The Race patreon

Is McLaren handling the F1 title fight fairly?

🕑 Added 2025-08-03 19:39:05 +0000 UTC

Comments

Courtney Noble

Piastri had the option to do one stop but chose a two stop. It's hardly unfair that Lando decided to take the risk and it paid off. I disagree completely with the opinion that whoever comes out ahead at the first corner should be handed the race on a platter.

Julie Edwards

Surely fairness is to give the optimum to each driver all through the race, at every point. Which is what played out. They should always give each driver the best chance.. surely giving any driver sub-optimal is unfair?

albertswift

There's a big assumption (not here) that if Oscar had gone for the one stop, he would have made it work. Yes he would have had track position but in general, he has been weaker than Lando when tyres are marginal.

MemphisNick

I need to go back and find the quote, but I swear McLaren said something after a similar situation about parity and not changing strategies (to Oscar’s detriment) like 5-6 races ago.

MemphisNick

This team ain’t big enough for the both of them. How long we think until one moves on (for one reason or another)?

Michael Holden

Read your comments before I listened to Scott and Jon's thoughts on here. Not sure how you think they're crying. Scott asked some questions, and Jon answered them very well, and very balanced. Scott felt for Oscar. The real talking point - which they brought out well - is the ramifications of allowing engineers to do split strategies and it's impact on the WDC.

jez

I have a headline suggestion for you. Racing team allows teammates to race after ensuring favoured driver is given superior strategy to overcome poorer driving

Bostwick Kingsley

The 2nd cars only chance at winning most of the time is to do the opposite strategy of the first car. I like that McLaren is letting them make these choices because it gives us better racing. Had Lando copied the same strategy as Oscar, he likely wouldn’t have even had a chance to win as they are so close in race pace.

Robbie Corrigan

Norris was on the back foot because Piastri went for the guy alongside and not ahead. He created his own monster on the run down to the first corner by effectively making Norris back off and get gobbled up by Russell and Alonso and it's the journalists crying 😜 Strategy is part of racing. Ffs grow up.

Dan W

People always say this but I really don't see it? I don't think Zak was any less enthusiastic about Oscar winning in Spa than he was about Lando winning today

Jose' Cardoso

I will say Zak does have a favorite child and it is not the one who's name starts with an O. This is obvious from radio messages to interviews after races (Watch an Oscar win and a Lando win interview with Zak) Zak clearly has a favorite.

Squilliam

If this were a championship decider, as proposed in the hypothetical, it would have never have happened the way it did. Oscar and his team would have strategized around covering off Lando as his only competitor, possibly to the detriment of his position among the rest of the field. They could and should have done that today, but they opted to focus on maximizing points and realized the threat too late. If it were the championship decider, there would be no controversy besides Oscar failing to realize the only competitor on the grid that matters right now. Lando took a gamble and it paid off, this is nothing new under the sun 😴

Scott Mitchell-Malm

I never said Norris had no right to win. He ended up being able to roll the dice on that strategy because he had a poor first lap and was on the backfoot. Racing isn’t always fair. As Piastri said, you judge risk/reward different depending on if you’re first and second. That’s how it goes. But that doesn’t mean you can’t observe that Piastri was unlucky. - SMM

Kyle Tyler-Biggs

Said it on YouTube so I’ll say it again here: I don't agree with this notion that if one driver has a worse turn 1 than the other that they don't have a right to win the race. This is how it sounds to me after first watching this, maybe i'm misinterpreting it, but if we go down this thought process then you may as well say the race result should be decided by the order they get to the first corner. It's absurd to me to say that it's unfair on Oscar, since it was still a 1-2. Lando made it work, he shouldn't be getting chastised or penalised for winning the race because "he didn't deserve to because he had a bad Turn 1", that's utter nonsense

Bill Armstrong

Not watched the video yet but I think it's completely fair. It's the only example I can think of In recent times when it's fair. It's only fair if you get every opportunity you would get if it wasn't your team mate. Allowing each side of the garage to try a different set up or strategy to change their fortunes is perfectly legitimate. Luck comes in to it over the course of a season so you should be allowed to use strategic variance to counter that.

Andrew Ferg

Isn't part of F1 about strategy? Seems this is being over blown a lot. They are in a championship fight, both sides of garage want to win. Mclaren have more or less won the constructors, so why not let both sides fight it out with their driver?