George Russell performance conspiracy theory debunked after Belgian GP disqualification

George Russell of Mercedes after the Belgian GP.

George Russell’s deeply impressive one-stop strategy at the Belgian Grand Prix wasn’t enough to prevent a disqualification — but unfortunately, it did kick off a round of conspiracy theories that his performance could only be purely tied to the fact that his car was underweight.

Ask Karun Chandhok — former driver turned Sky Sports F1 analyst — however, and you’ll hear a much different answer. He argues that Russell would have had no performance advantage from his underweight car.

Karun Chandhok: “No performance advantage for [Russell]”

Taking to social media after the race, Karun Chandhok wrote on X, “Such a shame for @GeorgeRussell63 – he made that strategy work for him & deserved that win. The last 10 laps were sublime – smooth, fast, error free.

“To be fair, the car would never have been below the 798kg weight limit during the race as they had fuel on board so no performance advantage for him.

“However, clear error by the team as 798 is the minimum “dry weight” without fuel so was a slam dunk DQ once the FIA drained the car out.”

However, a significant amount of confusion arose in the aftermath regarding Chandhok’s clarification.

Dig into the data from the Belgian GP:

 Disqualified George Russell data emerges with simple Hamilton question answered

 Sergio Perez’s last Red Bull race? Data discovery shows why he wasn’t fully to blame

One X user stated that “of course there’s a performance advantage” if the overall Mercedes W15 was underweight while dry.

Chandhok responded, “Effectively they’ve used fuel as ballast so the car was over the limit when it had fuel in it but under when [they] took the fuel out.

“Out on track, it always had fuel in it.”

Or, effectively, Russell had more than enough fuel in the tank, making his car of legal weight while it was on the track.

However, one primary — and much clearer — concern about Russell’s disqualification comes in the form of tyre degradation.

Many drivers noted that the new surface at Spa-Francorchamps resulted in greater tyre wear than expected. As a result, Russell’s tyres had far less tyre weight than a tyre from a driver on a two-stop strategy.

Further, a lack of a cool-down lap also meant that Russell wasn’t able to pick up any marbles that may have enabled his car to meet minimum weight.

Chandhok addressed this, saying, “The long stint would have caused more wear on the tread and lighter tyres.

“However the FIA are allowed to weigh the car with any other set.

“If you consider the opposite, drivers can pick up a load of rubber pick up to add weight so using the other set negates that.”

Read next: Belgian GP driver ratings: Why disqualified George Russell still deserves a perfect 10