planetf1.com

It is currently Mon Aug 19, 2019 4:02 pm

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2019 11:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 3:23 pm
Posts: 60
I've discussed this in the past with regards to Alonso being content to be number 1 at Ferrari with a very distant Massa, perhaps costing him titles to Vettel.

Max lost the race today because his Red Bull was not as fast *and* Gasly is not Ricciardio. Neither Gasly, nor Kyvat, nor Albon would have been up to the job of keeping within a pit stop of Max and Lewis at Hungary, but given Daniel's past performances at Hungary, and the good pace of the lead Red Bull, I'm sure he could have. And that's what cost Max the race today.

If I recall correctly, Helmut Marko anointed Max as number 1 alienating Daniel, has overseen a deterioration of the junior driver program from which they are relying on driver talent to their determent. They suddenly have a car that can challenge Merc, and instead of a Lewis and Nico driver configuration, they have an Alonso and Massa, Vettel and Raikkonen (to a lesser degree really, as the gap back to Kimi wasn't as severe) configuration.

And this is the danger for Max too. He shouldn't be happy to be beating his team-mate readily. He should be happy to be beating a team-mate who kept him pushing to get that first pole.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 04, 2019 11:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 344
You are completely correct. Having a second driver this inept hurts your challenge. Gasly needs to be replaced now as these performances are completely unacceptable and he is showing no signs of improvement. He only needed to keep within a pit stop up to lap 55 or so too, and then Max would have been safe. Not only that but Max could have slowed the pace to a certain extent to keep Gasly within a pit stop in the middle part of the race to completely box Lewis into staying behind him and not pitting. Having said that, Max could have slowed during the infield section to keep Leclerc within a pit stop of him, there is no need to go charging off into the distance like that and leaving Hamilton a chance to duck in for fresh rubber. Regardless, with someone reasonable in the second Red Bull, Max would not have needed to deliberately go slow.

So back to Gasly, Silverstone looked like he may have got a handle on things, (despite this being nine races in), but the last two races have shown that he hasn't really improved and that Silverstone was just a false dawn, so his time is up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 9:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 4:06 pm
Posts: 899
Some drivers need more time. When Kimi was with Alonso, he was thrashed too, i think almost by half the points Alonso had.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 9:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15579
They've not contrived to make him No.1 it's just what happened. They would rather Gasly was much closer.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:46 am
Posts: 270
Location: Suffolk, UK
Is it that simple? Had Bottas kept within reach of Hamilton he could have played the same role as you say Gasly should have...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:52 am
Posts: 2802
tim3003 wrote:
Is it that simple? Had Bottas kept within reach of Hamilton he could have played the same role as you say Gasly should have...

Bottas' race was heavily compromised from the start.

_________________
Where I'm going, I don't need roads


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 1091
They also in part cost themselves by running the first stint too quickly. As soon as the gap opened to Leclerc then either Red Bull or Mercedes would pit to do the undercut, with it almost certainly being Red Bull to pit as they were 1 second ahead of Mercedes and would have the gap first. They had the gap to Leclerc on lap 25. If Verstappen had run a slower pace he could have extended his first stint to lap 30 or later and not had to take the hards so long and run out of tyres.

Building big leads is never a good thing in F1, it puts you out of sync. Firstly with SC's and today Hamilton never would have been able to do a 2 stopper if the Ferrari's were in the picture.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 7717
Location: Mumbai, India
Gasly is so much slower now he's at risk of being overtaken by Sainz.

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 11:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 1028
da4an1qu1 wrote:
I've discussed this in the past with regards to Alonso being content to be number 1 at Ferrari with a very distant Massa, perhaps costing him titles to Vettel.

Max lost the race today because his Red Bull was not as fast *and* Gasly is not Ricciardio. Neither Gasly, nor Kyvat, nor Albon would have been up to the job of keeping within a pit stop of Max and Lewis at Hungary, but given Daniel's past performances at Hungary, and the good pace of the lead Red Bull, I'm sure he could have. And that's what cost Max the race today.

If I recall correctly, Helmut Marko anointed Max as number 1 alienating Daniel, has overseen a deterioration of the junior driver program from which they are relying on driver talent to their determent. They suddenly have a car that can challenge Merc, and instead of a Lewis and Nico driver configuration, they have an Alonso and Massa, Vettel and Raikkonen (to a lesser degree really, as the gap back to Kimi wasn't as severe) configuration.

And this is the danger for Max too. He shouldn't be happy to be beating his team-mate readily. He should be happy to be beating a team-mate who kept him pushing to get that first pole.


You recall incorrectly.
They never appointed Max as number one. It was just an interview where RBR said Max can build the team around himself after he signed a long term contract.
They gave Ricciardo equal treatment which is evident in Dans results when his PU was reliable.
RBR said they gave Ricciardo everything he wanted and thought he was going to sign. Dan never denied this.
Ricciardo then decided to leave saying he wanted a change.
He then changed his story to he did not believe in the honda project.
He then changed his story to team building around Max.
Fact is RBR wanted to keep Ricciardo, but Ricciado made his decision to leave for his own insecurities that you cannot blame RBR for.
Their Junior programme remains the best in F1 and Helmut made it a success. Show me any other team that has brought top drivers into F1.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 1:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:46 am
Posts: 270
Location: Suffolk, UK
tootsie323 wrote:
tim3003 wrote:
Is it that simple? Had Bottas kept within reach of Hamilton he could have played the same role as you say Gasly should have...

Bottas' race was heavily compromised from the start.


My point is: Hamilton no more had a no 2 able to help him than Verstappen did, so it's too simple to say that Red Bull could and would have won with Gasly++ ..


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 2:06 pm
Posts: 2788
Location: England
tim3003 wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
tim3003 wrote:
Is it that simple? Had Bottas kept within reach of Hamilton he could have played the same role as you say Gasly should have...

Bottas' race was heavily compromised from the start.


My point is: Hamilton no more had a no 2 able to help him than Verstappen did, so it's too simple to say that Red Bull could and would have won with Gasly++ ..


Well, a 2nd Merc would only have had a bearing on what went on if the roles were reversed. It was a few factors that allowed Mercedes that free 2nd stop: Ferrari being uncharecteristically slow (out of Red Bull's control) and Gasly not occupying what should have been the natural space between the slow Ferrari's and the leaders. If Lewis had to pass a less than compliant Gasly, it could well have bought Max enough breathing space (although personally, I doubt it... his tyres were cooked). If Bottas was in that natural space, he would have waved Lewis through anyway.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition 2019:
Current positon: 8th | 3 Podiums | 4 Wins
2018 Pick 10 Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 3:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 344
Flash2k11 wrote:
tim3003 wrote:
tootsie323 wrote:
tim3003 wrote:
Is it that simple? Had Bottas kept within reach of Hamilton he could have played the same role as you say Gasly should have...

Bottas' race was heavily compromised from the start.


My point is: Hamilton no more had a no 2 able to help him than Verstappen did, so it's too simple to say that Red Bull could and would have won with Gasly++ ..


Well, a 2nd Merc would only have had a bearing on what went on if the roles were reversed. It was a few factors that allowed Mercedes that free 2nd stop: Ferrari being uncharecteristically slow (out of Red Bull's control) and Gasly not occupying what should have been the natural space between the slow Ferrari's and the leaders. If Lewis had to pass a less than compliant Gasly, it could well have bought Max enough breathing space (although personally, I doubt it... his tyres were cooked). If Bottas was in that natural space, he would have waved Lewis through anyway.


With hindsight, what about Max driving deliberately slowly on the twisty parts of the track to keep the Ferrari's within a pit stop of himself and Lewis? Max didn't need to charge off into the lead like that opening up a huge gap, he could/should have trapped Hamilton and limited his strategy options to just staying put behind him in his dirty air and I believe this would have won him the race. I understand why this didn't happen yesterday, but going forward it makes sense to try and do this right?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 3:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 1091
Not even deliberately slowly, he just needed to take a small amount off, 0.3 off his lap times, Hamilton showed no interest in attempting to close in during the first stint. On equal tyres he wasn’t going to be able to pass, so he just sat there.

Max dropped Leclerc at 0.8-0.9 per lap. If he had dropped him at 0.5-0.6 per lap he would have won the race as the gap wouldn’t have opened up until lap 30-31 and Max would have pitted 7 laps later. Had a lighter car on the hards and 7 laps less on them.

Max destroyed his tyres driving unnecessarily quickly. The pit wall should have slowed him down. By lap 19 his times dropped off. Laps 23 and 24 were 22.4 and 22.6.
Once Max pitted, Lewis who’s tyres were in better shape did 21.7 and 21.8. Hamilton tyres lasted about 5 lap longer than Max.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3753
Johnson wrote:
Not even deliberately slowly, he just needed to take a small amount off, 0.3 off his lap times, Hamilton showed no interest in attempting to close in during the first stint. On equal tyres he wasn’t going to be able to pass, so he just sat there.

Max dropped Leclerc at 0.8-0.9 per lap. If he had dropped him at 0.5-0.6 per lap he would have won the race as the gap wouldn’t have opened up until lap 30-31 and Max would have pitted 7 laps later. Had a lighter car on the hards and 7 laps less on them.

Max destroyed his tyres driving unnecessarily quickly. The pit wall should have slowed him down. By lap 19 his times dropped off. Laps 23 and 24 were 22.4 and 22.6.
Once Max pitted, Lewis who’s tyres were in better shape did 21.7 and 21.8. Hamilton tyres lasted about 5 lap longer than Max.


You know what, I hate to see drivers going too slowly but you are right. He lost that race because he was driving too well and too fast. So ironic.
The next race he will probably go slower, and what we will get is a boring race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 5:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7886
kleefton wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Not even deliberately slowly, he just needed to take a small amount off, 0.3 off his lap times, Hamilton showed no interest in attempting to close in during the first stint. On equal tyres he wasn’t going to be able to pass, so he just sat there.

Max dropped Leclerc at 0.8-0.9 per lap. If he had dropped him at 0.5-0.6 per lap he would have won the race as the gap wouldn’t have opened up until lap 30-31 and Max would have pitted 7 laps later. Had a lighter car on the hards and 7 laps less on them.

Max destroyed his tyres driving unnecessarily quickly. The pit wall should have slowed him down. By lap 19 his times dropped off. Laps 23 and 24 were 22.4 and 22.6.
Once Max pitted, Lewis who’s tyres were in better shape did 21.7 and 21.8. Hamilton tyres lasted about 5 lap longer than Max.


You know what, I hate to see drivers going too slowly but you are right. He lost that race because he was driving too well and too fast. So ironic.
The next race he will probably go slower, and what we will get is a boring race.

I'm not convinced. Hamilton clearly had a lot more pace than Verstappen all the way through the race, he was able to close the gap at will and get into the DRS even at the rapid speed they were going and pulling away from the Ferrari's.

Had Verstappen drove slower he would have been overtaken IMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 10:47 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:14 pm
Posts: 3753
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Not even deliberately slowly, he just needed to take a small amount off, 0.3 off his lap times, Hamilton showed no interest in attempting to close in during the first stint. On equal tyres he wasn’t going to be able to pass, so he just sat there.

Max dropped Leclerc at 0.8-0.9 per lap. If he had dropped him at 0.5-0.6 per lap he would have won the race as the gap wouldn’t have opened up until lap 30-31 and Max would have pitted 7 laps later. Had a lighter car on the hards and 7 laps less on them.

Max destroyed his tyres driving unnecessarily quickly. The pit wall should have slowed him down. By lap 19 his times dropped off. Laps 23 and 24 were 22.4 and 22.6.
Once Max pitted, Lewis who’s tyres were in better shape did 21.7 and 21.8. Hamilton tyres lasted about 5 lap longer than Max.


You know what, I hate to see drivers going too slowly but you are right. He lost that race because he was driving too well and too fast. So ironic.
The next race he will probably go slower, and what we will get is a boring race.

I'm not convinced. Hamilton clearly had a lot more pace than Verstappen all the way through the race, he was able to close the gap at will and get into the DRS even at the rapid speed they were going and pulling away from the Ferrari's.

Had Verstappen drove slower he would have been overtaken IMO.


All he had to do is drive a little slower in the first two sectors. If he drove the same in the third sector Ham was not getting by. Ham couldn't get within 1 second in the first stint. Just watching an onboard of bottas following Raikonnen. As long as you get separation and good exit out of the last corner, noone is getting by. It's been that way for years really.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 2:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 6690
Johnson wrote:
They also in part cost themselves by running the first stint too quickly. As soon as the gap opened to Leclerc then either Red Bull or Mercedes would pit to do the undercut, with it almost certainly being Red Bull to pit as they were 1 second ahead of Mercedes and would have the gap first. They had the gap to Leclerc on lap 25. If Verstappen had run a slower pace he could have extended his first stint to lap 30 or later and not had to take the hards so long and run out of tyres.

Building big leads is never a good thing in F1, it puts you out of sync. Firstly with SC's and today Hamilton never would have been able to do a 2 stopper if the Ferrari's were in the picture.

There was no way for Max to go slower. That was the beauty of the race. Hamilton was applying pressure on Max and really forcing him to use those tires. Max tried to back off and control the pace a few times but he kept coming under attack every time he tried to back off. Especially after the first stops. Max came out on the hards trying to take it easy and within a couple of laps he had Hamilton up his gearbox.

This is something we've seen with Lewis when chasing Sebastian Vettel as well. He keeps the pressure on and forces you to either take the life out of your tires or risk being overtaken. He's not going to hang back and allow you to dictate the pace. It was Lewis and not Max dictating the pace in this race and I honestly think Max did just about everything he could do. I agree with the OP's main point that this is the type of race where a stronger teammate would have been helpful.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 3:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 344
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Not even deliberately slowly, he just needed to take a small amount off, 0.3 off his lap times, Hamilton showed no interest in attempting to close in during the first stint. On equal tyres he wasn’t going to be able to pass, so he just sat there.

Max dropped Leclerc at 0.8-0.9 per lap. If he had dropped him at 0.5-0.6 per lap he would have won the race as the gap wouldn’t have opened up until lap 30-31 and Max would have pitted 7 laps later. Had a lighter car on the hards and 7 laps less on them.

Max destroyed his tyres driving unnecessarily quickly. The pit wall should have slowed him down. By lap 19 his times dropped off. Laps 23 and 24 were 22.4 and 22.6.
Once Max pitted, Lewis who’s tyres were in better shape did 21.7 and 21.8. Hamilton tyres lasted about 5 lap longer than Max.


You know what, I hate to see drivers going too slowly but you are right. He lost that race because he was driving too well and too fast. So ironic.
The next race he will probably go slower, and what we will get is a boring race.

I'm not convinced. Hamilton clearly had a lot more pace than Verstappen all the way through the race, he was able to close the gap at will and get into the DRS even at the rapid speed they were going and pulling away from the Ferrari's.

Had Verstappen drove slower he would have been overtaken IMO.


Your post just demonstrates why MV could easily have driven slower and kept LH behind.

You say that LH was faster all race, (which he was), but clearly LH couldn't pass at any point when their tyre life was fairly equal. The only feasible place was into turn 1 and maybe somewhere during turn 2 and turn 3 we also saw overtakes if the driver in front exited turn 1 poorly.

Around the outside of turn 4 was a no-go as generally the inside guy would (wrongly) crowd the outside guy off the circuit by not lifting enough, (Kyvat vs Albon and sort of Max vs Lewis on lap 39, although this was probably more LH fearing a crowd off so he drove off the track just in case). Therefore turn 5 onwards for the rest of the lap we saw no overtakes for position into these corners, so MV could drive slightly slower by lifting in these corners, preserving more tyre life and only racing flat out between the penultimate corner and turn 4 on the following lap. LH would not have been able to pass him and it would have kept the Ferrari's in range to dissuade Mercedes from pitting Hamilton for fresh rubber. This would have won Max the grand prix.

You only need to race at maximum speed during the 'overtaking parts' of the circuit to prevent the guy behind you getting past. The rest of the lap you can drive like some kind of quasi-safety car if you like. This is how Hamilton won at Monaco 2019 despite a tyre gaffe from Mercedes. He could drive extra slow during the 'non-overtaking parts' of the circuit, (pretty much the entire lap at Monaco), and so it was easy for him to make the tyres last while still staying ahead.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 4:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7886
F1 Racer wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Not even deliberately slowly, he just needed to take a small amount off, 0.3 off his lap times, Hamilton showed no interest in attempting to close in during the first stint. On equal tyres he wasn’t going to be able to pass, so he just sat there.

Max dropped Leclerc at 0.8-0.9 per lap. If he had dropped him at 0.5-0.6 per lap he would have won the race as the gap wouldn’t have opened up until lap 30-31 and Max would have pitted 7 laps later. Had a lighter car on the hards and 7 laps less on them.

Max destroyed his tyres driving unnecessarily quickly. The pit wall should have slowed him down. By lap 19 his times dropped off. Laps 23 and 24 were 22.4 and 22.6.
Once Max pitted, Lewis who’s tyres were in better shape did 21.7 and 21.8. Hamilton tyres lasted about 5 lap longer than Max.


You know what, I hate to see drivers going too slowly but you are right. He lost that race because he was driving too well and too fast. So ironic.
The next race he will probably go slower, and what we will get is a boring race.

I'm not convinced. Hamilton clearly had a lot more pace than Verstappen all the way through the race, he was able to close the gap at will and get into the DRS even at the rapid speed they were going and pulling away from the Ferrari's.

Had Verstappen drove slower he would have been overtaken IMO.


Your post just demonstrates why MV could easily have driven slower and kept LH behind.

You say that LH was faster all race, (which he was), but clearly LH couldn't pass at any point when their tyre life was fairly equal. The only feasible place was into turn 1 and maybe somewhere during turn 2 and turn 3 we also saw overtakes if the driver in front exited turn 1 poorly.

Around the outside of turn 4 was a no-go as generally the inside guy would (wrongly) crowd the outside guy off the circuit by not lifting enough, (Kyvat vs Albon and sort of Max vs Lewis on lap 39, although this was probably more LH fearing a crowd off so he drove off the track just in case). Therefore turn 5 onwards for the rest of the lap we saw no overtakes for position into these corners, so MV could drive slightly slower by lifting in these corners, preserving more tyre life and only racing flat out between the penultimate corner and turn 4 on the following lap. LH would not have been able to pass him and it would have kept the Ferrari's in range to dissuade Mercedes from pitting Hamilton for fresh rubber. This would have won Max the grand prix.

You only need to race at maximum speed during the 'overtaking parts' of the circuit to prevent the guy behind you getting past. The rest of the lap you can drive like some kind of quasi-safety car if you like. This is how Hamilton won at Monaco 2019 despite a tyre gaffe from Mercedes. He could drive extra slow during the 'non-overtaking parts' of the circuit, (pretty much the entire lap at Monaco), and so it was easy for him to make the tyres last while still staying ahead.

Had Verstappen slowed Hamilton would have been closer and therefore able to overtake.

Hamilton clearly had more pace but not a big enough of an advantage to make a pass. Verstappen slowing increases that difference.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 5:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 344
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
kleefton wrote:
Johnson wrote:
Not even deliberately slowly, he just needed to take a small amount off, 0.3 off his lap times, Hamilton showed no interest in attempting to close in during the first stint. On equal tyres he wasn’t going to be able to pass, so he just sat there.

Max dropped Leclerc at 0.8-0.9 per lap. If he had dropped him at 0.5-0.6 per lap he would have won the race as the gap wouldn’t have opened up until lap 30-31 and Max would have pitted 7 laps later. Had a lighter car on the hards and 7 laps less on them.

Max destroyed his tyres driving unnecessarily quickly. The pit wall should have slowed him down. By lap 19 his times dropped off. Laps 23 and 24 were 22.4 and 22.6.
Once Max pitted, Lewis who’s tyres were in better shape did 21.7 and 21.8. Hamilton tyres lasted about 5 lap longer than Max.


You know what, I hate to see drivers going too slowly but you are right. He lost that race because he was driving too well and too fast. So ironic.
The next race he will probably go slower, and what we will get is a boring race.

I'm not convinced. Hamilton clearly had a lot more pace than Verstappen all the way through the race, he was able to close the gap at will and get into the DRS even at the rapid speed they were going and pulling away from the Ferrari's.

Had Verstappen drove slower he would have been overtaken IMO.


Your post just demonstrates why MV could easily have driven slower and kept LH behind.

You say that LH was faster all race, (which he was), but clearly LH couldn't pass at any point when their tyre life was fairly equal. The only feasible place was into turn 1 and maybe somewhere during turn 2 and turn 3 we also saw overtakes if the driver in front exited turn 1 poorly.

Around the outside of turn 4 was a no-go as generally the inside guy would (wrongly) crowd the outside guy off the circuit by not lifting enough, (Kyvat vs Albon and sort of Max vs Lewis on lap 39, although this was probably more LH fearing a crowd off so he drove off the track just in case). Therefore turn 5 onwards for the rest of the lap we saw no overtakes for position into these corners, so MV could drive slightly slower by lifting in these corners, preserving more tyre life and only racing flat out between the penultimate corner and turn 4 on the following lap. LH would not have been able to pass him and it would have kept the Ferrari's in range to dissuade Mercedes from pitting Hamilton for fresh rubber. This would have won Max the grand prix.

You only need to race at maximum speed during the 'overtaking parts' of the circuit to prevent the guy behind you getting past. The rest of the lap you can drive like some kind of quasi-safety car if you like. This is how Hamilton won at Monaco 2019 despite a tyre gaffe from Mercedes. He could drive extra slow during the 'non-overtaking parts' of the circuit, (pretty much the entire lap at Monaco), and so it was easy for him to make the tyres last while still staying ahead.

Had Verstappen slowed Hamilton would have been closer and therefore able to overtake.

Hamilton clearly had more pace but not a big enough of an advantage to make a pass. Verstappen slowing increases that difference.


No because Hamilton closed to as close as he could with the dirty air and Max was still able to fend him off into turn 1. Max would just be driving slightly slower in the twisty infield section where you are not at risk of being overtaken.

Villeneuve did this at Japan 1997 and was able to prevent himself being overtaken by Schumacher, and Hamilton did this at Abu Dhabi 2016 and was able to prevent himself being overtaken by Rosberg, so it is easily doable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 10:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7886
F1 Racer wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
kleefton wrote:

You know what, I hate to see drivers going too slowly but you are right. He lost that race because he was driving too well and too fast. So ironic.
The next race he will probably go slower, and what we will get is a boring race.

I'm not convinced. Hamilton clearly had a lot more pace than Verstappen all the way through the race, he was able to close the gap at will and get into the DRS even at the rapid speed they were going and pulling away from the Ferrari's.

Had Verstappen drove slower he would have been overtaken IMO.


Your post just demonstrates why MV could easily have driven slower and kept LH behind.

You say that LH was faster all race, (which he was), but clearly LH couldn't pass at any point when their tyre life was fairly equal. The only feasible place was into turn 1 and maybe somewhere during turn 2 and turn 3 we also saw overtakes if the driver in front exited turn 1 poorly.

Around the outside of turn 4 was a no-go as generally the inside guy would (wrongly) crowd the outside guy off the circuit by not lifting enough, (Kyvat vs Albon and sort of Max vs Lewis on lap 39, although this was probably more LH fearing a crowd off so he drove off the track just in case). Therefore turn 5 onwards for the rest of the lap we saw no overtakes for position into these corners, so MV could drive slightly slower by lifting in these corners, preserving more tyre life and only racing flat out between the penultimate corner and turn 4 on the following lap. LH would not have been able to pass him and it would have kept the Ferrari's in range to dissuade Mercedes from pitting Hamilton for fresh rubber. This would have won Max the grand prix.

You only need to race at maximum speed during the 'overtaking parts' of the circuit to prevent the guy behind you getting past. The rest of the lap you can drive like some kind of quasi-safety car if you like. This is how Hamilton won at Monaco 2019 despite a tyre gaffe from Mercedes. He could drive extra slow during the 'non-overtaking parts' of the circuit, (pretty much the entire lap at Monaco), and so it was easy for him to make the tyres last while still staying ahead.

Had Verstappen slowed Hamilton would have been closer and therefore able to overtake.

Hamilton clearly had more pace but not a big enough of an advantage to make a pass. Verstappen slowing increases that difference.


No because Hamilton closed to as close as he could with the dirty air and Max was still able to fend him off into turn 1. Max would just be driving slightly slower in the twisty infield section where you are not at risk of being overtaken.

Villeneuve did this at Japan 1997 and was able to prevent himself being overtaken by Schumacher, and Hamilton did this at Abu Dhabi 2016 and was able to prevent himself being overtaken by Rosberg, so it is easily doable.

That works if you have the pace to pull the gap back out before the straight. I dont think Verstappen did.

Maybe he could have held Hamilton off, but it's far from certain. As Sandman says, Hamilton was able to control the pace from behind by putting Verstappen in a position where he felt he couldn't drive slower for fear of being overtaken.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2018 12:53 am
Posts: 344
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
F1 Racer wrote:
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Had Verstappen slowed Hamilton would have been closer and therefore able to overtake.

Hamilton clearly had more pace but not a big enough of an advantage to make a pass. Verstappen slowing increases that difference.


No because Hamilton closed to as close as he could with the dirty air and Max was still able to fend him off into turn 1. Max would just be driving slightly slower in the twisty infield section where you are not at risk of being overtaken.

Villeneuve did this at Japan 1997 and was able to prevent himself being overtaken by Schumacher, and Hamilton did this at Abu Dhabi 2016 and was able to prevent himself being overtaken by Rosberg, so it is easily doable.

That works if you have the pace to pull the gap back out before the straight. I dont think Verstappen did.

Maybe he could have held Hamilton off, but it's far from certain. As Sandman says, Hamilton was able to control the pace from behind by putting Verstappen in a position where he felt he couldn't drive slower for fear of being overtaken.


We know because there were a couple of times LH got a run on MV down the start/finish straight, and MV moved over slightly to cover the inside into turn 1 but LH was nowhere near to getting a move done.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 3:24 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 2107
Location: Miami, Florida
AravJ wrote:
da4an1qu1 wrote:
I've discussed this in the past with regards to Alonso being content to be number 1 at Ferrari with a very distant Massa, perhaps costing him titles to Vettel.

Max lost the race today because his Red Bull was not as fast *and* Gasly is not Ricciardio. Neither Gasly, nor Kyvat, nor Albon would have been up to the job of keeping within a pit stop of Max and Lewis at Hungary, but given Daniel's past performances at Hungary, and the good pace of the lead Red Bull, I'm sure he could have. And that's what cost Max the race today.

If I recall correctly, Helmut Marko anointed Max as number 1 alienating Daniel, has overseen a deterioration of the junior driver program from which they are relying on driver talent to their determent. They suddenly have a car that can challenge Merc, and instead of a Lewis and Nico driver configuration, they have an Alonso and Massa, Vettel and Raikkonen (to a lesser degree really, as the gap back to Kimi wasn't as severe) configuration.

And this is the danger for Max too. He shouldn't be happy to be beating his team-mate readily. He should be happy to be beating a team-mate who kept him pushing to get that first pole.


You recall incorrectly.
They never appointed Max as number one. It was just an interview where RBR said Max can build the team around himself after he signed a long term contract.
They gave Ricciardo equal treatment which is evident in Dans results when his PU was reliable.
RBR said they gave Ricciardo everything he wanted and thought he was going to sign. Dan never denied this.
Ricciardo then decided to leave saying he wanted a change.
He then changed his story to he did not believe in the honda project.
He then changed his story to team building around Max.
Fact is RBR wanted to keep Ricciardo, but Ricciado made his decision to leave for his own insecurities that you cannot blame RBR for.
Their Junior programme remains the best in F1 and Helmut made it a success. Show me any other team that has brought top drivers into F1.

Minardi, Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Sauber, Williams have all brought quality talent up through the ranks.

And keep in mind that Max was not a Red Bull junior driver before he was given the Toro Rosso seat. The Most curious thing I find odd is that Tost has said the absolute best driver they’ve ever had was Kvyat and he said that while Verstappen was one of his drivers. To hear people say he’s not capable of hanging with Max is perplexing and if move to see him in the same team with Max to see what he’s got. He was unjustly demoted because the didn’t want to lose Max to any other team and BS’d their way in selling their justification as to why they demoted him. The guy was doing an excellent job and his clash with Vettel in Russia was initially his fault, but the 2nd contact was all Vettel’s fault and Red Bull ran with the narrative of it being 100% Kvyat’s fault instead of defending him.

_________________
HAMILTON :: ALONSO :: VETTEL :: RAIKKONEN :: RICCIARDO :: VERSTAPPEN
BOTTAS :: MAGNUSSEN :: OCON :: SAINZ :: PEREZ :: VANDOORNE :: HULKENBERG
GROSJEAN :: GASLY :: ERICSON :: LECLERC :: STROLL :: SEROTKIN :: HARTLEY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 1028
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
AravJ wrote:
da4an1qu1 wrote:
I've discussed this in the past with regards to Alonso being content to be number 1 at Ferrari with a very distant Massa, perhaps costing him titles to Vettel.

Max lost the race today because his Red Bull was not as fast *and* Gasly is not Ricciardio. Neither Gasly, nor Kyvat, nor Albon would have been up to the job of keeping within a pit stop of Max and Lewis at Hungary, but given Daniel's past performances at Hungary, and the good pace of the lead Red Bull, I'm sure he could have. And that's what cost Max the race today.

If I recall correctly, Helmut Marko anointed Max as number 1 alienating Daniel, has overseen a deterioration of the junior driver program from which they are relying on driver talent to their determent. They suddenly have a car that can challenge Merc, and instead of a Lewis and Nico driver configuration, they have an Alonso and Massa, Vettel and Raikkonen (to a lesser degree really, as the gap back to Kimi wasn't as severe) configuration.

And this is the danger for Max too. He shouldn't be happy to be beating his team-mate readily. He should be happy to be beating a team-mate who kept him pushing to get that first pole.


You recall incorrectly.
They never appointed Max as number one. It was just an interview where RBR said Max can build the team around himself after he signed a long term contract.
They gave Ricciardo equal treatment which is evident in Dans results when his PU was reliable.
RBR said they gave Ricciardo everything he wanted and thought he was going to sign. Dan never denied this.
Ricciardo then decided to leave saying he wanted a change.
He then changed his story to he did not believe in the honda project.
He then changed his story to team building around Max.
Fact is RBR wanted to keep Ricciardo, but Ricciado made his decision to leave for his own insecurities that you cannot blame RBR for.
Their Junior programme remains the best in F1 and Helmut made it a success. Show me any other team that has brought top drivers into F1.

Minardi, Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Sauber, Williams have all brought quality talent up through the ranks.

And keep in mind that Max was not a Red Bull junior driver before he was given the Toro Rosso seat. The Most curious thing I find odd is that Tost has said the absolute best driver they’ve ever had was Kvyat and he said that while Verstappen was one of his drivers. To hear people say he’s not capable of hanging with Max is perplexing and if move to see him in the same team with Max to see what he’s got. He was unjustly demoted because the didn’t want to lose Max to any other team and BS’d their way in selling their justification as to why they demoted him. The guy was doing an excellent job and his clash with Vettel in Russia was initially his fault, but the 2nd contact was all Vettel’s fault and Red Bull ran with the narrative of it being 100% Kvyat’s fault instead of defending him.


Lol, where is Minardi, Ferrari, Mercedes, Mclaren, Sauber, Williams programme now.
Try listing all the drivers, and top drivers those teams have brought into F1 and compare it to RBR since the start of the RBR F1 programme till now.
Then you will understand what i am saying.
It does not matter if max was the junior driver since he was born, its about RBR actively seeking young talent and giving them a chance into F1. That is the point of the programme. The more drivers you bring in the higher your chances of finding a top driver. No team is aggressive as RBR when it comes to this. Yes sometimes it hurts peoples feeling but the positive is that it exposes top talent. The top talent will stay and even get poached. Agree on the Kvyat thing. He was good with bad timing and deserves another shot in the RBR. RBR was under pressure to sign Max who showed greater talent than Kvyat. They still looked after Kvyat though, and even brought him back


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15579
AravJ wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
AravJ wrote:
da4an1qu1 wrote:
I've discussed this in the past with regards to Alonso being content to be number 1 at Ferrari with a very distant Massa, perhaps costing him titles to Vettel.

Max lost the race today because his Red Bull was not as fast *and* Gasly is not Ricciardio. Neither Gasly, nor Kyvat, nor Albon would have been up to the job of keeping within a pit stop of Max and Lewis at Hungary, but given Daniel's past performances at Hungary, and the good pace of the lead Red Bull, I'm sure he could have. And that's what cost Max the race today.

If I recall correctly, Helmut Marko anointed Max as number 1 alienating Daniel, has overseen a deterioration of the junior driver program from which they are relying on driver talent to their determent. They suddenly have a car that can challenge Merc, and instead of a Lewis and Nico driver configuration, they have an Alonso and Massa, Vettel and Raikkonen (to a lesser degree really, as the gap back to Kimi wasn't as severe) configuration.

And this is the danger for Max too. He shouldn't be happy to be beating his team-mate readily. He should be happy to be beating a team-mate who kept him pushing to get that first pole.


You recall incorrectly.
They never appointed Max as number one. It was just an interview where RBR said Max can build the team around himself after he signed a long term contract.
They gave Ricciardo equal treatment which is evident in Dans results when his PU was reliable.
RBR said they gave Ricciardo everything he wanted and thought he was going to sign. Dan never denied this.
Ricciardo then decided to leave saying he wanted a change.
He then changed his story to he did not believe in the honda project.
He then changed his story to team building around Max.
Fact is RBR wanted to keep Ricciardo, but Ricciado made his decision to leave for his own insecurities that you cannot blame RBR for.
Their Junior programme remains the best in F1 and Helmut made it a success. Show me any other team that has brought top drivers into F1.

Minardi, Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Sauber, Williams have all brought quality talent up through the ranks.

And keep in mind that Max was not a Red Bull junior driver before he was given the Toro Rosso seat. The Most curious thing I find odd is that Tost has said the absolute best driver they’ve ever had was Kvyat and he said that while Verstappen was one of his drivers. To hear people say he’s not capable of hanging with Max is perplexing and if move to see him in the same team with Max to see what he’s got. He was unjustly demoted because the didn’t want to lose Max to any other team and BS’d their way in selling their justification as to why they demoted him. The guy was doing an excellent job and his clash with Vettel in Russia was initially his fault, but the 2nd contact was all Vettel’s fault and Red Bull ran with the narrative of it being 100% Kvyat’s fault instead of defending him.


Lol, where is Minardi, Ferrari, Mercedes, Mclaren, Sauber, Williams programme now.
Try listing all the drivers, and top drivers those teams have brought into F1 and compare it to RBR since the start of the RBR F1 programme till now.
Then you will understand what i am saying.
It does not matter if max was the junior driver since he was born, its about RBR actively seeking young talent and giving them a chance into F1. That is the point of the programme. The more drivers you bring in the higher your chances of finding a top driver. No team is aggressive as RBR when it comes to this. Yes sometimes it hurts peoples feeling but the positive is that it exposes top talent. The top talent will stay and even get poached. Agree on the Kvyat thing. He was good with bad timing and deserves another shot in the RBR. RBR was under pressure to sign Max who showed greater talent than Kvyat. They still looked after Kvyat though, and even brought him back



Minardi gave a debut to 5 race winning drivers. Red Bull, just 3 so far.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:31 am
Posts: 2134
AravJ wrote:
da4an1qu1 wrote:
I've discussed this in the past with regards to Alonso being content to be number 1 at Ferrari with a very distant Massa, perhaps costing him titles to Vettel.

Max lost the race today because his Red Bull was not as fast *and* Gasly is not Ricciardio. Neither Gasly, nor Kyvat, nor Albon would have been up to the job of keeping within a pit stop of Max and Lewis at Hungary, but given Daniel's past performances at Hungary, and the good pace of the lead Red Bull, I'm sure he could have. And that's what cost Max the race today.

If I recall correctly, Helmut Marko anointed Max as number 1 alienating Daniel, has overseen a deterioration of the junior driver program from which they are relying on driver talent to their determent. They suddenly have a car that can challenge Merc, and instead of a Lewis and Nico driver configuration, they have an Alonso and Massa, Vettel and Raikkonen (to a lesser degree really, as the gap back to Kimi wasn't as severe) configuration.

And this is the danger for Max too. He shouldn't be happy to be beating his team-mate readily. He should be happy to be beating a team-mate who kept him pushing to get that first pole.


You recall incorrectly.
They never appointed Max as number one. It was just an interview where RBR said Max can build the team around himself after he signed a long term contract.
They gave Ricciardo equal treatment which is evident in Dans results when his PU was reliable.
RBR said they gave Ricciardo everything he wanted and thought he was going to sign. Dan never denied this.
Ricciardo then decided to leave saying he wanted a change.
He then changed his story to he did not believe in the honda project.
He then changed his story to team building around Max.
Fact is RBR wanted to keep Ricciardo, but Ricciado made his decision to leave for his own insecurities that you cannot blame RBR for.
Their Junior programme remains the best in F1 and Helmut made it a success. Show me any other team that has brought top drivers into F1.


This. I had the impression that Dan had Webber in his ear. But whatever the case, Dan chose to leave believing that RB was going to build the team around Max, independent of his performance, rather than because of it (as compared to Max).

But I disagree with the main contention of this thread. Michael had no Lewis Nico configuration when he tidily won his campaigns. Max merely should have pitted after Hamilton, then go for the catch and pass, but hindsight is 20 20.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 1091
sandman1347 wrote:
Johnson wrote:
They also in part cost themselves by running the first stint too quickly. As soon as the gap opened to Leclerc then either Red Bull or Mercedes would pit to do the undercut, with it almost certainly being Red Bull to pit as they were 1 second ahead of Mercedes and would have the gap first. They had the gap to Leclerc on lap 25. If Verstappen had run a slower pace he could have extended his first stint to lap 30 or later and not had to take the hards so long and run out of tyres.

Building big leads is never a good thing in F1, it puts you out of sync. Firstly with SC's and today Hamilton never would have been able to do a 2 stopper if the Ferrari's were in the picture.

There was no way for Max to go slower. That was the beauty of the race. Hamilton was applying pressure on Max and really forcing him to use those tires. Max tried to back off and control the pace a few times but he kept coming under attack every time he tried to back off. Especially after the first stops. Max came out on the hards trying to take it easy and within a couple of laps he had Hamilton up his gearbox.

This is something we've seen with Lewis when chasing Sebastian Vettel as well. He keeps the pressure on and forces you to either take the life out of your tires or risk being overtaken. He's not going to hang back and allow you to dictate the pace. It was Lewis and not Max dictating the pace in this race and I honestly think Max did just about everything he could do. I agree with the OP's main point that this is the type of race where a stronger teammate would have been helpful.


He only needed to go 0.3 per lap slower, in S1. Hamilton never had DRS once in the first stint. No way Hamilton was passing when the tyres were equal in stint 1.

Hamilton attacked him in stint 2 and even then he only got close because Verstappen made an error in S2 allowing Hamilton very close into the DRS zone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 1:20 am
Posts: 1091
The other option for Verstappen to win was pitting him with 14 laps to go.

He was 15.5 seconds ahead as Hamilton was cooling his brakes at this phase and in traffic. They could put Max on the soft, so it would be Max on a new soft vs Hamilton on an 8 lap older medium. Max 4 seconds behind, could he have done it?

However, at that moment in the race it looked like Max would win as he matched Lewis’ times for 4-5 laps.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2012 2:54 pm
Posts: 1053
da4an1qu1 wrote:
I've discussed this in the past with regards to Alonso being content to be number 1 at Ferrari with a very distant Massa, perhaps costing him titles to Vettel.

Max lost the race today because his Red Bull was not as fast *and* Gasly is not Ricciardio. Neither Gasly, nor Kyvat, nor Albon would have been up to the job of keeping within a pit stop of Max and Lewis at Hungary, but given Daniel's past performances at Hungary, and the good pace of the lead Red Bull, I'm sure he could have. And that's what cost Max the race today.

If I recall correctly, Helmut Marko anointed Max as number 1 alienating Daniel, has overseen a deterioration of the junior driver program from which they are relying on driver talent to their determent. They suddenly have a car that can challenge Merc, and instead of a Lewis and Nico driver configuration, they have an Alonso and Massa, Vettel and Raikkonen (to a lesser degree really, as the gap back to Kimi wasn't as severe) configuration.

And this is the danger for Max too. He shouldn't be happy to be beating his team-mate readily. He should be happy to be beating a team-mate who kept him pushing to get that first pole.


I said this ages ago, MARKO is the problem at RBR. He favours one driver and that is why Ric left. He went against Vettel a multiple champion... you don't do that unless you have guts. If you don't perform against a team mate like that.. it can be a career killer. The gap between Max/Ric wasn't that bad at all.

If you favour a driver or comfort one over the other.. it alienates one. We saw it with Webber/Vettel, so Mark left. When the pressure started to mount - Vettel left. They lost two drivers and needed to recover. They got Max/Ric a very good combo but didn't go out of their way to make both feel loved - instead it was all about Max.

And before people tell me Marko has zero power... the fact that HE and Horner both answer to the big man.. really tells all. RBR need a better 2nd driver but who wants to go there and be treated like that?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 1028
Teddy007 wrote:
da4an1qu1 wrote:
I've discussed this in the past with regards to Alonso being content to be number 1 at Ferrari with a very distant Massa, perhaps costing him titles to Vettel.

Max lost the race today because his Red Bull was not as fast *and* Gasly is not Ricciardio. Neither Gasly, nor Kyvat, nor Albon would have been up to the job of keeping within a pit stop of Max and Lewis at Hungary, but given Daniel's past performances at Hungary, and the good pace of the lead Red Bull, I'm sure he could have. And that's what cost Max the race today.

If I recall correctly, Helmut Marko anointed Max as number 1 alienating Daniel, has overseen a deterioration of the junior driver program from which they are relying on driver talent to their determent. They suddenly have a car that can challenge Merc, and instead of a Lewis and Nico driver configuration, they have an Alonso and Massa, Vettel and Raikkonen (to a lesser degree really, as the gap back to Kimi wasn't as severe) configuration.

And this is the danger for Max too. He shouldn't be happy to be beating his team-mate readily. He should be happy to be beating a team-mate who kept him pushing to get that first pole.


I said this ages ago, MARKO is the problem at RBR. He favours one driver and that is why Ric left. He went against Vettel a multiple champion... you don't do that unless you have guts. If you don't perform against a team mate like that.. it can be a career killer. The gap between Max/Ric wasn't that bad at all.

If you favour a driver or comfort one over the other.. it alienates one. We saw it with Webber/Vettel, so Mark left. When the pressure started to mount - Vettel left. They lost two drivers and needed to recover. They got Max/Ric a very good combo but didn't go out of their way to make both feel loved - instead it was all about Max.

And before people tell me Marko has zero power... the fact that HE and Horner both answer to the big man.. really tells all. RBR need a better 2nd driver but who wants to go there and be treated like that?


Ric is a 30 year old man, dont make excuses for him, you are insulting his emotional intelligence.
If that is really the case he should take a page out of young Leclerc and Verstappen that did not back out of a fight
There are many drivers that will that will want to jump into that seat, dont be so naive.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 1028
mikeyg123 wrote:
AravJ wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
AravJ wrote:
da4an1qu1 wrote:
I've discussed this in the past with regards to Alonso being content to be number 1 at Ferrari with a very distant Massa, perhaps costing him titles to Vettel.

Max lost the race today because his Red Bull was not as fast *and* Gasly is not Ricciardio. Neither Gasly, nor Kyvat, nor Albon would have been up to the job of keeping within a pit stop of Max and Lewis at Hungary, but given Daniel's past performances at Hungary, and the good pace of the lead Red Bull, I'm sure he could have. And that's what cost Max the race today.

If I recall correctly, Helmut Marko anointed Max as number 1 alienating Daniel, has overseen a deterioration of the junior driver program from which they are relying on driver talent to their determent. They suddenly have a car that can challenge Merc, and instead of a Lewis and Nico driver configuration, they have an Alonso and Massa, Vettel and Raikkonen (to a lesser degree really, as the gap back to Kimi wasn't as severe) configuration.

And this is the danger for Max too. He shouldn't be happy to be beating his team-mate readily. He should be happy to be beating a team-mate who kept him pushing to get that first pole.


You recall incorrectly.
They never appointed Max as number one. It was just an interview where RBR said Max can build the team around himself after he signed a long term contract.
They gave Ricciardo equal treatment which is evident in Dans results when his PU was reliable.
RBR said they gave Ricciardo everything he wanted and thought he was going to sign. Dan never denied this.
Ricciardo then decided to leave saying he wanted a change.
He then changed his story to he did not believe in the honda project.
He then changed his story to team building around Max.
Fact is RBR wanted to keep Ricciardo, but Ricciado made his decision to leave for his own insecurities that you cannot blame RBR for.
Their Junior programme remains the best in F1 and Helmut made it a success. Show me any other team that has brought top drivers into F1.

Minardi, Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Sauber, Williams have all brought quality talent up through the ranks.

And keep in mind that Max was not a Red Bull junior driver before he was given the Toro Rosso seat. The Most curious thing I find odd is that Tost has said the absolute best driver they’ve ever had was Kvyat and he said that while Verstappen was one of his drivers. To hear people say he’s not capable of hanging with Max is perplexing and if move to see him in the same team with Max to see what he’s got. He was unjustly demoted because the didn’t want to lose Max to any other team and BS’d their way in selling their justification as to why they demoted him. The guy was doing an excellent job and his clash with Vettel in Russia was initially his fault, but the 2nd contact was all Vettel’s fault and Red Bull ran with the narrative of it being 100% Kvyat’s fault instead of defending him.


Lol, where is Minardi, Ferrari, Mercedes, Mclaren, Sauber, Williams programme now.
Try listing all the drivers, and top drivers those teams have brought into F1 and compare it to RBR since the start of the RBR F1 programme till now.
Then you will understand what i am saying.
It does not matter if max was the junior driver since he was born, its about RBR actively seeking young talent and giving them a chance into F1. That is the point of the programme. The more drivers you bring in the higher your chances of finding a top driver. No team is aggressive as RBR when it comes to this. Yes sometimes it hurts peoples feeling but the positive is that it exposes top talent. The top talent will stay and even get poached. Agree on the Kvyat thing. He was good with bad timing and deserves another shot in the RBR. RBR was under pressure to sign Max who showed greater talent than Kvyat. They still looked after Kvyat though, and even brought him back



Minardi gave a debut to 5 race winning drivers. Red Bull, just 3 so far.


I said since the start of the RBR F1 programme.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 15579
AravJ wrote:
mikeyg123 wrote:
AravJ wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
AravJ wrote:

You recall incorrectly.
They never appointed Max as number one. It was just an interview where RBR said Max can build the team around himself after he signed a long term contract.
They gave Ricciardo equal treatment which is evident in Dans results when his PU was reliable.
RBR said they gave Ricciardo everything he wanted and thought he was going to sign. Dan never denied this.
Ricciardo then decided to leave saying he wanted a change.
He then changed his story to he did not believe in the honda project.
He then changed his story to team building around Max.
Fact is RBR wanted to keep Ricciardo, but Ricciado made his decision to leave for his own insecurities that you cannot blame RBR for.
Their Junior programme remains the best in F1 and Helmut made it a success. Show me any other team that has brought top drivers into F1.

Minardi, Ferrari, Mercedes, McLaren, Sauber, Williams have all brought quality talent up through the ranks.

And keep in mind that Max was not a Red Bull junior driver before he was given the Toro Rosso seat. The Most curious thing I find odd is that Tost has said the absolute best driver they’ve ever had was Kvyat and he said that while Verstappen was one of his drivers. To hear people say he’s not capable of hanging with Max is perplexing and if move to see him in the same team with Max to see what he’s got. He was unjustly demoted because the didn’t want to lose Max to any other team and BS’d their way in selling their justification as to why they demoted him. The guy was doing an excellent job and his clash with Vettel in Russia was initially his fault, but the 2nd contact was all Vettel’s fault and Red Bull ran with the narrative of it being 100% Kvyat’s fault instead of defending him.


Lol, where is Minardi, Ferrari, Mercedes, Mclaren, Sauber, Williams programme now.
Try listing all the drivers, and top drivers those teams have brought into F1 and compare it to RBR since the start of the RBR F1 programme till now.
Then you will understand what i am saying.
It does not matter if max was the junior driver since he was born, its about RBR actively seeking young talent and giving them a chance into F1. That is the point of the programme. The more drivers you bring in the higher your chances of finding a top driver. No team is aggressive as RBR when it comes to this. Yes sometimes it hurts peoples feeling but the positive is that it exposes top talent. The top talent will stay and even get poached. Agree on the Kvyat thing. He was good with bad timing and deserves another shot in the RBR. RBR was under pressure to sign Max who showed greater talent than Kvyat. They still looked after Kvyat though, and even brought him back



Minardi gave a debut to 5 race winning drivers. Red Bull, just 3 so far.


I said since the start of the RBR F1 programme.


In that case it would be 2 race winners for Minardi (really when we say that we mean Flavio Briatore) vs 3 for Red Bull despite Minardi only running for 6 of the 20 years the RBR junior program has been ongoing for.

Comparing like to like - Minardi and RBR 1999 - 2005 we had RBR backing drivers like Bernoldi and Karthikeyan whilst Minardi put in Alonso and Webber.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:31 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 8:42 am
Posts: 1028
mikeyg123 wrote:

In that case it would be 2 race winners for Minardi (really when we say that we mean Flavio Briatore) vs 3 for Red Bull despite Minardi only running for 6 of the 20 years the RBR junior program has been ongoing for.

Comparing like to like - Minardi and RBR 1999 - 2005 we had RBR backing drivers like Bernoldi and Karthikeyan whilst Minardi put in Alonso and Webber.


So your point is Minardi was better from 1999 to 2005. We seem to be digressing. The OP said that Marko is overseeing the deterioration of the RBR programme. The fact that you can only come up with a team that ceased to exist 14 years ago that is comparable is proof that the OP is way of the mark. That is the point.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alienturnedhuman, Argentum, F1 MERCENARY, Paolo_Lasardi, Siao7 and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group