I thought of replying here since I think it's relevant to Team-Mercedes and how Toto and the Management of Mercedes have decided to run things.Schuttelberg wrote: ↑02 Aug 2017, 12:57If you ask my opinion, you have to respect HAM for his sportsman spirit. It was a very very respectful thing to do. However, the Bahrain non-swap leads me to believe there is more to this than just 'fair status' between the two drivers.
My hunch is that at the time, BOT wasn't a confirmed fixture in the Mercedes-Benz plans for 2018, now he is. So it makes no sense to have a disgruntled driver. Also, his own performance has been solid and instilled faith in the team compared to that time where they were willing to put all their eggs in the HAM basket.
...
Just my 2 cents. But again, massive massive respect for HAM. I'm very suspicious however of Mercedes' intentions and find all this 'team ethos' talks absolute bull sh!t. Wolff's reaction after the swap is a very resounding proof to this argument.
As has been argued and pointed out before Hungary, Mercedes has been running things under the spirit of equality for quite some time. One can argue that from 2014 till 2016, it was their moral obligation to do so, because they were only battling themselves. So to issue team-orders in one drivers favor would be akin to artificially manipulating the race result and therefore the World-Drivers-Championship.
Mercedes was dealing with quite a bit of criticism for being that dominant, so the only way to keep the spectacle interesting was to indeed allow open racing between their two drivers, both in sole contention for the world-championship. I think if you look back to the years and seasons before, you can also see that Mercedes has always run things fairly equally and transparent for both their drivers. One exception was Malaysia 2013 when both Hamilton and Rosberg were battling for 3rd position at a very important race - the home race of major sponsor Petronas. Hamilton was leading and Rosberg was behind, but had pace. At the same time RedBull had the notorious multi-21 order. The reasons for keeping Hamilton ahead were given to that Mercedes (Brawn) felt that they were managing potential issues (not sure if heat, fuel or tires or a combination) and that both cars were ordered to "bring it home". Hamilton was ahead and Rosberg to the best of my knowledge attempted a few times (without success) and was then ordered clearly to stand down.
The podium was quite memorable because when confronted, Hamilton felt bad and did admit he wasn't happy about the team-order and that Rosberg deserved to be on the podium.
Anyway, fast forward to today and this season and I don't think Mercedes is all that different from the team they have been before. Yes, they are battling over both championships with Ferrari and every point counts, yet I do believe that both Toto and Lauda have a very strong desire to keep things equal for both drivers and that "how you win" is just as important as simply winning.
There is one underlying factor though that has been present even in the years between 2014 and 2016 in that the team-result is most important and more important than the drivers own ambition. Toto has said on multiple occasions that the driver drives for the team (is an employee of) and that the team is larger than the driver. The team consists of hundreds of employees. Because of that, the team-result is always most important.
This was quite evident in Monaco (2016) when Rosberg was ahead of Hamilton and Rosberg was obviously nursing some issue (tires out of temperature range). At that point, both Mercedes were behind Ricciardo who was building a large gap - behind Rosberg, there was a long train of cars being held up. Rosberg was ordered multiple times to "speed up" but failed to do so before then ordering him to free Hamilton. Mercedes didn't do that to help Hamilton's own WDC ambition but because as a team, they didn't want one of their cars to sabotage the race for both cars. If they had not freed the quicker car (Hamilton), the risk would have been being undercut by multiple cars behind eventually when nearing the pit stop window. Mercedes did the only sensible thing here.
In 2017 so far, there have been team-orders - yes - but not to the extent I believe it was to benefit one driver over the other, but to get the best possible team-result. A good example of this was in Bahrain. Bottas was leading the race initially, but was driving slow as a result of incorrect tire pressures. Ferrari gambled on strategy with an early pit under the safety car (or was it VSC?) and gained a position. The situation then was Vettel ahead of Bottas and Hamilton. Again, Bottas didn't have the pace and Mercedes took a long time (around 10 laps if I recall) until they decided to free Hamilton as Vettel at that point was building a gap. This wasn't a case of Mercedes helping Hamilton, but Mercedes helping Mercedes. Later in the race, Hamilton was closing quickly with a lot more pace on Bottas (as a result of different strategies) and they gave the order beforehand to not "hold him up" as at that point, he was still in contention for a possible win. It being Bahrain, it would probably also not have been impossible for Hamilton to get past Bottas with a legitimate pass, but every second was crucial vs Ferrari.
In Barcelona, as explained in this very topic (Link = viewtopic.php?p=699298#p699298), Bottas did hold up Vettel mid race, but at that point, he was actually battling for position with Vettel. Both Vettel and Hamilton were on different strategies to Bottas. Bottas didn't have the pace (as a result of the older engine) so his only chance of gaining a position was to go on a different strategy to the rest - that being a 1-stop and make track position count at a track as difficult to overtake as Barcelona. This had the beneficial side effect of Bottas eventually being in a position to hold up Vettel closing in from behind. This was not a case of "Bottas being the pawn for Hamilton" and even if he was, it was just as likely that the goal was to help the team gain the best result, regardless of which driver was leading the race. The way I see it, Barcelona and Bottas strategy was a net win/win for the team, Hamilton and Bottas himself. As explained when you follow the link, there was no risk behind from Ricciardo to not attempt the 1-stop with Bottas.
Hungary 2017 and we have the best indication that Mercedes is rather consistent in how they have decided to run the team for now. Throughout this topic, I have always questioned if Mercedes would be as "equal" if the WDC leading car (that being Hamilton) was the slower car ahead holding up Bottas, and if they would force a swap or indeed play the WDC game. After seeing Hamilton giving up his position to Bottas last corner despite building a sufficient gap, I am not that sure. Sure, at some point, Mercedes will focus on the WDC, but I am rather doubtful they will ever order one driver to slow down significantly to hand over a better position. I just don't think Mercedes, who is in this sport for image reasons, would dare do it.
They will happily order one driver to make room for the faster one, but I don't think they will order the driver ahead to artificially drive slow to enable the other to pass, except if it gains the team and the team alone. One can argue if this is smart or not and only time will tell.
As for the last question about Toto and Niki - from what I understand, Toto being upset post race was due to an argument with Niki. From what I could tell from the RTL broadcast, I think Niki wanted Hamilton to keep the position as he had build a sufficient gap and had the better pace to be "moral victor", where as Toto stood by his decision that if Hamilton failed to improve the team-result by overcoming one of the Ferraris that he should give the place back to Valteri.
