F1 strategist explains how sandbagging actually works, points finger at guilty team

Sandbagging is always a hot topic during F1 pre-season testing.

It refers to Formula 1 teams intentionally slowing their cars down, so their rivals see inaccurate data. The idea is to then to catch your enemies by surprise when it really counts at the first grand prix.

Sandbagging can be achieved by putting more fuel than necessary into a car, to weigh it down and make it slower.

Ruth Buscombe, who worked for Ferrari and Sauber in strategy jobs, explained why teams use differing amount of fuel during testing.

“Low fuel was a range between 30-40 kilos,” she said about testing with Sauber. “But remember it’s about equivalent fuel.

“Some teams speak as though they are going down to qualifying trim, and some teams speak in terms of actual fuel in the car.

“That’s because we run more sensors in testing than in a race.

“So it’s driven by what you want to achieve - if you run a soft compound, like you would in Monaco, then you run a low fuel load. If you’re running a qualifying sim, you run a low fuel load. “If you ran a 30kg fuel load it would effectively be 40kg because of the sensors.”

Jolyon Palmer replied: “We used to do 30kg at Renault and we’d often look alright in testing.”

Which clues from F1 testing hint at the pecking order?

Whatever the timesheets say in testing, we know it only counts when racing begins at the Australian Grand Prix on March 16.

Until then, F1 fans are left looking for clues from testing to guess who has the quickest car.

“The race sims are the best reference,” Buscombe said.

“It wouldn’t be crazy for a big team to never drop below 50kg equivalent in testing.

“One of the most fascinating things is: a qualifying session in Formula 1 is 18 minutes, and teams get knocked out because they go at the beginning, then don’t go at the end, and track evolution can dominate between a fast car and a slow car.

“Track evolution makes a huge difference. Bahrain gets faster, then slower, then faster again.”

Which F1 teams are guilty of sandbagging?

Palmer asked: “Why don’t the big teams just run the day on 50kg of fuel?”

Buscombe answered: “There’s an element of not showing your hand but that’s becoming less and less over the years.

“There is a historic trend of teams like Ferrari running slightly lower at the end of testing than their rivals.”

But what is the actual purpose of testing? Palmer expressed his confusion at why teams value the art of hiding data from rivals.

He asked: “Surely everyone’s hand is shown? At the end of three days of coverage, if you stop in the pitlane, the cameras are on. If the engine blows up, the cameras are on. Everyone is looking at everyone else?”

Buscombe answered: “If you are three tenths off pole, you’re in for a tough season, historically, if you are Lando Norris or Max Verstappen.

“So running sensors on the car, even if you run equivalent to qualifying, you are effectively sandbagging compared to where you would be in Australia.

“You don’t have to do much, these days, in terms of fuel. First to last was 1.3% last year. Three tenths is about 0.4%.

“You don’t have to do much to sandbag.”

'Confused by the logic of sandbagging'

Palmer said: “I don’t understand why anyone sandbags. Every year I am confused by the logic of sandbagging.

“If Ferrari took the shackles off and did a 1.29.2, and they’re a second-and-a-half quicker than Verstappen, what are Red Bull going to do about it?”

Buscombe replied: “I’ve heard people give logical answers on both sides of this.

“Fred Vasseur says ‘focus on ourselves’. Other team principals say ‘we don’t want to show our hand because this is our roll-out car’.”

Palmer pointed out another oddity of testing.

“50kg of fuel is a silly weight,” he said. “You never run 50kg of fuel apart from half-way through a grand prix for one lap.

“So, all this testing work, why don’t they test on the fuel that they’d qualify with?”

Buscombe answered: “Because, 2014 was the year, Mercedes did a 50kg fuel run. With one set of tyres, they did a mini qualifying sim and also got some long run data.

“They got something which was a bit of both, while testing other things.”