Poll on 2013 Malaysian GP team orders

[bhall]

I'm not surprised by the results of this voting. In any case the majority of voters did not think that team orders were justified. In the Merc case we even have three times the votes against team orders than for team orders. Even in the Red Bull case a clear majority of voters do not agree with the team order being issued.

On behalf of everyone, I'd like to thank you for interpreting the mysterious numerals and shapes at the top of this page. I can only imagine where we'd be without such insight. I myself was left wondering who to support in the algebraic erection race that wizardry appears to depict.

Thank you for making sense of the senseless.

[raymondu999]

I'm not surprised by the results of this voting. In any case the majority of voters did not think that team orders were justified. In the Merc case we even have three times the votes against team orders than for team orders. Even in the Red Bull case a clear majority of voters do not agree with the team order being issued.

On behalf of everyone, I'd like to thank you for interpreting the mysterious numerals and shapes at the top of this page. I can only imagine where we'd be without such insight. I myself was left wondering who to support in the algebraic erection race that wizardry appears to depict.

Thank you for making sense of the senseless.

Come on Ben - did you really have to stoop so low as to attack his post like that?

[bhall]

I didn't have to; I wanted to. And it's not just the post; it's the "poll" itself. Not only is the premise woefully uninformed, the options presented are biased, as they often are when the author decides he needs popular support for his biased views.

To start, Mercedes couldn't let Rosberg pass Hamilton; they could either let him try to pass Hamilton or order Hamilton to cede his position. See how wording changes things?

How about the response to "Red Bull should not have issued a team order at this stage of the season"?

"The team order at Red Bull was justified" or "The team order at Red Bull was justified because its drivers have previously taken each other out in a fight for position" or "...because the points difference between Champion and runner up has been four points or less in four of the last six years" or "...because the team had expressed grave concerns about tire wear all weekend."

There's a reason why proper polling is done with simple questions and simple "yes" or "no" answers: words mean something. The author of this poll lead voters where he wanted them to go with biased options. And then he had the temerity to "interpret" the "results" in case anyone couldn't figure out that higher numbers have larger values than lower numbers.

So, yes, I wanted to have a little fun with this completely bullshit exercise.

[FoxHound]

In total agreement with Ben.

The biggest flaw of any poll, is poor wording or question construction.
So let's de-construct.

Merc should have Nico let pass Lewis.

1.This implies that it was solely Mercedes who had power in the tussle between it's drivers. This is false.
2. It also implies that Rosberg would have stayed ahead had he passed Lewis. We also know this to be false.
3. It implies that Hamilton should make way for Rosberg without a fight. Hamilton aficionados will naturally vote "nein danke".
4. The construction of the sentence is horrific, quite frankly.


Team order at Merc was the right thing to do

1. This implies that both drivers where pedal to the metal, flat out racing. We know this is false.
2. Also foregoes any facts of the situation that we know, like both drivers needing to conserve fuel.
3. It implies that Mercedes had an option. This is false.

I can give countless examples of polls gone wrong, but the main issue is that whomever conducts a poll will have an agenda.
Unless is it is conducted by a neutral 3rd party with next to no knowledge of it's paymaster.
For me at least, there appears to be an agenda oozing out the pores of this poll.

[Gettingonabit]

I didn't have to; I wanted to. And it's not just the post; it's the "poll" itself. Not only is the premise woefully uninformed, the options presented are biased, as they often are when the author decides he needs popular support for his biased views.

To start, Mercedes couldn't let Rosberg pass Hamilton; they could either let him try to pass Hamilton or order Hamilton to cede his position. See how wording changes things?

How about the response to "Red Bull should not have issued a team order at this stage of the season"?

"The team order at Red Bull was justified" or "The team order at Red Bull was justified because its drivers have previously taken each other out in a fight for position" or "...because the points difference between Champion and runner up has been four points or less in four of the last six years" or "...because the team had expressed grave concerns about tire wear all weekend."

There's a reason why proper polling is done with simple questions and simple "yes" or "no" answers: words mean something. The author of this poll lead voters where he wanted them to go with biased options. And then he had the temerity to "interpret" the "results" in case anyone couldn't figure out that higher numbers have larger values than lower numbers.

So, yes, I wanted to have a little fun with this completely bullshit exercise.

Pretty much sums up the validity of most polls imo - on this forum, on this subject or most any other subject.

[PlatinumZealot]

Even if it were not for the fuel situation there is an argument that Rosberg should not be allowed to pass Hamilton in any case for long term strategic reasons. Just take a look at the points table. Hamilton is right up there near the top and his position gives a psychological boost to the team as well as a psychological threat to the RedBull and Ferrari drivers. Rosberg has not shown that he can threaten the Bulls and the Ferraris in qualifying or the race and in the long term the championship. If you want to look on it simply, Rosberg is seen a pushover by the opposition.
I believe Ross understands this all too well, and he knows he has to go with the Number 1 driver strategy to impact maximum pressure and I fully support it for the good of the team.

[FoxHound]

@Nsmikle

he knows he has to go with the Number 1 driver strategy to impact maximum pressure and I fully support it for the good of the team.

What if the shoe was on the other foot and Rosberg was favoured over Hamilton?

There is a can of worms by issuing number 1 status. Rosberg is a high calibre driver, higher than Webber or Massa in my view.
The point here is that at this stage of the season, it is pointless racing with a team mate in the latter part of a GP when your best combined result is on. Any team boss would be on the blower to their driver issuing cooling down orders.

Yet with Mercedes I dont think it's as clear cut as at Red Bull or Ferrari. Lewis does not have it all his own way, and the team haven't issued Rosberg KY jelly, for the perceived rogerring some think he would receive.
Had either driver pulled a stunt like Vettel did in Sepang, I would expect some public hanging out to dry or worse...both cars in the gravel.
Simply the reason why I don't believe Mercedes have a number 1.

[Richard]

Simply the reason why I don't believe Mercedes have a number 1.

Yet. I'm sure they'll switch to support the leading diver once one of them emerges in that role based on results.

[@singWebberfan]

F1 is ultimately a team sport, with the drivers and cars being the emd result of that teams output. It takes thousands of man hours to prepare a car for each circuit. Frankly, Vettel abused the position he holds in the team. Teams can only have one boss, and its Horner who is held resposible. If a strategy or tech person makes a dud call, theres an investigation and potential dismissal. F1 is unforgiving.
Each driver for each race has to share the load for evaluating parts, tyre degradation, aero setup, gearing etc. There resrrictions on tyres allocation engine and gearbox longevity etc. If there's a war inside RB, how can they share data? Team orders, are part of the game folks. In Malaysia Vettel was the person who lost out with Webber leading having used option tyre earlier. If Vettels mechanics had picked up on it, they will do similar in future to keep Webber behind at future events.
Vettel didnt play by team rules, overusing engines and other compomemts is patently stupid, when its against a teammate. Vettel must rate Webber a threat to do this!

[Juzh]

F1 is ultimately a team sport, with the drivers and cars being the emd result of that teams output. It takes thousands of man hours to prepare a car for each circuit. Frankly, Vettel abused the position he holds in the team. Teams can only have one boss, and its Horner who is held resposible. If a strategy or tech person makes a dud call, theres an investigation and potential dismissal. F1 is unforgiving.
Each driver for each race has to share the load for evaluating parts, tyre degradation, aero setup, gearing etc. There resrrictions on tyres allocation engine and gearbox longevity etc. If there's a war inside RB, how can they share data? Team orders, are part of the game folks. In Malaysia Vettel was the person who lost out with Webber leading having used option tyre earlier. If Vettels mechanics had picked up on it, they will do similar in future to keep Webber behind at future events.
Vettel didnt play by team rules, overusing engines and other compomemts is patently stupid, when its against a teammate. Vettel must rate Webber a threat to do this!

And you felt compelled to register to share this with us? Team orders at this stage of the season is an idiotic thing to do, no matter how you spin it.

[langwadt]

F1 is ultimately a team sport, with the drivers and cars being the emd result of that teams output. It takes thousands of man hours to prepare a car for each circuit. Frankly, Vettel abused the position he holds in the team. Teams can only have one boss, and its Horner who is held resposible. If a strategy or tech person makes a dud call, theres an investigation and potential dismissal. F1 is unforgiving.
Each driver for each race has to share the load for evaluating parts, tyre degradation, aero setup, gearing etc. There resrrictions on tyres allocation engine and gearbox longevity etc. If there's a war inside RB, how can they share data? Team orders, are part of the game folks. In Malaysia Vettel was the person who lost out with Webber leading having used option tyre earlier. If Vettels mechanics had picked up on it, they will do similar in future to keep Webber behind at future events.
Vettel didnt play by team rules, overusing engines and other compomemts is patently stupid, when its against a teammate. Vettel must rate Webber a threat to do this!

And you felt compelled to register to share this with us? Team orders at this stage of the season is an idiotic thing to do, no matter how you spin it.

but it wasn't team orders in the normal sense of telling the drivers to finish in the order that maximized the no1 drivers points

it was; stop fighting, you'll run out of fuel and tires, put unneeded stress on engine and gearbox that needs to last for more races and you cannot gain any points for the team

[FoxHound]

Simply the reason why I don't believe Mercedes have a number 1.

Yet. I'm sure they'll switch to support the leading diver once one of them emerges in that role based on results.

Perhaps, but then a driver can look himself in the eye and say he was beaten fair and square. Rosberg and Hamilton are still only 2 GP in. To back either driver at this early stage would upset the dynamic of the garage.
Once a clear leader emerges it is only natural to back the leader.

[mnmracer]

F1 is ultimately a team sport, with the drivers and cars being the emd result of that teams output. It takes thousands of man hours to prepare a car for each circuit. Frankly, Vettel abused the position he holds in the team. Teams can only have one boss, and its Horner who is held resposible. If a strategy or tech person makes a dud call, theres an investigation and potential dismissal. F1 is unforgiving.
Each driver for each race has to share the load for evaluating parts, tyre degradation, aero setup, gearing etc. There resrrictions on tyres allocation engine and gearbox longevity etc. If there's a war inside RB, how can they share data? Team orders, are part of the game folks. In Malaysia Vettel was the person who lost out with Webber leading having used option tyre earlier. If Vettels mechanics had picked up on it, they will do similar in future to keep Webber behind at future events.
Vettel didnt play by team rules, overusing engines and other compomemts is patently stupid, when its against a teammate. Vettel must rate Webber a threat to do this!

And you felt compelled to register to share this with us? Team orders at this stage of the season is an idiotic thing to do, no matter how you spin it.

but it wasn't team orders in the normal sense of telling the drivers to finish in the order that maximized the no1 drivers points

it was; stop fighting, you'll run out of fuel and tires, put unneeded stress on engine and gearbox that needs to last for more races and you cannot gain any points for the team

You need the engine and the gearbox to gather points, which in the end is the most important thing.
So the question then becomes, how likely is it that in saving the engine and the gearbox, he would be able to score more than 7 extra points in 3 to 4 laps later on in the season? Unless he again comes out right behind two lead drivers after a pit stop, who then lose all pace after 3 to 4 laps, it's reasonable to think that it is the best use of 3 to 4 laps extra engine stress in the season.

[Stradivarius]

But as we already covered – the drivers don't always know the technical details of how much fuel they actually have. They're told only what they need to know. Brawn also hinted at exactly this after the race when he said "we'll show the drivers the data, and then they'll understand".

To be fair - we don't know what data it was going to be. For all we know it could've been a P45 for Rosberg.

True. My point is mostly not that this is what happened, but that for all we (and hamilton when he said rosberg should have beaten him) know, this could well be what happened. Wolff's assertion seems to back up that it's a highly likely scenario.

I don't think it is a highly likely scenario. Why didn't the team simply tell Rosberg that he needed to slow down in order to conserve fuel, and that he wouldn't make it to the end of the race if didn't? Rosberg obviously believed that if he could get passed Hamilton, he could try to chase down the Red Bulls and it was quite obvious that Rosberg wasn't happy with the instructions to stay behind Hamilton. If he had been explained that this was out of the question due to a lack of fuel in his own car, and that Hamilton was carrying the same amount of fuel, it would have been much easier for Rosberg to accept. If it was true that Rosberg didn't have more fuel than Hamilton, the best, easiest and most obvious thing to do, would have been to say exactly that. This would have made things easier to accept for everyone. But in the end, Rosberg was told to hold position, not to save fuel, so I doubt he was as low on fuel as Hamilton.

In Malaysia, Red Bull was clearly the best team and Mercedes was clearly the second best team. What a shame that the teams are trying to prevent the only possibilities we had to see some racing for the top positions at the end of the race. We only see good racing when a slower driver/car is in front of a faster driver/car. In the end Vettel was behind Webber and faster, while Rosberg was behind Hamilton and faster. But both Red Bull and Mercedes tried to prevent what everyone wanted to see, although only Mercedes succeeded.

[mnmracer]

True. My point is mostly not that this is what happened, but that for all we (and hamilton when he said rosberg should have beaten him) know, this could well be what happened. Wolff's assertion seems to back up that it's a highly likely scenario.

I don't think it is a highly likely scenario. Why didn't the team simply tell Rosberg that he needed to slow down in order to conserve fuel, and that he wouldn't make it to the end of the race if didn't? Rosberg obviously believed that if he could get passed Hamilton, he could try to chase down the Red Bulls and it was quite obvious that Rosberg wasn't happy with the instructions to stay behind Hamilton. If he had been explained that this was out of the question due to a lack of fuel in his own car, and that Hamilton was carrying the same amount of fuel, it would have been much easier for Rosberg to accept. If it was true that Rosberg didn't have more fuel than Hamilton, the best, easiest and most obvious thing to do, would have been to say exactly that. This would have made things easier to accept for everyone. But in the end, Rosberg was told to hold position, not to save fuel, so I doubt he was as low on fuel as Hamilton.

In Malaysia, Red Bull was clearly the best team and Mercedes was clearly the second best team. What a shame that the teams are trying to prevent the only possibilities we had to see some racing for the top positions at the end of the race. We only see good racing when a slower driver/car is in front of a faster driver/car. In the end Vettel was behind Webber and faster, while Rosberg was behind Hamilton and faster. But both Red Bull and Mercedes tried to prevent what everyone wanted to see, although only Mercedes succeeded.

While easier to accept at the moment, no doubt Rosberg would have found at the team lied to him. Not sure that would have gone over well...