Mercedes had locked out the front row of the Russian Grand Prix, but the wrong driver was on pole.
The rumours began immediately upon Valtteri Bottas fending off Lewis Hamilton in the battle for P1 — surely Mercedes wouldn’t allow a straight fight between its two drivers when both championship battles were still live, even if they were only flickering in the twilight of the season.
After all, Hamilton is Mercedes’ only realistic title contender at this point of the season, and Sebastian Vettel, 40 points behind Hamilton in the standings before the Russian Grand Prix, is the Briton’s only realistic challenger, even if the chances of him beating Lewis to a fifth world championship became only more remote throughout a difficult October.
The German had qualified third alongside Hamilton in what was essentially a must-win grand prix to keep his title destiny in his control, and with Ferrari and Mercedes closely matched on race pace in Sochi, nothing could be taken for granted despite the Silver Arrows dominating qualifying.
Sebastian Vettel. (GEPA Pictures/Red Bull Content Pool).
All the headline factors lent an air of inevitability to Mercedes making the call for Bottas to cede his lead to Hamilton in the name of the drivers championship fight, and indeed at around half distance the Finn was ordered to do exactly that.
The deed done, Hamilton extended his championship lead to a crushing 50 points over Vettel as he led home a Mercedes formation finish, but it was to the pleasure of no-one.
Not Hamilton and certainly not Bottas was happy with the result, and suddenly Sochi became ground zero for the reopening of the tension between teams and individuals in Formula One.
Countering all the key reasons Hamilton was ordained by Mercedes management to finish ahead of Bottas was the inescapable emotional narrative that Bottas deserved to win the 2018 Russian Grand Prix, having controlled the race from pole position at a circuit around which he has never been outqualified by a teammate and has typically excelled on Sundays.
Add to the mix the fact that Bottas has been forlornly searching for a win all season to kick his sophomore Mercedes year into gear. He was denied victory through strategy in Bahrain, a safety car in China and debris in Azerbaijan, leaving him languishing down the order in the championship standings.
Some subsequent risky strategies then led to underwhelming results and his ensuing lack of confidence begot his recent poor form, but he used Russia, a happy hunting ground of his, to put together the most complete weekend of his season to date and reverse his declining performance trend.
Adding to the distaste was that Hamilton already held a commanding 40-point lead over Vettel going into the race and that the team order was the difference between him extending that to 43 points or 50 points. Mathematically the title fight lives on, but, all things being equal, it was only ever a decision about how fast Hamilton is likely to earn his fifth crown.
So does Bottas’ personal narrative outweigh the collective story attempting to be told by Mercedes?
Consider as a contrasting example the derision levelled at Ferrari after qualifying for the Italian Grand Prix, when the championship was still well and truly in the balance. The team chose to give Kimi Raikkonen, not Vettel, the benefit of a team-ordered slipstream around the power circuit and then sent him out too late to at least pick up a tow from Hamilton.
Raikkonen led the Ferrari front-row lockout, which was a contributing factor in Vettel’s first-lap crash with Hamilton that cost him a podium place.
Consider also the Italian team’s handling of its German Grand Prix strategy — it dithered in ordering the slower Raikkonen out of Vettel’s way, which created unnecessary pressure on Sebastian when the rain came and therefore played an indirect role in his crash.
Indeed for every reason one might deride the use of team orders in the latter stages of a championship battle there is an occasion when the reluctance to deploy them has been fairly criticised.
Lewis Hamilton looks set to claim another title. (Photo: Mercedes AMG Petronas)
“Somebody needs to be the baddie sometimes, and it’s me today,” Mercedes boss Toto Wolff said, summing up the team-orders equation. “What do I opt for: to be the baddie on Sunday evening, or do I want to be the idiot in Abu Dhabi at the end of the season?
“I’d rather be the baddie today than the idiot at the end of the year.”
A fifth Hamilton title may seem like a sure thing, but predicting the outcome of the next five grands prix — and this weekend’s Japanese Grand Prix is already forecast to be typhoon-affected as a case in point — is a mug’s game.
Questions of perceived fairness or natural justice simply don’t come into it, because by the time we get to Abu Dhabi who wins the championship, not who wins the Russian Grand Prix, is the only question that matters.
anon
Roar Pro
This is a simple question. Are you a greater favourite for the championship with a 1.5 race lead, the best car (by a margin) and all the momentum in late September, or are you a greater favourite with the best car, the momentum and a 2 race lead in mid-May? Mathematically you are a shorter priced favourite in late September with the 1.5 race lead. Let's make it simpler. Is a 40 point lead more valuable in May or October? Even if Hamilton DNF'd in two consecutive races, he would still be favourite for the championship. That's almost unheard of in this era of bulletproof reliability. Hamilton's had one DNF since Malaysia 2016 (2/10/2016). One DNF in two years. They could have two DNF's in a row and still be favourite like I said. You're looking back at 2002 after it happened, not at what Ferrari's thinking would have been thinking in May 2002. They weren't to know that they would continue winning. Barrichello wasn't even close to Schumacher. He beat Schumacher by 0.05 second in Melbourne qualifying, taken out on the first corner. Schumacher out qualified him by 0.625 second in Malaysia. Schumacher tangled with Montoya early on. Barrichello went out with a mechanical failure. If it can happen to Barrichello's car it can happen to Schumacher's. Schumacher out qualified Barrichello by 0.7 second in Brazil. Schumacher won, but you could argue that the Williams was quicker. Schumacher outqualified Barrichello by 0.064 at Imola. Beat him comfortably in the race. Spain, Schumacher outqualified Barrichello by 0.326. Barrichello had mechanical problem in the race. If it can happen to Barrichello it can happen to Schumacher. Then yes, Barrichello outqualified and beat Schumacher in Austria, but Barrichello always went well in Austria. If you go over the speed advantage Schumacher had over Barrichello in all of 2000, all of 2001 and early 2002, then it would have been stupid of Ferrari to think Barrichello was any chance for the championship with a 44-6 point deficit to Schumacher.
Michael Lamonato
Expert
I don't think there's a disproportionate amount of anti-Schumacher or anti-Ferrari bias anywhere, to be honest. Schumacher was rightly criticised for his more questionable driving tactics but is regarded as highly as any of the greats; Ferrari is likewise given the credit it deserves for its historic successes but derided for its propensity to fall into deep troughs between purple patches. I understand what you mean when you're comparing them, but there are key differences. Barrichello was way behind in points, but he'd had four DNFs, three of which were mechanical, by Austria but had just one fewer pole position than Schumacher — he hadn't even had a chance by that point in the season. Bottas, on the other hand, as slowly worked his way out of contention by underperforming compared to Hamilton. Mercedes also had more to lose. Whereas Ferrari had a sizeable pace and points advantage — even with open development there wasn't going to be a sudden form reversal — Mercedes had only a points advantage. A DNF for Hamilton with a car only on par with Ferrari with a handful of races remaining would have been substantially more costly than a DNF for Schumacher in a far quicker car at the midseason break.
anon
Roar Pro
There's a huge anti-Schumacher/anti-Ferrari bias out there. Barrichello had 6 points. Schumacher had 44. Schumacher 21 points over Montoya (10 points for race win). Barrichello out of contention. Ferrari missed by the skin of their teeth with inferior cars 1997-99. McLaren had the edge again in 2000, Ferrari finally had the edge in 2001. In 2001 the Williams was often on the pace of the Ferrari, but had poor reliability. 6 rounds into 2002, Ferrari weren't to know that they would continue to dominate. A two race lead in mid-May is nothing. There were no limits on development back then. Teams could and would improve their competitiveness within the season (something we haven't seen in the hybrid era and much less since engines were homologated in 2006. Put this way. Are you in a stronger position with a 1.5 race lead in late September, or with a 2 race lead in mid-May. Hamilton went into Russia as a $1.10 favourite for the championship. Almost unbackable. Virtually assured of the championship such was his position. It was completely unnecessary. Certainly less necessary than doing it in 6 rounds into the season.
Michael Lamonato
Expert
Yeah, they could've, but I suppose Vettel was following closely enough that any change of the lead would've been a threat. Plus they both would've lost time and potentially opened themselves up to being undercut by Ferrari. It's fair to say it wasn't the cleanest day strategically for Mercedes, though.
Michael Lamonato
Expert
It's not a comparable example, though. Austria was the sixth round of that season in which Ferrari was so dominant that Schumacher already had a points advantage worth two race wins — and then of course there was the way it was executed. If you're judging the overall fairness, it's not a useful comparison.
anon
Roar Pro
Ferrari were right to move Barrichello over for Schumacher in Austria 2002 right?
marfu
Guest
Thanks Michael. If anything, Merc could have and should have swapped them before the pit stops as they then would have probably avoided being undercut by Vettel which could have been a problem if Ham had not been able to pass him as quickly as he did. Team orders don't make for pretty viewing but these teams don't spend hundreds of millions just to run second.