Strategy and the Renault Affair 16/09/2009 Today's big news is the departure of Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds from the Renault team, coupled with the company's statement that it will not contest the allegations of race fixing at the WMSC hearing. Reading between the lines, it seems that Renault has established that Piquet Jr was indeed asked to crash in the Singapore GP and that the two team leaders involved have been shown the door for putting the company in such an uncomfortable position.Nelson Piquet Jr and Fernando AlonsoAs I have said before, I found the story hard to believe initially but events have proved me wrong. Every day has revealed facts that seemed to confirm the Piquets' allegations and now we have little option but to believe them. It remains only to see what penalty the WMSC will impose and speculation explodes in the comments to Keith Collantine's article on the matter.If I may look on the bright side, however, Renault's actions seem to indicate that the company wants to stay in F1. To have dumped those responsible makes it clear that the company had no part in the scheme and takes as dim a view of it as does the FIA; it also raises the possibility of the WMSC taking the "full disclosure" route to treating the case leniently, as happened in the hearing on McLaren documents in the Renault team's possession. In fact, it looks to me as if Renault executives have already talked to the FIA and worked out the best way forward with them. Firing Briatore and Symonds would be the first and most obvious step in a process that will allow the WMSC to keep the team in the sport with a penalty much less than could be applied.We shall see. In the meantime, it is worth considering the fact that strategists within a team were able to construct so devious a plan, especially as it worked exactly as intended. I am somewhat in awe of the calculations that must have gone into the scheme and wonder whether it points out weaknesses in the F1 regulations that need to be attended to. The end of re-fueling, due next year, should lessen the opportunities for such underhand planning but the continued use of safety cars must surely be questioned.I have said before that the safety car is an unnecessary and unfair addition to the sport, that clearing up after accidents can be handled in better ways without bunching up the field, but the Renault/Singapore affair shows that it is too easily used by those with a mind to arrange race results to suit themselves. Ideally, GPs should have as little interruption as possible so that positions hard fought for are not negated by the interruption of such things as safety cars.Hopefully, we are seeing the end of the era in which strategy formulated on the pit wall wins and loses races. As admirable as brilliant strategy may be, it is not racing and the drivers should be free to decide for themselves how best to improve their positions. A driver like Prost, who paced himself in order to be in the best shape towards the end of a race, deserves any successes he has as a result; there is less value in a win constructed by the strategy of a man sitting in the pits, however.It is a team sport, yes, but there are some things that are best left to the drivers alone. Once out on the track, he is the man on the spot and his race should be decided on his decisions only. That is how it was before the advent of pit-to-car radios, refueling and safety cars. A team could cheat in the design of the car, clever evasions of the rules and team orders but there was never any possibility of arranging events in the race to ensure a victory.We should remember that the drivers' championship was the cause of F1's birth, that for many years it was the only award being competed for. The teams were eventually given recognition of their efforts in the constructors' championship but it has always been and remains the driver's crown that matters most. If the team is able to help or hinder through race strategy, the award becomes somehow devalued, as if the driver needed help to achieve it.And the safety car shuffles races so that true excellence and skill can be left without reward. Away with it, I say.
Clive
donwatters Much like yourself, Clive, I too initially thought the claims of the Piquets were just sour grapes. But it's now clear that Fat Flavio took it upon himself to sully the sport for what turned out to be a very minor victory. I wish there were a way he could be stripped of his rather substantial fortune over this...but that's probably not going to happen. It just breaks my heart that a jerkoff like Flav can bring our beloved sport into such disrepute. Sure, there have always been (and probably always will be, thank goodness) colorful characters and "creative" rule interperters in and around F1. But this sort of blatant cheating is just way too over the top. I say ban the three (immunity or not) from the sport forever. Date Added: 16/09/2009
Journeyer While I do agree with the gist of your article, Clive, I do disagree on two points:1. While I hate refuelling, I don't see it as any less valuable than wins in eras without refuelling. Whatever strategy a driver has, the driver still needs to make it work - and making unusual strategies work (like Michael Schumacher did in Hungary 1998) is no easier than just driving flat out. Let's also remember that Fangio's win at the Nurburgring in 1957 was partly due to him stopping for fuel and therefore running lighter and faster, as well as running longer on fresh tires - does that make his fightback to beat the Ferraris to win any less valuable? I don't think so.2. The Safety Car isn't the perfect solution, yes, but is there any other solution? There is a good reason for bunching up the field - it allows marshals more time to clean up debris while the drivers are on the other side of the track. That in itself would avoid larger shunts. Regardless of the rules, if someone wants to cheat, they'll find a way to cheat. Date Added: 16/09/2009
Nick Goodspeed I have been involved in slot car racing at various times in my life and can attest to having seen ingenious ways of cheating when no cash is involved. With the millions, if not billions being thrown about in F1, this comes as little surprise. What would put a grin on my face would be if Briatore or Symonds get offered millions to spill the beans about all the stuff they know about that hasn't come to the surface. I think all in all this is a good thing. Maybe there will be an inquiry forthcoming as many book makers gamblers and the like will be very disenchanted with this business. Still, I believe that this behavior all stems from the climate instilled by Ecclestone and Mosley during the Schumacher era. If those in charge tilt the scales in favour of one team, the other teams will feel it only fare to take back the advantage in any way they can. Date Added: 16/09/2009
verasaki I have to disagree w/Journeyer on the refueling. I've always thought it was too expensive, that luckily there have only been a handful of potentially disastrous accidents with it and really, I'm just not a fan of it as a basis for strategy. I think without it however we may be bored to sobs more than once in awhile because the backmarkers won't have even a ghost of a chance of a better than usual result due to a pit error by one of the better funded teams. But that, as they say, is racing. The safety car- I'm with you there. I hate them too and I think there may be times when they are being deployed too readily but, they really are more in the interest of the track workers than anyone else. As far as the rest of this mess goes, I'm sort of sick about it. After reading Piquet's statement I reluctantly started thinking there had to be some truth in this. And as EJ stated, this is pretty much an admission of guilt. Hopefully the whole truth comes out if they do go ahead with the hearing as stated. Either way, I think Renault deserves twice the penalty that McLaren received as well as a one year ban. They may claim ignorance but I'm having some doubts on that score and if they were clueless, or conveniently lacking curiosity...maybe they should employ someone who isn't. Flav. Symonds and Piquet-lite, even Alonso (shows you how disgusted I am, that) if he knew about this and never said anything- ban all of them for life from any racing. This really is the sleaziest F1 has gotten so far. If anything had gone wrong and something flew off that car and killed someone they'd be up on manslaughter at least. It's just a completely unforgivable act of irresponsibility and greed. Date Added: 16/09/2009
David So, it does appear to be true! Mosley must be chuckling and Flavio, Pat & Nelson Jr. should be looking for another vocation. Of course, Renault are not exactly blameless, for it’s usually pressure to perform from the next step up the ladder that breeds such behavior - and it’s standard practice to always protect the Company at its employees expense. Racing purists can breath a sigh of relief that refueling is gone in 2010 and along with it the strategist’s pit-stop position jumps too - within the individual teams, or otherwise.“And the safety car shuffles races so that true excellence and skill can be left without reward. Away with it, I say.” Which will bring us another step back to genuine racing.Leaving us with the tire issue. The choice of which compounds are brought to a race lies in Bridgestone’s hands, which - when some cars are known to perform better on a particular compound at a particular circuit - is a fix waiting to happen, or perhaps has already happened? That two tire compounds must be used within a race adds little to nothing at all to true racing. So, away with this nonsense too, create a few standard compounds, bring that selection to each venue and allow the teams to select what’s best for their cars. Date Added: 16/09/2009
Clive Don: I suppose the Flav will be missed as a character and for his outrageously one-sided view of things, but I cannot help wondering how many other tricks he has managed to get away with over the years. There were many rumours of Benetton cheats, for instance, and the Renault team has had its dubious moments too. And there was Flavio in the midst of it, his apparently clever team management now revealed as less than perfect. It puts a new light on his criticism of Ron Dennis at the height of the McLaren scandal.As for Pat Symonds, I am surprised and disappointed at his inclusion in the business and can only surmise that the demand from above for success became too much, just as you say.It is a sorry episode in the history of F1 and I hope it is not evidence of more that we know nothing about. Date Added: 16/09/2009
Clive Journeyer: I don't think I said that refueling devalues wins in F1 - it doesn't. But the strategy that has developed around it does and allows some to succeed who would have stood no chance had the contest been between driving skill alone. I do not think it's a huge issue, however, and there are better reasons to celebrate the end of refueling - having cars that can go the whole distance being one of them.I have suggested alternatives to the safety car before (one of which is just to throw it away and go back to the previous system) and don't really want to go over all that again. Is it not sufficient to say that the SC is not a perfect system and to thrash out a better one therefore?And of course cheating will always exist. I am merely trying to think of ways that make it more difficult and less appealing to do so. Date Added: 16/09/2009
Clive Nick: Agreed completely. The irony is that Briatore will probably make even more money when he publishes his story of how he fooled F1 for years... Date Added: 16/09/2009
Clive Vera: Unreasonably, I can forgive the car company any involvement it had in the Singapore business (and I don't actually believe they knew anything about it). They are company executives and live in a different world from the F1 team managers; their methods and motivations are very different from those in the sport and may well include all sorts of dubious tactics.I guess what I'm saying is that they cannot be expected to know much better - to understand how shocking and reprehensible race fixing is within the sport. Briatore and Symonds knew exactly what they were doing, however, and it is the cynicism that drove their actions that most surprises and disappoints me. I would much rather retain my illusion that F1 is a sport than have my eyes opened to the sordid truth.For that reason, I think it would be better to assume that Alonso had no part in the deal. Perhaps the experience will teach him that, as gifted as he is, he really does not need underhand help to succeed. Come to think of it, life proved that already since he won without assistance in the very next race... ;) Date Added: 16/09/2009
Clive David: Totally with you on the tire issue. The present fiddling with different compounds and insistence on the use of both types available is ridiculous and potentially dangerous. The intention behind selecting just one manufacturer to supply tires was to level the playing field and prevent races being decided by choice of tire brand; now we have them decided by a company that can favor one team or another by which type of tire it chooses to supply for each race.To me, standard means standard and either just one type of tire should be available or the whole range available to the teams at any time. The manufacturer gets plenty of marketing mileage merely from being the sole supplier and there is no need to change the rules in a pointless quest for greater public interest in tires. Date Added: 16/09/2009
verasaki Hope we're right about Alonso. I hopefully doubt he was "in" on the fix but then, I didn't want to believe any of this until I started wondering how anyone found out enough of it for it to eventually come out of rumour mode. If the man knew about this and that can be reasonably proven, then I am one Alonso fan who hopes he catches a fair share of the fall out. But, to put my reason for holding Renault to a higher level of responsibility- if someone had legally placed a bet on this race and their driver came in second...could Renault be sued for race fixing since they do own the team? My own corporate masters can be sued if I embezzle from a client or do something that could get a client sued or endanger someone's life-which is why they have micro management oversight. Date Added: 16/09/2009
explosiva Hmm...the Piquets. Just as guilty and should be fined, too, if Renault are fined. And if Renault are banned, they should be as well. If the Piquets were really that disturbed by the incident as they're now making it seem, where were they in Singapore last year? Huh? Yes, all parties involved should be severely punished. But it seems to me all Piquets want is revenge, not justice. Sad. Date Added: 16/09/2009
Clive Vera: All true but I was referring to my own feelings regarding Renault's responsibility. Somehow I expect less of them... Date Added: 16/09/2009
Clive Explosiva: There is no doubt that the Piquets revealed the story as retaliation for Nelsinho losing his seat. It may also be true that they used the threat of exposure to ensure that he retained the drive at the end of 2008 which is blackmail of a sort. So I would agree that they have something to answer for as well.A sorry story from beginning to end... Date Added: 16/09/2009
verasaki Yeah, it's a sorry mess alright. But my corporate masters are going to fire me if I don't stop sneaking into the transcripts and telemetry that's been leaked :). Cool inside look. Date Added: 16/09/2009
John Where is Dick Francis? Who is Flav's bookie? I think there is a great novel here, and what a glorious backdrop F! would be. Beats horse racing any day. Date Added: 16/09/2009
Clive John: Agreed. Over the last few years, F1 has supplied enough sordid and steamy episodes to keep any hack novelist supplied with ideas for the rest of his life! Date Added: 16/09/2009
Steven Roy You have to question Flav's intelligence in sacking Piquet junior. He must have known that Piquet senior would not take that lying down especially when he had a smoking gun.I am glad to see the back of refuelling but I have a different take on tyres to anything that has been mentioned so far. I think Bridgestone should take all 4 compounds to each race and each driver should be allowed to run what he likes. If Lewis prefers harder tyre let him have them. If someone wants to run softs on the front and one medium and one hard on the rear let them.I would ban pit stops for tyres to. That way a safety car being deployed only closes the gaps but doesn't shuffle he order.I hope Flavio or Symonds does write a full disclosure. I can' wait to see what they say about Schumacher and Alonso. Date Added: 17/09/2009
Clive Steven: I agree with you regarding tyres compounds. That was what I meant by saying "the whole range available to the teams at any time".Not so sure about pit stops for tyres, however. I'll have to think about that one.Talking of full disclosure, whatever happened to Stepney's book? wasn't it supposed to be published by now? Date Added: 17/09/2009
Number 38 Nelson Piquet Jr. was COMPLICIT in the crash incident and frankly will never again sit in an F1 car. In fact I understand he's already been turned down as a pizza delivery driver. It's hard to imagine the HATRED the Piquets have shown simply because old Flav replaced him. HATRED so great they destoryed THEMSELVES. Had he held his tonguenone of this would have come to light and he might have got a seat at one of the new teams, perhaps ..... Lotus (sic). Date Added: 17/09/2009
Gusto They say a week is a long time in Politics, they should try a day in F1. With no Flavio and Pat to take the Heat who else can carry the Can, Renault...ING must be holding emergency meetings on how to contain this PR Disaster as we speak. Date Added: 17/09/2009
Steven Roy Apologies for mis-reading your comment Clive. I was scanning too quickly as usual.According to his website Stepney's book will be published last July.http://www.nigel-stepney.com/ Date Added: 17/09/2009
Nick Goodspeed Clive: It is interesting you mention Briatore's cynicism. Wasn't it he who took a young Schumacher under his wing at Benatton? Mighty contagious stuff, that Briatore cynicism! Date Added: 17/09/2009
Hezla I have just read James Allen articles of the subject and it seems that all evidence is only pointing at Pat Symonds not directly at Briatore and FIA believe that Alonso was not involved. I hope the last thing is true.Renault should be punished, but so should the person who did the crash and was silent for many months and only spoke because of revenge. Date Added: 17/09/2009
peter What I can't get over is the number of people suggesting FIA fine individuals, or even huge fines for renault.FIA has no legal power, it just controls motorsport.It's has no ability to fine anyone a cent more than theyare prepared to pay to participate in motorsport.For Flavio & Symonds that is zero. THey will just leavemotorsport and not pay any fines.For renault that that is 33 pounds 57 pence. Any attempt to invoke a Mclaren sized penalty will just result inRenault withdrawing from Motorsport and the sham ofthe WMSC court being made obvious.Mosely fined Mclaren what Mclaren were preparedto pay. He has an acute instinct for how much punishmentpeople are prepared to accept (don't know where he gets it from) and the broken personality to push them right to the limit.Consequently, the fine is unlikely to be repeated and the travesty of Mclaren's treatment clear. I said at the timeMclaren should just walk and call his bluff. The public outcry at his driving the team of Senna vs Prost out of the championship would have lead to a reduction.Grrrr... Date Added: 17/09/2009
Hezla I agree, if Renault get a fine in the size of McLaren they will leave the sport and then it is the whole F1 that will be punished.Renault actions yesterday is excactly what FIA wants and in return, I guess, the penalty will be acceptable for Renault.But the persons Pat Symonds, Briatore, Nelsinho should be banned from motorsport for a period. Just like when you try to cheat in cycling with doping. Date Added: 17/09/2009
Alianora La Canta peter, the FIA is legally empowered to fine any entity competing in its series up to £50,000. This is enshrined in the International Sporting Code and backed by a court decision in Nice dating back to 2000 (which didn't address the matter of fines specifically but effectively said that the FIA, as a sporting body, can hand down judgements that are only challengeable by its own appeals procedures and whichever national/international courts are relevant to a given case). Beyond the £50,000 mark, things get rather shaky, but certainly the FIA can fine individuals.In Symonds' case it won't make a difference as the FIA has already offered him immunity, but in theory he could still be prosecuted in a French or English court if anyone was inclined and the court didn't accept the FIA's take on immunity (which it's not obliged to do).Flavio, however, could be fined (though I doubt his wallet will notice the size of the fine) and be legally required to pay. The difference between this and a standard court fine is that failure to pay would be a civil offence under contract law, not a criminal offence. Date Added: 17/09/2009
Pink Peril I am still having a hard time getting my head around this. None of it makes sense, none at all. Why would Flav & Symmonds do this? Why would Piquet? Why fire Piquet if he had dirt like this? Why do S&Max's enemies always seem to suffer such a public fall from grace? Questions indeed. The only thing I am reasonably sure of is that Alonso would not have been involved in such a plan, even - especially - if he were the main beneficiary. It's just not his style. He may have thrown a tanty or two along the way, but I firmly believe that he would only want to win on merit. And I think that Flav and Symmonds would know that & therefore not let him in on it, in case he tried to scupper the plans. Date Added: 17/09/2009
Clive Number 38: Agreed that the affair is the result of the Piquets' wish for revenge on Flavio. That does not lessen the sordid nature of Briatore and Symonds offense however. As Shakespeare would have said: a pox on both their houses. Date Added: 17/09/2009
Clive Gusto: I'm sure the Renault board have been working for days on the best way to minimise damage from the scandal. And, as I said earlier, it wouldn't surprise me if a deal has already been agreed with the FIA. Date Added: 17/09/2009
Clive Steven: Ah, so Stepney is a little late in meeting his publication date. That's a pity - I was looking forward to a good read... Date Added: 17/09/2009
Clive Nick: A case of the master and his willing pupil, perhaps. ;) Date Added: 17/09/2009
Clive Hezla: I read through the documents on the case as leaked yesterday and agree with James Allen's assessment. Others have pointed out that Symonds has been involved with Briatore for a long time and was most likely mixed up in the shady dealings at Benetton while the Flav was in charge. Pat is not quite the upstanding and honourable engineer we thought, it seems.Piquet has immunity from the FIA as well as Symonds so I don't think any penalties will be coming from that quarter. Date Added: 17/09/2009
Clive Alianora: Thank you for your usual excellent clarification of the legal matters raised. Where would we be without you? :) Date Added: 17/09/2009
Clive Peril: I think the motivation behind the scheme was to gain a win that would encourage Renault to stay in F1. As events turned out with Alonso winning the next race quite legitimately, it was completely unnecessary and, perhaps, confirms the adage that cheats never prosper.Agreed on Alonso - there is no evidence at all that he was aware of the plot. Date Added: 17/09/2009
michael Clive, Renault by way of letting both retire from their held positions makes me feel that Renault are far more involved in this scheme than willing to admit. And as Irvine correctly states -this is only a sign of changing times in F1 but certainly not the biggest cheat in F1 history. What about Mosley's constant scheming and manipulating against, well, not just Ron Denis & McLaren?So there is no Stepney tell-it-all book - there never will be one - and neither Pat nor Flav will be inclined to write one either. I think for the dismal truth we will have to invite Eddie Irvine over and have some good old Irish Malt at hand. When I first commented on this "scandal" on your blog I stated it would be the end of F1 as we know it. But now, strangely, I feel not at all so. This really depressing story feels so inherently F1-like - so not at all wrong - that I am inclined to feel as entertained by it as watching the great procession - a Valencia GP :-) Date Added: 17/09/2009
Lee This whole affair is horrid and disgraceful but far from surprising. I am willing to bet that this happens in some form far more than we think. In fact Briatore himself has been involved in at least on I can think of when schumacher purposefully crashed into damon hill in order to secure the championship (I am still horrified that he did not get banned for life for that incident). Then schumacher again when at ferrari, purposefully parked his car on the apex of a bend to bring out the safety car and aid his teammate to a victory. These are the ones that come to mind but I am sure there are many others that were less blatant.Renault should be handed at least the same hefty fine as Maclaren received for the spygate as this is far far more serious!I am also skeptical that Alonso did not know anything about this whole affair as surely to benefit so much from it he would have had to be driving to a stategy that took the safety car element into account. Perhaps he was somehow kept in the dark but I am finding it hard to believe this could be the case. Date Added: 18/09/2009
Gusto I find it hard to find Alonso complicite in the affair, because the less people who `need to know` the better. There was no reason to involve Alonso in the affair. Plus with His scapes with the FIA via McLaren would He stand it ?. The interesting thing to watch is the `Sinking Ship Sydrome` that will inevitably follow. Date Added: 18/09/2009
Clive Michael: You may be correct that these scandals begin to look and feel like F1. That would be a sad commentary on the way it has changed over the years, however, and I would prefer that this is one of the last upsets that we'll see. Perhaps Vatanen will sweep out the stable if he gets elected... Date Added: 19/09/2009
Clive Lee and Gusto: I'm with Gusto on the matter of Alonso being aware of the plot - there was no need for him to be included in it as he could be relied upon to get the most from his car whatever the circumstances. Symonds gave him a good reason to pit early (to avoid having to pass Nakajima) and he would have accepted that. Date Added: 19/09/2009
RSS comments feed
Back to the main blog
You may use some HTML in comments. For bold text use <strong></strong> and for italic text use <em></em>. If you know what you're doing feel free to use more complex mark-up but please no deprecated tags, break tags or JavaScript.
Enter the code shown above: Name * Comment * Email * URL
