Icon: enlarge
Lewis Hamilton (right) has often left Max Verstappen behind - that's how it should stay.
Photo:
Laszlo Balogh / AP
That Lewis Hamilton has extended his contract with Mercedes for another year - probably with an additional option for 2022 - is no surprise.
After all, the Briton, who became Formula 1 world champion for the seventh time in 2020 and thus set Michael Schumacher's record, also wants his eighth title and thus the sole top of the record lists.
The fact that he also had joint work on social change written into his contract is something completely new in Formula 1. A crucial part of the new agreement builds "on the shared commitment to more diversity and inclusion in motorsport," says Mercedes .
"This will take place in the form of a joint, non-profit foundation that aims to support more inclusion and diversity in all its forms in motorsport."
What is not communicated openly, however, is a possible contract detail that provides topics for discussion.
The dominator of the past few years is said to have had a say in deciding who will be his teammate in the future.
Of course, none of the protagonists officially confirm this.
But many insiders are sure that it was precisely this topic that contributed to the fact that the negotiations dragged on for so long.
The reason: Mercedes team boss Toto Wolff has shown great interest in Red Bull star Max Verstappen for years.
Some experts already believe that the 23-year-old could beat Hamilton in an equivalent car.
But such an intra-team fight is apparently not what the Briton would wish for in the last few years of his career.
Hence the will to implement the Verstappen clause.
His compatriot Damon Hill was the first driver to report on the controversial contract detail on Twitter.
The 1996 world champion also made it clear that he couldn't find anything wrong with it.
“I would do the same thing in his place.” And the Swiss ex-GP driver and TV expert Marc Surer also told SPIEGEL: “That would be just a clever maneuver.
This way he avoids having a problem that he really doesn't need.
I am not sure, however, whether he has got through all of his wishes, whether in addition to Verstappen it might not also be about the young Mercedes driver George Russell. "The current Williams driver already stood in for Hamilton at the end of 2020 in Bahrain canceled due to Corona.
Such actions are not new: In the winter of 1983/1984, Bernie Ecclestone, in his role as Brabham team boss at the time, had the problem of wanting to sign the up-and-coming super talent Ayrton Senna alongside world champion Nelson Piquet.
Piquet had just won his second title.
But Piquet recognized the danger that his young compatriot would pose for him very quickly, resisted and also convinced sponsor Parmalat, who then did not want "two Brazilians" on the team.
Ecclestone gave in "for the sake of the team's peace."
Of course, Ecclestone told F1-Insider.com that instead of Mercedes he would not have let Hamilton dictate any conditions, "because everyone is replaceable".
Senna was twice "victim" of a veto
Senna, whom he at least placed with Toleman in his second role as F1 boss "in the interests of Formula 1 as a whole", later became three times world champion and absolute superstar of the scene, and again victim of a "veto".
His arch rival Alain Prost, who took a year off in 1992, celebrated a comeback in 1993 with the then clearly superior Williams team - but only on the condition that Senna would not be his teammate.
Even if personal animosities played an additional role in this case: The argument of many top stars and also some team bosses that they do not want to have two superstars of equal value on the team is officially usually this: If they take points away from each other, it can easily happen that then a third world champion will be.
This happened in 1986, when Piquet and Nigel Mansell fought to the blood at Williams - and the title ultimately went to Prost in the McLaren.
Or 2007 at McLaren: top dog Fernando Alonso and newcomer Hamilton stole the decisive points - Kimi Raikkonen became world champion in a Ferrari with one point ahead.
Michael Schumacher held the same position of power that Hamilton has now secured at Mercedes for many years during his time at Ferrari - even without a fixed clause.
Team boss Jean Todt discussed all driver commitments with him.
Whether Eddie Irvine, Rubens Barrichello or Felipe Massa - there was always a clear number two "by Schumacher's grace".
Only when Ferrari chief Luca di Montezemolo made it clear in the summer of 2006 that he wanted to bring Kimi Raikkonen to Ferrari for 2007 was Schumacher's power enough to prevent the deal.
When he realized that he would no longer be able to avoid the Finn, whom he considered a very, very strong rival, as a team-mate without a corresponding written contract clause, this contributed to his decision to retire.
Hamilton probably wanted to avoid such a situation.
Or as Marc Surer puts it: "All clever drivers should learn from the past."
Icon: The mirror