Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Singapore, 2024

Mercedes got Hamilton’s Singapore GP strategy wrong, Wolff admits

Formula 1

Posted on

| Written by

Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff described his team’s Singapore Grand Prix performance as “really painful” after they failed to capitalise on their second row lock-out.

While George Russell finished where he started, in fourth place, Lewis Hamilton dropped back three places from his third place start. Wolff admitted the team made a mistake by putting him on the soft tyre compound for the start of the race, while every other driver in the top 10 used mediums.

“Our strategy decisions in the race were determined by our experiences in the past here where track position is crucial,” Wolff explained. “We thought that the soft tyre would give Lewis an advantage at the start but that turned out to be the wrong decision.

“With our challenges managing the rear surfaces, we went backwards. Overtaking proved possible, contrary to previous races here where it has been more processional, and in hindsight we should have started him on the medium.”

However Wolff said the team’s core problem was its W15’s poor race pace. “We were too slow today,” he admitted.

“We are struggling at the moment with tracks that are hot and demanding on traction, like here and Baku, but that is no excuse. It is difficult for us to accept but we must do and find a way to improve.”

Neither Mercedes driver spoke to the media after taking the chequered flag as the team said they needed time to “recover from the exertions of this evening’s race,” which is regularly one of the most punishing on the calendar.

In a statement issued by Mercedes afterwards, Hamilton said “it is hard to describe the range of emotions you feel when we have a difficult race like that.”

“This year continues to be a testing one for everyone, but we are all pushing as hard as we can. We don’t always get things right and that was the case today with our strategy. We all head into the weekend, and every decision we take, with the right intentions and sometimes it doesn’t work out. It can be frustrating, but we are all in this together.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Miss nothing from RaceFans

Get a daily email with all our latest stories - and nothing else. No marketing, no ads. Sign up here:

2024 Singapore Grand Prix

Browse all 2024 Singapore Grand Prix articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

35 comments on “Mercedes got Hamilton’s Singapore GP strategy wrong, Wolff admits”

  1. It looked like a bad decision before lap1. And then they pitted early where they didn’t need to, compounding the problem.

    1. Before lap 1 it looked like an interesting strategy with a small chance of big rewards.

      Unfortunately, it didn’t work out as Hamilton narrowly missed the opportunity to overtake Verstappen at the start, and much less had a chance to use his softer tyres to overtake, or even challenge, the cars in front during the early stage.

      Not necessarily a bad (split) strategy, but it simply didn’t work out this time.

      1. it would have never worked, if he was 4 seconds behind Norris or 4 seconds behind VES, it would have still been his team pitting Russell ahead of Hamilton. This was most likely intentional.

      2. I think he’d have had more chance of passing at the start if he’d been on an inside slot, but from where he was, Max was always going to close that gap to the outside (and that is perfectly fair), so with hindsight, I think it was wishful thinking by Merc.

        1. FOMO is inherent in a lot of the strategies that HAM is getting, going back at least a year. Russell’s race strategies are more on point and conservative.

          These kinds of behaviors should be addressed at their meetings when they talk about execution, planning and strategy, but it’s clear given how prevalent this kind of thing happens to HAM, especially when hes close to the pointy end, how little faith they have in HAM to honestly race for a win. And in turn, the strategy is so bad for HAM, it really only benefits Russell, whom Mercedes clearly have a more vested interest in. Merc still stab-o-taging Lewis, who does nothing but act like a saint in front of the cameras for that team.

          1. Whilst it proved to be a bad strategy, I am glad they decided to try something different for one of the cars. Maybe it would have made more sense though to try starting on hards. But then, if they had, and if there had been an early safety car, we’d have been saying it was obvious that would happen and asking why they didn’t risk starting one of the car on softs.

          2. Merc’s strategy with Lewis was a very common one, stick him behind his teammate, seen it plenty of times this year, putting him on a ‘desparate’ strategy. That obviously would never pay off because Lewis’ car is horribly slow down the straights on the average. Pitting him earlier in that race was always going to destroy his chances of a podium. MED-HARD was a far better strategy than SOFT-HARD. By 40 seconds at least.

          3. *desperate

          4. furthermore, cutting his stint shorter than it needs to be is also a common strategy that Merc employs. They love putting this guy behind other drivers, they have been doing it for years pretty much. Lewis knows he was screwed, Bono knows he screwed Lewis, and Lewis knows Toto is full of it. Its so obvious, and imo, he doesn’t get paid enough to play the clown, which Mercedes are. Hopefully Lewis has a race engineer that respects him and himself enough that this will never happen to him again. Im tired of watching Lewis get played like a fool, its beyond garbage.

      3. Yeah, the only chance this strategy had at succeeding was getting ahead at the start, that is why they took softs.

        In the end it did not work, and Hamilton had to stop relatively early. That said – Sainz showed that strategy could work if done right and with enough pace in the car.

        1. @bascb To be fair, that strategy worked to an extent for Sainz who was in a battle with midfielders who he could significantly outpace when he had clear air, or pass on track with a tyre advantage. Hamilton from 3rd on the grid was set up for a battle at the front, where the same tactic probably wouldn’t have worked because an early stop would have lost him too much time in traffic relative to the front runners who would be in clear air (albeit on older tyres).

          I think the soft strat was a bit of a gamble, but mostly based on the recent Singapore races which Ferrari have led and then ‘parked the bus’ for the first stint, in which case the soft tyre could have held on for long enough not to leave him so vulnerable for the 2nd stint on the hards.

          1. Good point about Sainz and midfielders. Up at the sharp end, the tyre advantages at the end went away quickly, with Piastri not able to close the gap to Max, and LeClerk getting stuck by the time he caught up Russell.

    2. They meant to pit him behind George, HAM can’t overtake people down the straights at almost all tracks, and he was always going to get stalled behind the cars he lost position to, on a track that values position supremely. This was such a bad strategy, there is no way it was a mistake, it was either incompetence or intentional. But considering how many times they have put HAM on a FOMO strategy and caused him to pit early, when hes clearly a driver who can out drive harder compounds, this is more of a habit/behavior which is manifested to facilitate the political agenda at Mercedes.

      I was like, wow Lewis actually had a decent Saturday, oh, wait, they put him on softs when everyone else was on Mediums. Nevermind. Shame on HAM’s race engineer for cosigning that garbage strategy.

      1. They thought Lewis could overtake Lando and Max but both had a good start. And I think they hoped on a safety car which isn’t strange here but since Canada no safetycars … we miss Logan you could depend on him to get a safety car.

    3. This was one of the worst decisions they did. This circuit is not Monaco, it is super hot as well. Only logical explanation is that they re trying to make Russel look better and happy next your to keep him in the team. In monaca you can run soft whole race as it s impossible to overtake. Singapore has a few good straights and tyre condition is critical. Don’t understand the need to burn ham this way, loosing valuable points and money unnecessarily. Justifying an opportunity at start is silly, you can keep that advantage over the stint, it’s impossible here with the softs! Mercedes is super bad in hot conditions already, so only logical thing is to make Russel happy, rest is blabla.

  2. I think no one really predicted that instead of a typical tire management race where leaders go only fast enough to stay ahead and maintain enough tire to cancel out an undercut the leader just ran away from lights out. In the usual case having the softs may have allowed them to overcut verstappen. Or maybe stay close and then try to undercut.

  3. Even a layman could see Mercedes didn’t have leading pace this weekend. And even if he had jumped both Max and Lando at the start, this is not Monaco. Toto/Mercedes should be apologising to their fans who gave up their time to watch this farce.

    1. well said

  4. Understatement of the year.
    Their whole strategy was based on either Norris or Max having bad starts, but the run to the first corner is so short on this track, that an average start is enough to keep position, and that’s what happened. He got alongside Max but turn 1 was right there.

    And his chances were done in less than 10 seconds. Mercedes is 4th fastest team but the car is above the team by quite some margin.

  5. Where did Mercedes lose their neurons?

    1. They’ve never been especially hot on strategy, but don’t have a car 1.5-2 seconds a lap faster than the competition anymore. So their lack of strategic sharpness hurts them more often.

      1. look at the how far ahead Russell was of Hamilton after Russell pitting, its clear they were using HAM to scope the tires and give Russell the best possible aspect. Great drives from a lot of the teams on the grid, but Merc deserved p7 and p8. Hopefully they get humbled by Ferrari and RBR next round.

        1. I was surprised how far ahead Russell was after the pit stops, especially when they were talking about the undercut being so effective. I guess Russell staying out longer stretched out the leaders whilst Hamilton was caught up in having to pass cars and that was enough to nullify the advantage of the undercut and the samm lead Hamilton had had.

        2. @pcxmac

          its clear they were using HAM to scope the tires and give Russell the best possible aspect

          Yep clear. So clear. Very very clear.

          Quite clearly the difference in starting tyres had nothing to do with it.

  6. BLS (@brightlampshade)
    22nd September 2024, 19:01

    Starting on softs suggests they were hoping for a safety car around lap 10, or perhaps even considering a 2 stopper. As it is they just threw Hamilton’s race and then just kind of forgot about him.

  7. Sure. Anyhow, George said thank you.

    1. It was all for George. He needs building up for next year as the team lead.

  8. Mercedes has been treating Hamilton like he’s a Ferrari employee since he announced his move to the Italian team. He knew it would happen and that Russell would get the favorable strategies.

  9. When they lined up on the grid it looked like a bad idea. If Lewis started on mediums it should have been a guaranteed P3

    1. I’m unconvinced by that. Lewis was far too slow on the hard tires. Given the tire life delta of only 9 laps to Russell, he was far too slow on the hard. Even with a conventional medium-hard strategy, Lewis would have struggled in the second stint.

      1. difference is clean air which lewis didn’t have, if he started on meds he would definately had p3

  10. What I don’t understand is why they didn’t bring him in for mediums when it became apparent that he was never going to keep Leclerc behind. Sure, he might have temporarily fallen behind Sainz, and it would have made little difference to his finishing position, but at least he would have been able to go for fastest lap, and not have to drive around the last 20 laps 2.5 seconds off the pace.

    1. Sure, he might have temporarily fallen behind Sainz

      Even if they brought him in immediately after Leclerc passed Sainz, Hamilton would definitely have fallen behind Sainz, as well as Alonso, Hulkenberg, Perez and Colapinto.

      1. Fair enough, that’s quite a lot of cars to pass :-) It was painful to watch his race though.

  11. In hindsight, starting on the medium would’ve indeed been better, & the moment the starting compounds appeared on Live Timing, I was surprised about his starting compound being soft instead of medium like for all other top 10 starters.

Comments are closed.