McLaren’s Conservative Approach: Is Their Cautious Strategy Hampering Championship Chances?
McLaren currently finds itself in an enviable position with two championship-caliber drivers in Lando Norris and Oscar Piastri, a fast car, and the constructors’ title to defend. However, recent race management decisions have sparked debate about whether the team’s cautious approach and reluctance to upset either driver could ultimately cost them in their championship defense.
The Japanese Grand Prix Controversy
The most recent example of McLaren’s conservative strategy came at the 2025 Japanese Grand Prix, where the team’s approach arguably cost them a shot at victory. With Norris sitting second behind Max Verstappen and Piastri in third with seemingly better pace, McLaren refused to implement team orders that could have given them a better chance at challenging for the win[1].
Piastri requested to be allowed to attack Verstappen, but McLaren maintained the status quo, despite the Australian appearing to have stronger pace in the latter stages of the race[2]. This decision allowed Verstappen to secure victory and close to within just one point of championship leader Norris[1].
As one analysis put it: “By trying to manage too well, McLaren offers no competition to its rival for the title… By being overly cordial, the Woking team is boosting the confidence of a man in search of his fifth crown.”[1]
The Equal Driver Policy Dilemma
McLaren’s commitment to treating both drivers equally creates a strategic straightjacket that competitors are quick to exploit. Red Bull team principal Christian Horner pointedly observed after Japan: “The problem they have is they have two drivers that are fighting for the drivers championship. The difficulty they have is that they’ve made a bed where they’re going to let them race.”[3]
This has led to a situation where the team appears unwilling to make the tough calls necessary to maximize results. After Japan, Horner directly criticized McLaren’s approach, stating their equal driver policy had compromised their race result[4].
One Reddit comment captured the sentiment: “McLaren is hesitant to favor one driver over the other at this stage of the season, as it could lead to discontent among the team. This is the reason they chose not to instruct Lando to yield his position for Oscar. However, they may face challenges with this approach as the season progresses.”[5]
A History of Conservative Decision-Making
This isn’t a new pattern for McLaren. Throughout 2024 and into 2025, the team has developed a reputation for conservative strategy calls that prioritize solid points over ambitious attempts at victories[6].
The team infamously struggled with strategy during the 2024 British Grand Prix, where they lost a potential 1-2 finish due to three critical pitstop errors: not double-stacking Piastri behind Norris, fitting softs instead of mediums to Norris’s car, and a slow stop that allowed Hamilton to get ahead[7].
During the Hungarian Grand Prix in 2024, another controversy erupted when Norris initially refused team orders to let Piastri pass him for the win after a strategy call put Norris ahead during pit stops[8]. While Norris eventually complied, the radio exchanges were described as “ridiculous” and highlighted communication issues within the team[8].
The 2007 Warning Sign
McLaren’s current situation draws parallels to their infamous 2007 season, where internal rivalry between Fernando Alonso and Lewis Hamilton ultimately cost them both championships despite having the fastest car[2].
“McLaren is currently navigating a tricky scenario with two capable drivers who not only have fast cars but also the skill to secure victories… Implementing team orders at this stage of the season could backfire, leading to discontent among the drivers and potential internal strife—a situation reminiscent of the 2007 McLaren season.”[2]
The concern is that by trying to keep both drivers happy, McLaren risks allowing Verstappen to capitalize on their hesitancy, just as Kimi Räikkönen did for Ferrari in 2007[2].
The Strategy Department’s Weakness
Beyond driver management, McLaren’s overall strategic approach has been criticized as a significant vulnerability. One analysis states: “A significant vulnerability for McLaren lies in their strategic approach. They struggle to process information and adapt in real-time, which is a critical skill in racing.”[4]
This issue appears systemic, with another observer noting: “This issue isn’t limited to just one series; it’s a recurring theme across all of McLaren Racing, including IndyCar and Formula E, where their strategy consistently falls short.”[4]
The Case for Boldness
McLaren’s approach stands in stark contrast to how dominant teams have historically operated. As one analysis put it: “It’s not just about having the fastest car, it’s about using it to its full potential. Look at Red Bull, look at Mercedes during their dominant years – the pit wall was just as important as the driver’s seat.”[9]
The suggestion is that McLaren lacks the decisiveness that characterized strategists like Hannah Schmitz at Red Bull and James Vowles at Mercedes, who made bold calls that often secured victories[9].
Team Leadership Perspective
McLaren team principal Andrea Stella has defended their approach, particularly regarding their handling of driver dynamics. After the controversial Hungary 2023 race where Norris initially questioned team orders, Stella surprisingly said he would have been “extremely worried” if Norris hadn’t questioned the instruction[10].
This indicates a leadership philosophy that values driver autonomy and open dialogue, but may also reflect a reluctance to impose firm direction when needed.
The Cost of Caution
The cumulative effect of McLaren’s conservative approach was highlighted in a 2024 mid-season analysis that concluded the team would have been just points behind Red Bull “had it avoided errors and converted lost victory chances from the campaign’s first half.”[7]
While Stella framed these near-misses as “good news” because they show how far the team has come, others view them as squandered opportunities that could prove costly in a championship fight[7].
Conclusion
The evidence strongly suggests that McLaren’s cautious approach to both strategy and driver management is potentially hampering their championship chances. While their focus on team harmony and equal treatment may benefit the constructors’ championship in the short term, it risks undermining both drivers’ title hopes against the ruthlessly efficient Verstappen.
As one commenter succinctly put it: “To beat Max Verstappen, McLaren will need both of its drivers… By trying not to offend either driver, the world champion constructor team risks not going very far.”[1]
For McLaren to successfully defend their constructors’ title and mount a serious challenge for the drivers’ championship, they may need to find a better balance between team harmony and the decisive, sometimes difficult decisions that define championship-winning operations. The question remains: can they develop the “killer instinct” needed before it’s too late?