Welcome to Thursday’s edition of the RaceFans round-up.
Comment of the day
Jem wonders if Ferrari are failing to keep an eye on the big picture with their race strategies:
Seeing Ferrari get caught out by a completely predictable turn of events (Hamilton on better tyres catching Leclerc after fortuitous VSC timing) and then waiting until the driver asks about it before actually mulling it over and then failing to inform the drivers at the same time, does make me wonder whether they have anyone who is watching the whole race from a team perspective?
I’m sure they’ve got strategists looking at each driver, but is there anyone actually considering things “holistically” who has the authority to say “this is how we are going to handle this scenario”. It just feels like they’re still winging it on these calls and coming to a decision by committee.
Jem (@j1jem)
Happy birthday!
Happy birthday to Jonny!
On this day in motorsport
- Born today in 1959: Luis Perez-Sala, who made 26 grand prix starts in 1988 and 1989, all for Minardi
- 15 years ago today Mark Webber pipped Robert Kubica to pole position for the Monaco Grand Prix
- 60 years ago today Jackie Stewart won the non-championship BRDC International Trophy at Silverstone for BRM
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
Coventry Climax
15th May 2025, 0:35
Huh? No points, yet a round for the championship?
Interesting.
Can’t they just use that construct for the sprints in F1 please?
SteveP
15th May 2025, 6:40
No points, run on a Wednesday, with entry being optional – perfect.
MacLeod (@macleod)
15th May 2025, 7:53
Ideal for testing oh wait they don’t want that….
Coventry Climax
15th May 2025, 0:57
Regarding CotD: After he’s managed to get his team to actually inform him, isn’t that Vasseur’s job?
The “We’re checking” has become so typically Ferrari that it’s embarassing. They’re caught out all the time, it would seem, which makes this a team unsuitable for F1.
Unless…
They check not internally, but with Liberty and the FiA, to see if they’re still supporting the show sufficiently and as expected, and about what sanctions others can possibly be given without it becoming too overly conspicuous that everything is rigged.
That’s probably the deal they made with the FiA after they illegally fooled their fuel sensors. And they’ll finally be granted another title within just a couple more years. That’s before they’ve done their full sentence, but based on good behaviour.
pcxmac (@pcxmac)
15th May 2025, 5:55
so not only do they add weight, but they have aero restriction and power restrictions placed on their cars ?
smells just like when they hobbled the diesels so the FIA and the ‘manufactuers’ could push their new hybrid format.
Also, I wouldnt be surprised if Ferrari are getting kick backs from not giving two cents in F1. I mean they clearly lack any impetus to push their drivers any faster than 7th or 8th. They have literally taken Mercedes position w/ not caring, while Merc, Williams, & McLaren seem to have been ‘boosted’ for this season.
Honestly though I have to say, I think BOP exists in F1, they just don’t admit to it, and it has to do with Pirelli’s tires, their fuel flow metering system, and general stewarding.
MichaelN
15th May 2025, 7:00
Sportscar regulations have always been used to push certain technologies to attract manufacturers. Diesel in LMP had built in advantages as well. It’s how they, without the huge audience F1 can count on, need to sweeten the deal to bring in the big names.
And yes, the current BoP has always been to tweak the cars along various performance indicators. This is the point of the LMH class, and Toyota constantly complaining is not a great look for them. They more than anyone should have known exactly what to expect.
pcxmac (@pcxmac)
15th May 2025, 6:15
According to the current theory, the best place Aston can achieve this year is behind Williams.
1. McLaren
2. Mercedes
3. RBR
4. Ferrari
5. Williams
6. Aston
7. VCARB
8. Alpine (this team is subject to performance spurts due to it potentially going on the trading block)
9. Haas
10. BitCoin Express
Jere (@jerejj)
15th May 2025, 6:40
I don’t get the BitCoin Express reference for Audi/Sauber.
Jere (@jerejj)
15th May 2025, 6:39
While I was positive the S/F straight’s activation zone starting point would at the very least remain unchanged, I’m also unhappy because the Imola circuit is one of the worst for overtaking & the DRS train effect was clearly big already in 2022, hence, the 100-meter postponement for last year’s edition was totally unjustified, which led to a race where overtaking was effectively possible only with big tyre delta, so surprisingly Rui Marques hasn’t nullified his predecessor’s move by reverting to the previous starting point or alternatively as a compromise brought it forward by 75 meters like in Shanghai & Miami, or at the very least 50 meters to at least marginally minimize the naturally-increasing DRS train effect.
The Shanghai circuit is ultimately quite a bit more overtaking-friendly, so since its longest full-throttle section received an earlier starting point as well as Miami’s south section (albeit weirdly not the back straight equally), Imola’s S/F straight zone equally deserves an earlier starting point, especially after how last year’s edition went racing quality-wise.
The opposite action is simply contradictory & combined with comparatively worse cars for following, means racing quality could be even worse than in last year’s edition.
Diez Cilindros (@diezcilindros)
15th May 2025, 7:10
I’m OK with a relatively short DRS zone, but I think they should add an extra DRS zone between Variante Alta and Rivazza, it will bring cars closer a tenth or two and it will help.
Jere (@jerejj)
15th May 2025, 8:16
Unfortunately, FIA has always seemed to think the marginal rightward kink towards Rivazza 1 would be risky for DRS, even though it isn’t any tighter in radius than Zandvoort’s banked last corner, Marina Bay’s two kinks within activation zones, or Nurburgring’s back straight kink, etc.
GT Racer (@gt-racer)
15th May 2025, 14:27
@jerejj The thing they looked at with the kink before Rivazza is that the track drops away through it so the cars can get a bit light over that rise anyway which is something that would be more of an issue with DRS open.
Coventry Climax
15th May 2025, 16:22
So it’s no longer car design quality and driver skills that decide cornering speed, it’s increasingly just the FiA.
But by all means, keep calling it racing at the top level.
S Arkazam
15th May 2025, 7:52
Not being allowed to use the words BoP, is a bit like those quizzes where one cannot say ‘yes’ or ‘no’.
MichaelN
15th May 2025, 15:21
Toyota being in the headline is a good hint they’re complaining about BoP again. They have a great car and a solid line-up, but the team leadership has not adapted well to the Hypercar format. How many manufacturers are there now? A dozen or so, and aside from an emotionally charged outburst by Ferrari at Monza it’s basically always Toyota that’s doing the complaining.
It’s important to note that one of the reasons the BoP was baked into the Hypercar class is that the LMP1 class was way too expensive such that the only manufacturers still there were… oh right, it was only Toyota. The fact that they can’t outspend everyone and win is the point.
And their complaints are also a bit silly. The FIA and ACO have an extremely narrow window – just tenths of a percentage – in which they want each car to be. They’re even talking about a smaller gap, so that the cars are basically identical. But there’s no BoP on strategy, on tyres, on drivers. Plenty of ways for Toyota to make the difference.
That said, it has been altered a bit this year since the FIA and ACO have broadened the number of laps they take into account for the BoP. That’s a good change because previously they only took the best 10 laps, which meant it was only balancing performance on fresh tyres. And this also played into the difference between LMH and LMDh, as tyre wear differs there, in part due to LMH having their MGU on the front wheels.
S Arkazam
16th May 2025, 13:11
How ridiculous to have a (more or less) technically open motorsport, where teams are expected to innovate and develop, to then penaliseb them during the actual racing where they can prove how good they are.
It’s like FiFA requiring teams to reduce by 1 player for the next match after every game they win.
And how disappointing that fans accept this. Those fans should focus on spec series where they get what they appear to want.
Bullfrog (@bullfrog)
15th May 2025, 11:13
They need a new floor to accommodate the new low that they’ve hit.
How much more wind-tunnel time are they given if they come last?
batonage
15th May 2025, 20:15
COTD
Carl Parker (@mysticarl)
15th May 2025, 13:25
I think Toyota have a legitimate complaint, as do Porsche in WEC, because they (WEC) have deviated from a joint process that was meant to cover WEC and IMSA’s BOP process. It’s an extremely complicated thing to preside over though and I’m not aware of all the intricacies of it. Both should expect a boost for Le Mans, because the final race of last year should drop out of consideration as far as performance goes which Toyota won and Porsche were 2nd.
MichaelN
15th May 2025, 15:23
Le Mans has its own BoP, outside the normal process. It also doesn’t play a part in the BoP for the rest of the year.
The BoP at Le Mans has been very good these past few years, even without that rolling BoP.