F1 Winter Break
2017
Video: Daniel Ricciardo on Red Bull, F1 2017 and his relationship with Max Verstappen
Red Bull Racing
Daniel Ricciardo
Posted By: Editor   |  18 Mar 2017   |  11:43 am GMT  |  216 comments

Daniel Ricciardo doesn’t believe there will be much difference between the on-track action seen in the upcoming 2017 Formula 1 season than there was during last year’s championship.

F1 has introduced a new set of chassis regulations for the 2017 season, which have created larger and more aggressive looking cars that are several seconds faster than their predecessors thanks to the higher levels of downforce produced by the new aerodynamic devices. This has led to fears that there will be fewer overtaking moves and less exiting racing.

But in a wide-ranging interview with the Australia-based EFTM website, Ricciardo expressed his belief that the action will be at a similar level to the 2016 season, although he explained that the higher downforce levels could lead to some drivers struggling to get through the hotter events at peak performance.

Daniel Ricciardo

He said: “I don’t think there will be a whole lot of difference with the racing itself. Obviously we’re going to be lapping quicker but will that mean more overtaking or more action, incidents, [and] mistakes? I don’t know; I’m not sure.

“Hopefully it is at least as good, but we’ll see. I think if it is as fast then the hot races in particular will be really physical, and maybe if you get some drivers that aren’t as well prepared as others you might see towards the end of the race a little bit of action.”

By opening up the chassis regulations to allow greater aero freedom, F1 allowed the teams to pursue new paths in pursuit of downforce. Several squads – of which Ricciardo’s Red Bull team is one – opted to reintroduce the shark fin engine covers last seen in F1 in 2010. Other teams, including Mercedes, Ferrari, Haas F1 and Williams, have added another small aero device – dubbed the ‘T-wing’ – in front of the rear wing.

Mercedes T-wing

These structures have not been particularly well received by some F1 fans and paddock observers, but Ricciardo described how he would welcome ugly innovations so long as they added speed to his car.

He said: [The] T-wing is new. I’ve never heard or seen this – maybe people knew about this before, I don’t know, but I’ve never seen it.

“The shark fin, I think Red Bull ran it a few years ago when Mark Webber was around, Mark and Seb [Vetttel]. It looks ok – I’m kind of like ‘as long as it’s fast, it can look like anything’.

Daniel Ricciardo

“But they look interesting. I think most people say that the shark fin is not as attractive as the curve at the end of the [engine cover], but the T-wing is interesting, for sure. It kind of looks like a weather radar – one of those things that you see on top of some of the trucks. It looks a bit weird, but whatever.”

Living and laughing with Max Verstappen

One of the most anticipated stories of the 2017 season is expected to be the evolving relationship between Ricciardo and his team-mate Max Verstappen, who is starting his first full season with Red Bull after joining the team ahead of the 2016 Spanish Grand Prix.

The pair currently has a positive and friendly relationship, but that could be put under pressure if regular chances of race wins crop up or a world championship battle intensifies.

Daniel Ricciardo Max Verstappen

But, with no sign of tension so far, Ricciardo described how they get on within the Red Bull environment.

He said: “We try and keep it fun, for sure. It’s business but at the same time it’s a big part of our life so we have to find the fun moments and the more relaxed moments in it otherwise we’d probably be bored of it.

“Max is good. I certainly see some things, like – I’m still pretty immature – but he’ll laugh at things that I’m like ‘it’s not that funny’. So that’s where he’s definitely young.

“But it’s cool. We’ve got a good environment and Red Bull have got a good way of letting us be who we are as well. They don’t try and control us and say ‘say this or do this’ – within reason of course.”

Watch the full Ricciardo video interview with EFTM’s Trevor Long below

What do you make of Ricciardo’s comments? Leave your thoughts in the comment section below or head over to the JA on F1 Facebook page for more discussion.

Featured News
MORE FROM Red Bull Racing
LATEST FROM THE RED BULL RACING COMMUNITY
Previous
Next
Share This:
Posted by:

Add comment

E-mail is already registered on the site. Please use the login form or enter another.

You entered an incorrect username or password

Sorry, you must be logged in to post a comment.

216 comments

by Oldest
by Best by Newest by Oldest
1
Matthew Cheshire

He doesn't sound scared of max. And he's lying about Melbourne over Monaco. It's going to be interesting.

2

Your obviously not an Aussie.

3
Matthew Cheshire

Not so fast. He can't say that Monaco is unfinished business and that he's sworn to himself to fix it. It's not un-Australian to acknowledge that.

And you're missing an apostrophe.

4

He is not scared of Max but he will be

5

Very likeable man, his talk shows confidence. That tells me he can beat Max the way he beat Seb.

6

@mathew
I don't think any top driver is scared of other drivers. I think it's more a question of respect. And I think DR has a lot of respect for max"s abilities. Everyone can see right now that max is an exciting driver and it's going to be interesting to see how it pans out when these 2 drivers really start to push things to a new level.

7

would he be in f1 if he was scared?

8

never had australian meat pie. will go out to an australian restaurant for lunch now to satisfy my curiosity. nice one ricciardo.

9

just don't get a servo pie!

10

a lot of grease in that?

11

You will need to go to a bakery not a restaurant.

12

@aveli
So there you go. You better book the earliest flight to Australia if you want to quench your curiosity. Bon apetit✈️🍖

13

wherever ricciardo was, he said "you can get them out here".

14

You should come down Aveli. Ken and I will be the tour guides for you and your parents!

15

@ sars...hahaha, yes, the 'farmgate' will always be open.

16

Sorry mate, can't have one at a restaurant.

Australian Meat Pie needs to be had at the MCG, luke-warm and cost you a weeks salary; otherwise its just a meat pie.

17

Edit - SFS

18

a weeks salary? is it true that pie eaters at the mcg are often used as targets for high velocity cricket balls?

19

Yes... and also sometimes catchers of cricket balls are targets of high velocity meat pies... 😀

20

Pie eaters are the Aussie batsman when they face the English bowling attack!

21

[Mod]

Including Albert Park actually, and Turn 3 in particular. There's been some huge shunts there over the years, and not just the Alonso aeronautics last year. I'm thinking specifically of 2009 when Kubica and Vettel had a stupid arguement that ended up in lots of broken carbon composites, or the most horrendous accident in Australian history, the 2001 smash at T3 when Jacques Villeneuve smashed into the back of Ralfie launching the Canadian and fatally injuring a poor marshall.............I can still picture Ralfie looking dazed and confused (although uninjured) thinking "What the hell was Villeneuve flying past me?"

I don't know why T3 is so bad, maybe because it's a graduated curve with the braking zone "blind" but as Martin Brundle (1996) and Alex Wurz (2007) will testify, it's a stinger of a corner.

22

there could be fragments of pie left there to rob the wide eyed drivers of adhesion..

23

It was Turn 6 where the marshall was killed.

24

Well can see them behind the Ferrari and Mercs having their own battle with Williams.
The relationship between the two Red Bull drivers will go South by Race 4.
Just hope Mclaren finish the race with both cars . Will they be lapped by a Pink Force India or will they be in front of them in the Rear battle of the slow coaches.

25

It won't go sour if they're only fighting over 3rds, 4ths and 5ths. If it's for wins that's when it would turn nasty.

26

Can you back that up with any facts?

27

Ha! Scott asking for facts! That's a bit rich lad.

28

@KRB
Ohhh yesss, it's gonna be great👊🏻🤕🏎. Aussie grit and Dutch devil. Make your bets ladies and gentlemen🍻

29

It will have something to do with worn shoes I shouldn't wonder, hot, sweaty and sweet-smelling

30

Restaurants don't do pies....Go to a bakery instead....

31

What exactly does the 'meat' consist of?

32

Therin lies the mystery of the Australian meat pie... A good one will have minced beef in a slightly liquid gravy... a bad one will be awash with brown dishwater and a couple of lumps of gristle of unknown hereditary...

In a contrast to the usual consumer experience of branded vs un-branded product... the one that comes in a plain brown or white paper bag with no name or branding us usually superior to the one made in a factory and baked inside it's well printed and clearly branded plastic bag...

An interesting variety which sells in equal volume in New Zealand but almost unheard of in Australia is the mince-n-cheese variation...

There is also a vast array of reasonably common, but sold in much lower quantities variations. The steak pie (same recipe as the mince pie, but the chunks of meat are are bigger), steak and pepper, steak and mushroom, fish & potato pie, curry pie, vegetarian, and many others... do not confuse with the English pork pie... which while a pastry container of a similar shape and containing meat... is vastly different in that it usually consumed cold and gelatinous... Aussie pies should be warm to hot and slightly runny..

If any of this sounds like it is written with distain... I do in fact love them and have them for lunch at least once or twice a week...

33

Thank you for that detailed break down!

Actually you can get English pies that 'are hot and runny' at football grounds.. although the quality of the produce is questionable as best!

If you're at Lords cricket ground you can get your hands on a more upmarket pastry snack sourced from a posh butcher or premium farm shop.

34

may be where you but here restaurants serve pies.

35

eerm....ok

36

which bakeries make it in london?

37

Ah, for some reason I thought you were in Australia. If it's London, forget it- it won't be the real deal

38

at least i'll have an idea of what it tastes like.....without a shrimps on the Barbie.

39

I really hope DR is in contention for the championship at the pointy end of the season. Very exciting driver to watch when the fur is flying.

40

To be fair, the shark wings and T-wings aren't such a big deal as long as the fans enjoy the on track action

And yes, I think Ricciardo is right in that the action maybe similar to 2016 because DRS was a game changer that enables overtaking where it may have previously been impossible.

As for Max and Ricciardo, I think they will always get along because they have a relaxed relationship outside of working hours.

Yes, I can see them carrying on likewise as long as either don't do anything on track to break the trust e.g. After Malaysia 2016, the thing Ricciardo appreciated was Max raced fair and didn't pull off any underhand tactics

Which reminds me, I was very surprised by how relaxed Vettel was in 2014 when Ricciardo did better than him because number 1 drivers tend to get irritated when they get beaten because they're very competitive.

41

@goforet
Have to disagree on the bit about Danni and Max getting along. I think we'll see some tension creep in when/if they start fighting for wins regularly, and the WDC. We saw how DR reacted after Barcelona and even more after Monaco last year( and every right to aswell). I think when the screws really begin to tighten, the sparks will begin to fly. 2 highly talented and motivated drivers. It can only go one way imo. But I hope they keep it clean and I'm sure they will. Looking forward to seeing what RedBull has to offer in Melbourne🍻

42

Dan wasn't upset with Max, he was upset at the team stuffing up two potential wins for him

43

I thought he was upset at Lewis for forcing the team error....(aveli?)

44

@axel
I know. But it certainly showed he can give a bit when things go a bit curvy. That's what I mean.

45

@ James k

Actually Ricciardo and his father apologized for being gloomy at Monaco

But certainly we shall tune in to watch the drama unfold

46

Quote: 'As for Max and Ricciardo, I think they will always get along because they have a relaxed relationship outside of working hours.'
Rosberg and Hamilton. They had a pretty good relationship. Once.

47

@ Just Sayin'

Yes, that is until Rosberg broke the trust during qualifying Monaco 2014 and at Spa 2014

48

Maybe Vettel was relaxed becouse he knew he was going to Ferrari so he just didn't care.

49

@ bbbernie

Oh no, I don't think this is the case. Competitive animals care about their work

50

For sure. Vettel could not have known about Ferrari until mid-year at the earliest, and Ricciardo had already spanked him in Bahrain, China, Britain and Hungary by then.

51

Don't forget Vettel had to finish 5th or lower in WDC to break his red bull contract a year early to go to Ferrari. It's highly likely he made sure that happened.

52

Ok, so please work through the timeline then. When did Vettel start tanking? When did Alonso (whose contract ran to 2016) and Ferrari annul his remaining years, so there was even an opening?

With Dan DSQ'd from the first race, and retiring from the 2nd race (with a 10 place penalty for the 3rd race to boot), why wouldn't Vettel just throw the car off the track in Malaysia, instead of scooping up a 3rd? Why allow Ricciardo to overtake him on track in Bahrain and China, when he could've just binned it before then?

There's also the fact that after Vettel had announced his move to Ferrari (at Japan '14), when there was no more need for any supposed tanking, that he was still slower than Ricciardo.

Those putting forward the "Seb tanked '14" theory don't have the facts, evidence, or logic on their side.

53

KRB:

This I agree with you.

55

Not sure what you think this proves. It reads more like Luca getting a shot in at Hamilton, rather than pumping up Vettel. It's funny that Luca didn't even know that Vettel was already in his 3rd team when at RBR.

56

Thats naive. Do you think that there is no sneaky things happening behind the scenes years before the actual move? It's F1 and Ferrari!

Can't you remember that there was rumours Vettel going to Ferrari as early as 2012? Even on this site. I'm sure that James can confirm..

57

Just pure conjecture again

58

Just saying that if the other driver knows 100% sure that he is going to be with RedBull and the other knows he has an option and is not sure if he want's to continue with RedBull who you think is going to perform better if they are almost as equally fast drivers? Every tiny detail can make the difference when competing in top levels.

Just saying..

59

@ KRB

Good point

60

Montezemolo said 2012 he would like Seb after Alonso leaves.

61

Realy enjoyed that, Good luck and keep smiling Dan 🙂

62

Best pairing in F1.

Er sorry that's HAM and BOT hahahahaha

63

Bernie and Fabiana

64

Stroll and Massa

65

Definitely Ericsson and Wehrlein.

66

"...and less exiting racing." Probably not in the case of McLaren...

67

Hopefully Mr. Ricciardo is the world champion this season coming from me (Eurasia test driver racer) , because he was also near to it last season we all know that, after the many respects to Hamilton not to forget Rossberg!

68

Yeah he made Ham and Ros look very average in Monaco

69

And Lewis & Max made Honey Badger look ordinary in Brazil--

As for Monaco, both Hamilton & Ricciardo were good.

Stop using every post and situation as a means to bash Hamilton

70

Little doubt that in Verstappen and Ricciardo RB have the most exciting and talented pairing in F1. Both quick with good race craft and not afraid to take the field on with their overtaking abilities. They are proven performers.

As Max showed last year it was absolutely the correct decision to promote him to the senior team at the expense of Kyvat. And after the best part of a full season under his belt he will pose formidable opposition to Danny Ricc and the other drivers on the grid.

My take is that they're evenly matched and I hope that neither are disadvantaged by reliability issues or poor strategy calls. As many of the comments on JA's Forum would indicate there will be a lot of interest in these two. And no doubt a lot of interesting posts after each race.

71

@ Adrian...my sentiments as well. They are both exciting drivers and either of them could well take the title given the opportunity, despite verstappen's supposed lack of experience. Both of them share the 'opportunistic' gene and given the merest sniff will be in there like the proverbial rat up a drainpipe. What we need is for the red bulls to get in amongst the top, ferrari and mercedes, runners on track as then you'll see the sparks fly. That means great getaways which this year will be somewhat problematic with the new rules re starting procedures. Six days to go....WOW, seems like years not four months.

72

Thanks Ken........Interesting point you made in your other post that both drivers are Marko products having come out of the RB junior program. Also in Danny's case that he got the gig over Jean-Eric Vergne who is now out of F1 altogether. I can't see therefore why Marko would favour either driver.

In retrospect I was going to add that comparing the two Danny might be a little quicker over one lap but Fursty ferret has beat me to it.

Yup, I'll be tuned in to Foxtel on Friday for the practice sessions. Actually went to the Melbourne GP a couple years back and the weather......well you know what the weather is like in Melbourne. Changes every damn 5 minutes!!

73

I think danni Rics one lap qually speed should just edge him ahead over a season, but if it's close and there's a title up for grabs, I just get the impression the red bull. hierarchy will favour max.

74

I hope your wrong, but I fear you might be right.
DR would make a fantastic WC, his likability would help promote F1.

76

Care to elaborate on what the point your trying to make is Eric?

77

It's a reaction on this part "" I just get the impression the red bull. hierarchy will favour max."". That "impression" = see link..

78

I tend to agree. As long as Marko is involved I can't see it being any other way. We all saw the garage tilt towards Vettels side when he was in contention for wins and i wouldn't be surprised to see history repeat itself with Verstappen.
In saying that I also think RIc is far more laid back and less intense as Webber so I can't see any internal politics that may come into play having the effect that they did with the veteran Aussie.
Only one week to go for all to be revealed...

79

these kind of prejudice. Hard to fight against ideas without any facts to build upon.

80

@ Sars...yes, the differences in demeanour between webber and ricci are easily discernible and vastly different. Where they converge is in their steely approach to taking on the challenges. With Marko , he didn't like Webber at all, in fact i would go as far as to say that he was hostile towards Mark at times. I think that Marko resented that Webber was not one of 'his boys' and that his deals were done direct with DM, or so i am led to believe. At one stage Marko was keen to let him go but DM said that it was Mark's decision and if he wanted to stay he was welcome. That would've really upset Marko no end!!! I do think that Marko poisoned the garage and i would've loved to see webber driving for the Scuderia who tried really hard to entice him away.Unfortunately It came too late in Webbers career. The fact that Verstappen is six/seven years younger than Ricci will add another dimension to the politics of driver preferences. If a championship is in the offing would it be better to give it to Verstappen to bind him closer long term than Ricci? I guess we'll see how all that plays out in the future but i wouldn't like to try and forecast the outcome until we see regular wins on the board.

81

The reports that came out after Spa last year when Max had his kamikaze dive into La Source would suggest nothing has changed since those days Ken.
This extract from Webber's biography sums up the situation at the time and you know nothing has changed.

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/mark-webber-on-former-f1-red-bull-teammate-sebastian-vettel/news-story/1ea431c86fef570633f0fee3dae00243

I look forward to the day when Marko leaves as we will finally see whether Horner is as spineless as Webber implies.
In Christians defence though it must be hard trying to manage these pampered little princess's that we call modern day F1 driver's, just look at the backflips we have to endure from Toto every year with his driver's...

82

Sars:

Having read the extract from Mark's bio and being the straight shooter he is I'm inclined to believe every word of it, especially given Vettle's meltdown in Mexico.

83

His actual book 'Aussie Grit' is a really good read in its entirety whether your a fan or not.
It's always good to hear the inside word on any rivalry , let alone one as intense as the Webber/Vettel one.

84

Marko was involved with Vettel and Mark situation. It still went South as Marko like his Boss favoured the German. Hence the "Not bad for a No.2 driver" radio message, after they put the new front end pencilled for Mark onto Vettels car and put the old one on Marks car.
Marko will only go so far in appeasing both drivers. The end of the day Max is young more marketable and will be around longer than DR . So in terms of Red Bull lifestyle advertising Youth angle will always be tops. Having Marko around is neither here nor there.

85

@ BK Flamer...are you saying that verstappen is a better marketing prop than Ricciardo? Sorry but i don't agree. Verstappen may be sometime in the future but not now..IMO.

86

If this is the sort of (increased) access to the drivers that we can look forward to under Liberty's stewardship then I find myself bored already.

87

Suzie Woolf gets banned from driving. She tried to get off saying it would affect her charity work and would be embarrasing due to her Merc Ambassadorship.

88

@sally
She should of thought of that before she got caught speeding for the 3rd time😉

89

Very likeable guy! However, sorry Daniel - I feel, this year is going to be tough and a key one with respect to both yours and Max's future - two potential world champs in a car that is not the quickest at the start.

90

I just thought that when you are competing in top levels of any sport, it matters if you are 100% committed or "just" 98% committed. But maybe you are right. He is a professional.

91

@ bbbernie

Indeed, a professional is always 100% committed come rain or shine.

As Vettel revealed, the new 2014 cars took him a bit getting used to

92

Yes. I can only imagine. Vettel just seems so emotional. But maybe he can put emotions aside. I just think that when you are so skillfull and talented, the rest is just about getting things right in your head. And if something is bothering you it will have an effect. Like last year.

93

@ bbbernie

I would say what was bothering Vettel in 2016 is the fact the Italian media are hard on Ferrari workers and by the looks of things Ferrari workers take the criticism to heart

94

Oh, that^ was supposed to be a reply @goferet

95

Ric is without doubt the best driver in the field at the moment having outdriven Ham in an inferior car at Monaco as a proven fact but I have a feeling that with a bit more racecraft this year that he will find it harder and harder to keep Ver at bay and when Ver proves consistently quicker then the relationship will sour,the dr and owner will show favouritism and Ric will be off to Ferrari next year,but what do I know

96

I think Ham and Ric are the 2 best drivers on the grid and have been for a while. My hope is to see them as Ferrari team-mates in 2018 with Vettel and Alonso in the Mercs....I know, I'm dreaming.

97

Oooo, that's got a nice ring to it Ray!

98

What nonsense over driven a car.
The whole idea of racing is to drive to the limit. Alonso Hamilton Vettel Kimi are the top guns as they are Champions followed by the rest. Max tops in the youth category . The rest are in the other category of F1 drivers.

99

Hmm good thought. So there are two categories:

F1 Champions and F1 drivers

100

Kyvat had beaten riccardo fair and square , when they were teamates at quite a few races, thats a proven fact as well, does that make him the better driver?

101

@ FF....please explain then why ricciardo is currently driving at Red Bull and has won 4 GP's? and Kvyat is where?

102

Think you may have missed ferrets point Kennethmont. He was, quite rightly, putting [Mod] Scott right. I know you are in the same camp but surely you can see he only pokes for reaction from HAM fans and contributes very little in the way of reasoned debate or insightful comment. RIC is a fantastic driver.. I don't think Ferret is saying otherwise it's just Scott comments need to be pulled up on.

103

Gotta admit it produced a good debate or you don't like it because it didn't agree with your opinion

104

@ Dean...on re reading ,yes, you may be right. Perhaps FF might care to correct me if i did in fact get it 'assabout'. All good.

105

[q] at quite a few races, [/q]
Some races.. that's a difference.

106

😂

107

Outdrove Hamilton last year in Monaco? That's funny. You do know the result from that race, correct? The Red Bull was the faster car in Monaco, and Ricciardo was spotted a 13 second lead before Mercedes swapped the cars around. Hamilton then was consistently faster than Ricciardo, causing RBR to blink and go to inter's to avoid the undercut. Of course Hamilton stayed out and skipped the inter's phase entirely. When a driver often wins races he has no right winning, at what point do you begin to think that there might be a reason behind it?

Lewis is an exceptional individual and edgy person that when he operates on a high is unbeatable. When Lewis has that 100 per cent thing going on he is your man. These are the days when you know why he is in that car, and why he is the best paid driver. The race that comes into mind is Monaco last year when it was raining and our car was not fastest, and lacking grip in the wet. He was unbelievable.

https://inews.co.uk/essentials/sport/formula-one/lewis-hamilton-tabloid-dream-f1-says-toto-wolff/

All just my opinion, of course. 🙂

108

@ KRB... Remind me what was the time differential at the time ricciardo pitted? How long did he sit on the jacks? How far in front was hamilton when ricciardo re entered the track and how long did it take ricciardo to catch hamilton and force him to cut the corner of the chicane and how long did it take ricciardo to pull alongside hamilton before he was shut out after hamilton cut the chicane ? Would love to see the numbers.

109

kenneth, it's right at your fingertips, as I've shown you many times:

http://www.fia.com/events/fia-formula-one-world-championship/season-2016/event-timing-information-16

By the Pit Stop Summary, we can work out that Ricciardo was delayed roughly 10 secs in his 2nd stop. Spotted a 13 secs lead, but lost 10 secs due to a bad pitstop.

From the Lap History, we can see at the end of lap 15 that HAM was 14.036s back of RIC. After 7 laps that was down to 11.278s (-2.78s).

We can also see from Document 46 in the Stewards' Decisions, that Hamilton never shut out Ricciardo.

From that decision:

Fact Appeared to not leave enough room whilst defending a position in turn 11.
Offence Alleged Breach of Article 27.6 of the FIA Formula One Sporting Regulations.
Decision No further action.
Reason Car 44 left at least one car width between his own car and the edge of the track.

It's all right there for you.

110

KRB, It's called nursing a lead.
But the alternative facts have it that Hamilton was always in control and he forced the RB error..

111

See my post below ... Ricciardo wasn't nursing a lead, he was consistently losing time (approx 0.4s/lap) to Hamilton. He lost a big chunk on lap 22 (1.5s), and RBR called him in.

I guess I shouldn't assume that people other than me actually look at the laptime data afterwards, to help in forming their opinions. It would've helped you guys see what was happening.

Nursing a lead is Hamilton in Brazil last year with Max on his tail. Max was allowed to get close a few times, but then Hamilton would always pull away afterwards.

112

So does 'out front, controlling the race, conserving his tyre's' only apply when it's a Hamilton driven Mercedes KRB?

113

Sarsippious, does "chasing down the race leader with blistering lap times" only apply to Ricciardo?

114

No-one is arguing he wasn't. But thanks for the enlightened input all the same.

115

SARS. I think I need further enlightenment, do was Danny skilfully controlling the gap, or getting caught hand over fist? It seems lots of people think they know the answer, but you seem to be sending mixed signals.

116

Of course it doesn't, but I don't think you can say that that's what Ricciardo was doing, IF you look at the laptimes (see Lap History in the link I posted above to kenneth). On laps 17 & 20 Ricciardo ups his laptime by approx half a second. Lap 20 is the only lap where he is quicker than a released Hamilton in RIC's first stint. They both lap around 1.5s slower on lap 21, then on lap 22 RIC loses 1.5 secs to Lewis. That is not "controlling a race". Meanwhile Max on inter's is going 3.5 secs faster than RIC, so RBR blink and bring RIC in. Wrong move. When you're 11 secs ahead of 2nd, and 43 secs ahead of 3rd, then if you can control the race, and maintain the gap, then you stay out and wait for 2nd to pit. It seems that RBR didn't think RIC could.

117

KRB, you'd be right if Ric was never on the pace all weekend. His qualifying pace would indicate to the unbiased observer that he had plenty of time in his pocket.

118

That was in the dry LKFE, not on a wet track. Different story. If he was deliberately going slower so as to conserve his tires, then why did he come in so early? It's clear ... he was losing time consistently, then he lost a huge chunk (1.5 secs, on the same tires), and RBR blinked the very next lap.

That is the unbiased view of things. He lost a big chunk on 1 lap, RBR thought the tires were done, and called him in. If he was matching Hamilton's times, they would've left him out.

119

Honestly, I think it may have been more the case of RB not anticipating the Merc of Lewis being able to make the direct switch from wets to slicks that found them a situation they didn't expect to find themselves in.
Pitting Ric for fresh rubber was under the assumption that Hamilton would need to pit as well and when RIC did it made the case for Merc to do the only thing they could to get Lewis in front, to run straight onto the slicks.
It could have backfired spectacularly if Lewis had dumped it into the wall on over-heated rubber or it could pay off and leave themselves in a position to capitalise on any monumental RB stuff ups.
I appreciate the effort in the presentation of the lap times however they don't account for the variables that present themselves during a race so I have paid zero attention on this occasion.

120

Let's be honest, you haven't paid them any attention before this either. No problem, I do it for the undecideds in the gallery mostly.

Fact remains that if Ricciardo could have matched Hamilton’s times, that there would be no need to bring him in with a 10s-plus lead. Horrible strategy call.

121

Agreed, disagree, agreed. Well done KRB, you've actually come out in front for a change!

122

Yeah but to be fair an office of chimps would have done a better job than the stewards last year.

123

NickH, are you saying that Nico should have got a penalty in Spain? It seems that a lot of people think the stewards did a poor job every time they failed to give Lewis a penalty that they think he deserved. Monaco is a good example of this, the rule says a cars width must be left, and it is clear that this happened, but still people seem to think that the stewards should have penalised Lewis anyway! The rule book exists, the stewards are familiar with its contents, the fact that it doesn't match with the one armchair experts have in their heads is hardly their fault.

124

'the fact that it doesn't match with the one armchair experts have in their heads is hardly their fault.'

Veterans of the sport / ex drivers also disagreed with the stewards on many occasions. I suppose they are armchair chair critics?!

The fact is you think they did a good job last year because Lewis didn't get any penalties.

125

I recall Brundle and Villeneuve laying the entire blame for Barcelona on Rosberg. Did you agree with them there?

What should Lewis have got a penalty for? Spain, Monaco, Austria ... for all of those he did nothing wrong. Mexico was the one that sticks out, but as was shown, Lewis was not under threat from behind, and slowed after rejoining the track. There was an incident in Mexico that should've resulted in a penalty, and it was Hulkenburg cutting turn 5 after spinning out of turn 4. He was at low speed, so could and should have taken turn 5 as normal, but he decided that he would just rejoin some metres up from turn 5. That was a deliberate cutting of the track, and it wasn't even investigated! Then Hulk has the cheek to say that Hamilton should've been penalized after the race! A bit of "well Lewis did it" going on there, without seeing the clear differences.

126

NickH, lots of people disagree with the stewards every single time they make a decision, do we just say they are wrong every time because of this? Or do we recognise that they have far more information than we do at their fingertips and accept the decision they have to make? They don't get it right every time, Lewis not getting any penalties last season has nothing to do with it, I thought they did a good job in 2015 as well, including the justified penalty they gave Lewis in Hungary. No referee, umpire or steward gets it right every time, but I think in F1 we have a good system and overall they do a good job. The fact is you think they did a bad job last year because Lewis didn't get any penalties....

127

Tim:

To your comment: "The rule book exists, the stewards are familiar with its contents, the fact that it doesn't match with the one armchair experts have in their heads is hardly their fault."

Sometimes its not the "armchair experts" who disagree with stewards' decisions. For example, to quote Martin Brundle after he agreed with the decisions made after the Mexican GP: "On a related note, I would have penalised Lewis back at Monaco in May for cutting the chicane when Danny Ric was chasing him down." I think you'd agree Brundle is no arm chair critic but he could of course be wrong on this one.

128

Adrian, should we not bother with the stewards and just ask Martin what he thinks? I seem to remember being puzzled by Brundle's comments about Monaco as he made them after being shown around the steward's room in Mexico and said he was "blown away" by the amount of information they had at their disposal, surely he realises that they would have had a similar amount of info in Monaco?

129

Tim:

No I wasn't suggesting that we just check with Martin and dispense with the stewards. I was merely pointing out that even people with reputations in F1 (like him) sometimes disagree with the decisions of the stewards.

I would agree that they get it right most of the time but probably the most affected (i.e, the racers) might have a different opinion.

130

@ Adrian...have just caught up. Picture this. Middle aged office manager/accountant whatever, seated in front of 50inch TV watching the race with a beer in his hand. Sees Monaco incident and immediately forms an opinion. Now picture this. Ex Renowned F1 driver and prime TV/race commentator sits/stands in commentary box and witnesses the exact same event then later proceeds to watch replays and then forms an opinion. Who are you going to believe would have the better judgement of the two? I, like you, have a similar answer.

131

Kenneth, You forgot the third party in the group. Three professional race stewards including an ex renowned F1 driver sit in front of several TV screens including all feeds from driver cams that they can rewind and view in slow motion, plus the telemetry and GPS data from all the cars, plus a copy of the real rule book as opposed to one they wish existed. Who are you going to believe would have the better judgement of the three? Unlike you I believe there is an obvious answer.

132

Adrian, people always disagree, Martin's opinion carries more weight than the armchair experts on this site, but it is still just his opinion formed without the level of information the stewards have at their disposal. If Martin retired from commentating and took the driver steward job now and again, other people with reputations would disagree with his decisions. The stewards get it right most of the time, perfection isn't possible.

133

How am I talking about Spain??

I was actually referring to MV not being penalised for pushing cars off as result of carrying too much speed into corners whilst Rosberg and Vettel were penalised from the same thing.

134

NickH, because if you are saying that the stewards did a poor job last year, then perhaps you think they did a poor job in Spain as well. For many people the issue of the stewards competence depends on the driver involved and if they like to see that driver get penalties or not.
being a race steward is a very difficult job, the rule book is not that long on driving standards and is open to different interpretations, I think they did a good job overall last year and saying that an office full of chimps would have done better is unwarranted.

135

Do you disagree with that particular decision? I recall someone posting an image of the "infraction" in a rage on that race report page, yet their image quite clearly showed that Hamilton had perfectly left a car's width!! Easy one. Ricciardo was never going to pass on the outside going into Tabac, so did the 'raise the hand and hope for punishment' tactic. I recall Alonso doing the same while behind Hamilton at Korea '13. It's just frustration boiling over, but it's ridiculous to see.

136

Not really with that one, no. I think it's too difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt. Frankly the whole 'gaining an advantage' is a very grey area open to interpretation. Just look at Mexico and the zillions of different opinions towards those incidents. But I would say the stewards certainly have their favourites..

I was more referring to the inconsistencies of stewarding regarding MV shoving KR off the circuit twice at Spa without penalty whilst at being unable to stay on the track himself. This came after SV and NR were both penalised for exactly the same offence and Vettel's incident was even during a wet race at lower speed where more leeway is supposedly allowed!

137

Nick. Gaining an advantage means simply gaining or failing to lose a position by going off the track. This is the measure the stewards use, there were many different opinions after Mexico, although I don't remember quite so many after any of the other identical incidents over the years. The stewards got it right in Mexico, Charlie even went to the following press conference to explain why they got it right, but still the complaining continued because people really wanted Lewis to get a penalty. If you go into a corner in second place, skip that corner and emerge in first, you get a penalty. If you go into a corner side by side with another driver and he is clearly about to overtake you, but you keep that position by going off the circuit, then you get a penalty, neither of these circumstances occurred in Mexico, so no penalty given. The only thing Lewis gained was a few seconds, but as he immediately backed off after rejoining he was deemed not to have gained a lasting advantage, and so was ok in the eyes of the stewards. Many people think that the rules in this area should be toughened up, but as the rules stand the stewards on the day got it spot on.

138

'Charlie even went to the following press conference to explain why they got it right'

Tim you must have been one of the very few who was actually impressed with what Charlie had to say in that presser.

I thought at the time the overwhelming response from most observers was that he came across as someone not really knowing his [Mod]

139

Nick. I guess that it is possible that Charlie doesn't know one body part from another (I saw the un modded version of your post in my inbox), but I think that it is far more likely that after so many decades in the sport, his knowledge level is far superior to ours. What was there not to be impressed with after Mexico, he showed people the evidence, he explained the rule, not enough for some people obviously but I have yet to see any kind of response from those observers that explains exactly why they think Lewis should have got a penalty that includes any reference to the actual rule book or any evidence to support their claims. There was zero precedent for penalising Lewis, no other driver has ever been penalised for what he did, insulting Charlie doesn't change this rather inconvenient fact.

140

KRB:

Well I agree that Lewis made up ground on Dan after getting past Rosberg but interesting that you left out the bit where Danny's Pit Crew didn't have any tyres for him. And if they did do you think he would have held track position to the end? Being Monaco probably. A what if scenario I hear you say? Yeah probably but in the same breath the one that got away from Dan. Lewis should have sent a thank you card to RB for that one! My opinion of course.

141

That's the pit crew and DR fault.
Lewis should've sent a thank you to RB?
Well DR should have sent a thank you card to Mercedes for Malaysia.
Swings and roundabouts.
Mercedes and Ferrari battle for wins this season. Red Bull will only have chances on a few tracks due to lack of engine power.
Mercedes never turn their engines up in testing. That's left for qualifying and racing.

142

BK:

How was it Ricciardo's fault?

143

Adrian, of course Ricciardo would've won with a normal pit stop time on his 2nd stop. I suppose I could turn back the clock 24 hrs before and say that if unreliability with his engine hadn't struck Hamilton (again!) right before Q3, that Lewis might've been on pole, or at least ahead of Rosberg. Then if he was ahead of Rosberg, then Ricciardo wouldn't have been 13 secs up the road from him. Of course perhaps then the strategies would've played out different, etc., etc.

It is true that RBR were initially planning to put softs on for Ricciardo, and they had them ready (it's ironic as the softs proved to be the best option then, as Perez showed). It is true that when they saw Hamilton pit and take ultrasofts, that the pitwall changed the tire call to supersofts, and this is where the proverbial s--t hit the fan. The SS tires were not immediately available b/c of the Monaco pit setup, and the rest is history. It wasn't a totally unforced error, is what I'm getting at. Ricciardo's driving that weekend was stellar, and he wasn't to blame of course. Trust me, Hamilton's lost more than his fair share of such races (Monaco '15 rings a bell).

144

KRB:

We could talk until the cows come home about all the variables that could have or should of happened at Monaco that day. You've mentioned a plausable one concerning Lewis. Someone else might postulate a far less plausible one by saying that if the race was dry then Rosberg may have won. However, we know full well that the FIA has no control over the weather so this can be dismissed. It seems to me that the most obvious, telling and unique failure that occured that day was the one that occured off track in that RB had no tyres teady to fit to Dan's car and that he sat motionless for almost 14 seconds. The RB Pit Wall and garage kicked an own goal that day and Horner admitted that the calamity resulted from a lack of communication between the two.

I believe the error was totally unforced and don't accept the often repeated belief by one poster on JA's Forum that Lewis singularly caused the entire RB crew to go into a collective panic and thereby handed him victory. Lewis is good but he's not that good.

Finally, while I agree that Lewis made up ground on Dan I think you make too much of it. Why so? Because even assuming if Dan had held track position for the final stint do you think that Lewis would have been able to effect a pass on a good defensive driver in the narrow streets of Monaco? Remember Dan tried on Lewis and failed.

145

If Ricciardo was ahead after his 2nd stop, Lewis would not have got past. It's Monaco! Never give up track position at Monaco, especially when you have a 10 sec lead.

Why the error was forced was because they changed the tire call (from S to SS) BECAUSE of what Lewis took at his pitstop. They reacted instead of trusting themselves, and it cost them. Rosberg and Mercedes gave them a nice cushion, and they frittered it away.

146

KRB:

To your quote: "It's Monaco! Never give up track position at Monaco, especially when you have a 10 sec lead.” Isn’t that the point I made? Hamilton needed team orders to get past a sight-seeing Rosberg (do you think Rosberg would have yielded otherwise?).

Before you were saying that it “wasn’t a totally unforced error” now you’re saying that “the error was forced”. Splitting hairs on my part perhaps but Pit Walls and garages are constantly reacting to what other teams are doing with their drivers. The important thing is that they have proper communication and procedures in place to react competently. It seems to me that RB had a ‘communication’ and ‘organisational’ problem that day and perhaps Horner can explain it better than I can:

”So the call was made to go to the super-soft tyre and based on how we are set up here in Monaco – the pit wall is upstairs and obviously the garage is downstairs – the tyres are on heat both in the garage and behind the garage, and unfortunately the set of tyres that were called for weren't readily to hand and were at the back of the garage. I'm not making excuses because there are none, obviously the tightness of the garages here it's very tight to have extreme wets, intermediates and three different types of slicks for both cars in the garage at one time. But as I say, it's a communication error that has happened at short notice, with 30 seconds notice, that on a normal working day would have been no issue at all.”

Post-race Horner said that the team would be developing new procedures to avoid a repeat of what happened.

Of course you can spin it to show that Hamilton and the Merc hierarchy inadvertently instigated the error but really?

147

I believe James said the same thing as me in the race report. The tire change was in reaction to a competitors actions ... textbook def'n for something not being an unforced error. Was he spinning too?

How you can say it was totally unforced is beyond me.

148

KRB:

Yes, I agree that RB were reacting to what Merc were doing but the errors that followed were self-inflicted. I think you're giving Merc too much credit. That's all I'm saying. A seemingly well versed man in F1 like yourself shouldn't have to appeal to James Allen to prove your case.

149

Remember that Hamilton required team orders to get past his team-mate who was driving Miss Daisy so thinking he was going to pass RIC is.....

150

Sars, Required team orders? A lazy dig by your usual high standards, Lewi swould have got passed Nico eventually, just like so many others did that day, but it would have taken time and been risky, so the obvious decision was taken. Proved to be the right one didn't it?

151

A lazy dig? More a STATEMENT OF FACT ! Feel free to tell me how I could have phrased that so as not to upset you?

Team orders are great when its not your hero who is on the receiving end of them aren't they TIm!

152

Sars. Just the word "required" that I found to be mis placed, No reason to believe that Lewis wouldn't have got by Nico without the team order, just as Perez, Vettel, Alonso and Hulkenberg all did later in the race. Team orders are routine in F1, the only difference between that particular incident and the dozens of others that happened last year is Lewis was involved, and so obviously the reaction has to be out of all proportion as usual.

153

Tim:

Firstly I'll preface my comments by saying that both Dan and Lewis would have been worthy winners that day. And any comments I have made are not meant to detract from Lewis' victory. As I remember after Malaysia you didn't use any language to detract from Dan's victory.

In my post to KRB I stated that Lewis "needed" team orders to get by Rosberg but only in the context to argue how difficult overtaking is in Monaco and by extension that Lewis probably would not have got by Dan. My contextual argument was proven by the fact that Dan couldn't get past Lewis.

We both agree that Rosberg had an absolute shocker in Monaco unembecoming of the WDC that he later became. You made the point that a number of lessor drivers got past him and possibly Lewis may have as well. Fair point but when those other drivers had got by I think by that time Rosberg had junked it and didn't care. Any chance of a podium was gone so why bother.

Conversely do you think Rosberg would have let Lewis through without team orders? Purely a hypothetical on my part I know but I think he would not have purely to aggravate Lewis especially given the tension between the two. Remember Monaco 2015 when Rosberg mysteriously went into the run off road and brought Q3 to an end when he was on provisional pole which Lewis could have bettered. Remember also his "full lock" explanation when penalised for pushing Verstappen off track. It seems to me that Rosberg isn't an entirely honest fellow.

154

Adrian, I agree on all points, I feel that my views on that race have been mis represented somewhat. Lewis was always going to struggle to overtake a none compliant Nico on track, but the fact is the switch occured on lap 15 and Nico pitted on lap twenty. It is possible Lewis might have got by him in those five laps as Nico was clearly struggling under braking, but the more likely outcome would have been Lewis limited to Nico's pace until he was released by Rosberg pulling into the pit lane. Would the time lost have been enough to affect the outcome of the race? We can't know, it isn't as simple as adding the time lost on at the end of the race, as those slower laps would have meant he drove in a different way later in the race. This is one of many "what ifs" that always occur after a race, what if Red Bull hadn't messed up Dan's stop? What if Lewis' car had fired up in Q3? What if Nico had been able to get some heat in the tyres? Etc etc etc

155

It is different though Tim as those drivers you mentioned didn't have the luxury of a Rosberg deliberately letting them by.
Its different again due to the fact the team orders had a profound effect on the outcome of the race.
I find its your inability to accept the reasoning that's out of proportion, if anything.

156

Sars, it appears you miss understand. By using the word "required" it seemed to me that you were implying that Lewis could not have passed Nico without the team order. The fact that so many drivers in less competitive cars managed to get by Nico without any cooperation from him, leads me to believe that Lewis would have managed it as well. Do you disagree with this? Do you think that if the team order hadn't come then Lewis would have trailed home in p8 still stuck behind Rosberg? Mercedes did the sensible thing and switched their cars around when it became obvious that one was much much faster than the other, every other team would have done exactly the same in the same situation, so trying to belittle Lewis' achievement in winning the race by insinuating it wouldn't have happened without the team order is a bit pointless, as that team order would always have come, no matter what the team or driver involved. If Max had been holding Ricci up in the same way, then Horner would have given the same order and Danny would have gladly accepted the invitation. My reaction that it was the sensible thing to do would have been the same, would yours?

157

Hamilton failed to pass his team-mate and it was only when they were implemented that he passed him, correct?
Had he spent a few more laps behind him, as with the several he had already until that point, Lewis wouldn't have won that GP as he wouldn't have come out in front of RIC, even after the botched RB pitstop. He barely managed it as it were so therefore the team-orders that came into play when they did, and alongside the RB error, contributed directly to the Merc win.
Tell yourself it was down to Hamilon alone until the cows come home but its clear that wasn't the case at all.
Your merely making a fool of yourself to suggest otherwise!

158

Sarsippious. usual insults when on the back foot, when did I ever suggest that Lewis won the race on his own? This has never been my position, as ever a sequence of events culminated in Lewis standing on the top step, he was involved in making some of those events happen, but not all of them. We are left with some questions that I will try and answer to make things clearer for you, if you have alternative answers then I would as ever be happy to look at them. Did Lewis require a team order to get by Nico? He has overtaken him plenty of times before, and others managed it that day, so probably not. Could Lewis have got by without the team order in enough time to still be in with a shot of winning the race? Maybe, maybe not, I don't know and neither do you. Was the team order the right thing to do? yes clearly, Lewis vindicated the decision by immediately lapping over two seconds quicker than Nico. Would every other team have done the same thing? Yes of course they would. Does Lewis deserve any credit for winning the race? Yes of course he does, either man would have deserved the victory, both drove brilliant races.

160

Which is why I said that he wouldn't get past RIC. Please re-read what I posted. It's Monaco! It's going to be even worse this year with the wider cars.

161

For those of you who haven't read the link that quote is from Toto Wollf.
I mean, what else would he say now?
I think anyone who watched that race, indeed the whole weekend, is aware that Ric put in one of the best pole laps we've ever seen around Monaco in an age.
Those same people would also be aware that Ric forced Hamilton to gamble on skipping the inters as not to do so would've given him ZERO chance of snatching a win. Track position is key and that's the sole reason that decision was made. Add DR's pitstop calamity and the 'Hail Mary' that was staying out on the wets pays off with an unlikely victory.
To suggest otherwise is letting common sense wave at you as it passes you by.

162

@ Sars....very well said. I couldn't agree more.

163

Should be obvious that that was a quote from Wolff, from the URL I posted right after it. What's he going to say? Maybe he would just say nothing, rather than indirectly show up his teammate.

RIC forced Hamilton to gamble on skipping the inters? I would think it was Rosberg holding him up and letting Ricciardo scamper away easily, that caused any shift in thinking. Thing is, most drivers in Lewis' position wouldn't have even tried for the win! Certainly Rosberg was all too content to just middle along, and just keep it out of the barriers. Most drivers 13 secs back would've consolidated 2nd place, and been happy with that. That's why Hamilton is different than most.

164

'Thing is, most drivers in Lewis' position wouldn't have even tried for the win!'

I'm pretty sure most of the top tier drivers would just drive as fast as their package allows them to and whatever result falls in their laps is a by product.

165

Hamilton and Rosberg were in the same car, yet one was going 3s/lap faster than the other! Monaco 2016 was not a let-the-car-do-the-work kinda race. That should be obvious.

166

When I say package I mean car/driver potential.

More to the point is I disagree that only Lewis would have 'tried for win' in that particular situation.

167

Seriously I'm not sure who else would. Factor in his position in the championship at the time, and I honestly think most would bag 2nd and be happy with that. I can imagine a quote like "the win was not possible today, because we spotted them a 13 secs lead and we can't do that when Dan is driving lIke he did this weekend", putting some blame on Rosberg for holding them up. Most any driver without the success of Hamilton would likely find some support for that explanation.

Of course we can't peek into a parallel universe and see how other drivers would've handled it. We just have Rosberg (no lump, but obviously no wet-weather specialist) to go by, and he had a nightmare race.

168

He forced him into it by being in front of him KRB.
You can blame Rosberg for holding him up or Lewis himself for being unable to pass a guy 2 seconds a lap slower than him or even Joan from payroll but it hardly matter's.
And are you really saying that no other driver on that grid wouldn't have tried something similar if they were in the same situation? Rubbish, they may not have had the talent of Hamilton to pull it off but they certainly would've tried something similar along those veins especially considering they weren't in the most dominant car in the history of Formula One!

169

@ Sars...How very true. Ricciardo was on fire during that race. How far ahead was hamilton when ricciardo actually rejoined? How long did it take for ricciardo to close on hamilton's exhaust pipe coming into the chicane? For the life of me, i still don't understand the logic of the decision not to penalise hamilton for under cutting the chicane? Monaco, despite all the drawbacks, is still the jewel in the crown and i fervently hope that ricci will get another opportunity to win that race.

170

Kenneth, they were both on fire in that race. It was a great drive from both men, it went Lewis' way in the end, but that's sport. It saddens me that some people seem unable to put theiir prejudices aside and simply enjoy a great battle between two top drivers.

171

Tim

That Lewis and Dan were clearly the best drivers in Monaco last year is obvious. Plainly obvious especially given the wet conditions.

From the perspective of Danny Ricc fans it was a pity that through no fault of his own was denied a probable victory just as from the perspective of Hamilton fans through no fault of his was denied a probable victory in Malaysia last year.

172

Adrian, You are correct, it is obvious, my complaint is with the people who for whatever reason seek to belittle the achievement of either man in delivering such a top drawer performance. It was a pity that Dan didn't make it to the top step, and I fully understand the disappointment of his fans, but I don't see why that should spill over into taking a swipe at Lewis.

173

Give it as rest would you. Pointing out he won due to the misfortune that befell others is not taking a swipe at Lewis at all. Stop being so sensitive!

174

Sars, I'm not being over sensitive at all, I just don't think that the misfortune of others was the only reason Lewis won. I have never tried to deny that Dan was unlucky not to win, as I keep saying either man would have been a worthy winner. I fail to see how your comment is relevant to mine to be honest Sarsippious, and as much of a python fan as I am, I don't see the point of your gif either!

175

So even without the team-orders, the botched RB pit-stop, you still think Lewis would've won the Monaco GP? If you honestly believe that it merely shoes your own bias towards him and not the anti-bias against him you vehemently try to project around here.
Keep going though even if its pointless (ala the gif).
Good day, enjoy the season as our conversations are a complete waste of time.
Suggesting this is the case isn't taking a swipe a Lewis at all, no matter how much you want to believe it.

176

Sarsippious, sometimes I wonder if you bother reading my posts, or just reply to what you think I might have said. I will try one more time to explain my position, Lewis won the race because of a sequence of events, some he was involved in bringing about, and some he was not. This is what I have said all along, so to answer your questions again, he would not have won without the RB strategy blunder, and I have never said that he would. He might have got passed Nico in time to catch Dan without the team order, but then again he might not have. We do not know the answer to this question, but we do know that the switch happened on lap 15, and Nico pitted on lap 20, so five laps difference even if he couldn't get by.
It does seem that our conversations are a waste of time, especially as it appears you can't even be bothered to read what I have written before having another dig.

177

Why are you directing this at Kenneth? There was one person who made this sub-thread about Lewis so maybe your barking up the wrong tree.

178

@ Sars....not unexpected.

179

Kenneth. It shouldn't be unexpected, my view of the race was both drivers performed brilliantly and either would have been a worthy winner, your view is "There was only one person who deserved to win that day in monaco and it was RICCIARDO", obviously one of us has a reasonable and balanced view of the sport, and the other doesn't.

180

Lol, the issue originally was not that neither driver wasn't impressive at Monaco it was that Lewis doesn't with the errors of that RB pitstop.
Its you who has taken this sub-thread and made it into something it wasn't and then tried to portray others as being unbalanced and bias in their opinions whilst you plant yourself on the so called moral high ground.
Smh!

181

Sars. Kenneth thinks that one of the drivers wasn't impressive, and his comments reflect this view, I have never tried to claim that Lewis would have won without the strategy error on Dan's car, but I do think Lewis deserves some credit for getting himself close enough to benefit. Is that clear enough for you? I don't know what smh means, and if believing that both drivers deserves the win puts someone on the moral high ground, then I deserve to be up here, other people who have said that only one driver deserved to win that day do not.

182

Sars, I was making the point that for some people their blind dislike of a particular driver affects their ability to enjoy the races. As soon as someone brings up Monaco lat year, then clearly Lewis is involved in the conversation, and a quick look through the comments shows am effort from some to belittle his achievements that day, I think this is a shame as it was a cracking race. I enjoyed every lap of last years Monaco GP, when it looked like a slam dunk win for Danny, I still enjoyed it, and if he had ended up winning I would have come on this site and congratulated him on his brilliant drive and well taken victory. The reason I directed my original comment at Kenneth is he has never done that with Lewis, not once.

183

Here's the logic kenneth ... it was at a restart, with colder tires. He was the leading car, not passing. It didn't stop an overtake from happening ... if anything, it allowed Ricciardo the run on him that he got. If Hamilton had taken the chicane, then Ricciardo would've had to follow him through.

In those situations, the driver that went off will get a warning, that if they repeatedly do it, that they will have to give up the position. That's been the way for as long as I can remember, and especially at that chicane in Monaco.

Of course if you're honest with yourself, you know this too. If the roles are ever reversed in the future, of course you will be this convention's biggest proponent then. You'd be right at that time, but also a hypocrite.

184

@ KRB back to old fallback! Sorry no cigar. A very weak argument so go for the poster. hahaha Hamilton panicked under pressure and he should've been penalisedl. He wasn't. Normally i would support the stewards based on the fact that they have infinitely more data to rely upon, but in this case they,IMO, they right royally failed to react and change the lead of the race. Extremely disappointing. Hamilton did not deserve the win. He cheated by cutting the corner whilst ricciardo took the long way around. You will never convince me otherwise. Hamilton's car travelled a shorter distance!!!!!

185

Where did I attack you? I said if you change your thinking on this rule in the future when it suits you, that you'd be a hypocrite. Anything false in that statement?

I've told you what the rule is. It's clear.

Hamilton FULLY deserved his win, a great one in his CV.

I will save a link to your comment here, for when you inevitably change your tune when it suits. 🍳

186

@ KRB...Just how wrong can you possibly be. There was only one person who deserved to win that day in monaco and it was RICCIARDO. Oh and i might add your fascination with my posts prove come across as showing an unhealthy interest. Obviously you are fixated and your bias towards hamilton knows no bounds. It's time you reset and got over last season and the 'little ballerina's' fail to back rosberg [his team mate] into the clutches of ferrari, the mercedes team's arch enemies. He's certainly got it in the bag for 2017 now that he has subordinated wolffie. Enjoy the race...haha

187

Dan drove superbly all weekend, but Hamilton drove brilliantly well also. That you're not magnanimous enough to admit that, is solely your problem, and your peculiar issue.

Enjoy the season. 😀

188

Where did Rosberg drive that most dominant car to, that day? 7th!!! From P2!!! The Merc was not all dominant on that day, such that the drivers just had to drive it to a win. Driver skill was on display that day. We had Kimi in the Ferrari (2nd best overall car at that time) putting it into the wall. Magnussen and Verstappen too. So yeah, I'm saying that not many drivers would've gone "balls to the wall" as Hamilton did, in order to close on Ricciardo, and get events to move in their favour.

189

Cmon KRB I was just starting to like you and now you prove just how biased you are.There was a reason the Red Bull was the faster car in Monaco and that was the driver.

190

Really? Perhaps you should look at the Lap History, and see what times Verstappen was doing with the Red Bull when he wasn't in traffic. The RB12 was the best wet-weather car last year.

191

You are slipping KRB.Monaco was wet at the start but was drying throughout the race to eventually be dry at the end.The perfect tricky conditions that bring a drivers ability to the forefront.

192

Huh? So to wet-weather you can add 'best car in changeable conditions'. Verstappen and Ricciardo were both setting similar times; Hamilton was dropping Rosberg by close to 3 secs a lap!!

193

LOL, thanks for that scott.

194

@ Scott...yes, he certainly showed hamilton up at monaco but that is history and we are dealing with the now. You may well be right, however i believe that both drivers are at a level which leaves very little between them ATM. Depending who is dominating and the likely outcomes will determine which driver gets the special treatment. Both driver's are Marko's appointments and he will not be able to show too much discernible favouritism because of that. Webber was not a marko appointee and that biased marko's judgement, that and webber's personal friendship and support by dieter mateschitz. Ricciardo is still contracted to red bull for 2018, i believe however that contracts can always be broken and your suggestion of a drive with ferrari may ultimately make sense. Vettel did say, quite a while back that he didn't mind if Ricciardo joined him.

195

I mean Back Packers

196

BK:

It's actually Back Markers not Back Packers.

197

Jeez you've already started Kenneth 😁 ramping up your Aussie driver.
Seems like the Aussie crews are all over this post. Bit of Back Palmers bravado in Camden and Earls Court on Jaf1 😄

198

BK:

Oh, you mean Aussie back packers. Sorry mate my bad but you're still off the mark. It use to be called 'Kangaroo Valley' but that was in the 60s and 70s. Now the Aussies are all over London town.

199

Well its an article on an Aussie driver so where were you expecting us to be BK? And yet your here writing about Lewis, go figure....

200

@ Sars...hahaah, good one BKF, trolling as normal?

201

Hey not trolling Kenneth.
Not my thing.
You make some good points at times Kenneth. Always plus 1 when you are right 👍
In fact I'd go as far as to say over the winter you've made some valid points.

202

@ BKF....Gee, Wow, WTH, i don't quite know what to say...I'm overwhelmed that you've been so generous, lavish even, with your condescensions re my 'winter posts'. 'm not too sure what to do or say...Should i prostrate myself or maybe even genuflect at the feet of the 'great F1 source'? I'm sure you'll forgive me the fluster as you completely took the wind outa my sails...... hahaha enjoy melbourne BKF..we all need some relief.

203

Find it hard to believe that marko does not act without the approval of the owner.It will not matter unless red Bull are up there fighting for a championship between the 2 drivers then we will find out the true machinations behind the team.Think seb has to step up this year and dominate kimi or it might be him being replaced.Just watching old footage of the 2001 gp crash between schumacher and villenueve,wow those cars were the real deal.Got there thru the Tom Pryce crash at Kyalami,wow did you ever see that?

204

Yes, a long time ago.

205

Such a great positive mental attitude. The presence of this Red Bill driver line up on the grid offers as much excitement as any regulation change!

206

She was only 5mph over the 30mph speed limit....not exactly a major speeding crime. In the 70's I was caught doing 50 in a 30mph zone. Cop just gave me a warning. A different time with much less traffic, and I was driving an AM DB6 Mark II which might have helped.....but his attitude could have gone either way. My lucky day.

207

She already collected 9 points on the license!
Game over after that..

208

Yeah but I read somewhere that she's already had 9 points....

This particular offence wasn't that serious but I guess it's all added up?

i got done a few years ago, only 3 points but have been pretty careful since because if it goes to 6 then insurance starts to go up. Then again I guess Susie doesn't need to worry about insurance costs!

209

Anyone else and its not news. In 2004 I was clocked 172km over the limit and didn't even get a mention in my local paper. The injustice of it all!

210

@ Sars....Que?

211

Daytona Triumph on a lovely stretch of the Pacific Highway between Coffs and Grafton (sign posted 100km zone). Six year suspension and $4000 for my trouble.
Thanks Formula one!

212

I am surprised you let anyone know this. We all have done stupid stuff in our youth, but to go apparently 272kph in a 100kph zone, on public roads, is just incredibly stupid and reckless, at whatever age.

I will assume that Australian states have since introduced "stunt driving" laws, like many other jurisdictions. Here in Ontario, if you're caught going 50kph over the limit, it is considered stunt driving and will be a severe fine and instant compounding of your vehicle, etc.

If you have a need for speed, there are local tracks in which to get your kicks. It will cost ya, but far less than you ended up paying.

213

You shouldn't be KRB. Posting such information under an alias on an internet forum such as this is something I don't worry too much about.
You'd be aware by now I speak my mind without filtering much and that's the way I naturally am outside of this site. What you see is what you get and if people want to judge me on here because of it all the power to them.
This site is a place that can enlighten me, frustrate me and bring me pure joy all in one go. Its also a place I know I can find like minded individuals from an eclectic and diverse backgrounds that share this addiction to this sport and thus by default, speed also.
As long as I don't get half tanked and sideways one night and post my personal deets I should be fine from having the Hamilton fan club rock up on my porch with pitch forks.

Riding bikes both on and off the track at speed is something I did for many years in pursuit of the next adrenalin hit from a very young age. It was always a case of risk v reward and for the most part I was able to justify it.
You start off with your screaming Suzuki 2 stroke Rms and progress to doing 300 plus on public roads with slightly more powerful Honda's and Daytona's. Its been costly although its a drop in the ocean in the overall amount I've spent chasing the next thrill and when you get that speed bug at a young age its very hard to find the cure (although fatherhood has done a decent job of that I must say).
I certainly count my lucky stars that I'm still around and its inevitable that you learn from your experiences, eventually.

Maybe that's why the current state of F1 irks me so much as it appears so sanitised. There isn't the risk v reward involved these days compared to the past. What ramifications are there for these drivers exceeding their own limits and that of their car? Next to nothing and that's a major turn off for me.
I'm certainly not advocating that these cars and circuits go back to the death traps that many used to be however wouldn't the sport, the drivers and us the fans be better off as a whole if there were actual repercussions for a ill thought out action?

As for the laws here I think if you get caught doing 30k plus you immediately get your licence rescinded and if your caught doing burnouts or 'hooning' as we refer to it you can have your vehicle impounded for one month or so.

If you were surprised before KRB I can only imagine what your thinking now....

214

Australian food in Spain aka meat pie - most likely from the influence or hands of an English expat living on the Costa B. I think the Brits were eating pies before Ozzie was "invented".

Otherwise a crappy interview, move along nothing to see here.

215

Max being young ? ... yes hes young but he outperforms Daniel in race format more times than not.

Daniel is the one who is feeling the pressure and this season he will have to publicly admit hes number two to Max. I think he has already admitted this to himself.

216

Since Max stopped using Daniels set-up he is getting bettera and better.

Top Tags
SEARCH Red Bull Racing
JA ON F1 In association with...
Multi award winning Formula One photographer
Multi award winning Formula One photographer

Sign up to receive the latest F1 News & Updates direct to your inbox

You have Successfully Subscribed!