TennesseeJed
Footballguy
Antonelli - welcome to F1....
Great start, less great 2nd lap.
Great start, less great 2nd lap.
Just got a little worse weekend for Mercedes/Antonelli - Russell took his last new power unit this weekend - and its likely damaged now...
was just watching the reply in the office and let out an OH NO! when he slid into the wallJust got a little worse weekend for Mercedes/Antonelli - Russell took his last new power unit this weekend - and its likely damaged now...

You love to see it.Red Bull just seems to lose it after the car has been running for a bit.
McLaren are the Spurs of F1 - can't get out of their own way.
Saw those final laps last night, that was greatThe Formula 3 championship went down to the last corner of the final race of the season. The last three laps of the race are worth watching. The two title contenders are Leo Fornaroli in the red, white & blue car and his Italian countryman Gabriele Mini with the Alpine livery.
- YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.www.youtube.com
It didn't matter in the end because Mini was disqualified for underinflated tires.
I love the conspiracy theory that F1 found the Red Bull out of spec earlier in the year and have finally made Red Bull revert Verstappen's car to Perez's specs (presumably Perez had to revert back many races ago).

Apparently its been an issue with the FIA for awhile and they basically 100% decided it was against the rules during the summer break (the theory goes that Perez has been running the corrected setup for awhile now which is why he's languishing...it also makes more sense than Perez just suddenly sucking this year and the vote of confidence he got from Red Bull).I love the conspiracy theory that F1 found the Red Bull out of spec earlier in the year and have finally made Red Bull revert Verstappen's car to Perez's specs (presumably Perez had to revert back many races ago).
I'm new to this, but watching DTS there was a similar thing that happened to Ferrari. Ferrari were very fast, but they had a "not by the rules" fuel flow advantage. Ferrari became really slow after the new technical directives came out, similar to Red bull now.
Just a coincidence that when the FIA state you cannot use asymmetrical breaking (iirc), Red Bull can't win a race and Max can't turn the car?![]()
Apparently they're also still studying the "flexible wing" McClaren and Mercedes are using. I think we all know what that means....come on down Charles!
What about not swapping cars on the last lap in Italy when they knew Oscar couldn't catch Charles? Whats that, 7 points now?(Secretly hoping Lando loses the championship by about 5 points...)
#badtactics
As soon as Checo was challenging Max last year I felt Red Bull "turned him down" He went from right there with him to at least half a second back from that point on. Checo didn't just forget how to drive.I love the conspiracy theory that F1 found the Red Bull out of spec earlier in the year and have finally made Red Bull revert Verstappen's car to Perez's specs (presumably Perez had to revert back many races ago).
I think they're up to 10...7 for Hungary and 3 last week. More than anything though, Piastri should have had orders to protect 1st place on the first lap rather than racing and forcing Norris to bail on the corner and give Piastri space.What about not swapping cars on the last lap in Italy when they knew Oscar couldn't catch Charles? Whats that, 7 points now?(Secretly hoping Lando loses the championship by about 5 points...)
#badtactics
Need a running tally of McLaren throwing points out of the cockpit
Just like Daddy promised...Lance Stroll - Future World Champion![]()
Insane that that this hasn't been the case since he opened up a points lead vs. Piastri. F1 in general seems to have the least team-like teams of any sport. In every other sport being on a team means "you do whatever you're asked to do to help the team achieve its primary goals" in F1, it seems like being on a team means "I expect the team to give me almost exactly what they're giving my team-mate...no matter the situation".It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
One of the reasons I struggle to respect this sport. Should be every driver for themselves. Best one wins.It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
Insane that that this hasn't been the case since he opened up a points lead vs. Piastri. F1 in general seems to have the least team-like teams of any sport. In every other sport being on a team means "you do whatever you're asked to do to help the team achieve its primary goals" in F1, it seems like being on a team means "I expect the team to give me almost exactly what they're giving my team-mate...no matter the situation".It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
One of the reasons I struggle to respect this sport. Should be every driver for themselves. Best one wins.It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
I can't respect favoring one driver over another.
That's more or less what I think makes sense. Except I'd say it shouldn't necessarily be 'the driver ahead at that point' and shouldn't always be halfway through the season. I think it should be that at any point in the season they favor whoever is more likely to win the season. So maybe you go into the season favoring Max...if Sergio is a few points ahead...well, Max is still more likely to win. But if you're 3/4 of the way through the season and Sergio has a 50 point lead...you're going to favor him. And if you have two drivers with roughly equal skill/history, then maybe you wait long enough for one to open up a clear lead before you favor either.Insane that that this hasn't been the case since he opened up a points lead vs. Piastri. F1 in general seems to have the least team-like teams of any sport. In every other sport being on a team means "you do whatever you're asked to do to help the team achieve its primary goals" in F1, it seems like being on a team means "I expect the team to give me almost exactly what they're giving my team-mate...no matter the situation".It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
One of the reasons I struggle to respect this sport. Should be every driver for themselves. Best one wins.It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
I can't respect favoring one driver over another.
Wild reading these two replies back to back.
Think I agree with zoo here, it is a "team sport".
One of the podcasts I listen to brought this up and the question of team orders. I liked what they said Ferrari (iirc) did back with Vettel and Kimi (again, i think). They did not have team orders until half way through the season, then they would prioritize the driver ahead at that point. That kind of made sense to me as it let's the drivers fight it out on their own to a certain point, then you play the team game with the driver that earned the #1 spot.
They are trying to keep two #1 quality drivers happy. Telling Piastri after a few races that he's going to have to give away points to his teammate for the rest of the season even if Piastri is faster is crazy. Piastri would exercise the next available opt out in his deal and be gone.That's more or less what I think makes sense. Except I'd say it shouldn't necessarily be 'the driver ahead at that point' and shouldn't always be halfway through the season. I think it should be that at any point in the season they favor whoever is more likely to win the season. So maybe you go into the season favoring Max...if Sergio is a few points ahead...well, Max is still more likely to win. But if you're 3/4 of the way through the season and Sergio has a 50 point lead...you're going to favor him. And if you have two drivers with roughly equal skill/history, then maybe you wait long enough for one to open up a clear lead before you favor either.Insane that that this hasn't been the case since he opened up a points lead vs. Piastri. F1 in general seems to have the least team-like teams of any sport. In every other sport being on a team means "you do whatever you're asked to do to help the team achieve its primary goals" in F1, it seems like being on a team means "I expect the team to give me almost exactly what they're giving my team-mate...no matter the situation".It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
One of the reasons I struggle to respect this sport. Should be every driver for themselves. Best one wins.It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
I can't respect favoring one driver over another.
Wild reading these two replies back to back.
Think I agree with zoo here, it is a "team sport".
One of the podcasts I listen to brought this up and the question of team orders. I liked what they said Ferrari (iirc) did back with Vettel and Kimi (again, i think). They did not have team orders until half way through the season, then they would prioritize the driver ahead at that point. That kind of made sense to me as it let's the drivers fight it out on their own to a certain point, then you play the team game with the driver that earned the #1 spot.
I'd also be fine with a complete free for all...but then they should do away with the two car teams...limit it to one car and let additional teams enter. I assume that would never happen since it would reduce the value of the teams for the existing ownership groups.
Exactly what came up on the pod.They are trying to keep two #1 quality drivers happy. Telling Piastri after a few races that he's going to have to give away points to his teammate for the rest of the season even if Piastri is faster is crazy. Piastri would exercise the next available opt out in his deal and be gone.That's more or less what I think makes sense. Except I'd say it shouldn't necessarily be 'the driver ahead at that point' and shouldn't always be halfway through the season. I think it should be that at any point in the season they favor whoever is more likely to win the season. So maybe you go into the season favoring Max...if Sergio is a few points ahead...well, Max is still more likely to win. But if you're 3/4 of the way through the season and Sergio has a 50 point lead...you're going to favor him. And if you have two drivers with roughly equal skill/history, then maybe you wait long enough for one to open up a clear lead before you favor either.Insane that that this hasn't been the case since he opened up a points lead vs. Piastri. F1 in general seems to have the least team-like teams of any sport. In every other sport being on a team means "you do whatever you're asked to do to help the team achieve its primary goals" in F1, it seems like being on a team means "I expect the team to give me almost exactly what they're giving my team-mate...no matter the situation".It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
One of the reasons I struggle to respect this sport. Should be every driver for themselves. Best one wins.It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
I can't respect favoring one driver over another.
Wild reading these two replies back to back.
Think I agree with zoo here, it is a "team sport".
One of the podcasts I listen to brought this up and the question of team orders. I liked what they said Ferrari (iirc) did back with Vettel and Kimi (again, i think). They did not have team orders until half way through the season, then they would prioritize the driver ahead at that point. That kind of made sense to me as it let's the drivers fight it out on their own to a certain point, then you play the team game with the driver that earned the #1 spot.
I'd also be fine with a complete free for all...but then they should do away with the two car teams...limit it to one car and let additional teams enter. I assume that would never happen since it would reduce the value of the teams for the existing ownership groups.
My daughter loves Lando and I made the mistake last week of saying I think Piastri is the better driver. But I do.
I would have been fine if they wanted to let Norris win in Hungary but I also understand them giving it back to Piastri; Piastri was only in that position because of a team screwup, not because Norris had outraced him.Exactly what came up on the pod.They are trying to keep two #1 quality drivers happy. Telling Piastri after a few races that he's going to have to give away points to his teammate for the rest of the season even if Piastri is faster is crazy. Piastri would exercise the next available opt out in his deal and be gone.That's more or less what I think makes sense. Except I'd say it shouldn't necessarily be 'the driver ahead at that point' and shouldn't always be halfway through the season. I think it should be that at any point in the season they favor whoever is more likely to win the season. So maybe you go into the season favoring Max...if Sergio is a few points ahead...well, Max is still more likely to win. But if you're 3/4 of the way through the season and Sergio has a 50 point lead...you're going to favor him. And if you have two drivers with roughly equal skill/history, then maybe you wait long enough for one to open up a clear lead before you favor either.Insane that that this hasn't been the case since he opened up a points lead vs. Piastri. F1 in general seems to have the least team-like teams of any sport. In every other sport being on a team means "you do whatever you're asked to do to help the team achieve its primary goals" in F1, it seems like being on a team means "I expect the team to give me almost exactly what they're giving my team-mate...no matter the situation".It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
One of the reasons I struggle to respect this sport. Should be every driver for themselves. Best one wins.It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
I can't respect favoring one driver over another.
Wild reading these two replies back to back.
Think I agree with zoo here, it is a "team sport".
One of the podcasts I listen to brought this up and the question of team orders. I liked what they said Ferrari (iirc) did back with Vettel and Kimi (again, i think). They did not have team orders until half way through the season, then they would prioritize the driver ahead at that point. That kind of made sense to me as it let's the drivers fight it out on their own to a certain point, then you play the team game with the driver that earned the #1 spot.
I'd also be fine with a complete free for all...but then they should do away with the two car teams...limit it to one car and let additional teams enter. I assume that would never happen since it would reduce the value of the teams for the existing ownership groups.
So then you lose Lando? Because in Hungary they told him to swap back because "he would need Piastri later if he wanted to win a title." Piastri then overtakes him on lap 1 in Italy and messes up Lando's race.
Fair enough if you're not going to tell Piastri not to overtake if Lando is leading, but then they should not have made Lando swap back in Hungary imo.
They are trying to keep two #1 quality drivers happy. Telling Piastri after a few races that he's going to have to give away points to his teammate for the rest of the season even if Piastri is faster is crazy. Piastri would exercise the next available opt out in his deal and be gone.That's more or less what I think makes sense. Except I'd say it shouldn't necessarily be 'the driver ahead at that point' and shouldn't always be halfway through the season. I think it should be that at any point in the season they favor whoever is more likely to win the season. So maybe you go into the season favoring Max...if Sergio is a few points ahead...well, Max is still more likely to win. But if you're 3/4 of the way through the season and Sergio has a 50 point lead...you're going to favor him. And if you have two drivers with roughly equal skill/history, then maybe you wait long enough for one to open up a clear lead before you favor either.Insane that that this hasn't been the case since he opened up a points lead vs. Piastri. F1 in general seems to have the least team-like teams of any sport. In every other sport being on a team means "you do whatever you're asked to do to help the team achieve its primary goals" in F1, it seems like being on a team means "I expect the team to give me almost exactly what they're giving my team-mate...no matter the situation".It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
One of the reasons I struggle to respect this sport. Should be every driver for themselves. Best one wins.It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
I can't respect favoring one driver over another.
Wild reading these two replies back to back.
Think I agree with zoo here, it is a "team sport".
One of the podcasts I listen to brought this up and the question of team orders. I liked what they said Ferrari (iirc) did back with Vettel and Kimi (again, i think). They did not have team orders until half way through the season, then they would prioritize the driver ahead at that point. That kind of made sense to me as it let's the drivers fight it out on their own to a certain point, then you play the team game with the driver that earned the #1 spot.
I'd also be fine with a complete free for all...but then they should do away with the two car teams...limit it to one car and let additional teams enter. I assume that would never happen since it would reduce the value of the teams for the existing ownership groups.
Not entirely true.I would have been fine if they wanted to let Norris win in Hungary but I also understand them giving it back to Piastri; Piastri was only in that position because of a team screwup, not because Norris had outraced him.
The post I was replying to said at any point in the season where it appears one driver is more likely to win than the other, which could be at any time. If I'm McLaren, the Constructor's title is worth much more to me than Norris getting the driver title. If you've got two alphas on your team, tell them to go earn it. That's how racing should be. Manipulating race finishes to squeeze out a few more points for your favored driver seems really lame to me.They are trying to keep two #1 quality drivers happy. Telling Piastri after a few races that he's going to have to give away points to his teammate for the rest of the season even if Piastri is faster is crazy. Piastri would exercise the next available opt out in his deal and be gone.That's more or less what I think makes sense. Except I'd say it shouldn't necessarily be 'the driver ahead at that point' and shouldn't always be halfway through the season. I think it should be that at any point in the season they favor whoever is more likely to win the season. So maybe you go into the season favoring Max...if Sergio is a few points ahead...well, Max is still more likely to win. But if you're 3/4 of the way through the season and Sergio has a 50 point lead...you're going to favor him. And if you have two drivers with roughly equal skill/history, then maybe you wait long enough for one to open up a clear lead before you favor either.Insane that that this hasn't been the case since he opened up a points lead vs. Piastri. F1 in general seems to have the least team-like teams of any sport. In every other sport being on a team means "you do whatever you're asked to do to help the team achieve its primary goals" in F1, it seems like being on a team means "I expect the team to give me almost exactly what they're giving my team-mate...no matter the situation".It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
One of the reasons I struggle to respect this sport. Should be every driver for themselves. Best one wins.It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
I can't respect favoring one driver over another.
Wild reading these two replies back to back.
Think I agree with zoo here, it is a "team sport".
One of the podcasts I listen to brought this up and the question of team orders. I liked what they said Ferrari (iirc) did back with Vettel and Kimi (again, i think). They did not have team orders until half way through the season, then they would prioritize the driver ahead at that point. That kind of made sense to me as it let's the drivers fight it out on their own to a certain point, then you play the team game with the driver that earned the #1 spot.
I'd also be fine with a complete free for all...but then they should do away with the two car teams...limit it to one car and let additional teams enter. I assume that would never happen since it would reduce the value of the teams for the existing ownership groups.
I don't think anyone was suggesting that Piastri yield to Norris after a "few races".
But, at this stage of the season - you have to see a bigger picture, and that is two-fold - as a team, you want to have a driver championship and a team championship - both lead to more sponsorship money.
Through 12 races of the season - just over half-way - Norris had finished ahead of Piastri 9 times. To date, Norris has out-qualified Piastri 14-2. Norris was in 2nd place in the drivers standing when the Hungary fiasco happened, where Lando undercut Piastri and was forced to give back the lead - despite using a legitimate strategy to gain the lead (and Norris only lost the lead because Piastri had a better start - otherwise, Norris out-qualified Piastri, and was pulling away in the end. Maiden win, I can sort of see that being a factor - but team orders should have been to get out front in a 1-2, and then race, not risk an issue that eliminates the 1-2.
Then you get to Monza where again, Lando, who sits second in the standings, while Piastri sits 4th, wins pole, and the team should have ensured that race stayed 1-2 from start to finish - this time, Piastri cost the team points by allowing Ferrari to try a different strategy that won the race.
On the back of all the whining by the team to Norris in Hungary about "needing Piastri for Lando to win a championship" - there should've been clear instructions that when Norris is ahead, Piastri is the supporting driver, and looking to maximize points for the team.
As near as I can tell, this has cost Norris 16 points in the standings - in what is shaping up to be a close race, assuming Red Bull don't find their earlier form.
The post I was replying to said at any point in the season where it appears one driver is more likely to win than the other, which could be at any time. If I'm McLaren, the Constructor's title is worth much more to me than Norris getting the driver title.They are trying to keep two #1 quality drivers happy. Telling Piastri after a few races that he's going to have to give away points to his teammate for the rest of the season even if Piastri is faster is crazy. Piastri would exercise the next available opt out in his deal and be gone.That's more or less what I think makes sense. Except I'd say it shouldn't necessarily be 'the driver ahead at that point' and shouldn't always be halfway through the season. I think it should be that at any point in the season they favor whoever is more likely to win the season. So maybe you go into the season favoring Max...if Sergio is a few points ahead...well, Max is still more likely to win. But if you're 3/4 of the way through the season and Sergio has a 50 point lead...you're going to favor him. And if you have two drivers with roughly equal skill/history, then maybe you wait long enough for one to open up a clear lead before you favor either.Insane that that this hasn't been the case since he opened up a points lead vs. Piastri. F1 in general seems to have the least team-like teams of any sport. In every other sport being on a team means "you do whatever you're asked to do to help the team achieve its primary goals" in F1, it seems like being on a team means "I expect the team to give me almost exactly what they're giving my team-mate...no matter the situation".It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
One of the reasons I struggle to respect this sport. Should be every driver for themselves. Best one wins.It would appear that Zak Brown has intervened at McLaren and knocked some sense into the squad, and they will now be favoring Lando Norris to maximize points.
I can't respect favoring one driver over another.
Wild reading these two replies back to back.
Think I agree with zoo here, it is a "team sport".
One of the podcasts I listen to brought this up and the question of team orders. I liked what they said Ferrari (iirc) did back with Vettel and Kimi (again, i think). They did not have team orders until half way through the season, then they would prioritize the driver ahead at that point. That kind of made sense to me as it let's the drivers fight it out on their own to a certain point, then you play the team game with the driver that earned the #1 spot.
I'd also be fine with a complete free for all...but then they should do away with the two car teams...limit it to one car and let additional teams enter. I assume that would never happen since it would reduce the value of the teams for the existing ownership groups.
I don't think anyone was suggesting that Piastri yield to Norris after a "few races".
But, at this stage of the season - you have to see a bigger picture, and that is two-fold - as a team, you want to have a driver championship and a team championship - both lead to more sponsorship money.
Through 12 races of the season - just over half-way - Norris had finished ahead of Piastri 9 times. To date, Norris has out-qualified Piastri 14-2. Norris was in 2nd place in the drivers standing when the Hungary fiasco happened, where Lando undercut Piastri and was forced to give back the lead - despite using a legitimate strategy to gain the lead (and Norris only lost the lead because Piastri had a better start - otherwise, Norris out-qualified Piastri, and was pulling away in the end. Maiden win, I can sort of see that being a factor - but team orders should have been to get out front in a 1-2, and then race, not risk an issue that eliminates the 1-2.
Then you get to Monza where again, Lando, who sits second in the standings, while Piastri sits 4th, wins pole, and the team should have ensured that race stayed 1-2 from start to finish - this time, Piastri cost the team points by allowing Ferrari to try a different strategy that won the race.
On the back of all the whining by the team to Norris in Hungary about "needing Piastri for Lando to win a championship" - there should've been clear instructions that when Norris is ahead, Piastri is the supporting driver, and looking to maximize points for the team.
As near as I can tell, this has cost Norris 16 points in the standings - in what is shaping up to be a close race, assuming Red Bull don't find their earlier form.
It would be an interesting analysis - but I suspect the opposite is true. More sponsorship money and exposure for the team in having the World Champion, and no downside.If I'm McLaren, the Constructor's title is worth much more to me than Norris getting the driver title.
We're talking millions of dollars, not a few bucks. The analysts I've heard talk about it seem to agree the team championship is more important for the team and the brand. Red Bull isn't trying to tank to get more wind tunnel time.It would be an interesting analysis - but I suspect the opposite is true. More sponsorship money and exposure for the team in having the World Champion, and no downside.If I'm McLaren, the Constructor's title is worth much more to me than Norris getting the driver title.
The Constructor's Championship is actually a bit of a Pyrrhic victory - yes you get a few more dollars, but it also comes with the cost of development time in the following season, and with the 2026 car coming around the corner, I don't think McLaren are going to be pleased to see that development time cut next season - as that can have knock-on effects for several seasons.
I suspect that Mercedes is secretly happy (now) that they are 4th in the Constructor's championship leading into next season.
That's interesting. My thinking earlier in the thread assumed that the individual championship was worth more, but I've only been following F1 for a bit more than a year, so wouldn't be surprised to learn that that's a bad assumption.We're talking millions of dollars, not a few bucks. The analysts I've heard talk about it seem to agree the team championship is more important for the team and the brand. Red Bull isn't trying to tank to get more wind tunnel time.It would be an interesting analysis - but I suspect the opposite is true. More sponsorship money and exposure for the team in having the World Champion, and no downside.If I'm McLaren, the Constructor's title is worth much more to me than Norris getting the driver title.
The Constructor's Championship is actually a bit of a Pyrrhic victory - yes you get a few more dollars, but it also comes with the cost of development time in the following season, and with the 2026 car coming around the corner, I don't think McLaren are going to be pleased to see that development time cut next season - as that can have knock-on effects for several seasons.
I suspect that Mercedes is secretly happy (now) that they are 4th in the Constructor's championship leading into next season.
That's interesting. My thinking earlier in the thread assumed that the individual championship was worth more, but I've only been following F1 for a bit more than a year, so wouldn't be surprised to learn that that's a bad assumption.We're talking millions of dollars, not a few bucks. The analysts I've heard talk about it seem to agree the team championship is more important for the team and the brand. Red Bull isn't trying to tank to get more wind tunnel time.It would be an interesting analysis - but I suspect the opposite is true. More sponsorship money and exposure for the team in having the World Champion, and no downside.If I'm McLaren, the Constructor's title is worth much more to me than Norris getting the driver title.
The Constructor's Championship is actually a bit of a Pyrrhic victory - yes you get a few more dollars, but it also comes with the cost of development time in the following season, and with the 2026 car coming around the corner, I don't think McLaren are going to be pleased to see that development time cut next season - as that can have knock-on effects for several seasons.
I suspect that Mercedes is secretly happy (now) that they are 4th in the Constructor's championship leading into next season.