2025 McLaren F1 Team

[Badger]

No, I was not being facetious or making a joke or attempting mockery..
I was serious about the difference between the two perspectives, because in one case there is an attempt to manipulate as many 'chance variables' as possible and guarantee 'outcome' (price fixing on raw materials, price fixing on finished goods) ; whereas in the other case, chance variables are left to chance and there is guarantee only on 'opportunity', the outcome is free to be influenced by merit/luck/environment etc, expecting nature's law of averages to 'even out' chance variables.
Now, depending on one's interpretation of what exactly 'chance variables' are, papaya rules can mean 'equality in outcome' or 'equality in opportunity' - both can be argued to be valid. I am interested to know how many serious followers of F1 hold one view vs the other.

Capitalism isn't equal opportunity. Pure capitalism is the situation at Red Bull, where one driver earned an advantage in the past, that is now baked in so that he controls the environment for the internal competition.

As a team you should hit the middle ground, that is where the happiest people in the world live. McLaren is doing well.

The way you use the term equal opportunity makes it seem like a rookie should walk into a team and hold as much sway as a world champion. It’s a nice thought in principle but sometimes the world doesn’t treat people equally because they aren’t equal in ability, or haven’t proven themselves to be yet. We invest more in the people that we think can give us a competitive advantage. That’s what teams to, that’s what companies do, that’s what countries do (well smart ones).

Oscar didn’t get the full smorgasbord of benefits for a good while either. He got upgrades later than Lando for a couple of years, he was asked to move aside when needed. But as his performance level steadily improved he got more and more equal treatment. It is earned, it’s not an entitlement.

[FittingMechanics]

Here's a question. Would Mclaren have done the pit stop on lap 7 if Norris was ahead of Piastri?

They wouldn't.

I think this is the crux of many issues people have raised about the Lando/Oscar issues.

Almost all would work the exact same if the other way round.

Yeah, if you think there is a conspiracy to hurt Piastri then everything looks like one.

McLaren showed that they have subpar strategy team unwilling to take any kind of risk to the detriment of the team result. This is one constant these last two years and now we are supposed to be surprised they messed up another strategy?

Zak Brown (and Stella) are aware this is a weakness and they went and signed Will Courtenay (Head of Race Strategy at Red Bull Racing) in September 2024. https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... lJlupxTNSp

Red Bull smartly chose to block him joining McLaren as late as possible (he is still at Red Bull) and from latest reports I saw will start working at McLaren mid 2026.

[TimW]

No, I was not being facetious or making a joke or attempting mockery..
I was serious about the difference between the two perspectives, because in one case there is an attempt to manipulate as many 'chance variables' as possible and guarantee 'outcome' (price fixing on raw materials, price fixing on finished goods) ; whereas in the other case, chance variables are left to chance and there is guarantee only on 'opportunity', the outcome is free to be influenced by merit/luck/environment etc, expecting nature's law of averages to 'even out' chance variables.
Now, depending on one's interpretation of what exactly 'chance variables' are, papaya rules can mean 'equality in outcome' or 'equality in opportunity' - both can be argued to be valid. I am interested to know how many serious followers of F1 hold one view vs the other.

Capitalism isn't equal opportunity. Pure capitalism is the situation at Red Bull, where one driver earned an advantage in the past, that is now baked in so that he controls the environment for the internal competition.

As a team you should hit the middle ground, that is where the happiest people in the world live. McLaren is doing well.

The way you use the term equal opportunity makes it seem like a rookie should walk into a team and hold as much sway as a world champion. It’s a nice thought in principle but sometimes the world doesn’t treat people equally because they aren’t equal in ability, or haven’t proven themselves to be yet. We invest more in the people that we think can give us a competitive advantage. That’s what teams to, that’s what companies do, that’s what countries do (well smart ones).

Oscar didn’t get the full smorgasbord of benefits for a good while either. He got upgrades later than Lando for a couple of years, he was asked to move aside when needed. But as his performance level steadily improved he got more and more equal treatment. It is earned, it’s not an entitlement.

That is in the word equal, isn't it?

I am not saying one is right and the other is wrong, this is a competition, not welfare. The Red Bull way brought them world titles, but it also destroyed talents. It makes it difficult for them to attract a top tier second driver. The McLaren way made Piastri blossom and helped them have a very strong driver pairing, but now puts the WDC at risk. Choose your evil.

[basti313]

I don't think whey would have.

I think so too. Such situations are pre defined before the race. When is the first lap to stop under SC is a clear pre race discussion, not who is first.

I think if there was a bigger gap between Lando and Oscar well outside any double stack disadvantage they would have.

They had enough gap.

I think its also who Lando couldn't follow Max in the Papaya rules Oscar had first call on strategy and the team made it for him/them both so Oscar would have been screwed.

I think the whole Papaya rules just screws all of them.
The first Papaya rules were good when they were about the team result. No attacking in for example Monza was fine and helped everyone.
Since they started to drive only against each other the Papaya rules changed and are utter BS. They do not help anyone in the team, strongest example is still the missed P1 in Japan.
Without Papaya rules, they would not sit in the situation they have now.

Government mandated communist bodies also centralise ...

I thought your posts during the race were funny in full panic mode....but going into politic theory tops it

[SiLo]

Really Mclaren should have pit at least 1 car. Just ask the lead driver in the race what they want to do, and the other car does the opposite.

[SilviuAgo]

The F2 champion, and P3 in F2 standings before Abu Dhabi (same number of points as Crawford).

[FittingMechanics]

Definitely interesting signing. I'm surprised Fornaroli is not signed up somewhere else. We've let Bortoleto go so I expect similar story here, he will be around the team but if opportunity opens up he will be let go.

Such a shame McLaren does not have a strong relationship with a "junior" team.

[Badger]

The way you use the term equal opportunity makes it seem like a rookie should walk into a team and hold as much sway as a world champion. It’s a nice thought in principle but sometimes the world doesn’t treat people equally because they aren’t equal in ability, or haven’t proven themselves to be yet. We invest more in the people that we think can give us a competitive advantage. That’s what teams to, that’s what companies do, that’s what countries do (well smart ones).

Oscar didn’t get the full smorgasbord of benefits for a good while either. He got upgrades later than Lando for a couple of years, he was asked to move aside when needed. But as his performance level steadily improved he got more and more equal treatment. It is earned, it’s not an entitlement.

That is in the word equal, isn't it?

I am not saying one is right and the other is wrong, this is a competition, not welfare. The Red Bull way brought them world titles, but it also destroyed talents. It makes it difficult for them to attract a top tier second driver. The McLaren way made Piastri blossom and helped them have a very strong driver pairing, but now puts the WDC at risk. Choose your evil.

Equal opportunity for equal ability, that is equality for me. Performance determines who gets the chance to lead a team.

Why did Oscar get second dibs on upgrades for two years if he was given equal opportunity? Lando won Miami 2024 with huge upgrades that Oscar didn't have. Equal opportunity according to you? I think not. This concept as you've defined it doesn't exist in F1.