[Team] Williams: Do they have a spare tub?

[broadrun96]

Latifi-61 races and 25 points so .15 points/race
Sargeant-16 races and 0 points

F2 numbers 67 races and 483 points for Latifi to 31 races and 148 points

Ah yes, how to have fun with statistics and blur the actual data. Let's take actual numbers and convert them to a theoretical points total with this random number as the base. Sounds like NFL QBR and MLB WAR, both of which have been GREAT at predicting success. Oh wait, that's right no they haven't

[Richard C]

Yeah, it's hard to find a good way to objectively compare Latifi and Sargeant. I was trying to look at both of their rookie F1 seasons, but the Williams was so bad in 2020 that it makes it hard to compare to 2023.

If I were to make a serious stab at this, I would probably try to look at race pace deltas between Williams teammates when they were on same tires, same fuel loads, same race and both pushing vs. managing tire degradation to see who has the better race pace. Then you can maybe produce some type of rating between teammates. But that would give a George to Nicholas and Alex to Logan rating. If you assume both George and Alex are getting nearly the most from the car you might be able to compare Nicholas to Logan? Even then, like I point about above, if you use rookie seasons, the 2020 car was not good so makes it hard to do apples to apples with 2023 which is a much better car.

Regardless, all of that would be some serious work to prepare the right data for analysis and while the per lap timing exists, only the teams may really know what are the best laps/situations to compare two drivers like I suggest.

Richard

[GTRMagic]

Its easy to compare... does Lavazza Coffee pay better/more than Duracell?

[Richard C]

I wanted to share that I think Williams is doing a great job on some of their YouTube content recently. Two examples...

This is Vowles himself talking to detailed specifics around the Bahrain GP. Lots of interesting details. I hope they keep this going.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9ueQCCM9yM

"Team Torque" Podcast style with Alex, Logan and guests. This one has Lia Block as guest. This is their second episode. This looks promising.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cjk62ZjYKSU

Richard

[GTRMagic]

Where would the team be without Mr Vowles & Mr Fry to tip the toys out of the toy box and starting again…

Here

Metal instead of carbon? WOW!

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Where would the team be without Mr Vowles & Mr Fry to tip the toys out of the toy box and starting again…

Here

Metal instead of carbon? WOW!

Nice video. Thanks for sharing. I think it is less about things like metal vs. carbon but rather overall internal operational efficiencies hampered by decades old automation solutions. So I am more shocked about the Excel centric manufacturing and inventory management than the metal bits on the car. I am a firm believer that you can't rely upon tooling as a silver bullet for organizational or operational challenges. But if you are looking to setup a modern and efficient operational system, then modern tooling will help. So it sounds like they are moving from a mostly manual process (aided somewhat by a nearly paper process in Excel) to software that will help manage manufacturing operations and their supply chain. But again, the tooling will only be a positive if they are part of a well managed and efficient workflows, processes and procedures. It sounds like Williams didn't focus enough on themselves as much as they did the cars. No doubt funding was part of that, but this is the benefit of having someone external come in and say "This is not how to be successful".

Richard

[chillibowl]

great video. shocking to see how little they have modernized over the past 20 years and yeah funding must have been behind much of this. in 2004 (walrus nose year?) they swung for the fences, fell short after a fairly successful 2003 season, and its been a fairly steady (some blips) decline since then.

would this then be a win for the budget cap system? a team can rebuild its processes while not falling even further behind because spending is now capped? perhaps also explains the relatively lower amount the team was sold for compared to the current F1 team valuations being floated around?

i was thinking about ranting in the 2024 rumours thread about how content all teams on the grid seem to be about not having made much progress forward and how 2024 is just a weak rehash of a fairly boring 2023 season...but kudos to Vowles and Fry!

they are not acting in a complacent way at all!

watching to see how it works out for Williams might have just become the storyline that keeps me interested in the 2024 season!

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

would this then be a win for the budget cap system? a team can rebuild its processes while not falling even further behind because spending is now capped?

The challenge is... if you want to improve infrastructure (including likely expensive manufacturing and inventory management software) and that comes out of your larger capped budget, then you are taking money away from actual car development.

https://us.motorsport.com/f1/news/br...pree/10522775/

If my understanding of this is correct, there are two caps within the current cost cap structure (well three if you count the future 2026 power unit cost caps, but that is not part of this topic). So the two cost caps are... (1) "Capital Expenditures" and (2) "Relevant Costs".

So we focus on the second one which is $135M and it has some exclusions. The CapEx cap is one that aggregates CapEx spending over a period of time. To the article above that is $36M over four years. So lets say your per year average is $9M. You can spend more than $9M, but your overage comes out of the other $135M yearly budget. I think the two budgets are capped separately. But breaking the CapEx budget pulls money out of the other. There are also exclusions on CapEx for stuff like wind tunnels.

So... if you are Mercedes or Ferrari who have likely had a modern process with all types of relevant hardware and software going into the cost cap era, your CapEx spending might fit well within the $9M per year value. The big teams are mostly already well setup. But if you are Williams who has a bunch of antiquated solutions, you will want to spend more than $9M per year to "catch up" (facilities, test equipment, tooling, software, etc.). But if you do spend more than the $9M then you are then pulling money out of car development to fund your infrastructure improvements.

As the article above says, Vowles knew things were bad when he showed up and it was going to cost money (from CapEx budget) to improve. He was trying last year, early this year to see if the other teams would allow for an increase for some teams to catch up (to not defund card development as part of infrastructure improvements). But the effort fell apart because all of the other teams said, "If Williams gets a bigger CapEx budget, why can't we have one as well".

So to answer your question... As structured, the cost caps are going to work better when teams have parity in capabilities, but for teams that are needing to catch up, they may continue to lag behind as they consider spending part of the $135M for CapEx while other teams don't have to do that.

I "think" I heard that part of the falling out between Gunther and Haas was over this same topic. I can't remember the details, but I think there might be a ramp down of CapEx spending capabilities and that Haas was not spending to the CapEx limits. So Haas F1 was leaving money on the table from a cost cap perspective. But I might be remembering this wrong.

Richard

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Richard C

So to answer your question... As structured, the cost caps are going to work better when teams have parity in capabilities, but for teams that are needing to catch up, they may continue to lag behind as they consider spending part of the $135M for CapEx while other teams don't have to do that.

sure but thats exactly why its a win for the cap no?

for example excluding the extra Capex budget and just focusing on the 135m annual operating budget... lets say Williams in an effort to catch up to Merc (for arguments sake) is willing to sacrifice performance in the next 2 seasons by only spend 50% (67.5m) of its budget on car performance and the other 50% (67.5m) on CapEx/modernization where as Merc have decided to spend 80% (108m) on performance and 20% (27m) of its remaining budget on CapEx type spending.

so over 2 years, thats Williams spending 81m more on CapEx than Merc would be...thats a lot of extra tosh to spend towards modernizing/catching up.

factor in that there is a rule change coming up in two year so a team like Williams operating at the back of the grid regardless may even find itself another opportunity to be even more aggressive in how much they allocate towards CapEx spending relative to the top end teams without actually suffering any consequences from falling down the WCC table/losing out on prize money.

obviously im making up all those percentages and simplifying, but it seems like there is a pretty big opportunity here?

for sure they will still lag behind Merc's facilities and processes but would it still be a 20year difference?

if there is an opportunity to be found with this sort of logic then again kudos to Vowles and Fry for going for it right?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

sure but thats exactly why its a win for the cap no?

I continue to fully support the caps. So I think they are "winning" either way.

I guess my (really Vowles) point is that in the short term, their ability to catch up is hampered by the CapEx caps being "flat" (applied to everyone equally). I think the "ideal" that the caps are shooting for is parity of resources and that it is things like efficient operation and smart thinking wins the day. But this topic is illustrating that the timeline to infrastructure parity is slow. Or you can make it fast, but at the expense of on-track action. Regardless, it seems that the idea to allow Williams to catch up is a dead topic. And as Williams catches up (even on the slow path) it eventually becomes a moot point.

Richard

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Where would the team be without Mr Vowles & Mr Fry to tip the toys out of the toy box and starting again…

Here

Metal instead of carbon? WOW!

Telling points made in that vid - shows just how much Paddy Lowe was made a scapegoat to cover core team issues in 2019 - bet he felt relieved as he drove away from Grove for the last time!

Clearly lack of financial resources has been an issue but I suspect that living in the past probably didn't help. One of those times that it takes someone coming from a better operation to understand the issues and how to address them.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Tourer

Telling points made in that vid - shows just how much Paddy Lowe was made a scapegoat to cover core team issues in 2019 - bet he felt relieved as he drove away from Grove for the last time!

Clearly lack of financial resources has been an issue but I suspect that living in the past probably didn't help. One of those times that it takes someone coming from a better operation to understand the issues and how to address them.

The previous regime was told many times, like with their gearbox being 10+ years out of date, but they never wanted to listen.

Dorilton gradually building it back up.

[GTRMagic]

Can the team find another ‘24 tub for Mr Albon on the excel spreadsheet?

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Can the team find another ‘24 tub for Mr Albon on the excel spreadsheet?

Confirmed on the teev coverage Williams don’t have a spare tub in Australia…

Um… WTF…

[HDTVKSS]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Confirmed on the teev coverage Williams don’t have a spare tub in Australia…

Um… WTF…

The Sky team bleating continuously that they should give Sargents car to Albon was pretty poor. Sargent isn’t the one that binned it so shouldn’t be penalised.

[steve_r]

Williams just announced that this is exactly what will happen. Albon in Sargents car.

Sargent was relatively quick in FP by the way. I'm not sure he really deserves a place in F1, but this is a real kick in the teeth.

[steve_r]

. double post

[HDTVKSS]

Yup, I’m much more an Albon fan than a Sargent fan but this is a poor decision.

[Mike Harte]

Williams also have to make decisions based on what is in the best interests of the team as a whole, though. Each team benefits from payments made by FOM which is graduated based on points each team score in the constructors' championship, and last year Albon scored 27 out of the team's 28 points.

So, although it is rather unfair on Sargeant, it has been done in the best interests of the team.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by HDTVKSS

Yup, I’m much more an Albon fan than a Sargent fan but this is a poor decision.

Team has no choice but to chase points and $. Sargent unlikely to get either.

[GTRMagic]

While it certainly helps Mr Vowles’ narrative around Williams needing significant structural change, you can’t bring something along with you if it doesn’t physically exist.

Would suggest Mr Sargeant is crushed… however from his release in the media, he accepts the team game, not just his own goals.

DotR even if he doesn’t get to make the start.

[HDTVKSS]

Originally Posted by peebee2

Team has no choice but to chase points and $. Sargent unlikely to get either.

Then he shouldn’t have put it in the wall….

[Moneyseeker]

Others in the paddock seem to see attributes in Albon that I must have missed. To me he has always been relatively inconsistent and still liable to make a rash move or crash the car despite many F1 races under his belt. Even rumbles of a return to Red Bull - could he really pull out a pole lap and race winning performance on every track, every weekend?

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by Moneyseeker

Others in the paddock seem to see attributes in Albon that I must have missed. To me he has always been relatively inconsistent and still liable to make a rash move or crash the car despite many F1 races under his belt. Even rumbles of a return to Red Bull - could he really pull out a pole lap and race winning performance on every track, every weekend?

The Williams has been a dog of a car for a while, but perhaps less of a dog in the last couple of years than it has been. But expectations of anyone driving the Williams are automatically very low, so a Q2 appearance or a point or two is viewed by many as a massive over achievement and hence Albons stock has risen.

The other real problem we have in judging Albons performance is that his teammate is not very good, and is not a good yardstick to compare.

FWIW - I think he is a reasonably good driver. But not absolutely top level. Some of his race performances last year looked good. He failed at the main RBR team, but many good drivers have similarly failed and he clearly was promoted far too soon. It would be interesting to see how he would get on if put next to a known quality teammate - say someone like Norris, Sainz or even Hulkenburg.

[Sodemo]

I guess there was no option to bring a 2023 tub with them?