Sebastian Vettel, Ferrari, Circuit de Catalunya, 2016

Red Bull ‘can challenge Ferrari every weekend’

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Christian Horner says Red Bull are now in a position to be a consistent threat to Ferrari.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Comment of the day

Here’s a question which will keep us talking for a while – how would Sunday’s race have unfolded if the leaders had stuck to the same strategy?

I wish Red Bull and Ferrari had kept all four drivers on the same strategy. Would have loved to see Verstappen have a go at Ricciardo as in my opinion he had the better pace all through the race being much easier on the tyres.
HRT (@Vvans)

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Ponzonha and Tenerifeman!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

The 1981 Belgian Grand Prix was marred by the death of a marshal and another shocking incident involving a mechanic:

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

Posted on Categories F1 Fanatic round-upTags

Promoted content from around the web | Become a RaceFans Supporter to hide this ad and others

  • 80 comments on “Red Bull ‘can challenge Ferrari every weekend’”

    1. Can’t remember the last time Jackie Stewart said something I agreed with.

      1. Jack (@jackisthestig)
        17th May 2016, 2:06

        In the words of Senna “I find it amazing you say such a thing Stewart! If you no longer go for a gap, you are no longer a racing driver.”

        1. also in the voice of senna to Jackie: (crying) i was lying, the gap wasn’t there and i never intended to overtake…

        2. @jackisthestig, as pointed out by matiascasali, what people forget about when reciting that quote by Senna is the context in which he said it, which was whilst he was pretending that he had tried to overtake Prost in the 1990 Japanese GP (to avoid being disqualified from the WDC) instead of planning to ram him out of the race.

        3. Yeah right! And Ayrton would do the very same thing Nico did. He would shut the door risking collision. However, that’s a good investment for the future because your opponent is psychologically buried. It’s hard to see Ayrton’s fan being taught by his ways. Life is hard sometimes.

        4. There’s going for a gap as a racing driver, and then there’s going for a gap that most assuredly was never going to remain a gap. And as Senna also said in the interview with Jackie Stewart, you don’t get it right 100% of the time.

          Looking at the 1990 incident I can totally see why AS thought he had a gap and indeed went for it. His car was half-way alongside AP’s when AP decided to turn into him to close the gap. Different from what happened last weekend where Nico made his direction across the track obvious and firm, so LH went for a gap that was hopelessly always looking like it was going to close.

        5. Going for the gap was the right things to do but going for the grass no.

          I think Hamilton should have lifted and slowed down as soon as he saw where Rosberg was turning to, yes maybe there was not enough time to react, who knows?

          But I still blame Rosberg though :) unnecessarily aggressive defending.

          1. Michael Brown (@)
            17th May 2016, 16:34

            I think Hamilton thought he could get alongside sooner and scare Rosberg into opening the gap. But Rosberg wasn’t having that.

            1. Yeah a bit of a gamble from both the sides but in the end both paid the price.

      2. The man is an attention seeker who keeps mouthing off and in many cases against a fellow English man. To him, anyone for the podium so long as it’s not Hamilton. Whatever his motives are, he is yet to say.
        The obvious fact with the incident on Sunday is that with Nico there has been precedence and it is not once. His penchant for running people off track in a very dangerous manner led to more stringent rules and greater clarification of existing rules.
        Having repeated the same dangerous maneuver yet again last weekend, one would have thought those in authority would clamp down hard on him because apparently he has not learnt from his errors. But being that both men on this occasion were driving for the sane team, and had both lost their ability to continue to race as a result of the crash, the stewards differed punishment, if any, to the team which pays the two men.
        Now, the obvious question is, hypothetical though it may seem, what would the decision of the stewards have been had Lewis been driving a Ferrari when Nico veered to the far edge of the track, completely outside the racing line, to block off a car rocketing to overtake at a speed which is over 180bhp faster than him all the while being aware that he was at a disadvantage due to the massive speed differential?
        Ferrari would not tolerate this pat on the back decision by the stewards.

        1. Say what you will but don’t dare suggest Jackie Stewart is an Englishman.

          1. Besides that, three time world champion and statistically one of the best of all times, if not the best, doesn’t need to draw attention more than that. Better to put it this way: When Sir Jackie Stewart speaks we all listen.

            1. When Jackie Stewart speaks it may be the case the everyone hears it, but I suspect a large percentage of that everyone wishes they hadn’t.

        2. The man is an attention seeker who keeps mouthing off and in many cases against a fellow English man.

          Jackie Stewart isn’t an Englishman.

          1. “veered to the far edge of the track, completely outside the racing line, to block off a car rocketing to overtake”

            any car is allowed to defend track position, on or off the racing line. Do you also think Manor cars shouldn’t be allowed to defend against Mercedes ever?

            1. Of curse every one has the right to defend track position but if everyone defends like Nico Rosberg did last Sunday, we would continue to have dangerous accidents arising from such maneuvers. Do you agree that Nico Rosberg has precedence for such actions which led to rule clarifications in the past?
              So if you insist that what Nico did is right, then Mark Webber should have ran Vettel off the track in Malaysia 2013. Had Mark Webber not done what is expected of every racing driver to finally give room based on the speed of the person overtaking and the fact that overtaking action has already been initiated both men may have not finished that race.

        3. Say what you will but Lewis would have done exactly the same thing if he was in the lead. He’s shoved Nico off the track several times – it’s just that most tracks don’t have grass running down the side so it’s a non-event.

          Both were driving hard, made a decision to go right and it was at this point that both were given a window of opportunity no longer than 0.3 seconds to either back out or change course – neither did and they crashed.

          1. “He’s shoved Nico off the track several times”

            No, Lewis has never pushed Rosberg off a straight. You people need to stop confusing race craft in corners, and dangerous driving.

            There’s a specific racing rule that defines them both. Familiarise yourself with them.

            1. @n – Hamilton has done it to Fernando on a straight (Bahrain 2012 from memory ‘you have to always leave da room!’ screamed Alonso), how is it any different?

            2. “@n – Hamilton has done it to Fernando on a straight (Bahrain 2012 from memory ‘you have to always leave da room!’ screamed Alonso), how is it any different?”

              No, funnily enough you’re mistaking Hamilton for Rosberg, it was Rosberg in Bahrain 2012 pushing both Hamilton and Alonso off when Alonso made that now infamous quote.

          2. Exactly, what would Lewis do in Nico position… He would close that door shut.

            What would Nico do in Lewis position? Probably lift and settle for second.

            This is why Lewis is a multiple world champion. Nico atleast is learning something from his teamate.

            Lewis will find this championship ver hard to win.

      3. Alex McFarlane
        17th May 2016, 12:18

        How can he blame Lewis for Nico being in the wrong engine mode?

        There was no maliciousness on the part of either driver as far as I am concerned, but a root cause analysis puts the mistake on Nico. There would have been no move to make on Hamilton’s part had Nico been in the right mode, and I suspect with the form Nico has been in would have pulled a gap at the point they collided.

        Although the collision prevented either driver from scoring, Nico still gets the benefit as it’s one less race for Lewis to close the gap. He’s obviously not going to want to get involved in any incident that’s going to reduce the chances of getting maximum points, especially as he’s had no luck this year.

    2. OmarRoncal - Go Seb!!! (@)
      17th May 2016, 2:00

      @chaddy it seems to me Jackie can’t stand Lewis is also a 3WDC, every time JS speaks, he tries to bring Ham down. It has become ridiculous.

      1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
        17th May 2016, 2:17

        I also get the impression that Jackie does not like Hamilton. He’s always been very critical of him, almost needlessly so.

        Not to mention that in this particular case he is wrong. He can think whatever he likes but the incident has been analyzed heavily, the stewards have gone over it and Mercedes themselves have stated that neither driver was solely to blame for the incident, so not sure why Jackie seems to think otherwise other than his general dislike for Hamilton. (Not that he has to like Hamilton, heck he might be a Vettel supporter for all I know).

      2. The man like a host of others would prefer their English champion rather be someone else. So his constant disapproval is not surprising. As with most of his assertions against Lewis, he is even more wrong on this occasion.
        Time and time again we have seen drivers make such daring overtakes as Hamilton was attempting last Sunday. Once the extra overtake momentum is on and drivers are committed due to their higher speed differential, they don’t back out trusting that the person being passed understands that there is no more defending needed at this point.
        To illustrate, Sebastian Vettel’s multi 21 overtake on Mark Webber, as painful as it was for Mark, he still left room for Vettel after having moved to the edge of the track to ward off a faster Vettel on DRS/rocket mode (similar to Lewis’ speed compared to Nico’s sitting duck mode ). Webber at the last second left space for Seb to pass without which both of them would have crashed or worse still hurt themselves. Drivers do these all the time when they see a much faster car already punting to overtake. Heck Lewis let thru a Nico Rosberg who was on much juice a corner prior to that. He could have stubbornly planted his car in his way to block him.
        But in Nico’s case, being aware of his predicament and surroundings as he has claimed, he stuck to his ground and endangered the lives of not just his team mate’s but others around them.

        1. Jackie Stewart isn’t English .

          1. I think JS is being totally consistent. His argument with Senna was that there is going for a gap, sure, but there is also times when there isn’t really a gap, or at least not a viable one for long enough to earn the spot.

            Consistently, JS thinks LH went for a gap that was not a viable one. And Nico’s legal swerve across the track to defend should have been LH’s first clue at very low odds that there was always going to be a viable gap to the right of NR who was moving rapidly to the right.

            1. The only thing consistent about Stewart is his dislike of Lewis Hamilton.

              He never has anything good to say about him, and is always putting him down.

              It’s become pretty obvious for all to see, though not everyone will admit it.

        2. Perfectly put.

          The Vettel/Webber scenario is a good one to use. Rosberg has a dangerous mentality and last weekend could have ended very differently.

          1. Dangerous mentality that he needs to win against Lewis.

            He will never be a champion otherwise

    3. Re COTD I think the better question would have been “how would the race have turned out had there been no need to change tyres” ?

      1. Only Seb could beat Daniel.

      2. pastaman (@)
        17th May 2016, 11:40

        A snooze-fest?

      3. COTD was interesting as on the 1st stint and 2nd Vettel was catching Ricciardo by large amounts before pitting suggesting Ferrari was faster and better on tyres. Ricciardo also lost tyre performance with 6 lap younger tyres in the final stint. However if all strategies were mirrored the lower placed teammate would not be allowed to undercut or defend from the lead driver in the other team so result would have been Ricciardo, Vettel, Verstappen, Raikkonen in my opinion.

    4. As much as I’d like to, I’m not sure I can agree with Kvyat on this one. Verstappen is remarkable, sure, but his win caught me by surprise. If Kvyat was in that car, I wouldn’t have believed it because his race pace compared to Ricciardo has normally been slower on average but Verstappen, at some points in the race, was actually quicker than Ricciardo.

      If Kvyat was in that Red Bull, I would’ve been expecting him to qualify lower than 4th (maybe just behind the Ferrari boys, so 6th at least) and be fighting against Bottas at least in the race.

      What I would like to know is what Carlos Sainz could’ve done in that car. That could’ve been quite interesting I reckon

      1. – What I would like to know is what Carlos Sainz could’ve done in that car. That could’ve been quite interesting I reckon

        Yep. That is exactly what I would like to know. Carlos has shown he has a massive single lap pace. His race pace is also good which is why I would like to see him in the senior team as soon as possible. I think fans should be happy there a crop of talents currently coming up the ladder.

        1. That’s an interesting thought. Sainz qualified way above the punching weight of the Toro Rosso, and was as high as P3, just one place below Max. Honestly, I would think that if Sainz was in a Red Bull and on Verstappen’s strategy, he could have taken the win as well

          1. I think he has the potential to have taken the victory had he been in the same position as Max. But I am certain he would have qualified better than Max. No doubt about that.

          2. Sainz and Ric would’ve won with Ver strategy. Not Kvyat though. Kvyat should think about consistently beating Sainz first instead of making this kind of statement.

            1. Kvyat would crash into Vettel before he could get past round 1 but his qualifier would be much worse then Daniel or Max maybe p7-p9 Sainz is a good qualifier but in race pace a little slower i think Raikonnen would pass him much earlier. He would be P4 at the begin and would end there too.

            2. From what I saw, it wasn’t speed that made Ver won, it was his consistency in driving and not making any mistakes. Probably everyone that in Ver position should be able to defend from Kimi because Kimi wasn’t anywhere near enough to pass Ver and that is mostly because Kimi can’t follow Ver through the last corner, either because the Ferrari lack the low speed DF or the car simply lose too much DF when it get near the RBR car. So basically it is a question of which driver can drive consistently while under pressure. Ric probably would do very well, Sainz probably can do good enough job. Kvyat, I’m not really sure.

            3. Kyvatt should know potential is a weak comparison to actual achievement. Verstappen actually won in 1st race with Red Bull Kyvatt never won in a Red Bull.

    5. I’m looking forward to Red Bull’s resurgence in 2016 and 2017. Not because I’m a big fan of the team, but only because they are the only team with the competency to beat Mercedes. Ferrari don’t know how to make a championship winning car anymore, and an upgraded Renault PU in a Red Bull will make a far more formidable competitor than a Ferrari.

      1. I think I have to agree with that @todfod. One can really see Alonso’s point of view about Ferrari always seeing their chances being “soon, next race, in a few races, next year”

      2. It’s not only a matter of Redbull being more technically savvy than Ferrari, they also have better strategies during races. Ferrari have twice lost chances of victory 5 races in.
        When they called in Vettel for his ultimate pit stop, I remember mentioning on the race forum that Ferrari had just lost the victory. Who sacrifices positions at Barcelona of all places? Most importantly, Seb’s pace when he was called in was good enough for him to continue to the end of the race as we saw with Ves and Kimi.
        So yes Redbull have the potential to challenge Mercedes mostly on the one lap pace but overall race pace is still where Mercedes demolishes her rivals and that is where they need to focus.
        But I do believe Redbull is the place to be come 2017/18 once the new rules kick in.
        So one should expect Ves to challenge for Driver’s champ.

      Heres a video of the Palmer Magnussen incident for anyone who hasn’t seen it

      1. Neil (@neilosjames)
        17th May 2016, 7:58

        Good find, thanks!

        Doesn’t really look like much but I imagine the stewards had better views, and it looked far worse from what they saw.

      2. @stefguy Alonso no longer winning surely didn’t do the grandstands any good, look at how empty they are…

        1. Yeah, noticed this during the race, its sad

        2. The Blade Runner (@)
          17th May 2016, 10:30

          The video screens at the circuit said that there were over 87,000 fans in attendance on Sunday. I know what you mean though; that particular footage does show a lot of empty seats.

    7. Not a Rosberg and most definitely not a Hamilton fan. I think Hamilton was 60% to blame. But when you have Niki and Jackie 2 of the greats say Hamilton was to blame you can’t argue with them. They know more have done more to understand the situation more than anyone.

      1. No.

        Lauda’s opinion was emotionally charged and he gave it immediately after the crash not knowing any of the facts at the time. I don’t know when Stewart gave his opinion but its clear if you look back on his running commentary of Hamiltons career he has an obvious dislike for him. He even tried to undermine his 3rd world title win in the immediate moments after winning it in Austin while just about every one else on camera was jubilant.

      2. I’d still call it Rosberg’s fault as the simple fact remains that Hamilton had an over lap which warrants him some racing room. This isn’t the same as yielding as Hamilton didn’t exactly yield on the first corner when Rosberg managed to get past him.
        Besides only making 1 move, Rosberg’s move was similar to Gelael’s in the second GP2 race where they ultimately gave no racing room (though Gelael had far more time to realise he had to then Rosberg, both Mercedes drivers too committed to their respective maneuvers to pull out) and the fact Rosberg wasn’t punished is likely why Gelael wasn’t punished (which amazes me).

      3. To me it’s very clear, Hamilton had a brain fart moment there, he could have braked and backed out of it or even stick it to Rosberg. But going on the grass with some 250km/h? even if he could keep the the car under control and overtook Rosberg on the grass, how the hell does he think he could slow down for the turn. Brain fart = 100% to blame.

        1. I read somewhere that the rule book says you have to leave room to driver who is alone side, which makes sense, if it’s just an over lap, it would be very difficult for the driver in front to see/judge I think.

          1. The popular image showing LH’s front wing beside NR’s rear wheel also shows LH’s Right wheel over the line and on the grass… The door was already closed and LH should have backed off.

            My viewpoint is Hamilton is getting desperate to win a race, he was late for the national anthem and then stuffed his start (again). I’ve heard rumour that he apologised for the incident too… NR must put the incident behind him and let it go, otherwise, he will screw his chances up for WDC this season…

            Next season I suspect we will see much more competitive PU’s considering the abolishment of the token upgrades and therefore more likely a race that is much more open…

            With regards to Kvyat, it sounds like sour grapes, I don’t think he could have beaten the ferrari’s in quali and don’t think he has the ability to keep the tyres working for 32 laps. He may have got the fastest lap of the race, but, this was on fresh soft tyres late on in the race. As far as Ferrari throwing the win to red bull, no one expected those tyres to last near half race distance.

            1. William Jones
              17th May 2016, 17:55

              There’s an even more popular image amone Lewis’ fans which shows Lewis alongside and not even touching the white line, so…

      4. @jamiejay995

        They aren’t infallible. Lauda made the statement straight away before any telemetry or analysis had been done. As Toto said ‘he has his instinctive reaction’. And I don’t know if Stewart’s comments were made in a similar fashion without knowing all the facts, but it wouldn’t be the first time he was wrong giving an opinion on Hamilton:

        “McLaren have the resources, the money, the long-term commitment and huge experience. If I were Lewis I would have stayed with them.”

        1. Many people around here also thought he should have stayed at Mac, while that whole thing was happening and well before anyone knew how dominant the Mercedes team would be. It is easy to call someone’s opinion wrong from the perfect vision of hindsight. Personally, as it was all happening I thought LH needed to move on from Mac as I thought there was too much baggage and LH needed to leave the nest. Does that make me smarter or know more than Sir Jackie Stewart? I don’t think so. We all have our opinions and can only back them up with good arguments as to why we think we’re right, again, forgetting how hindsight can cloud the initial debate.

          1. @robbie

            I’m not making a point about anyone here being smarter or knowing more than Stewart, I’m just stating he isn’t infallible when offering his opinion when he doesn’t know all the facts, legend of the sport or not. Him saying Hamilton is in the wrong for this incident isn’t gospel just because he’s a great and we can argue with him on it. His opinion is just as capable of being wrong as yours or mine.

            The stewards have ruled neither party was predominately at fault, the team have, many pundits have analysed it and offered differing opinions on Rosberg, Hamilton or both being to blame. Just because Stewart is a great of the sport doesn’t mean his opinions are incapable of being incorrect. I cited a quote as an example of an incorrect opinion from him, not trying to score points for those of us who disagreed and by dumb luck were right about the Mercedes move.

            1. @philipgb That’s fair comment. I wasn’t trying to say JS is always right either. Just suggesting that he likely did know all the facts before he gave his opinion on the weekend’s incident. Just as he would have opined on LH’s move from Mac before any of us knew how it would end up for him at Merc. To call him wrong on his opinion at the time is I think unfair as millions agreed with him at the time. Just cautioning against looking at the timing of things and not forgetting the luxury of hindsight. Yes in hindsight JS and those millions who agreed with him about LH leaving Mac are no longer saying it was a mistake. JS surely doesn’t still think it was a mistake. You’ve protected hindsight to call JS wrong on that topic.

            2. Should read ‘you’ve projected hindsight to call JS wrong’

      5. With the greatest respect to Lauda and Stewart, they were racing in the days when a steering wheel was just a steering wheel. The steering wheel is a much more complicated beast now.

        Lauda made his comments immediately after the event and the Stewart article doesn’t even mention Rosberg’s incorrect engine mode choice. I would suggest their opinion would be more valid if they had actively taken the additional complications of a modern F1 car (and therefore the driver’s decision making) into consideration before making a statement.

        I should point out, I’m not necessarily blaming Rosberg for the incident here, but his engine mode choice should at least be considered in any argument, rather than laying the blame solely at Hamilton’s door.

        If Hamilton hadn’t gone for it, and instead jumped on the brakes, and subsequently followed Rosberg home in second, then any post-race analysis would likely have shown that was his best chance to take the lead, and then we’d all be saying he’d lost his killer instinct. It was a split second decision and he chose the wrong way. Rosberg made a split second decision on the grid and turned his engine mode switch the wrong way – or maybe forgot to adjust it altogether. This is a consequence of the ban on driver coaching, which is what everyone wanted. These kind of incidents were inevitable, particularly when the cars are so complicated and the wrong mode can cause a vast difference in performance.

        A racing incident was the best decision. Both drivers made mistakes and both drivers paid the price.

        1. Mercedes confirmed THEY were to blame for the wrong engine mode settings on Nico’s car, not Nico. 1st he could have possibly known about it was on exit of turn 2 when he put his foot down.

          1. Very interesting.

          2. Not that I don’t believe you, but provide me with a reference to them saying that.

            Although I can’t see how they can blame themselves. Since the ban on driver coaching, it is now the responsibility of the driver to set engine modes. The only way they could blame themselves is if his engineer told him to use that mode for the start while still in the garage. It seems more likely that Rosberg simply forgot to flick the switch when he finished the formation lap.

          3. on the reply with sky, you can see Anthony D. talking about the position of Nico’s switch and it being different from Lewis’. If Mercedes did claim fault, then their fault might only be that they didn’t coach Nico enough so that he would remember. I kind of find it hard to believe, knowing something about designing interfaces/usability/etc… that Mercedes changes up their steering wheels for every race. Strategies can change, but to be honest, if Nico wasn’t prepared for the start, Nico is to blame too… I have to say, Mercedes are holding Nico’s hand this season, giving him every opportunity. Just waiting to see Lewis have more power after the start.

    8. I wonder if Jackie Stewart’s comments are based up his first viewing of the incident or after further analysis. I’ll be honest when first seeing the accident happen my own first thought was that it was an impulsive, aggressive Hamilton to blame. Niki Lauda was much the same blaming Hamilton straight after the incident.

      But I think when you see the replays objectively, especially some of the analysis by well respected pundits you can see some of the blame does lay with Rosberg as well.

      Jackie Stewart has always been critical of Hamilton, I don’t know if he dislikes him or just see’s a flawed star who he thinks could be great if he tackled those flaws. I do suspect he’s made these rash comments post race before any detailed analysis has been done, the irony of making a mistake on impulse not being lost on me.

      1. I would suggest Jackie Stewart took the time to fully understand both drivers’ situation before formulating an opinion. His comments are not rash. He probably thinks that if NR was fined for Spa, why shouldn’t LH be fined now. And it’s ok for JS to have his opinion as we are all entitled. It so happens that on this site a small percentage more agreed that LH was more to blame. Ie. Agreed with the likes of JS. The only thing ‘rash’ was his opinion about a fine and it’s moot since it doesn’t seem the team is motivated that way for this incident.

        1. @robbie

          I think the Spa ’14 incident was a different matter. The team confirmed Rosberg admitted he could have avoided the incident but chose not to so as to make a point costing the team a 1-2 finish. Hamilton had the entitlement to the racing line on corner exit and it was for Rosberg as the car behind to not drive into a space that would cause a collision.

          This incident was different, Hamilton with an over speed went for an inside gap as any driver would, Rosberg went to close that gap defensively as you would also expect most drivers to. In a split second Hamilton avoided taking to the grass at which point he became a passenger to an unavoidable collision. There was no will or deliberate action by either, it is as ruled by the stewards and team a racing incident which given the amount they’ve battle on track inevitable to eventually happen.

          1. @philipgb Agreed. I’ve only defended Nico to those who are blaming him and overall I am glad this was deemed a racing incident. If I’ve sounded like I blame LH I do only in that I think the driver in behind has more onus to control the situation, but overall I think they both did what they had to do and as I say I’m glad both the stewards and the team are happy to move on.

      2. JS has had a problem with LH since he turned down the offer of ‘tuition’ and subsequent management by the great one during his rookie year. Things have been a little strained since that point. While I admire JS achievements, he has not competed or driven these complex cars and will have little comprehension of coming across someone fiddling with his settings while 15mph slower than the guy up your exhaust.

        The fact everyone forgets is NR has absolute form at this kind of instinctive behaviour. He has the rather unique position of pulling off stunts like this so many times the regulations were changed just to avoid such. Let’s say that again. The regulations were changed to penalise those that choose to drive someone off the track on a straight. Because he kept doing it. Yet he gets away with it again.

        Ridiculous to expect LH to react given its simply not supposed to happen.

      3. It’s because he drives completely differently I think. Stewart has always had a smooth but fast mentality, so when people win not using this approach his ego takes a hit.

        The great drivers and pundits can appreciate all different styles of driver. Stewart isn’t one of them.

        1. (Pundit that is!!)

    9. LOL people still argue about the crash? That is the advantage of new media.

      We here at F1 fanatic already reached our conclusions and moved on,.. printed press is now debating that… to late.

      Real thing is now Red Bull resurgence. Up next is Monaco, Red Bull has spectacular drivers and best car for slow speed corners, could they possibly challange Nico and Mercedes? 3x in a row winners there. Will Lewis Hamilton catch a break? He hasn’t had a perfect weekend in months now. And again he had a bad start.

      Nico was clearly ahead of him after the first two corners. As the nature of circuit is rather simple and impossible to overtake. We can assume he would have won the race. Unless Mercedes would put Nico on 3 stop and Lewis on 2 stop to cover Red Bull/Ferrari?

      Also talk about rating bias. It seems the best thing that can happen to a race is Mercedes crashing. Bernie, ol’ Octogenarian CEO was quite right to want to plant some bombs on Mercedes cars…. It was so funny watching him suggest that on grid walk, and then it happend. DAYUM. His intuition must be above average.

      But watching from results… best that can happen for an overall booring race to boost its rating is… step 1. Crash Mercedes. step 2. youngest guy without a win yet should win. It is funny ain’t it? But that is what us fans love. We want teams that are close on performance, we want underdog to win.

      We do not care Riciardo was striped of win due to wrong strategy, we dont mind Kimi being stucked behind a slower car for 20 laps… No problem.

      What do you guys think? What do we fans really want?

    10. The fact that some people some how managed to find a way of blaming Hamilton for Bottas losing control and running into the side of him in Bahrain shows that some people will say anything. I’m surprised Stewart didn’t blame Hamilton for the GP2 crash just for being at the circuit that day.

      Can you imagine the outcry if Hamilton started the race in the wrong engine modes, and once realising his mistake, makes an aggressive defensive manouver and forces his team mate off the track and into a spin causing both cars to smash? Can you imagine?

      What Rosberg did in Spain was _literally_ no different to what he did in Bahrain 2012 (infact, potentially worse as he knew there was a significant speed differential between the 2 cars) so how to people justify his actions now, when he was punished back then?

    11. Ferrari needs to stop cylinder cutting. Ferrari has started doing that since Shanghai but it affects low speed traction, I can’t understand how they did not notice that Merc and Renault have never run they PU’s like that.

    Comments are closed.