Mario Isola has raised concerns over the apparent level of trust between Lewis Hamilton and the Ferrari pit wall after the seven-time world champion’s strategy unravelled during the Singapore Grand Prix. Hamilton remained on a set of C5 Soft tyres for 44 laps after not stopping under the Virtual Safety Car, eventually finishing sixth after his pace collapsed late in the race.
The decision not to pit on lap 39 became one of the most debated strategic moments of Ferrari’s Singapore weekend. Lewis Hamilton had fitted the Soft tyres at around lap 18 and, after staying out during the VSC, was forced to extend the stint as far as possible, probably hoping for another Safety Car that never arrived.
Lewis Hamilton loses Singapore podium chance after missing Ferrari stop
Lewis Hamilton did not pit alongside team-mate Charles Leclerc during the neutralisation, a decision that ultimately cost him any realistic chance of finishing third in Singapore. The British driver accepted responsibility after the race, while the circumstances behind Hamilton’s missed VSC stop became a major talking point.
What remains harder to understand from a strategic perspective is why Ferrari did not subsequently insist on bringing him into the pits so he could attack the final part of the race on fresher tyres. Instead, Hamilton continued circulating on the C5 Softs as performance deteriorated sharply.
From lap 39 until the chequered flag, it appeared that the Ferrari engineers and Lewis Hamilton were no longer discussing the possibility of another stop. He eventually completed 44 laps on the Soft compound and crossed the line sixth.
Mario Isola questions trust between Lewis Hamilton and Ferrari pit wall
Mario Isola, the former Pirelli motorsport director and current ACI general director, believes the episode suggested a deeper concern than tyre degradation alone.
“What concerns me most is that, looking at it from the outside, it seems there isn’t the right level of trust between the driver and the pit wall. The team certainly had more data than Lewis…” Mario Isola explained.
The former Pirelli executive pointed out that even when degradation initially appears limited, tyre performance can eventually reach a critical point.
“However low the degradation may have been, it was clear that at some point the cliff could arrive,” Mario Isola said. He explained that degradation tends to remain relatively constant at the beginning of a stint before becoming increasingly non-linear, eventually reaching a level that can “take away the driver’s ability to fight with the others”.
“Hamilton did 44 laps on the Softs…” Mario Isola added.
The episode can also be viewed in the wider context of Ferrari’s pit-stop and strategy data, particularly given how important the timing of stops became during the Virtual Safety Car period.
Mario Isola says Ferrari must make clear who decides strategy
For Mario Isola, the crucial issue is the relationship between what the driver feels from inside the cockpit and the wider information available to the engineers on the pit wall.
“The engineers try to predict and anticipate the cliff. The driver reads the situation and makes his own assessments,” he explained on ACI Radio. However, Mario Isola stressed that the driver cannot have an exact prediction of what will happen as the stint develops.
“There has to be an absolute connection between the driver and the pit wall and, above all, it has to be clear who makes the decision,” Mario Isola concluded.
His message is that a driver should naturally have his own interpretation of the race and should influence strategy through the feedback coming directly from the track. If the situation concerns a short period, following the driver’s judgement can be entirely reasonable. But when tyre behaviour can evolve substantially over many laps, Mario Isola believes the team must eventually intervene.
Ferrari team principal Fred Vasseur has already faced detailed questions about Lewis Hamilton’s Singapore strategy. Mario Isola’s assessment now adds another dimension to the debate, focusing not simply on whether the original decision was correct, but on the decision-making structure and level of trust between the cockpit and the Ferrari pit wall.
Leave a Reply