Why Lando Norris Gets So Much Hate

 

       

     It’s been a long time since I’ve written anything for this blog; a series of moves, new jobs, and a few scholarly articles have been taking up most of my time. So, what is the topic that appears to have gotten me interested enough to take the time to write something not for work? Why, the over-the-top, disproportionate amount of hate I see Lando Norris getting in online communities.

            To read F1 social media, you wouldn’t know that Norris consistently polls as one of the most popular drivers on the grid. (This is where I will also admit that I am a McLaren fan and a Lando Norris fan.) Even with his popularity, the way he’s discussed online would make any outside observer think he must have spit in Lewis Hamilton’s face, murdered Max Verstappen’s cat, and been consistently dominated by his teammate, worst driver on the grid.

            Except, none of these things are true. Norris seems to be well-liked across the grid, maintaining close friendships, including with his past teammates and his current championship rival. Sure, he’s let his temper get the best of him a few times and been perhaps a little too blunt, but what driver hasn’t? He also has been no slouch of a driver, having never been outqualified by a teammate over the course of the season (including this one – it’s now mathematically impossible), scoring multiple podiums in a mid-field car in his second year of F1, and placing himself as the driver that is most likely to be able to catch the formidable Verstappen this year.

            Is Norris having his best season ever? Well, yes and no. Statistically, it isn’t even close to his previous seasons, but this is also the first time he’s had a car with the ability to get consistent podiums and wins. On the flip side, he has been extremely inconsistent, and he would be the first to tell any hater or fan that hasn’t been driving well enough to deserve a championship. However, this article isn’t about the fair and deserved criticism of his driving. This is about the way the hate has gone to another level.

            To understand this, we have to begin with why do we love (or hate) any driver? What makes a fan feel so passionately about a person they’ve never met that they (me) will spend hours defending them or slandering them on social media? Most of us have no logic for our choices. In the end, it’s often just vibes. Sure, we may come up with reasons (he’s a hard racer, he’s from my country, his affect is annoying etc.), but those reasons often end up revealing more about ourselves and what we value than anything substantial about a particular driver.

            Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu in his book Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste argues that our tastes (the things we like and dislike) are not merely personal preferences, but serve to reflect who we are and how we see ourselves in the world. They also signal these views to others and provide us with cultural capital, a type of power, to distinguish from and helps us fit into a group. This is how Donald Trump, a multi-millionaire elite, can be seen as a man of the people, whereas poor academics like me are somehow labeled as elite. We have different amounts and types of cultural capital.

            So, what kind of status and cultural capital does hating Lando Norris give someone? How does this hater see themselves in the world and how do they want others to see them? To answer these questions, we have to start with: Who is a hater trying to distinguish themselves from?

            Thankfully, that one is much easier to answer. We know that the reputation of a Lando Norris fan is they are young, generally new to the sport. Lando Norris fans are also more likely to be girls and women and/or to be members of the LGBTQ+ community. In fact, he is the most popular driver “among female fans and all fans under age 25.” Simply put, Norris suffers from what I often call the “boy band effect.”

            In popular music, this kind of things happens all the time. A musical artist or group gets very popular with female audiences, especially teenagers (and often gay men), and all of the sudden, they begin to get hate from straight men and “cool girls.” Rock critic Carl Wilson literally wrote a whole book on his own hatred of Celine Dion that documented this effect. By virulently hating Norris, anti-Lando fans are establishing that they are more masculine, hetero, and therefore, in the world of F1, more deserving of belonging than those “Drive-to-Survive fan girlies who just like the drivers because they’re hot” (this is a paraphrase, of course, though I have seen the term “Landosexual” being thrown around).  Because let’s be real, sports, including Formula 1, are for straight men, and everyone else is a visitor. In fact, F1 and the men involved have done little to dissuade this notion, from posts about how women are less intelligent from the head of the FIA to accusations of sexual harassment to the continued objectification and belittling of women on the grid and in the fandom. Hating the driver most beloved by female and queer fans is what gets you cultural capital in the mainstream world of F1. It’s what, as Wilson would say, makes someone “cool.”

            Of course, it’s not a coincidence that Norris is the driver who attracts these fans. He is often extremely emotional and vulnerable and talks openly about his mental health struggles. He has extremely close, longtime friendships and feels comfortable to be both verbally and physically affectionate with them. His negative feelings often manifest in extreme self-deprecation, the expected avenue of undesirable emotions for women, rather than anger at others, the more masculine expression. And unlike Charles Leclerc, the other driver who most fits these parameters, he doesn’t have a tragic backstory to explain feeling too much. He’s just like that.

            Does these mean all Norris haters are misogynistic homophobes? No, of course not, nothing so simplistic. In fact, most of our preferences are subconscious and complicated. At a surface level, we do just like what we like, and underneath is a whole web of reasons that we may or may not actually understand. But it does mean that when people get online and say awful things about him, it’s not just because they believe what they are saying and want to tell the world about it. It gives them a little bit of cache, of cool, of masculine power. And, for many of them, it’s because they value more masculine ways of being: aggressive, unemotional, selfish.

            It also means that Norris, even as he’s having one of his worst seasons, is somehow becoming underrated. The number of people who rate his teammate Oscar Piastri as better than him, including journalists, seems too high for the actual statistics of the season. I’ve never seen a driver beating his teammate so thoroughly in every statistic (qualy and race h2h, points, podiums) be so scrutinized and disparaged against that same teammate. (For comparison, this was Norris’s second year against Sainz.) But this isn’t surprising. The way people describe Piastri (cool, unemotional, ruthless) codes as masculine in a way Norris never will. (I will also just put here that Piastri is an excellent driver, and I’m excited for the future of McLaren. I think the hype around him is correct, but that the disparaging of Norris’s abilities in comparison is not.)

            There’s also this belief that somehow, to be successful in F1, you have to have all of these masculine characteristics, and there’s not room for the more feminine ones like patience, collaboration, emotion, and loyalty, but that’s factually not true. What some fans label in Norris as “overly emotional,” they call in other drivers “passionate.” We’ve seen Verstappen’s temper and aggression get the best of him, losing him points in both Austria and Hungary just this year, when he may have been better served by channeling Norris's introspection and careful driving. And being a team player does get you somewhere because in the end, this is a team sport. Don’t believe me? A key to Michael Schumacher’s success was genuinely caring about every single member of his team. Norris is known to have spent time doing his work-study for McLaren and helping the mechanics put away the car after races. His loyalty to McLaren has led him to turn down offers from Red Bull multiple times. His patience has helped him to avoid crashes in the midfield and led him to insane levels of consistency, including a wild point-scoring streak in 2021. It also helps him keep his tyres alive, something teammate Piastri still struggles with in comparison.

            That being said, I was glad when Norris and Verstappen came together in Austria, and part of me wishes he would have punted Piastri off the track last week. Just as being overly aggressive or dispassionate can be a negative, so too can being overly loyal, emotional, and careful. But, I do believe that, while he may need to get a bit more aggressive, a bit more selfish, Norris can win a championship while staying true to the himself, the person his fans love. Bring on the hate.

             

LGBTQ Issues in F1 - Money, Globalization, Culture

I know that I promised a scathing indictment of Renault’s team culture almost six weeks ago, but clearly, that did not happen. It is coming, I promise, fueled even more by my anger at the Hülkenberg situation (Grosjean, really?), but that post is requiring more outside research that originally planned. However, I am finding it is requiring more research than originally conceived, and I currently extremely behind on the research I get paid to do, it will have to wait.

Instead, this blog was inspired by this twitter thread from Matt Bishop (TheBishf1), where he discusses his opinions and experiences being a gay man in F1. I highly recommend you go read his thread, but he touched on a topic that has been going through my mind as well, both during Sochi this season and also when it was announced that F1 might be moving into Saudi Arabia. As both a bisexual/queer person and a woman whose work crosses the line into LGBTQ+ and feminist activism, I felt the need to interrogate my level of investment in F1, the FIA’s policies regarding gender and sexuality, and the messy compromises necessary for a sport to truly be global. This post will not get into the gender issue, as that will take a separate post of its own, but I would like to spend a few paragraphs discussing my thoughts on these issues.

Hopefully, I didn’t scare away too many of you by using the “f” word in the paragraph above. While I am both an outspoken advocate for women and the LGBTQ+ community, I did not get into F1 for its PC nature. In fact, I often joke that I left the second most corrupt sport (football, or as Americans like to call it, soccer) for the most corrupt sport of Formula 1. And in fact, the corruption is a big part of what I enjoy about it - the scandals, the cheating, the big egos and even bigger bank accounts. Crashgate, Spygate, the Renault brake-bias nonsense, the shady sponsors, Ferrari’s current engine spec (allegedly, of course), all add to the drama of the sport. But generally, the drama revolves around rich people screwing other rich people, so I can enjoy it without a twinge of guilt (ok, maybe a little guilt, but I live for schadenfreude. Sue me). I knew what I was getting into, and it wasn’t a Marxist-feminist utopia, nor do I want it to be. That’s not what I’m here for.

Like all sports, F1 and other European open-wheel racing leagues are not particularly gay-friendly, though they do tend to be more friendly to lesbians, as most women’s sports are (see this year’s World Cup). This has to do with the long history of sexology, wherein gender and sexual orientation were not separated. In Western culture, gender and sexual orientation were connected through a number of pseudo-scientific theories developed by sexologists like Havelock Ellis. These theories posited that in a same-sex couple, one person had too many male/female “germs” that didn’t match their sex assigned at birth, and therefore, where either a man in a woman’s body or a woman in a man’s body. Thus, the butch lesbian or gay effeminate man were mixed up, therefore, maintaining the concept of heterosexuality.

Now, in 2019, most of us know that someone’s perceived effeminacy or butchness does not indicate their sexual orientation, but there is still a stigma attached to gay men as being weak or feminine (and as I will discuss in my post on gender, perceived as not as successful in sports). This stigma is compounded by the homosocial nature of sports. While F1 is technically co-ed, in its current iteration (and for most of its existence), it is a male sport. Within spaces of intense homosocial bonding, actions that might otherwise be viewed as homosexual are instead interpreted as the product of male-bonding. Think, for example, of de-pantsing your friend at football practice, or the way athletes often slap each other on the butt.[1] In order to avoid any hints of homosexual behavior in these homosocial practices, gay identity becomes further stigmatized and women become further objectified (see grid girls and locker talk).

Statistically speaking, if F1 drivers were taken from a random sample of men, at least two men on the grid would be gay or bisexual. Now, the intense homophobia that often surrounds male-dominated sports tends to discourage boys from pursuing or continuing on in sports, but most likely, F1 has had and does have drivers who fall farther to the right on the Kinsey scale.

But F1, unlike other sports, has more than just stigma attached to coming out and being open. As Matt Bishop pointed out in his blog post, sexual relations between men are illegal in both Singapore and Abu Dhabi, and homosexuals face intense discrimination and even extrajudicial killings in countries like Russia, Bahrain, and Azerbaijan. While F1 drivers and crew would most likely be protected from such violence and discrimination over the race weekend due to their wealth and Western privilege, it would make going to these countries extremely uncomfortable. Furthermore, sponsors based in these countries, such as McLaren’s partnership with Team Bahrain Merida, would most likely drop sponsorships if a driver/team principal/etc. came out as gay. Homophobia is of course not unique to these countries, and it is likely that a gay driver would lose some support from fans in Europe, the US, etc., as well. There have been gay drivers in the past, such as Mike Beuttler who did race in F1, but the sport has changed since then in a number of ways related to neoliberalism and globalization that have shifted the financial implications of such an identity.

F1 strives to be a global sport, and as Matt Bishop’s post points out, at its best, F1 can provide opportunities for spreading tolerance and acceptance for the LGBTQ community around the world. However, cultures vary widely when it comes to even the basic definitions of gender, sexuality, marriage, etc., and a liberal Western view of these issues will naturally be incompatible with or incomprehensible to other cultures. While I personally would love to see an openly gay or lesbian driver in F1 right now, the politics and the economics connected to those politics make it unlikely if not impossible for that be an option. But who knows, maybe I will be proven wrong.

I have, of course, 8,000 more thoughts on this, so I will probably come back to this issue at some point. Please comment if you disagree or feel free to ask questions if some things did not make sense to you or you just want to know more about the history of sexuality in the West.

I won’t promise when the next post is going to be, but I will say that at least I will have a lot more time to write/research when there is no racing on for a few months.

---

[1] Or for more specific F1 examples, go enjoy the subreddit Fanf1ction, but don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Silly Season Analysis Part 2

(Apologies for the lateness on this one, once more. My fear of this post being obsolete tomorrow has definitely diminished my ability to post on time.)

Edit: Well, this aged poorly quite quickly, but I am still holding on to tiny vestiges of hope for Nico. Maybe a move to RBR if Albon shunts completely, but who knows? Anyway, enjoy reading my hilariously hopeful post, and I am really looking forward to working on my analysis of Renault in the next few weeks.

Finally race week again! And before we get the announcements this weekend that will start the domino effect, I wanted to finish my thoughts about next year’s line-up.

6) Mercedes – Obviously, Hamilton is staying put. No doubt about that, and probably for at least the next three years, maybe more. This team is about Hamilton and supporting his run to beat Schumacher’s records, which is both good for him and good for Mercedes. This is why no one has yet to convince me that Mercedes will drop Bottas. He makes mistakes, sure, but he is challenging Hamilton enough to keep him honest and to give good information about the car, but not so good that the team ends up in another Rosberg-situation. Hamilton has proven in the past that he wants priority and doesn’t do well with not being the number one driver. Bottas, on the other hand, clearly wants to beat Hamilton, but has a much more level-head and can handle being told to let Hamilton win or not being the priority. Perhaps this is why he will never be as good as Hamilton, but this also why I don’t see Toto, for all of his investment in Ocon, sitting the youngster next to Hamilton. Especially after a year off, and especially, especially after his behavior the year before, both crashing into Perez and Verstappen. It’s a needless gamble, and I think Ocon will have a seat somewhere else next year to give him a chance.

I did hear a rumor that Danny Ric might be going to Mercedes. I actually think this would be a great move on Mercedes’s part, as he has proven that he can handle a volatile teammate in Max Verstappen and has at least a couple more years than Hamilton if he does well. If not, drop him, and put Ocon in the seat. If this wild fantasy were to come to play, I could see Bottas either going to Williams or to Rally. But, in my opinion, there is no advantage to dropping Bottas the year before the 2021 rule changes, so he probably has another year in the Merc. (I think the Danny Ric move might actually be more likely after Hulkenberg’s response to the Ocon story, see the end of the post.)

7) Williams – They are keeping Russell for sure, but Kubica is a huge question mark. While I’m not in the conspiracy camp that Kubica has a worse car, I do think there are reasons that Claire might want to keep him, particularly for engineering and development. That said, they also need money, and if they can get a driver who brings cash with them, they will probably move Kubica to the development side and out of the driver seat. Possibilities for a replacement are Latifi,, whoever gets dropped from the Red Bull teams, Bottas, or, a long-shot as he is out of a job but has a ton of funding, Ericsson.

8)  Haas – I will be both surprised and irritated if Guenther keeps both Grosjean and Magnussen next year, and with Magnussen still under contract, my guess is Grosjean is out. My guess has been reinforced by both his poor performance and his recent social media activity, in which he has been going through the history of his racing career. Besides that, he has also been posting about the other activities he enjoys, such as cooking, cycling, and spending time with his family. He definitely doesn’t seem like a guy interested in staying, and I think he already knows he’s gone.

If this is the case, who to replace him? If Ocon does indeed get Hulkenberg’s seat, I see Hulkenberg going there. Steiner already said that he doesn’t want a rookie as they are still working on developing the car, and the Hulk’s consistency and general midfield abilities would be a step forward in trying to get something out of the chassis. And honestly, I think Hulk has a better chance of getting a podium there than at Renault right now. Plus, think of the rivalry between him and Magnussen (or more importantly, think of the fanfiction).

Other options include Ocon, Alonso (though unlikely, see below), Perez (also unlikely), Bottas, Kvyat.

9 and 10) Let’s just combine this Red Bull/Toro Rosso mess into one. As has been well documented, the Red Bull program has screwed itself, and I really don’t understand the move to promote Albon over Kvyat if Gasly’s problem was he was promoted too soon (which I think it might have been, or it might just be that Gasly is an average to below-average driver). I will say that I do believe all three non-Max drivers have their fate in their own hands at this point, and their performance from now until the end of the season will determine where they are for next year.

Albon’s promotion makes sense to me only in two contexts: 1) Red Bull already knows how Gasly and Kvyat perform, and they want to give Albon a chance to have the most information to decide the seat for next year. I mean, what do they have to lose at this point? Or 2) They already have a different driver signed for the seat for next year, and just want to give Albon some experience in the Big Boy car. I know there is talk about how Red Bull doesn’t go outside their program, but there have been exceptions in the past and there are a number of reasons why I think it might be a good idea for them now.

If the issue is that they didn’t give Gasly enough time to cook, then they probably want to keep Albon in the oven a little longer as well. They would not have wanted to promote Kvyat at that point, as it might further damage his confidence/Marko thinks he gave him his chance/whatever.

If they have already signed a driver for next year, I believe it will be an older, experienced driver to support Max as his number 2. Perez, Hulkenberg, and Bottas would all be great options, bringing home points, but retiring or leaving in two or three years, when Albon will be ready for the seat. Hulkenberg’s recent post joking about the Autobild article about Ocon going to Renault and him going to Haas lead me to believe that he already knows what he’s doing for next year, whether it is staying at Renault, going to Haas, or in my wildest dreams, moving to RBR. In case people forgot, there was already a rumor that Hulk was going to RBR midseason, and while that seemed extremely far-fetched, I don’t think this is.

Either this or Danny Ric is leaving Renault and Ocon is taking his place rather than Hulk’s. This is the only reason I am lending any credence to the Danny Ric to Mercedes rumor.

And finally, stop trying to make Fernando happen. Seriously, he is a great driver, but Alonso burned a lot of bridges leaving F1, and with the young talent on the grid now, I don’t see any teams wanting to take such a gamble. Not only has he been out of F1 for a year, but he has proven difficult to work with for those higher up them him. Stories from his co-workers and subordinates show that Alonso is probably actually a lovely person to work with – except when you are his boss. I am, however, salivating over the prospect of Alonso one day being a team boss. But we will see.

Well, there you go. These predictions will probably be invalidated in two hours, but I will stay optimistic.

After Spa and Monza, I plan on doing a post about the shitshow that is Renault, why it’s different from other manufacturer teams, and how the French cultural generally and Cyril Abiteboul (or as Horner’s calls him, “Cyril Irritable”) specifically are keeping their team from its maximum potential.

See you after Monza!

Silly Season Analysis, Part 1

Halfway through summer break (thank goodness!), and I have loved seeing what each driver and boss does with their time off – so many beautiful beach pictures. 😊 This post took a little longer than normal, as the midseason bombshell (or mostly predictable decision) changed some of my thoughts.

There have been a number of excellent analyses and predictions for next year’s driver line-up floating around the web, such as Dieter Rencken at Racingfans.net and Formula 1's official analysis, and I hope this one will add nuance to these already excellent articles. My predictions will focus on factors outside of driving skill; as someone who knows very little about how to drive well generally, I can only base my analysis on results. I will leave the determination of who the best drivers are to someone much more qualified than I. Instead, this post will look at things like driver personality, team compatibility, past behavior, personal relationships, and of course, money.

Actual footage of me driving. 

The teams are listed in order from what I think are the most predictable to the least predictable.

1) McLaren – Carlos Sainz and Lando Norris

Having already signed and announced their line-up for the next year, McLaren provides the most predictability on the grid. This one was a no brainer, and it was smart of McLaren to sign both of them so quickly before another seat somewhere opened up to tempt them elsewhere. Both drivers have proven that they can get results on the track, with Sainz almost catching Gasly in a far superior car, and Norris in tenth place his rookie year, a year that has included 4 DNFs, of which 3 were arguably not his fault. Beyond their on-track performance, the two drivers have excellent chemistry, playing video games with one another outside of work, and making amazing videos. Norris has the best social media presence of any driver, and both will be attracting new fans to McLaren, which might mean more sponsors for the team. Furthermore, Norris brings with him the large British fan base, though he has to compete with the other British drivers on the grid, whereas Sainz comes from Spain, the sole representative (currently) from his country. McLaren nailed this one.

2) Racing Point – Lance Stroll and Sergio Perez

When your dad owns the company, you’re not going anywhere. Stroll has been underperforming in qualifying this year, but making up for it in the races, coming in fourth in the chaos that was Hockenheim. As long as he wants to keep racing, that seat is his. Perez brings Mexican money to the team, important for one of the less financially flush teams on the grid, as well as experience and stability. While he has had a lackluster start to the year – currently 16^th – the car is most likely the culprit here. Perez has also had chances to leave before and chosen not to. I don’t think he would make a lateral move to another midfield team, and I don’t foresee one of the big three calling him up the ranks. But who knows?

3) Alfa Romeo – Kimi Raikkonen and Antonio Giovinazzi

Another team that I predict will stay with their current line-up. Raikkonen signed a two-year deal with the team last year, and I see no reason why he or the team would want to part ways. He seems much happier on a team where his job has a higher proportion of racing to media, and the Iceman doesn’t seem frustrated fighting for best of the rest, consistently outperforming his car and scoring points.

 Giovinazzi is the bigger question mark in this duo, but I think the team will give him a second year to see what happens. As the baby Ferrari team, Alfa Romeo has little to lose and Ferrari has a lot to gain by taking a gamble on another year with an Italian driver who might one day earn a Ferrari seat. Though Giovinazzi has been underperforming, he did not really race last year and has been improving steadily enough that unless he totally bombs the second half of the season. Plus, Raikkonen provides the team with stability, experience, and star power, but he isn’t the type of driver to get into the politics of who is the number one driver, giving Alfa Romeo the perfect opportunity to focus on Giovinazzi rather than Raikkonen. To paraphrase the man himself, you can leave him alone – he knows what he’s doing.

4) Ferrari – Sebastian Vettel and Charles Leclerc

With both drivers signed for next year, there is only one reason the team is this far down: the persistent rumors of Vettel’s retirement. There are reasons why Vettel might decide to leave F1 – he is having another baby, he has said multiple times that the sport is no longer what he loved, he has continued to make mistakes under the pressure of Ferrari, and of course, his number one driver status being challenged by the young Leclerc. But I don’t really think any of these arguments point to a retirement next year. He already has two children, he is very private and good at balancing home/work life, he seems more focused on his own driving than on that of Leclerc, and besides, Leclerc’s youthful mistakes have allowed the German to maintain a solid lead in the driver standings. Vettel’s performance in Hockenheim proved to me that the old Vettel is in there somewhere.

I don’t think he will make a move until after 2020, but I do see the regulation changes affecting what happens – he might not like them and very well retire, but not next year. I do love the idea of a swap back to Red Bull, which I think would honestly be good for him (Ferrari seems like a cesspool of a place to work), but the dominance of Verstappen in the mind of Christian Horner (to be discussed in a later post) would make it difficult for Vettel,

As for Leclerc, why give up such a good gig? He will only get better with time, and though extremely hard on himself, he has an aura of maturity and levelheadedness about him that I think will make dealing with the hot mess that is Ferrari much more bearable for him than it has been for Vettel.

5) Renault – Daniel Ricciardo and Nico Hülkenberg (??????)

Now we are getting to the teams where I think we might see some line-up changes. I know there is a lot of speculation about Ricciardo leaving Renault, mostly IMO due to fan frustration at having such a charming and skilled driver on such a terrible team. My thoughts on Renault as an organization need an entire post of their own, but this is the team that Ricciardo hitched himself to for at least the next year. He best be invested in their success at this point; otherwise, what is doing?

Hülkenberg on the other hand is a much more complex case. His contract expires at the end of this season, essentially making him a free agent. Both he and team boss Cyril Abiteboul have been telling the press that they are considering their options. While I believe there is some truth in these statements, I also believe it is likely that both Nico and Cyril are attempting to improve their negotiating position going into contract time. Hülkenberg does have significant reasons for wanting to leave Renault. His rant on the team radio after Silverstone showed a crack in his normal laidback persona, frustrated by the team’s failed strategy and lack of trust in him as a driver. I imagine this rant is also partially due to Renault firmly proclaiming Ricciardo as their number one driver. Evidence of this abounds, from the salary differential to the abundance of merch available featuring Ricciardo and not Hülkenberg to the use of team orders in Canada. While Nico has the personality to be a great number two driver for one of the top three teams, he wants a podium (maybe too much, as his mistake at Hockenheim showed), and the continued preferential treatment of Ricciardo, despite them being quite even overall, must frustrate him.

Of course, Renault has other options as well. As most people know by now, Abiteboul and Toto Wolff (from Mercedes) has a handshake deal that Esteban Ocon was going to take the second seat at Renault until Ricciardo made the decision to leave Red Bull for the French team. Abiteboul may be looking to make good on that promise, leaving the Hulk out in the cold. If this happens, Nico will have other options (most likely Haas, which would make me so happy because he and Magnussen on the same team would be the greatest hot mess since Rosberg and Hamilton). I honestly see Ocon as the only real contender for the Renault seat at this moment (though I love Jack Aitken, but that is a personal preference). That being said, I think both Hülkenberg and Renault would do best to stick it out a little while longer. As long as the car and team are performing, the Hulk would be a good number two driver to Ricciardo and his consistency would help build the team to where they want to be. My prediction is that Hülkenberg will stay with Renault. However, there is also a possibility that Ocon (or Bottas, to be discussed in the next post) will take his seat, forcing him to look elsewhere, most likely Haas, but in my wildest dreams (I am a fan), he takes the number two seat to Verstappen. When we get to the Red Bull mess I will talk more about why I think that would be a great move for the team.

Well, I only got through half the teams this post, and it’s already longer than I wanted it to be. I can’t wait to get into the really complicated messes at the end of this week, including Bottas’s strange predicament, Grosjean almost inevitable firing, and the hot mess that is Red Bull/Toro Rosso.

Thanks again for reading my thoughts. If you liked the post, please share! Disagree with me? I would love to hear your thoughts in the comments.

Competitive Collaboration – The Unique Characteristic of Formula 1

Welcome to my new blog, “Leave Me Alone, I Know What to Do,” a blog about the human element of F1. If you are looking for detailed analyses of aerodynamics, downforce, specs, track comparisons, etc., this is not the place for you. However, if you are wondering how to the personalities and competing interests on and off the track influence the final results, you are in the right place.

As for myself, I have a PhD in a humanities discipline and specialize in analyzing collaborative relationships, monetary interests, and conflicts between big personalities. While my professional expertise is generally reserved for these issues in the theatre, my newish-found love of racing has led me to want to understand more in depth how similar forces influence the world of Formula 1.

Which brings me to the subject of today’s post. As a young American woman, people are often surprised by my enthusiasm for the sport (how I got here will, I am sure, be the subject of another post). My usual reply always includes my favorite aspect of Formula 1: it is both a team sport and an individual sport. Of course, even the individual side is a team sport, as it takes hundreds of people to support each side of the garage, but I am talking about how each team wants to win a championship, but so does each individual driver. Even those drivers not in contention for a championship want to do well in hopes of moving up to a better team with a better car, receiving better sponsorships, and competing at a higher level within the next few years.

Yet, as most of us know, the team must also do well for the car to be competitive, both for monetary and developmental reasons. Sharing information between both sides of the garage allows for engineers to develop the car better and more efficiently throughout the season. Sometimes, however, the interests of each individual driver and/or the team boss come into conflict, and this is where the show gets exciting for me.

There are a few different ways that teams can work together. Here are a couple of examples:

First, in my dissertation, I developed a concept called antagonistic collaboration for when two or more people share a similar goal but have extremely different opinions and ideas about how to get there. Rather than compromise, each member of the team works independently within their own area. Think of this as a “stay in your own lane” kind of collaboration.

This kind of collaboration works best when there is a lot of trust between members of the team. A good, productive example of this happened in Hungary, when Hamilton, against his own judgement, pitted for mediums. He trusted James, and James knew Hamilton could drive well enough to catch Verstappen. James strategized; Hamilton drove. (We are seeing a very dysfunctional version of this at Ferrari right now, where no one trusts each other. Vettel clearly has been in the strategy lane a few times this season.) Vitally, both Hamilton and James knew that they shared a common goal: Hamilton to finish P1.

However, in thinking about the relationship between both sides of the garage, I would call what happens something more like competitive collaboration. Both sides know that they need to work together to get the best results from the car, but in the end, each side wants their driver to do better than their teammate. Other examples of this sort of collaboration could include when drivers or bosses across teams work together to change regulations – we saw this with the Pirelli tyre vote, when some of the teams wanted to go back to the 2018 tyres. Teams had to form voting blocs with their competitors, and in the end, those teams most interested in keeping the current tyres won out. Entities normally in competition with one another know that it is in their best individual interest to work with their competitors.

It’s not just between teams that competitive collaboration occurs, but also within teams. What makes F1 unique is that this is the case every week, every race, every moment. Competitive collaboration is the norm, rather than the exception.

So why does this matter?

There are some obvious ways in which it affects the sport, such as team orders. While a driver may want to beat their teammate in a race, having their teammate win the WDC can bring more prestige, more sponsors, and therefore, more money to the team. If one driver is already statistically eliminated, it makes sense to collaborate with their teammate for long term gains.

A more interesting example right now is what is happening at Haas. By having Grosjean and Magnussen run different specs, the two drivers know that they are getting vastly different cars and most likely, vastly different results. Now, while we know that Grosjean wanted to go back to the Australian spec, we don’t know what Magnussen wanted. Perhaps he wanted to go back too but knows that it is in the interest of the team and himself long term to figure out what the problem is with the new chassis. On the other hand, maybe both he and Grosjean think that they have the better spec for them. (Though from how Magnussen has been complaining the last two weeks, I don’t know if that’s a certainty).

Furthermore, with silly season upon us, teams must consider how each driver that they hire might navigate the difficulties of competitive collaboration. Though I think both drivers have matured immensely, historically Verstappen and Hamilton have struggled when they were not clearly number one driver. Neither is a great team player, so hiring a second driver that will be able to push down their pride and be a team player is critical. On the other side of that coin, we hear drivers like Hülkenberg and Bottas being frustrated at their number two status, and they might be looking for a team where both sides of the garage are focused more on the competition rather than the collaboration.

Either way, I love seeing these mini-dramas play out every race and thinking about how they affect the end results. For my next blog, I plan on doing my best to look at the role personality and collaboration play during silly season and give my predictions for next year’s line-up.

If you enjoyed this blog, please like, share, and comment. Are there any other models of collaboration that you think of us as being especially unique or important to F1?