There aren't supposed to be team orders, but

It depends. If driver A is much better than driver B and is just in a slump, I would still back driver A. If there are 5 races to go and driver A is 20 points behind driver B, driver B gets the nod.

 

I'm afraid you don't recall correctly. Schumacher's first race back was Malaysia, where he took pole, led at the start, then let Irvine overtake him and held up Hakkinen. Irvine famously said in the post-race press conference that not only was Shumacher the best number one driver in the world, but the best number 2 driver as well.

Now, what was the question again?

 

Hahaha! Good post, Scot!

 

If you are referring to Massa vs. Kimi. Massa will never have A status over Kimi, unless of course Hell freezes over.

 

you gotta also remember the implied #1 driver is usually getting played A LOT more money per season than the #2 driver, soooo who would you back for as long as possible? I want my investment to pay off!

 

Until its mathematically impossible for the other driver to win the title.

Thus last year Alonso was still equally favoured till the last race and destroying Lewis's chances at the title. (hooray )

Eddie was just an overrated driver and when he had his chance without Schumie next to him, he failed to deliver. The 1999 championship will always be the championship that noone wanted. Tho that Ferrari pit mixup with the tyres is still fresh in my memories and brings up laughs for the wrong reasons.

Looking back, Schumie went on to win 5 titles with Ferrari and Eddie went on to win nothing, I think Ferrari backed the right horse at the end of the day

 

McL, Ron Dennis, Hammi, and FA?

Last year?

 

Didn't Mika salo also gift Irvine that season? I always thought Ferrari did put their resources behind Irvine once Schumacher broke his leg.

 

Yes Ted, Mika acknowledged in a recent interview that he allowed Eddie to win a race, Eddie subsequently gave Mika the trophy.

By allowing Massa to show he can win last week, Ferrari is continuing with the "two #1 drivers program" they stated at the beginning of the season. Otherwise, Felipe would have found a reason to pit Sunday allowing Kimi into first and into a greater point lead. Ferrari team orders usually don't start until Monza. Then you will see one of them find a reason for a late pit stop to allow the other "#1" to go ahead.

Ferrari mangement like to see their driver win the WDC, but Ferrari management cares about the WCC more than anything.

 

Ferrari certainly did, Michael certainly didn't.

 

Which is the exact same strategy McLaren has. Where are the critics now?!?

All we heard is how McLaren screwed up by having two #1 drivers last year, here Ferrari is doing the same thing (as they should, by the way) and I am sure we will hear not a peep from the naysayers.

I agree with allowing both drivers to go for it until one of them is mathematically eliminated. This is what McLaren does and this is what Ferrari did last year and this. I think it is fair and sporting, let the best positioned driver receive the support once his teammate is out of contention, otherwise let them race.

Too bad Schumacher didn't buy into that idea otherwise he would be in the cockpit alongside Kimi

 

He had to be ordered back into the car to support Irvine, a fact that most here conveniently forget.

Team player, my arse.

 

IIRC, he was caught playing football/soccer I think..

 

I would agree with you to a point. I think I am going to throw up with that statement, but I also think it is healthy to see which driver will do the best at the end and not try to control the results. The difference with Mclaren last year is that somewhere along the line, Alonso was given the impression that he would have number one status, and actually he deserved it, but then he had the rug (carpet for someone as rich as you Ted) pulled out from under him and found himself some where between equal and a little less. He got blind sided, that wasn't the right thing to do, problems ensued. Ferrari has indicated they start with two #1's, and are actually letting that happen, or they would have let Kimi win in Bahrain.

I don't agree with you about Schumacher, but the latest surgery has left me too tired to talk to the wall.

 

Ron you don't remember the famous story? Shumi was out healing his leg at home and said it still wasn't strong enough to drive with. One afternoon Todt called him and his son answered.

"Can I speak to your dad?"
"Hold on he's out back playing soccer"
“Oh really?”

Or something along those lines. Needless to say after the ensuing conversation MS was back in the Ferrari.

 

Exactly.

 

It was Luca who called.

 

I stand corrected.

 

It seems to me that Ferrari seems to put the greatest pit strategy behind the driver that qualifies best. Massa got the optimal strategy because he qualified better than Kimi did. This plan of action seems to be very consistent until one driver has a significant mathematical advantage over the other. When that happens, the driver with the best chance of winning the WDC gets the optimal strategy.

This means that whomever performs better in qualifying, gets the most team support. It is totally fair because it leaves it all up to the drivers.

When McLaren tried to do this last year with Alonso and Hamilton, it didn't work because Alonso was still upset with the setup. It made the feud between them carry over into qualifying, and the commentators said that this setup probably led to the whole Alonso and Hamilton blocking episode in qualifying.

No matter how much Schumi was the top dog during his reign, this strategy was still constant then. There were times that Rubens would out qualify Michael, and Rubens would have the better strategy in those cases. He wouldn't necessarily win, but he would still have the team optimized strategy.

 

I don't buy that for a minute. McLaren's policy on letting their drivers race one another has always been clear so what leads you to believe Alonso had any reason to understand they'd abandoned it because he'd come to the team? Has Alonso ever claimed he'd been given number one status? I haven't seen any comment from him to that effect and I'm sure he would have had something to say about it if it had been the case.

In terms of seeing "which driver will do the best and not try to control the results", McLaren did exactly what you think is healthy but you criticise them. Ferrari appear to be doing the same this year and you are perfectly happy to see it happen. A lack of consistency I think.

 

Nonsense. Ferrari revolved around Schumacher. Austria 2002.

 

Face it, it didint matter what stratagy they used. Mike was going to win anyway.
So why not make it painless.

 

Doesn't hurt to have the entire team built around you. I wonder how he would have fared had he been teamed with Mika or Kimi?