Hamilton Apologizes for His Singapore Strategy Call After 40-Plus Laps on Softs End in Sixth

Lewis Hamilton finished sixth in Singapore and then used team radio to blame himself, not Ferrari. His post-race message accepted that the decision to stay out on worn soft tyres, while his team-mate stopped for fresh ones, was his call and cost the team valuable points, SportBible reports.

What actually happened to Hamilton’s race?

A split strategy that worked until it did not. Hamilton started third on medium tyres while the rest of the top seven chose softs, then stopped first, on lap 19, for softs, F1 Oversteer reports. Charles Leclerc’s own stop dropped him out just ahead of Hamilton, and Hamilton spent the next phase asking to be let past, saying he had the pace to chase race leader Max Verstappen and offering to hand the place back if he could not pull away. Ferrari kept Leclerc in front, Hamilton backed off, and the race moved to its decisive moment with the order unchanged. It was the second Ferrari argument of a weekend that had already produced the sprint venue row Hamilton shared with Verstappen.

What was the decision Hamilton apologised for?

Staying out under the lap-39 virtual safety car. Lance Stroll’s retirement triggered the VSC, Leclerc used it for a second stop and fresh softs, and Hamilton stayed on the set he had fitted on lap 19. Sky Sports pit reporter Ted Kravitz said the information from the team was that Hamilton was ready to come in, the tyres were out and the crew were prepared to stack both cars, but Hamilton drove past the pit entry, SportBible reports. His closing radio message took ownership of that choice, apologising and saying the strategy was his decision. That detail separates this from the usual Ferrari strategy row: the pit wall had a stop prepared, and the driver overruled it in the moment.

How did the last laps unfold on 40-plus-lap-old softs?

As a queue forming behind a car with no grip left. Leclerc passed Hamilton into turn four on his fresher tyres, then Kimi Antonelli and Lando Norris went past, SportBible reports. Oscar Piastri, 25 seconds behind Hamilton at one stage of the final stint, closed and passed him into turn 16. Hamilton, who also reported brake issues during the run, crossed the line sixth, 53.188 seconds behind Verstappen, F1 Oversteer reports. Race control also noted him leaving the track and gaining an advantage against Norris; the stewards have since taken no further action (see the October 12 update below). The tyre age explains the sequence: a soft compound asked to run more than 40 laps at Marina Bay is a defensive exercise, not a podium defence.

Why does the stacking detail matter?

Because a stack was the risk Hamilton declined. Stacking means both Ferraris stopping on the same lap, the second car waiting while the first is serviced, which costs seconds but buys fresh tyres at VSC speed, when the whole field is slowed and a stop is cheapest. Ferrari judged that trade worth making and had the tyres ready, according to Kravitz’s reporting. Hamilton judged the track position worth keeping. The results table graded both calls: Leclerc, who stacked in effect behind no one and took fresh rubber, finished second; Hamilton kept position and lost three places in the final laps anyway. Saturday’s sprint at the same circuit had already shown how little room Marina Bay leaves for recovering lost ground.

What did Verstappen and Antonelli take from the same race?

Verstappen took the win Singapore had always denied him, his second victory in a week, on his 250th grand prix start, even after his radio communication with his engineer cut out during the race, F1 Oversteer reports. Antonelli took third and the bigger prize in reach: his championship lead is now 102 points, and he can become the sport’s youngest champion at Austin on October 25 if he wins and George Russell finishes ninth or lower, according to the BBC report carried by NewsATW. Russell’s own weekend, from an engine-penalty start at the back to ninth, is the other half of that Austin scenario.

What has Vasseur clarified since the race? (Update, October 11)

That the call was clear and the miss was the driver’s. Vasseur told Sky Sports, via Reuters, that Ferrari kept both strategy options open for a virtual safety car, called both drivers in when it came, and would have finished second and third on track had Hamilton entered. He added there was no miscommunication and described the instruction as clear on the radio, while still framing the weekend’s performance as workable and the focus as Austin. Formula 1’s own report adds Vasseur’s blunter verdict to F1 TV: the call was to pit both cars, Hamilton decided to stay on track, and overall it was a mistake.

Hamilton’s fuller account, in a Ferrari statement carried in Australian coverage, fills in the sequence between those two versions: the team called him in under the VSC, he missed the entry, and after that he chose to stay out and try to hold position, before heavy degradation cost three places late on. That sequence reconciles the pit-wall reporting with the driver’s apology. The stop was prepared and called, the entry was missed in the moment, and the decision after the miss, to defend on old softs rather than recover, is the decision both men are describing.

What did the stewards decide about Hamilton and Norris? (Update, October 12)

No penalty, for a reason that needs both cars in it. The stewards reviewed video, timing and in-car evidence and determined that Hamilton left the track at Turn 1 while defending against Norris, but that Norris’s attempt was not a legitimate overtake because Norris also left the track at the same point, PlanetF1 reports, carrying the verdict. Both cars rejoined in the correct order, and both then lost their positions to Antonelli, who had been behind them when they went off. On that basis the stewards took no further action.

Formula 1’s own race report records the same sequence from the other side: Hamilton went wide defending, Antonelli swept past Norris and then took third from Hamilton at Turn 16, and the investigation into Hamilton ended with no further action required. The ruling closes this article’s last open item from Sunday. What it does not change is the result it was argued over: Hamilton still finished sixth, the places the excursion briefly protected were lost on track within a lap, and the strategy apology above remains the race’s real verdict on his evening.

What happens next after Singapore?

Scrutiny, then Austin. Ferrari leave Singapore with a second place, a sixth that should have been a podium, and a driver publicly absorbing a strategy argument the team usually absorbs for him, a contrast with the FIA’s admitted error earlier in this same weekend, where the officials took the blame. The open items are any FIA decision on the track-limits note against Hamilton and whether Ferrari change how much strategy authority sits with the driver mid-race. Austin decides both the Antonelli title scenario and the tone of Ferrari’s run-in. Austin also produced a very different kind of paddock row, as Alpine backed Franco Colapinto after Jeremy Clarkson’s Argentina joke on Sky F1.