Andres125sx]

Can we at least all agree to spell the drivers' names correctly in this thread? It's "Leclerc" not "Lecrerc". There are only two drivers, why are there so many instances of misspellings? It shouldn't be this hard. (The other one is "Sainz", btw). It's hard to take anyone's opinion seriously if they can't/won't even get basic things like the team's own drivers' names right in the team thread.

Sorry, didn't notice the corrector was changing Leclerc with Lecrerc. No idea what kind of correction is that, but correctors do funny things sometimes

[Andres125sx]

So now NOT providing TOs, is providing TOs?

Team told Leclerc to hold position, there was an order that was enforced for 20 laps which slowed Leclerc down and Sainz benefitted from it in the end (unlike Leclerc now in Canada who had the same pace as Sainz). Please stop inventing stories

Can you please prove it?

Even if true, that order was cancelled few laps later to favour Leclerc, contrary to Canada, so not comparable