2025 McLaren F1 Team

[mwillems]

Thing is with how Mclaren is handling the championship they are already being discussed negatively to the media and the community. Already people are calling it the Championship of the Mids (as in mediocres refering to the two Mclaren drivers).

Mate, they would be discussed negatively whatever they do. Teams that prioritise are discussed negatively, teams that try to be fair are discussed negatively. Somebody always has something to complain about because you have separate interests on all sides of this.

McLaren have made a choice and it’s the only choice that makes sense given the relative parity between their two drivers and their closeness in the standings. If they had prioritised Piastri that would have caused a monumental sh**storm that would dwarf whatever “controversies” that are currently being blown out of proportion.

As for the whole “Championship of the Mids”, I doubt many of us had heard that before you started bringing it up here. So maybe stop saying it Yeah, most people wouldn’t put Lando or Oscar at the very top of their driver ranking but that doesn’t make them “mid”.

I think the differing opinions in here such as Monza show there isnt just one way to handle this. The optics aren't around equality per se, they are around how it has been made to be equal and the rules to implement it, and whether that was ultimately "equal". That much is clear from in here and on social media.

Toto Wolff has stated this year that he has handled managing equality differently in the past and that the way the team are doing it has risks. The risks in that by being involved one driver might think that decisions are not actually equal.

Best way to not look your getting involved, is to not get involved. But the team feel they have the trust of the drivers, which so far they do. it doesn't appear they care about any noise outside the team.

[mwillems]

what is the debate that's going on ?
A : Team prioritizes Norris
B : Team doesn't have driver priority
irrespective of the 'form' of each driver.

Right ?
What will ensure a McLaren driver wins WDC - A or B ? Can anyone answer with certainty ? I don't think so.
Then the whole point of the back and forth pugilism in the last two pages, is only about the 'team PR' or 'image of the team' isn't it ? In that case, does A make the team villains ? does B make them saints ? Neither, as you will all agree with me. Then why are we wasting our time and the forum's content, over this ? The mainstream F1 media and all the 'streamers'/'podcasters' are anyway filling up the internet with hours and hours of 'whom are they favouring' , 'should they favour one' debates. Let's give it a rest, let the team do whatever it deems fit, because the team as an organization really cares only for the WCC, and it's already achieved it, handsomely. The WDC, as far as the teams (this particular team especially) are concerned, is only a 'good-to-have', not 'essential'. However, a vast majority of the F1 audience/fans don't really care for WCC, they care only about WDC, and the teams & FoM already know this.

It sort of morphed. It started as what can Lando and Oscar do strategically against each other to get ahead, and seemed to morph into Lando being favoured, then back a bit towards Oscar being disadvantaged due to being in the same teams as Lando, or at least that was my take. it kind of felt there was a question not actually being asked, and I thought it was more around whether the team are favouring Lando, which I don't think they are.

[Farnborough]

what is the debate that's going on ?
A : Team prioritizes Norris
B : Team doesn't have driver priority
irrespective of the 'form' of each driver.

Right ?
What will ensure a McLaren driver wins WDC - A or B ? Can anyone answer with certainty ? I don't think so.
Then the whole point of the back and forth pugilism in the last two pages, is only about the 'team PR' or 'image of the team' isn't it ? In that case, does A make the team villains ? does B make them saints ? Neither, as you will all agree with me. Then why are we wasting our time and the forum's content, over this ? The mainstream F1 media and all the 'streamers'/'podcasters' are anyway filling up the internet with hours and hours of 'whom are they favouring' , 'should they favour one' debates. Let's give it a rest, let the team do whatever it deems fit, because the team as an organization really cares only for the WCC, and it's already achieved it, handsomely. The WDC, as far as the teams (this particular team especially) are concerned, is only a 'good-to-have', not 'essential'. However, a vast majority of the F1 audience/fans don't really care for WCC, they care only about WDC, and the teams & FoM already know this.

Any sport arranged around a solus champion will have been designed to do this, also attracting so much spectating attention. Its really this which gets the viewers fired up, ultimately to commercial success in many cases.

There's no way of separation if two principal contestants exist in one team. It divides the team whatever the intent or sentiment, success or failure. The jeopardy rising substantially when risk of loosing the honour of WDC can pass to another team.

There's literally no way around the contention in psychological terms. Which, spectating wise, makes it more interesting to boot.

[Badger]

Thing is with how Mclaren is handling the championship they are already being discussed negatively to the media and the community. Already people are calling it the Championship of the Mids (as in mediocres refering to the two Mclaren drivers).

Mate, they would be discussed negatively whatever they do. Teams that prioritise are discussed negatively, teams that try to be fair are discussed negatively. Somebody always has something to complain about because you have separate interests on all sides of this.

McLaren have made a choice and it’s the only choice that makes sense given the relative parity between their two drivers and their closeness in the standings. If they had prioritised Piastri that would have caused a monumental sh**storm that would dwarf whatever “controversies” that are currently being blown out of proportion.

As for the whole “Championship of the Mids”, I doubt many of us had heard that before you started bringing it up here. So maybe stop saying it Yeah, most people wouldn’t put Lando or Oscar at the very top of their driver ranking but that doesn’t make them “mid”.

I think the differing opinions in here such as Monza show there isnt just one way to handle this. The optics aren't around equality per se, they are around how it has been made to be equal and the rules to implement it.

Toto Wolff has stated this year that he has handled managing equality differently in the past.

Uh, I see a fair few people advocating for them to put all their chips behind Oscar. So some people are definitely not on the equal treatment train.

As for Monza I think they made the right call. People focus on the slow stop but it’s the undercut delta which made them give the position back. They asked for the undercut as a favour to protect Oscar, contingent on the fact that it didn’t result in an undercut. Well it did result in an undercut. The 2-3 second time delta between the scenarios where Lando or Oscar pit first made the difference, even if Lando has a slow pit stop in both.

[polesetter]

If a McLaren driver becomes WDC, the Team did everything right. Regardless
If Verstappen wins, they did it wrong. Let's see at the end!

[mwillems]

what is the debate that's going on ?
A : Team prioritizes Norris
B : Team doesn't have driver priority
irrespective of the 'form' of each driver.

Right ?
What will ensure a McLaren driver wins WDC - A or B ? Can anyone answer with certainty ? I don't think so.
Then the whole point of the back and forth pugilism in the last two pages, is only about the 'team PR' or 'image of the team' isn't it ? In that case, does A make the team villains ? does B make them saints ? Neither, as you will all agree with me. Then why are we wasting our time and the forum's content, over this ? The mainstream F1 media and all the 'streamers'/'podcasters' are anyway filling up the internet with hours and hours of 'whom are they favouring' , 'should they favour one' debates. Let's give it a rest, let the team do whatever it deems fit, because the team as an organization really cares only for the WCC, and it's already achieved it, handsomely. The WDC, as far as the teams (this particular team especially) are concerned, is only a 'good-to-have', not 'essential'. However, a vast majority of the F1 audience/fans don't really care for WCC, they care only about WDC, and the teams & FoM already know this.

Any sport arranged around a solus champion will have been designed to do this, also attracting so much spectating attention. Its really this which gets the viewers fired up, ultimately to commercial success in many cases.

There's no way of separation if two principal contestants exist in one team. It divides the team whatever the intent or sentiment, success or failure. The jeopardy rising substantially when risk of loosing the honour of WDC can pass to another team.

There's literally no way around the contention in psychological terms. Which, spectating wise, makes it more interesting to boot.

Indeed, having two strong drivers is a blessing and a curse. it is what it is. Prioritise one you will lose the other and possibly take the team down with you, then you'll potentially sacrifice your ability to move forward coherently in the future.

I'm not sure they expected the timings and for Oscar to be this close to Lando, or that they would have this problem. But it's here, and this is the reality of it and they'd prefer not to lose either driver and to keep the harmony.

Time will tell just how realistic this is and whether a driver wants to try to force a move if they feel sharing the team isn't in their interest.

[mwillems]

Mate, they would be discussed negatively whatever they do. Teams that prioritise are discussed negatively, teams that try to be fair are discussed negatively. Somebody always has something to complain about because you have separate interests on all sides of this.

McLaren have made a choice and it’s the only choice that makes sense given the relative parity between their two drivers and their closeness in the standings. If they had prioritised Piastri that would have caused a monumental sh**storm that would dwarf whatever “controversies” that are currently being blown out of proportion.

As for the whole “Championship of the Mids”, I doubt many of us had heard that before you started bringing it up here. So maybe stop saying it Yeah, most people wouldn’t put Lando or Oscar at the very top of their driver ranking but that doesn’t make them “mid”.

I think the differing opinions in here such as Monza show there isnt just one way to handle this. The optics aren't around equality per se, they are around how it has been made to be equal and the rules to implement it.

Toto Wolff has stated this year that he has handled managing equality differently in the past.

Uh, I see a fair few people advocating for them to put all their chips behind Oscar. So some people are definitely not on the equal treatment train.

As for Monza I think they made the right call. People focus on the slow stop but it’s the undercut delta which made them give the position back. They asked for the undercut as a favour to protect Oscar, contingent on the fact that it didn’t result in an undercut. Well it did result in an undercut. The 2-3 second time delta between the scenarios where Lando or Oscar pit first made the difference, even if Lando has a slow pit stop in both.

But the much larger conversation is around how it is handled. A noisy minority do talk about favouring a driver, I don't get involved because it isn't that serious a conversation and not worth getting into, imo.

I don't think they made a bad call in their papaya rules, though others do. I think the issue lies in what I said previously, around the optics from the drivers (And to a much smaller extent, the fans), where since Mclaren are more active in the way they manage the drivers, they may perceive the team not being equal. Either through reality, paranoia or championship pressure.

So far, the drivers come away being really sensible and team focussed. But at some point that will change.

But I get what the team are trying to do. The longer they have harmony the more likely they can keep going in the same direction and be a team.

[mwillems]

It might be that they only get one championship year where the drivers allow this, and afterwards the guy that didn't win (assuming a Mclaren driver does), will do something to change the dynamics.

[venkyhere]

what is the debate that's going on ?
A : Team prioritizes Norris
B : Team doesn't have driver priority
irrespective of the 'form' of each driver.

Right ?
What will ensure a McLaren driver wins WDC - A or B ? Can anyone answer with certainty ? I don't think so.
Then the whole point of the back and forth pugilism in the last two pages, is only about the 'team PR' or 'image of the team' isn't it ? In that case, does A make the team villains ? does B make them saints ? Neither, as you will all agree with me. Then why are we wasting our time and the forum's content, over this ? The mainstream F1 media and all the 'streamers'/'podcasters' are anyway filling up the internet with hours and hours of 'whom are they favouring' , 'should they favour one' debates. Let's give it a rest, let the team do whatever it deems fit, because the team as an organization really cares only for the WCC, and it's already achieved it, handsomely. The WDC, as far as the teams (this particular team especially) are concerned, is only a 'good-to-have', not 'essential'. However, a vast majority of the F1 audience/fans don't really care for WCC, they care only about WDC, and the teams & FoM already know this.

It sort of morphed. It started as what can Lando and Oscar do strategically against each other to get ahead, and seemed to morph into Lando being favoured, then back a bit towards Oscar being disadvantaged due to being in the same teams as Lando, or at least that was my take. it kind of felt there was a question not actually being asked, and I thought it was more around whether the team are favouring Lando, which I don't think they are.

McLaren should ask one of their drivers to cleverly have a late-braking torpedo and take out Verstappen, while the other driver benefits, and do the same again with the other driver in the next race. The risk is that in one/both cases, Verstappen can end up not-DNF -ing while the McLaren does. There is the risk of being found guilty and getting 1/more race ban(s). There is also the risk of the 2nd torpedo deciding 'well, I dont need to do it, my teammate is out of the picture anyway'. F1 is not a gentleman's sport. No matter how much it's dressed up to be, by the team-PR/commentary/F1-media. It wouldn't surprise me if something like this happens. It has happened so many times in the past.

Will McLaren do it ? Whether they do or don't, are the people who like/dislike the team/driver(s) going to change their opinion ? None of our opinions matter, honestly. I don't know why we are wasting time on 'what should they do' , instead of analyzing 'what they have done' after a race.

[FittingMechanics]

Honestly McLaren just shouldn't have talked about Papaya rules. Naming them that makes it into much bigger story then it really is. It effectively comes down to "don't crash into each other" and "driver ahead has pit priority". Nothing really controversial about that.

[Darth-Piekus]

Wasnt the car last year just as close to Red Bull as it is now?

[mwillems]

what is the debate that's going on ?
A : Team prioritizes Norris
B : Team doesn't have driver priority
irrespective of the 'form' of each driver.

Right ?
What will ensure a McLaren driver wins WDC - A or B ? Can anyone answer with certainty ? I don't think so.
Then the whole point of the back and forth pugilism in the last two pages, is only about the 'team PR' or 'image of the team' isn't it ? In that case, does A make the team villains ? does B make them saints ? Neither, as you will all agree with me. Then why are we wasting our time and the forum's content, over this ? The mainstream F1 media and all the 'streamers'/'podcasters' are anyway filling up the internet with hours and hours of 'whom are they favouring' , 'should they favour one' debates. Let's give it a rest, let the team do whatever it deems fit, because the team as an organization really cares only for the WCC, and it's already achieved it, handsomely. The WDC, as far as the teams (this particular team especially) are concerned, is only a 'good-to-have', not 'essential'. However, a vast majority of the F1 audience/fans don't really care for WCC, they care only about WDC, and the teams & FoM already know this.

It sort of morphed. It started as what can Lando and Oscar do strategically against each other to get ahead, and seemed to morph into Lando being favoured, then back a bit towards Oscar being disadvantaged due to being in the same teams as Lando, or at least that was my take. it kind of felt there was a question not actually being asked, and I thought it was more around whether the team are favouring Lando, which I don't think they are.

McLaren should ask one of their drivers to cleverly have a late-braking torpedo and take out Verstappen, while the other driver benefits, and do the same again with the other driver in the next race. The risk is that in one/both cases, Verstappen can end up not-DNF -ing while the McLaren does. There is the risk of being found guilty and getting 1/more race ban(s). There is also the risk of the 2nd torpedo deciding 'well, I dont need to do it, my teammate is out of the picture anyway'. F1 is not a gentleman's sport. No matter how much it's dressed up to be, by the team-PR/commentary/F1-media. It wouldn't surprise me if something like this happens. It has happened so many times in the past.

Will McLaren do it ? Whether they do or don't, are the people who like/dislike the team/driver(s) going to change their opinion ? None of our opinions matter, honestly. I don't know why we are wasting time on 'what should they do' , instead of analyzing 'what they have done' after a race.

Well that's the thing. It's crunch time, everyone is going to have an opinion on how things should be done. There is always a group to say "they should have done X", no matter what happens.

The noise just reflects how much is at stake now and the team recognise this, they ignore the noise and do what they think is right. And that's the team I want. It's the qualities I most admire about Stella.

He's humble and not brash but he knows his mind and he will get his head down and do the thing he thinks is right even with all the pressure. I support everything he does, he is the glue that holds it all together. Want Papaya rules? You do that Andrea.

As for whether Andrea would ask someone to drive like that and that both drivers would do it? As I'm sure you know, that is highly unlikely.

[Vettel165]

what is the debate that's going on ?
A : Team prioritizes Norris
B : Team doesn't have driver priority
irrespective of the 'form' of each driver.

Right ?
What will ensure a McLaren driver wins WDC - A or B ? Can anyone answer with certainty ? I don't think so.
Then the whole point of the back and forth pugilism in the last two pages, is only about the 'team PR' or 'image of the team' isn't it ? In that case, does A make the team villains ? does B make them saints ? Neither, as you will all agree with me. Then why are we wasting our time and the forum's content, over this ? The mainstream F1 media and all the 'streamers'/'podcasters' are anyway filling up the internet with hours and hours of 'whom are they favouring' , 'should they favour one' debates. Let's give it a rest, let the team do whatever it deems fit, because the team as an organization really cares only for the WCC, and it's already achieved it, handsomely. The WDC, as far as the teams (this particular team especially) are concerned, is only a 'good-to-have', not 'essential'. However, a vast majority of the F1 audience/fans don't really care for WCC, they care only about WDC, and the teams & FoM already know this.

It sort of morphed. It started as what can Lando and Oscar do strategically against each other to get ahead, and seemed to morph into Lando being favoured, then back a bit towards Oscar being disadvantaged due to being in the same teams as Lando, or at least that was my take. it kind of felt there was a question not actually being asked, and I thought it was more around whether the team are favouring Lando, which I don't think they are.

McLaren should ask one of their drivers to cleverly have a late-braking torpedo and take out Verstappen, while the other driver benefits, and do the same again with the other driver in the next race. The risk is that in one/both cases, Verstappen can end up not-DNF -ing while the McLaren does. There is the risk of being found guilty and getting 1/more race ban(s). There is also the risk of the 2nd torpedo deciding 'well, I dont need to do it, my teammate is out of the picture anyway'. F1 is not a gentleman's sport. No matter how much it's dressed up to be, by the team-PR/commentary/F1-media. It wouldn't surprise me if something like this happens. It has happened so many times in the past.

Will McLaren do it ? Whether they do or don't, are the people who like/dislike the team/driver(s) going to change their opinion ? None of our opinions matter, honestly. I don't know why we are wasting time on 'what should they do' , instead of analyzing 'what they have done' after a race.

Like in 2007 with Alonso and Hamilton. They would rather see Kimi winning the title, its probably the same here. Piastri would rather see Max winning, than his teammate, just to prove some points...

[Farnborough]

Wasnt the car last year just as close to Red Bull as it is now?

What impact has that ?

We're here now, success, failure, decision and indecision all banked, this year up until now.

It's only forward to find the outcome .... past it irrelevant right now.

[Farnborough]

"Like in 2007 with Alonso and Hamilton. They would rather see Kimi winning the title, its probably the same here. Piastri would rather see Max winning, than his teammate, just to prove some points..."

While I can see that view (remember also Sch and Irvine, after broken leg) I'd be very surprised to hear of these two ultimately determined in that direction. They both appear to agree on their support for the team as a whole.