planetf1.com

It is currently Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:32 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules


Please read the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic

How You'd rate the 3 drivers?
Verstappen > Leclerc > Ocon 34%  34%  [ 11 ]
Verstappen > Ocon > Leclerc 25%  25%  [ 8 ]
Leclerc > Verstappen > Ocon 31%  31%  [ 10 ]
Leclerc > Ocon > Verstappen 3%  3%  [ 1 ]
Ocon > Verstappen > Leclerc 3%  3%  [ 1 ]
Ocon > Leclerc > Verstappen 3%  3%  [ 1 ]
Total votes : 32
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 12:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 6818
Location: Mumbai, India
The 3 drivers in question are the junior drivers of the big teams.

Verstappen got picked up by Red Bull after spending approx 1 & 1/2 years with Toro Rosso. Leclerc got lapped up by Ferrari even faster after completing half season (when he got signed) & 1 season with Sauber. Ocon has spent half year at Manor & will complete 2 years with Force India. However, unlike his 2 young rivals, Mercedes missed the trick (if You like) & didn't sign him as they weren't aware Ocon would be in such a situation that he's in now. His F1 career at the moment seems to be heading into a break (pun intended).

So now (atleast for 2019) we will see Verstappen & Leclerc fighting for podiums or even wins whereas Ocon would be on the sidelines or at Williams which wouldn't be a team to reflect his skills to the deserving eye.

A sad situation this.

P.S. The poll should be given keeping all of their junior careers in perspective as well!

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Last edited by UnlikeUday on Thu Sep 13, 2018 2:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 12:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:53 am
Posts: 594
There should be a 6 combination required in poll for all possibilities.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 2:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 6:31 pm
Posts: 350
Location: Chicago
Where’s the max > Ocon > Leclerc option ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 2:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 6818
Location: Mumbai, India
ohwell wrote:
Where’s the max > Ocon > Leclerc option ?


Taken care of!

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 4:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:29 am
Posts: 1983
Leclerc > Verstappen > Ocon.

Max's racing judgement is still terrible and sadly he still doesn't think so which negates to a serious extent any innate high speed he has. LeClerc is the closest modern driver I have seen to Jim Clark, ultra fast and ultra smooth. Ocon is quick but nothing special.

_________________
Kimi: "Come on, get the McLaren out of the way!”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 4:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14222
Right now Verstappen > Ocon > Leclerc

Leclerc gets a bit overrated as he has a weak team mate and a car faster than the team usually produces. Ocon is getting underrated for the opposite team mate. It doesn't help Ocon that his team mate generally gets underted as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 5:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2011 8:48 pm
Posts: 2932
Location: UK
Leclerc > Verstappen > Ocon

I'm still bought into the Leclerc hype. Next year we'll see if I'm right!

Verstappen still makes too many mistakes and now that he has driven in 74 Grands Prix I don't think inexperience can be used as an excuse any more. He has genuine character flaws that must be addressed before he can reach the very top.

Ocon is steadily improving and has had a good year but I'm not sure if he has genuine superstar quality.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 5:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:04 pm
Posts: 2046
Voted Verstappen > Leclerc > Ocon
but I am really unsure here. It could go any way, IMO.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 6:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 1:05 pm
Posts: 7518
Based on what we know I feel I have to vote Verstappen > Ocon > Leclerc but if I had to guess how I will rate then when all is said and done I'd go Verstappen > Leclerc > Ocon.

It would be nice to see Ocon in the Mercedes next year, having the top 3 young guns in the top 3 teams, but 2 out of 3 ain't bad.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 6:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:08 am
Posts: 98
I voted [b]Max > Ocon >Leclerc as of 2018.[/b]

2019 will be different

With Leclerc moving to Ferrari next year, it will take him probably 6 races to settle in and may even challenge Vettel in a couple of races.

I'm not sure about the Honda & Red Bull partnership, specially with Honda's reliabilities issues. I can see Max struggling a bit next season.

Still hoping that Ocon can get a seat. He's on par with Perez and slightly better in qualifying. Hopefully Mercedes has him cemented for a drive when either Bottas or Hamilton leaves. Could see a Russel & Ocon partnership in the future.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 6:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4889
Black_Flag_11 wrote:
Based on what we know I feel I have to vote Verstappen > Ocon > Leclerc but if I had to guess how I will rate then when all is said and done I'd go Verstappen > Leclerc > Ocon.

It would be nice to see Ocon in the Mercedes next year, having the top 3 young guns in the top 3 teams, but 2 out of 3 ain't bad.


Pretty much as I see it too.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 8:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1496
I believe Verstappen is overall the best, but is still inconsistent. But his good races are often extremely good. Ocon is solid, but to me has only had a few very impressive races. Leclerc may have had several very impressive races, but we really haven't had that much time to judge him yet. The fact is, Ericsson has been basically as good or better in 5 or 6 weekends. And he is not highly rated at all by most. And these races were not just the first 3. It will take more that that for me to rate Leclerc so high. I easily see Verstappen and Ocon as better than him at the moment. Leclerc looks to have been rather weak in the wet from what we have seen in his career in F1 so far. Ericsson has only finished 2 wet races in his career. Japan 2014, if you can call that a finish and Germany this year. In every other, I think he crashed out, showing he often struggles here. And on both wet occasions this year, he was clearly better than leclerc. Unfortunately, i see this could well be one of Leclerc's weaknesses at the moment. In a car that is capable of points, I think he should have more points over Ericsson than he currently does. Or if he is doing absolutely great, then people should start realizing that Ericsson isn't actually that bad.

For me, i think it would be Verstappen, Ocon, then Leclerc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 8:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:13 pm
Posts: 14222
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
I believe Verstappen is overall the best, but is still inconsistent. But his good races are often extremely good. Ocon is solid, but to me has only had a few very impressive races. Leclerc may have had several very impressive races, but we really haven't had that much time to judge him yet. The fact is, Ericsson has been basically as good or better in 5 or 6 weekends. And he is not highly rated at all by most. And these races were not just the first 3. It will take more that that for me to rate Leclerc so high. I easily see Verstappen and Ocon as better than him at the moment. Leclerc looks to have been rather weak in the wet from what we have seen in his career in F1 so far. Ericsson has only finished 2 wet races in his career. Japan 2014, if you can call that a finish and Germany this year. In every other, I think he crashed out, showing he often struggles here. And on both wet occasions this year, he was clearly better than leclerc. Unfortunately, i see this could well be one of Leclerc's weaknesses at the moment. In a car that is capable of points, I think he should have more points over Ericsson than he currently does. Or if he is doing absolutely great, then people should start realizing that Ericsson isn't actually that bad.

For me, i think it would be Verstappen, Ocon, then Leclerc.


In fairness to Leclerc it's very unusual for a rookie to outscore an experienced team mate. Leclerc will only be the second on the grid to do it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 8:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4889
Also in fairness to Leclerc in Germany he was absolutely cruising it in the points and was beating Ericsson before the team did that stupid gamble for the inters like McLaren did and it all went wrong for both Leclerc and Alonso. He did have a spin but he was on the wrong tyres so forgivable for me.

In terms of laps quicker it was 40-26 for Charles even with that daft gamble that threw away easy points.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 9:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1895
Location: Miami, Florida
mas wrote:
Leclerc > Verstappen > Ocon.

Max's racing judgement is still terrible and sadly he still doesn't think so which negates to a serious extent any innate high speed he has. LeClerc is the closest modern driver I have seen
to Jim Clark
, ultra fast and ultra smooth. Ocon is quick but nothing special.

8O

That's THEEEEE BOLDEST STATEMENT I THINK IVE EVER SEEN ON HERE EVER!!!

I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion because there's a British driver who has proven to be far superior to anything Leclerc has EVER accomplished. He was more brilliant in Karts
and did some pretty amazing things in the junior ranks that I don't recall seeing from Leclerc. His name is Lewis Hamilton.

We've seen so little from Leclerc to this point that it's impossible to say he's better than Ocon in any capacity, and I'm 100% confident in saying Ocon is the better of the two right now.
If I were Williams I'd pick up Ocon for next season for sure and then would have Sirotkin and Kubica fight for that second seat. The other excellent option would be for Haas to pick him up
should Grosjean not be retained.

For me given that Ocon hasn't been in a top car…

Ocon = Verstappen > Leclerc

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 10:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6074
Location: Michigan, USA
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion because there's a British driver who has proven to be far superior to anything Leclerc has EVER accomplished. He was more brilliant in Karts
and did some pretty amazing things in the junior ranks that I don't recall seeing from Leclerc. His name is Lewis Hamilton.

What did Lewis do in the junior ranks that was so much more impressive? A quick comparison of their junior records:

First year in cars
Hamilton: Formula Renault 2000, 3rd place
Leclerc: Formula Renault 2.0, 2nd place

Second year in cars
Hamilton: Formula Renault 2.0, champion
Leclerc: Formula 3, 5th place

Third year in cars
Hamilton: Formula 3, 5th place
Leclerc: GP3, champion

Fourth year in cars
Hamilton: Formula 3, champion
Leclerc: Formula 2, champion

Fifth year in cars
Hamilton: GP2, champion
(Leclerc: in F1)

It seems to me that Leclerc achieved everything Hamilton did in the junior categories, and often faster. You can consider Hamilton superior, I don't argue with that, but their junior careers are very comparable and the comparison probably favors Leclerc.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 10:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1496
mikeyg123 wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
I believe Verstappen is overall the best, but is still inconsistent. But his good races are often extremely good. Ocon is solid, but to me has only had a few very impressive races. Leclerc may have had several very impressive races, but we really haven't had that much time to judge him yet. The fact is, Ericsson has been basically as good or better in 5 or 6 weekends. And he is not highly rated at all by most. And these races were not just the first 3. It will take more that that for me to rate Leclerc so high. I easily see Verstappen and Ocon as better than him at the moment. Leclerc looks to have been rather weak in the wet from what we have seen in his career in F1 so far. Ericsson has only finished 2 wet races in his career. Japan 2014, if you can call that a finish and Germany this year. In every other, I think he crashed out, showing he often struggles here. And on both wet occasions this year, he was clearly better than leclerc. Unfortunately, i see this could well be one of Leclerc's weaknesses at the moment. In a car that is capable of points, I think he should have more points over Ericsson than he currently does. Or if he is doing absolutely great, then people should start realizing that Ericsson isn't actually that bad.

For me, i think it would be Verstappen, Ocon, then Leclerc.


In fairness to Leclerc it's very unusual for a rookie to outscore an experienced team mate. Leclerc will only be the second on the grid to do it.

Yea, i know it is unusual. It is just that the majority of people seem to rate Ericsson extremely low and the other way round for Leclerc. Qualifying for Ericsson is certainly poor, but quite a lot of the races haven;t been that different from them. I can agree that it is still an archivement that he is in the minority in outscoring his experienced team mate as a rookie, but I do think he is a bit over rated, and the opposite for Ericsson. I would rate Ericsson above Hartley, Stroll, Serotkin, and possibly grosjean and Vandoorne based on this season. Leclerc I would probably have 6th or 7th. One reason I rate Vandoorne so low if I include a bit more, is that it is shocking to see that he hasn't outqualified Alonso in 19 races. That is basically a full season! Even in the races, I don't see the occasional impressive performance like Ericsson has once in a while.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 10:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2015 3:45 am
Posts: 618
Location: Michigan, USA
So far I'm inclined to think Leclerc > Ocon > Verstappen. All of them seem to have raw speed, so I'm basing it largely on the differences in racecraft, and putting Verstappen at the back for the large number of mistakes and other incidents. It's impossible to say for sure and difficult to guess at this point, since much of the information comes from their respective performance in junior series.

_________________
Top Three: 9 wins, 26 podiums | 2016: 9th [6th] | 2017: 16th [6th] | 2018: 3rd [4th]
Pick 10: 1 win, 8 podiums | 2016: 22nd | 2017: 21st | 2018: 2nd
Group Pick'em: 2 wins, 11 podiums | 2016: 14th | 2017: 10th | 2018: 10th


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 10:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1496
Lotus49 wrote:
Also in fairness to Leclerc in Germany he was absolutely cruising it in the points and was beating Ericsson before the team did that stupid gamble for the inters like McLaren did and it all went wrong for both Leclerc and Alonso. He did have a spin but he was on the wrong tyres so forgivable for me.

In terms of laps quicker it was 40-26 for Charles even with that daft gamble that threw away easy points.


I am still surprised at that some people saw it this way. One thing I'm not sure about, but I heard some people mentioned this. I think it was Leclerc who made the call that he wanted the inters. I don't know that for sure, but yes, that was a mistake by either him or the team. But, he did not spin on those tyres. He very soon pitted and went back on to ultras. He then came out a second behind Vandoorne. He then didn't have 1 spin on these tyres, but 2. First one didn't cost him much time, but when he went onto the gravel, that most certainly did. He finished the race over 70 seconds behind Vandoorne (who was already quite a lot slower than Ericsson) and finished last. And that was even with the safety car that possibly undid a bit of the time he lost.
Meanwhile, Ericsson, who was on ultras was having a very solid race in the points. Even if Leclerc hadn't pitted for inters, his tyres will have been a slower compound and far older than Ericsson's (opposite way round to the start of the race which will have helped Leclerc be quicker there). So it could have been possible that Ericsson caught up and got past like he and Grosjean did with several other drivers. And how can we guarantee that Leclerc won't have made this mistake even without pitting? It was just as likely. It wasn't pitting that caused it.

The last 20 laps or so were terrible from Leclerc. He looked to be struggling more than Ericsson has in any stage of any race this season. But at least this hasn't occurred again with Leclerc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 11:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28382
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion because there's a British driver who has proven to be far superior to anything Leclerc has EVER accomplished. He was more brilliant in Karts
and did some pretty amazing things in the junior ranks that I don't recall seeing from Leclerc. His name is Lewis Hamilton.

What did Lewis do in the junior ranks that was so much more impressive? A quick comparison of their junior records:

First year in cars
Hamilton: Formula Renault 2000, 3rd place
Leclerc: Formula Renault 2.0, 2nd place

Second year in cars
Hamilton: Formula Renault 2.0, champion
Leclerc: Formula 3, 5th place

Third year in cars
Hamilton: Formula 3, 5th place
Leclerc: GP3, champion

Fourth year in cars
Hamilton: Formula 3, champion
Leclerc: Formula 2, champion

Fifth year in cars
Hamilton: GP2, champion
(Leclerc: in F1)

It seems to me that Leclerc achieved everything Hamilton did in the junior categories, and often faster. You can consider Hamilton superior, I don't argue with that, but their junior careers are very comparable and the comparison probably favors Leclerc.

Leclerc competed in Formula Renault 2.0 Alps which is not the main series, however he did compete in 6 races in the main series bagging 3 second place finishes.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 11:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28382
Verstappen>Leclerc>Ocon

tier 1>potential tier 1/at the moment tier 2>tier 2

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 11:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4889
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Also in fairness to Leclerc in Germany he was absolutely cruising it in the points and was beating Ericsson before the team did that stupid gamble for the inters like McLaren did and it all went wrong for both Leclerc and Alonso. He did have a spin but he was on the wrong tyres so forgivable for me.

In terms of laps quicker it was 40-26 for Charles even with that daft gamble that threw away easy points.


I am still surprised at that some people saw it this way. One thing I'm not sure about, but I heard some people mentioned this. I think it was Leclerc who made the call that he wanted the inters. I don't know that for sure, but yes, that was a mistake by either him or the team. But, he did not spin on those tyres. He very soon pitted and went back on to ultras. He then came out a second behind Vandoorne. He then didn't have 1 spin on these tyres, but 2. First one didn't cost him much time, but when he went onto the gravel, that most certainly did. He finished the race over 70 seconds behind Vandoorne (who was already quite a lot slower than Ericsson) and finished last. And that was even with the safety car that possibly undid a bit of the time he lost.
Meanwhile, Ericsson, who was on ultras was having a very solid race in the points. Even if Leclerc hadn't pitted for inters, his tyres will have been a slower compound and far older than Ericsson's (opposite way round to the start of the race which will have helped Leclerc be quicker there). So it could have been possible that Ericsson caught up and got past like he and Grosjean did with several other drivers. And how can we guarantee that Leclerc won't have made this mistake even without pitting? It was just as likely. It wasn't pitting that caused it.

The last 20 laps or so were terrible from Leclerc. He looked to be struggling more than Ericsson has in any stage of any race this season. But at least this hasn't occurred again with Leclerc.


Leclerc said he was called in which doesn't sound like it was up to him. I'd be surprised if a team let a rookie make that kind off call while running in the points tbh so it's hard to criticise much that comes after the gamble when he's obviously going to be desperately trying to make up for what he's now lost and be more aggressive while doing it. He said they struggled to get the tyres to work so I don't think it's the same as running in the points and just defending your position which he's done faultlessly countless times this year and had been doing up to that point in Germany, I don't know why he'd suddenly be as aggressive as he was post gamble, especially as he had a long stint to do on the softs.

I don't think Ericsson makes up the 20s while being in the traffic he was in while also trying to go long on his ultras so I think the 'W' was secure enough for Charles if they hadn't gambled at that time.



(Leclerc's and Vasseur's comments in here make it sound like it was just Sauber's call...
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... siyeC.html )

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28382
Lotus49 wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Also in fairness to Leclerc in Germany he was absolutely cruising it in the points and was beating Ericsson before the team did that stupid gamble for the inters like McLaren did and it all went wrong for both Leclerc and Alonso. He did have a spin but he was on the wrong tyres so forgivable for me.

In terms of laps quicker it was 40-26 for Charles even with that daft gamble that threw away easy points.


I am still surprised at that some people saw it this way. One thing I'm not sure about, but I heard some people mentioned this. I think it was Leclerc who made the call that he wanted the inters. I don't know that for sure, but yes, that was a mistake by either him or the team. But, he did not spin on those tyres. He very soon pitted and went back on to ultras. He then came out a second behind Vandoorne. He then didn't have 1 spin on these tyres, but 2. First one didn't cost him much time, but when he went onto the gravel, that most certainly did. He finished the race over 70 seconds behind Vandoorne (who was already quite a lot slower than Ericsson) and finished last. And that was even with the safety car that possibly undid a bit of the time he lost.
Meanwhile, Ericsson, who was on ultras was having a very solid race in the points. Even if Leclerc hadn't pitted for inters, his tyres will have been a slower compound and far older than Ericsson's (opposite way round to the start of the race which will have helped Leclerc be quicker there). So it could have been possible that Ericsson caught up and got past like he and Grosjean did with several other drivers. And how can we guarantee that Leclerc won't have made this mistake even without pitting? It was just as likely. It wasn't pitting that caused it.

The last 20 laps or so were terrible from Leclerc. He looked to be struggling more than Ericsson has in any stage of any race this season. But at least this hasn't occurred again with Leclerc.


Leclerc said he was called in which doesn't sound like it was up to him. I'd be surprised if a team let a rookie make that kind off call while running in the points tbh so it's hard to criticise much that comes after the gamble when he's obviously going to be desperately trying to make up for what he's now lost and be more aggressive while doing it. He said they struggled to get the tyres to work so I don't think it's the same as running in the points and just defending your position which he's done faultlessly countless times this year and had been doing up to that point in Germany, I don't know why he'd suddenly be as aggressive as he was post gamble, especially as he had a long stint to do on the softs.

I don't think Ericsson makes up the 20s while being in the traffic he was in while also trying to go long on his ultras so I think the 'W' was secure enough for Charles if they hadn't gambled at that time.



(Leclerc's and Vasseur's comments in here make it sound like it was just Sauber's call...
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... siyeC.html )

I believed they called both drivers in but Ericsson said no after remembering a similar situation before, so basically Ericsson used his greater experience to beat Leclerc, so technically he did beat him.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 5:38 pm
Posts: 1895
Location: Miami, Florida
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion because there's a British driver who has proven to be far superior to anything Leclerc has EVER accomplished. He was more brilliant in Karts
and did some pretty amazing things in the junior ranks that I don't recall seeing from Leclerc. His name is Lewis Hamilton.

What did Lewis do in the junior ranks that was so much more impressive? A quick comparison of their junior records:

First year in cars
Hamilton: Formula Renault 2000, 3rd place
Leclerc: Formula Renault 2.0, 2nd place

Second year in cars
Hamilton: Formula Renault 2.0, champion
Leclerc: Formula 3, 5th place

Third year in cars
Hamilton: Formula 3, 5th place
Leclerc: GP3, champion

Fourth year in cars
Hamilton: Formula 3, champion
Leclerc: Formula 2, champion

Fifth year in cars
Hamilton: GP2, champion
(Leclerc: in F1)

It seems to me that Leclerc achieved everything Hamilton did in the junior categories, and often faster. You can consider Hamilton superior, I don't argue with that, but their junior careers are very comparable and the comparison probably favors Leclerc.

I knew someone would go out of their way to post something like this…

What has been discussed is Leclerc being overall superb this year but the fact is he's been solid and better than his teammate. And what those figures you posted don't show is all the things that happened in those series throughout the season. All you see are final results. This year Ricciardo has had abysmal luck compared to Verstappen yet he sits very close to him in points and when he finishes, you can see that in actuality there isn't as much of a difference between them as some would have you believe. However, come the end of this season when all is said and done, someone will immediately jump to final standings of this season to paint a picture whereby Verstappen was light years faster/better than Ricciardo when that simply isn't the case.

This is precisely what you've done by posting that list. You looked only at final results and drew your conclusion from that alone.

Leclerc is indeed an amazing talent, but having watched both his and Hamilton's races in the feeder series, Hamilton was just that much better throughout and then his standout performances are to this day among the greatest in the history of all motorsport, not just in the Jr category. And while today the cars today are easier to drive, the driver is doing more in the cockpit with all the nobs and dials and in Hamilton's days the cars were so much more twitchy and nervous so it's tough to say which had their hands more full before F1.

I'll end by asking the simple question… If you could put a Rookie Hamilton against a Rookie Leclerc in the same car in the same team… Who would you put your money on?

I'd go all in on Hamilton every single time.

Keep in mind I was not a fan of Hamilton initially and had to take stock of myself and why I was so against him so vehemently, and when I decided to assess his performance purely and without bias, it was clear that the kid was just that god damned superb. That in turn helped me view other sports differently as well. While I am a die-hard Steelers and Giants fan, I no longer hate any players or teams because and if they are better than the ones I love and cheer for. instead I recognize their talents and commend them for it. HOWEVER… I do still flip my lid over horrific calls just as I do with F1… Well more vociferously than in F1 because F1 is just so different, but I will flip my lid on drivers for things like Verstappen on Bottas in Italy, Hamilton and Massa in 2008 (so many incidents between them that season), Ricciardo Dive absurd bombs (none worse than the one on Rosberg - But he seems to have curbed this for now). But I do recognize drivers' talents and abilities and good or bad, I assess according to what I see.

Thus far…

I've seen Max exude supreme pace in spurts but he wont hesitate to use his car as a weapon so it knock off points BIGTIME for me.

Leclerc took a few races to get going, but once he did hes been quite good, and I can't recall any obvious big mistakes from him.

Ocon has been pretty damn impressive from his first time out and has shown the fortitude to not yield to intimidation from other drivers, including his teammate.
He fights hard but fair, handles himself and represents the series and his team so well. Hope someone snaps this kid up. His road to F1 reminds me so much of Piquet Sr in that nothing was given to him. Really respect that.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 3:36 pm
Posts: 4889
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Also in fairness to Leclerc in Germany he was absolutely cruising it in the points and was beating Ericsson before the team did that stupid gamble for the inters like McLaren did and it all went wrong for both Leclerc and Alonso. He did have a spin but he was on the wrong tyres so forgivable for me.

In terms of laps quicker it was 40-26 for Charles even with that daft gamble that threw away easy points.


I am still surprised at that some people saw it this way. One thing I'm not sure about, but I heard some people mentioned this. I think it was Leclerc who made the call that he wanted the inters. I don't know that for sure, but yes, that was a mistake by either him or the team. But, he did not spin on those tyres. He very soon pitted and went back on to ultras. He then came out a second behind Vandoorne. He then didn't have 1 spin on these tyres, but 2. First one didn't cost him much time, but when he went onto the gravel, that most certainly did. He finished the race over 70 seconds behind Vandoorne (who was already quite a lot slower than Ericsson) and finished last. And that was even with the safety car that possibly undid a bit of the time he lost.
Meanwhile, Ericsson, who was on ultras was having a very solid race in the points. Even if Leclerc hadn't pitted for inters, his tyres will have been a slower compound and far older than Ericsson's (opposite way round to the start of the race which will have helped Leclerc be quicker there). So it could have been possible that Ericsson caught up and got past like he and Grosjean did with several other drivers. And how can we guarantee that Leclerc won't have made this mistake even without pitting? It was just as likely. It wasn't pitting that caused it.

The last 20 laps or so were terrible from Leclerc. He looked to be struggling more than Ericsson has in any stage of any race this season. But at least this hasn't occurred again with Leclerc.


Leclerc said he was called in which doesn't sound like it was up to him. I'd be surprised if a team let a rookie make that kind off call while running in the points tbh so it's hard to criticise much that comes after the gamble when he's obviously going to be desperately trying to make up for what he's now lost and be more aggressive while doing it. He said they struggled to get the tyres to work so I don't think it's the same as running in the points and just defending your position which he's done faultlessly countless times this year and had been doing up to that point in Germany, I don't know why he'd suddenly be as aggressive as he was post gamble, especially as he had a long stint to do on the softs.

I don't think Ericsson makes up the 20s while being in the traffic he was in while also trying to go long on his ultras so I think the 'W' was secure enough for Charles if they hadn't gambled at that time.



(Leclerc's and Vasseur's comments in here make it sound like it was just Sauber's call...
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... siyeC.html )

I believed they called both drivers in but Ericsson said no after remembering a similar situation before, so basically Ericsson used his greater experience to beat Leclerc, so technically he did beat him.


Haven't read that myself but I don't think I claimed otherwise, just pointing out Charles was well set before the teams gamble.

_________________
"Clark came through at the end of the first lap so far ahead that we in the pits were convinced that the rest of the field must have been wiped out in an accident."
-Eddie Dennis, describing the dominance of Jim Clark in the Lotus 49 at Spa 1967


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 2:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 23, 2014 3:53 am
Posts: 6074
Location: Michigan, USA
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
This is precisely what you've done by posting that list. You looked only at final results and drew your conclusion from that alone.

I take exception to this. I posted final results, because that was the quicker thing to post. That does not mean final results are all I'm going by, or all I know. I didn't watch Hamilton in GP2, I'll freely admit that, but I did watch Leclerc in F2 - snd I absolutely refute that what Hamilton did could have been more impressive. Leclerc began by setting every single pole up until after the halfway mark, and often by margins that are simply unheard of in F2. He also did things like pitting in a Sprint Race and still winning. He was absolutely in a class apart from the other drivers, and it showed right from the start.

As I said, you can believe Hamilton is better - even that he was better at the same age - but I do not agree with you that anything he achieved in the junior categories is more impressive.

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 2:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5547
Exediron wrote:
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
I'd love to hear how you came to that conclusion because there's a British driver who has proven to be far superior to anything Leclerc has EVER accomplished. He was more brilliant in Karts
and did some pretty amazing things in the junior ranks that I don't recall seeing from Leclerc. His name is Lewis Hamilton.

What did Lewis do in the junior ranks that was so much more impressive? A quick comparison of their junior records:

First year in cars
Hamilton: Formula Renault 2000, 3rd place
Leclerc: Formula Renault 2.0, 2nd place

Second year in cars
Hamilton: Formula Renault 2.0, champion
Leclerc: Formula 3, 5th place

Third year in cars
Hamilton: Formula 3, 5th place
Leclerc: GP3, champion

Fourth year in cars
Hamilton: Formula 3, champion
Leclerc: Formula 2, champion

Fifth year in cars
Hamilton: GP2, champion
(Leclerc: in F1)

It seems to me that Leclerc achieved everything Hamilton did in the junior categories, and often faster. You can consider Hamilton superior, I don't argue with that, but their junior careers are very comparable and the comparison probably favors Leclerc.

The landscape is completely different today from back when Hamilton was coming up as is the nature of the series they competed in. When Hamilton was coming up, there was no GP3 and the F3 Euroseries was extremely competitive. He raced against the likes of Paul di Resta, Sebastian Vettel, Nico Rosberg, Robert Kubica and Adrian Sutil in that series. The F3 series Charles entered didn't have nearly that level of talent in it. Same goes for GP2. Hamilton raced against Piquet Jr., Grosjean, Glock and other strong drivers while Leclerc was really the only top prospect in his championship season.

You also have to look at the number of wins and win percentage in the junior categories and you see that Hamilton won a much higher number and percentage of races. Really the F2 season Charles had in 2017 was his first really dominant year in the junior categories. He never won more than 4 races in a series before winning 7 last year in F2. Hamilton won 10 races out of 14 in Formula Renault in 2003 and 15 races out of 20 in F3 in 2005. Their careers in the junior categories are not really that similar.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 4:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2282
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
I'll end by asking the simple question… If you could put a Rookie Hamilton against a Rookie Leclerc in the same car in the same team… Who would you put your money on?

I'd go all in on Hamilton every single time.

Hamilton's rookie season is probably the best the sport has ever seen. However:

1. Hamilton drove a top car in his rookie season. Leclerc is in a Sauber.
2. Hamilton did far more testing before 2007 than Leclerc did before 2018.

Not really comparable situations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:15 am
Posts: 1496
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Also in fairness to Leclerc in Germany he was absolutely cruising it in the points and was beating Ericsson before the team did that stupid gamble for the inters like McLaren did and it all went wrong for both Leclerc and Alonso. He did have a spin but he was on the wrong tyres so forgivable for me.

In terms of laps quicker it was 40-26 for Charles even with that daft gamble that threw away easy points.


I am still surprised at that some people saw it this way. One thing I'm not sure about, but I heard some people mentioned this. I think it was Leclerc who made the call that he wanted the inters. I don't know that for sure, but yes, that was a mistake by either him or the team. But, he did not spin on those tyres. He very soon pitted and went back on to ultras. He then came out a second behind Vandoorne. He then didn't have 1 spin on these tyres, but 2. First one didn't cost him much time, but when he went onto the gravel, that most certainly did. He finished the race over 70 seconds behind Vandoorne (who was already quite a lot slower than Ericsson) and finished last. And that was even with the safety car that possibly undid a bit of the time he lost.
Meanwhile, Ericsson, who was on ultras was having a very solid race in the points. Even if Leclerc hadn't pitted for inters, his tyres will have been a slower compound and far older than Ericsson's (opposite way round to the start of the race which will have helped Leclerc be quicker there). So it could have been possible that Ericsson caught up and got past like he and Grosjean did with several other drivers. And how can we guarantee that Leclerc won't have made this mistake even without pitting? It was just as likely. It wasn't pitting that caused it.

The last 20 laps or so were terrible from Leclerc. He looked to be struggling more than Ericsson has in any stage of any race this season. But at least this hasn't occurred again with Leclerc.


Leclerc said he was called in which doesn't sound like it was up to him. I'd be surprised if a team let a rookie make that kind off call while running in the points tbh so it's hard to criticise much that comes after the gamble when he's obviously going to be desperately trying to make up for what he's now lost and be more aggressive while doing it. He said they struggled to get the tyres to work so I don't think it's the same as running in the points and just defending your position which he's done faultlessly countless times this year and had been doing up to that point in Germany, I don't know why he'd suddenly be as aggressive as he was post gamble, especially as he had a long stint to do on the softs.

I don't think Ericsson makes up the 20s while being in the traffic he was in while also trying to go long on his ultras so I think the 'W' was secure enough for Charles if they hadn't gambled at that time.



(Leclerc's and Vasseur's comments in here make it sound like it was just Sauber's call...
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... siyeC.html )

I believed they called both drivers in but Ericsson said no after remembering a similar situation before, so basically Ericsson used his greater experience to beat Leclerc, so technically he did beat him.

I'm going to guess this is what I read somewhere before. Leclerc could well have been called in, but may well have had an option not to accept it. But I still think his end was terrible, as Ericswson was on the same tyres and actually overtaking several drivers. Leclerc was on fresh tyres of the same compound and was against much slower drivers. Even though Ericsson was slower at first (although a small part of that will have been his softs vs Leclerc's ultras), Ericsson was far better at the end. No matter how unfortuante Leclerc's circumstances were after pitting, that is still no excuse for loosing 70 seconds in less than 20 laps. He could have easily got past Vandoorne and Gasly if not for this. Even if the gamble was unlucky, I still have to say that was overall a very poor race from Leclerc, despite him being quicker than Ericsson to start with. That 2nd mistakes at the end was easily avoidable. If he spun on track once, he should have learnt from it. But he kept pushing, and went off into the grass and gravel and messed up his car's performance. This was what cost him over a minute as the spin only put him around 5 seconds behind Vandoorne


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 10:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 1:30 pm
Posts: 28382
Lotus49 wrote:
pokerman wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
TheGiantHogweed wrote:
Lotus49 wrote:
Also in fairness to Leclerc in Germany he was absolutely cruising it in the points and was beating Ericsson before the team did that stupid gamble for the inters like McLaren did and it all went wrong for both Leclerc and Alonso. He did have a spin but he was on the wrong tyres so forgivable for me.

In terms of laps quicker it was 40-26 for Charles even with that daft gamble that threw away easy points.


I am still surprised at that some people saw it this way. One thing I'm not sure about, but I heard some people mentioned this. I think it was Leclerc who made the call that he wanted the inters. I don't know that for sure, but yes, that was a mistake by either him or the team. But, he did not spin on those tyres. He very soon pitted and went back on to ultras. He then came out a second behind Vandoorne. He then didn't have 1 spin on these tyres, but 2. First one didn't cost him much time, but when he went onto the gravel, that most certainly did. He finished the race over 70 seconds behind Vandoorne (who was already quite a lot slower than Ericsson) and finished last. And that was even with the safety car that possibly undid a bit of the time he lost.
Meanwhile, Ericsson, who was on ultras was having a very solid race in the points. Even if Leclerc hadn't pitted for inters, his tyres will have been a slower compound and far older than Ericsson's (opposite way round to the start of the race which will have helped Leclerc be quicker there). So it could have been possible that Ericsson caught up and got past like he and Grosjean did with several other drivers. And how can we guarantee that Leclerc won't have made this mistake even without pitting? It was just as likely. It wasn't pitting that caused it.

The last 20 laps or so were terrible from Leclerc. He looked to be struggling more than Ericsson has in any stage of any race this season. But at least this hasn't occurred again with Leclerc.


Leclerc said he was called in which doesn't sound like it was up to him. I'd be surprised if a team let a rookie make that kind off call while running in the points tbh so it's hard to criticise much that comes after the gamble when he's obviously going to be desperately trying to make up for what he's now lost and be more aggressive while doing it. He said they struggled to get the tyres to work so I don't think it's the same as running in the points and just defending your position which he's done faultlessly countless times this year and had been doing up to that point in Germany, I don't know why he'd suddenly be as aggressive as he was post gamble, especially as he had a long stint to do on the softs.

I don't think Ericsson makes up the 20s while being in the traffic he was in while also trying to go long on his ultras so I think the 'W' was secure enough for Charles if they hadn't gambled at that time.



(Leclerc's and Vasseur's comments in here make it sound like it was just Sauber's call...
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... siyeC.html )

I believed they called both drivers in but Ericsson said no after remembering a similar situation before, so basically Ericsson used his greater experience to beat Leclerc, so technically he did beat him.


Haven't read that myself but I don't think I claimed otherwise, just pointing out Charles was well set before the teams gamble.

Still it's part of a driver's skill set to read a situation, also yes in the dry Leclerc was quicker, in the wet unlike Ericsson, Leclerc made many mistakes.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place

2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 3rd

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 11:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 8:47 am
Posts: 39
F1 MERCENARY wrote:
We've seen so little from Leclerc to this point that it's impossible to say he's better than Ocon in any capacity, and I'm 100% confident in saying Ocon is the better of the two right now.
If I were Williams I'd pick up Ocon for next season for sure and then would have Sirotkin and Kubica fight for that second seat. The other excellent option would be for Haas to pick him up
should Grosjean not be retained.

For me given that Ocon hasn't been in a top car…

Ocon = Verstappen > Leclerc


This ^ is the wisest comment here so far.

Predictions are risky - especially about the future* - but I'll risk it.

• Ocon will win at least one Championship with Mercedes, so will his team mate George Russell.
• Leclerc will better Vettel over the 2019 season.
• Verstappen will be praying to the gods of F1 that Honda really and truly gets on par with Merc and Ferrari over the winter break.

* Someone will pick me up on the bleedin' obvious, mark my words.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 11:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5547
Ocon, for me, is not WDC material. I just don't see it. There's no spark there. Nothing special from a racecraft standpoint. Max is sloppy at times but blindingly quick and with obviously sharp instincts in battle. Charles also looks to have something special (though the sample size for him is too small to say anything with certainty).

For me, the proof is in the pudding. Two of these guys have secured seats at top teams from an early stage in their careers. The other one was passed up...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 8:47 am
Posts: 39
sandman1347 wrote:
Ocon, for me, is not WDC material. I just don't see it. There's no spark there. Nothing special from a racecraft standpoint. Max is sloppy at times but blindingly quick and with obviously sharp instincts in battle. Charles also looks to have something special (though the sample size for him is too small to say anything with certainty).

For me, the proof is in the pudding. Two of these guys have secured seats at top teams from an early stage in their careers. The other one was passed up...

Some time after my previous post, I heard Sky asking Wolff whether he would consider releasing Ocon or Russell. Of Ocon, he said: "Not in a million years. One day he's going to be in a Mercedes and win races and championships and show all the others out there that they made a mistake."

Of course, one could say that he would say that, but there again, he just might be speaking sincerely as one who has detailed inside knowledge.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5547
Huw wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Ocon, for me, is not WDC material. I just don't see it. There's no spark there. Nothing special from a racecraft standpoint. Max is sloppy at times but blindingly quick and with obviously sharp instincts in battle. Charles also looks to have something special (though the sample size for him is too small to say anything with certainty).

For me, the proof is in the pudding. Two of these guys have secured seats at top teams from an early stage in their careers. The other one was passed up...

Some time after my previous post, I heard Sky asking Wolff whether he would consider releasing Ocon or Russell. Of Ocon, he said: "Not in a million years. One day he's going to be in a Mercedes and win races and championships and show all the others out there that they made a mistake."

Of course, one could say that he would say that, but there again, he just might be speaking sincerely as one who has detailed inside knowledge.

Yet he chose to re-sign Bottas instead of giving Ocon the drive...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 2:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2012 10:39 am
Posts: 23910
Huw wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Ocon, for me, is not WDC material. I just don't see it. There's no spark there. Nothing special from a racecraft standpoint. Max is sloppy at times but blindingly quick and with obviously sharp instincts in battle. Charles also looks to have something special (though the sample size for him is too small to say anything with certainty).

For me, the proof is in the pudding. Two of these guys have secured seats at top teams from an early stage in their careers. The other one was passed up...

Some time after my previous post, I heard Sky asking Wolff whether he would consider releasing Ocon or Russell. Of Ocon, he said: "Not in a million years. One day he's going to be in a Mercedes and win races and championships and show all the others out there that they made a mistake."

Of course, one could say that he would say that, but there again, he just might be speaking sincerely as one who has detailed inside knowledge.

yeah but if he doesn't release him despite not being able to secure him a seat then he's basically admitting to standing in Ocon's way of a drive. Ocon's association with Mercedes is now hampering his chances of actually being in F1 next year. Fair enough that Mercedes get first call on his services but if they can't find him a seat then they shouldn't be allowed to sacrifice his career because of it


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 2:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 12, 2018 8:47 am
Posts: 39
sandman1347 wrote:
Huw wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Ocon, for me, is not WDC material. I just don't see it. There's no spark there. Nothing special from a racecraft standpoint. Max is sloppy at times but blindingly quick and with obviously sharp instincts in battle. Charles also looks to have something special (though the sample size for him is too small to say anything with certainty).

For me, the proof is in the pudding. Two of these guys have secured seats at top teams from an early stage in their careers. The other one was passed up...

Some time after my previous post, I heard Sky asking Wolff whether he would consider releasing Ocon or Russell. Of Ocon, he said: "Not in a million years. One day he's going to be in a Mercedes and win races and championships and show all the others out there that they made a mistake."

Of course, one could say that he would say that, but there again, he just might be speaking sincerely as one who has detailed inside knowledge.

Yet he chose to re-sign Bottas instead of giving Ocon the drive...


They had committed to Bottas prior to the Papa Stroll buy into Force India and Ricciardo’s surprise move to Renault. It was these unexpected events that hurt Ocon’s chance of a seat. It would have looked very bad if Wolff had tried to wriggle out of the commitment to Bottas. Don’t forget, Wolff is an employee of a major global company that is understandably highly concerned about its brand image.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 2:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 2:53 pm
Posts: 6818
Location: Mumbai, India
sandman1347 wrote:
Huw wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Ocon, for me, is not WDC material. I just don't see it. There's no spark there. Nothing special from a racecraft standpoint. Max is sloppy at times but blindingly quick and with obviously sharp instincts in battle. Charles also looks to have something special (though the sample size for him is too small to say anything with certainty).

For me, the proof is in the pudding. Two of these guys have secured seats at top teams from an early stage in their careers. The other one was passed up...

Some time after my previous post, I heard Sky asking Wolff whether he would consider releasing Ocon or Russell. Of Ocon, he said: "Not in a million years. One day he's going to be in a Mercedes and win races and championships and show all the others out there that they made a mistake."

Of course, one could say that he would say that, but there again, he just might be speaking sincerely as one who has detailed inside knowledge.

Yet he chose to re-sign Bottas instead of giving Ocon the drive...


A little hypothetical, had Force India's buyout by Stroll & Ricciardo's move to Renault had taken place before Bottas getting a contract extension, would Toto have signed Ocon instead?

_________________
Feel The Fourth


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 3:29 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 7:55 pm
Posts: 5547
UnlikeUday wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Huw wrote:
sandman1347 wrote:
Ocon, for me, is not WDC material. I just don't see it. There's no spark there. Nothing special from a racecraft standpoint. Max is sloppy at times but blindingly quick and with obviously sharp instincts in battle. Charles also looks to have something special (though the sample size for him is too small to say anything with certainty).

For me, the proof is in the pudding. Two of these guys have secured seats at top teams from an early stage in their careers. The other one was passed up...

Some time after my previous post, I heard Sky asking Wolff whether he would consider releasing Ocon or Russell. Of Ocon, he said: "Not in a million years. One day he's going to be in a Mercedes and win races and championships and show all the others out there that they made a mistake."

Of course, one could say that he would say that, but there again, he just might be speaking sincerely as one who has detailed inside knowledge.

Yet he chose to re-sign Bottas instead of giving Ocon the drive...


A little hypothetical, had Force India's buyout by Stroll & Ricciardo's move to Renault had taken place before Bottas getting a contract extension, would Toto have signed Ocon instead?

He certainly would have if he truly believed Ocon to be a future champion. In fact, if he thinks that highly of Ocon's abilities, why not sign him anyway? Why force him to drive for a lesser team? The way Wolf speaks about him now, he should have signed him to drive for Mercedes in 2019 regardless of whether there was a drive available at Renault. Ocon will be 22 next year and he is already of an age and level of experience where, if you're convinced of his abilties, there is no reason to delay moving him to a top car. Max and Charles are both 1 year younger than him and they have both secured top drives already. Ultimately I just think that Wolf is over-selling Ocon now that he dropped the ball with Esteban's career. I don't think Wolf saw him as a meaningful upgrade to Bottas nor as a potential replacement for Hamilton should he retire.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 4:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 7:54 am
Posts: 2282
Verstappen's speed when he isn't crashing is usually better than Ricciardo. Ocon has outqualified Perez this season, but Perez still appears to have better race pace when both are running in clean air. Ricciardo is rated by most as higher than Perez, so this rather confirms to me that Verstappen is probably a better driver than Ocon.

Where Leclerc fits in remains to be seen. Ericsson is not a real benchmark but Charles has dominated him. Next year against Vettel we will get a good picture of how good Leclerc is.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 4:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2013 11:13 am
Posts: 1646
Ocon should be looking to get out of his Mercedes contract ASAP, I predict if he remains with Mercedes and does not get a seat for next year it will be the end of his career as an F1 driver as when Russell wins F2 he too joins the queue as well.


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: Jezza13 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