Max Verstappen, Red Bull, Red Bull Ring, 2020

Verstappen’s broken front wing had “significant” effect on car

2020 Styrian Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by and

Red Bull team principal Christian Horner explained why the team chose not to change Max Verstappen’s front wing when he made an extra pit stop late in the Styrian Grand Prix.

Verstappen made a second pit stop on lap 68 to fit soft tyres in an effort to score the bonus point for fastest lap. Despite having noticed damage to his front wing, which became lodged in his bargeboard, the team chose not to change it.

“We looked at it and we felt that the time loss was potentially too great,” Horner explained. “We couldn’t see how much damage it had done until the car came into parc ferme at the end of the race.”

The damage caused a “significant shift” in the car’s balance, said Horner. “What effect that had on tyre life we need to look closely at the data to understand.”

“I think he did it on the exit of turn nine,” Horner added. “The guys in the operations room immediately saw the loss of downforce that that created. It was just kerb damage.”

Verstappen ran ahead of Valtteri Bottas in the opening stages of the race but was overtaken by the Mercedes driver for second place with four laps to go. Bottas ran a longer first stint than Verstappen, who pitted before either of the Mercedes drivers, and queried his team’s strategy on the radio.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

However Horner is certain the team would have lost out to Bottas had they left Verstappen out. “I think if we’d pitted later, they’d’ve pitted earlier,” he said in response to a question from RaceFans.

“So the bottom line is if you have a faster car, and we only had one car to play with at that point in the race, you either bank track position or you concede it. We chose to retain track position by pitting.

“So then Bottas was instructed to stay out because he’d obviously been instructed to close up to put them within an ‘undercut’. So you’re in this situation where you have to make a choice: You either concede the position through the pit stop or you keep the track position and you try and tough it out in the second half race.”

Verstappen “fully understood” the team’s strategy after the race, said Horner. “If you have a quicker car with longer range those options to either go longer or to go shorter, it almost doesn’t matter what you do.”

Red Bull won at their home circuit in 2018 and 2019, but Mercedes triumphed in both this year’s races at the track. Horner believes their rivals “underperformed in recent years” at the circuit.

“They struggled in the heat here on Friday. It’s been very cool [in the race]. I think they’ve underperformed in previous years, they performed well here today. They deserve that result. They were the best team today. We’re going to be working even harder to try and catch them.”

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2020 F1 season

Browse all 2020 F1 season articles

Author information

Dieter Rencken
Dieter Rencken has held full FIA Formula 1 media accreditation since 2000, during which period he has reported from over 300 grands prix, plus...
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.

87 comments on “Verstappen’s broken front wing had “significant” effect on car”

  1. Verstappen broke that wing and that’s why he lost P2. That’s on him. Nothing to do with Mercedes being unbeatable.

    1. @f1osaurus
      +1
      in fact, without the broken wing, he was on-course in lapping the entire field, including Lewis.

      1. at some point in race, i thought they were heading for the moon with that speed, too bad they had broken wing… they would teleport if it wasnt for the wing

        1. Can someone point me towards the comments section for adults? I seem to be stuck on Racekids.

          1. @petebaldwin Seems particularly bad on this topic. Something tells me Max and RBR are seen as a threat. And certainly so far he is going to be the only threat to the two Mercs.

      2. Yeah, he was so fast that he was able to see his rear wing ( in front of him, not in the mirror if you wondered ) before damage affected car’s performance, of course.

      3. @lums @mysticus @petebaldwin Well you can lamely try to be funny all you want and stick your head in the sand pretending Verstappen didn’t lose himself P2, but Verstappen was clearly keeping pace all race long and then suddenly he started losing time. Then just before Bottas was on him Verstappen had another drop in pace when his tyres started to run out of life.

        Also Sainz in a slower car was half a second faster than Verstappen when they both went for their fastest lap attempt.

        1. Still, you are a funny character. But hey, it would be boring if only the reality and facts ruled these topics :)

          1. Yeah it would be much more boring if you actually understood facts.

            So how much time did that broken wing cost Verstappen? Albon was 1 to 1.5s a lap faster. Sainz was 0.5s faster on their fast lap attempt. Are Albon and Sainz such better drivers?

        2. @f1osaurus no wonder your species are extinct.. What would the world become if this saurus people existed… :) I m sure you saw what I did there…

          1. @mysticus Well I’m right on everything I said though and indeed reason seems to be out the door in current times. Not sure why you’d rejoice about that but ok.

          2. Well you tagged me like, I was against your comment, you took it too saurus (serious) it was actually in support of your comment, I believe lums comment too, because they keep exaggerating Max, and attacking Mercedes one way or another, instead of admitting and admiring. Not sure which/part I said was against you?

          3. @mysticus Well you tagged me too.

            I get that you posted a joke (sort of) and I did too (sort of). Your post does express rejoice in “my breed” dying out. So it’s sort of a joke at my expense I guess?

            Oh I see now what you probably meant. I tagged you instead of Robbie in my post against the max Hype train.

        3. “Clearly keeping pace all race long…” with LH on cruise and conserve mode, able to crank it up at any point needed, which it wasn’t.

          1. Correct. I think the bottom line is the Merc’s engine is stronger and they will win again this year.
            Even if Max qualifies first he will have all he can handle to hold the position while Merc seems to have enough engine to overtake.
            I think this season will be another dud – hope I’m wrong.

          2. @robbie With Verstappen clearly also cruising along behind him …

            Albon was much faster than Verstappen at the end of the race. Faster than Bottas even. It’s not the car.

        4. I think your point about fastest lap makes sense, vers vs sainz, I guess damage was significant, since tyres were fine then.

    2. Yeah Newey had found a heap of time designing that specific part of the front wing, no wonder even Lewis was uneasy the whole time, let alone Bottas

      1. More importantly, mercedes has a new mirror design because they keep checking on max, mirror wears out before full race distant, so they designed this special DAMMS (dual axis max mirror system), it is specially designed so when it detects make max, it makes him appear further than actually he is :) so they dont worry about him… if any other competitor, it works as intended…

        1. *when it detects max*

  2. Poor Max, He felt powerless against the almighty force of the Mercedes team.
    At times it felt like Lewis was toying with him anytime Max pushed to close the gap. Only for Lewis to stretch it again with little effort.

    They need Vettel in the second car.

    1. It was obvious in the last race… they only shown anything thanx to SCx2! 1st sc merc had 18 sec gap to next guy, then second one was 10sec gap… if it wasnt for merc mishap of not pitting for fresher tyres, they wouldnt even be anywhere near… besides, red bull never for one sec stopped moaning last week, twice get ham penalized unfairly! But KARMA is not a very nice person! Ask Alonso?

    2. No no, you got it all wrong. He pushed Lewis in front of him. Let me explain. RB’s front wing creates so much high pressure that it was enough to push Lewis ahead. Every time when Lewis went faster it was just because Max was even faster. Couple of verses from ‘Strawberry Fields Forever’ says much more about some comments made:
      Living is easy with eyes closed
      Misunderstanding all you see
      It’s getting hard to be someone
      But it all works out
      It doesn’t matter much to me…”

    3. Vettel? Why? He van only drive a F1 on an empty track or when he starts from pole

  3. I really like Albon, and it’s difficult to fully understand how much Max is out performing the car, but the bottom line is he’s got to be better than battling a Racing Point for best if the rest, otherwise he’ll repeat the fate of Gasly. He’s lucky that the Ferraris are do off pace, as any other season, battling for 4th place would sound quite good.

    1. It was really strange him being so far off the pace as he’s not usually that bad and certainly is normally way way faster than the midfield.

      I’m actually wondering whether there was initially some strategy being brought into play by placing Albon in a spot that could prevent the Mercedes cars from successfully doing an undercut as it seemed like he was a consistent gap behind for quite a while almost like he was driving to a specified time.

      Either that or there was an unspecified issue with his car.

      Whatever the reason, I hope it/he sorts it soon as I’m enjoying having him in the RBR team and wouldn’t like to see him cut up and thrown away.

      1. @dbradock Red Bull have indicated there was nothing wrong with the car, so it seems we can rule that explanation out.

        Furthermore, I’m dubious about the claims that “the car is built around Verstappen”, because as soon as Perez started to pressure him, Albon suddenly picked his pace up by over half a second a lap and could then sustain that higher pace until Perez tried to pass him. The fact that Albon could go faster and then maintain that faster pace for an extended period of time would seem to go against that argument.

        1. I was aware that they had ruled out an issue with the car but RBR does tend to play things very close to the chest, particularly if it’s PU related now that they have HOnda PU’s

          I do think however that the fact that Albon was able to increase his pace suggests more that he was driving to a specified time, initially to probably prevent Mercedes from undercutting Max and after the pit stops to save PU wear and tear.

    2. @eurobrun The answer may be in the fact that the car is built around Verstappen and his driving style.

      1. Of which Albon has indicated multiple times to suit his style as well

        1. Yet Albon keeps saying he’s struggling with stability. Which affect Verstappen less

          1. That is the better driver, so no surprise there.

          2. @f1osaurus erikje has a point.

          3. @david-br Which is exactly my point.

            Same issue is at Mercedes, when the car was unstable Hamilton is miles ahead of Bottas or Rosberg. Yet Mercedes makes sure that Rosberg and Bottas have a car that’s not so unstable and works for them too. Red Bull doesn’t do that so they (have to) accept that Albon is 2 to 4 tenths a lap slower because of it

          4. @f1osaurus But a car ‘on the edge’ (less stable) can potentially be pushed further and be quicker as it’s more responsive. So what should a team do? Presumably build the car around their most talented driver, allowing the fastest car-driver combination possible without making the car too difficult even for this driver to drive. Of course that may complicate the handling for the other driver, compromising their times rather than improving them. I don’t think designing the car more towards Albon is a good solution. At the same time, Red Bull need another driver close to Verstappen, not 40-60 seconds down the road. They seem to be back where they were with Gasly. Personally I think they should have been a bit smarter at holding onto Ricciardo, signing Verstappen and quietly seeing him as the future, but without throwing that in DR’s face and making him feel it would be a Vetter-Webber rerun. Red Bull are bad at this stuff.

          5. @david-br Yes exactly. So it’s their choice. Mercedes chooses to have a 2 driver team while Red Bull choose to go full on with Verstappen. Both is fine, but Red Bull can then not complain their second driver is not keeping up. Same with Schumacher and his #2 team mate. They just never stood a chance. Especially in cases where they weren’t allowed to see telemetry as Herbert explained, That was just nuts.

            You could indeed see this aim for a stable car go wrong when Whitmarsh decided that McLaren should cater to Button’s desire for a very stable car too much. The car got much slower overall.

            I think Mercedes focus too much on Bottas too. Especially how they let him focus on Q3 at the detriment of his race pace. Almost everytime he ends up in front of Hamilton it’s killing their race/strategy.

            For the car I think they get it quite right. Bottas does seem to struggle a bit more, but not to the point where he’s 3 or 4 tenths down. Although if Verstappen would actually become a threat then it might have been better to focus on a faster car more rather than stability. Hindsight

          6. @f1osaurus You’re just wrong, plain and simple.

          7. @f1osaurus OK, thanks, I get your argument now. I agree totally about Hamilton and Button at McLaren. But it’s a difficult balance indeed, because having the second driver close is actually essential to ensuring a championship when it’s competitive. Massa and Raikkonen at Ferrari in 2007 and 2008 were a perfect combination for example. Webber kept close enough to Vettel. Ditto Rosberg and Hamilton. Bottas, hmm. Mercedes really benefitted from Ferrari (and Vettel) not maximizing their performances over the seasons when they recently had a chance. But in all these cases, we’re talking about a car at the top of the grid. Red Bull are still some distance off that at most tracks, so it kind of makes sense for them to maximize one driver, Verstappen, and aim for 3rd or sometimes 2nd on average, rather than aim for both drivers finishing a bit further down.

          8. @robbie You’re just something someone dragged out of a shower drain. Go play under your bridge, troll.

          9. @david-br But the Ferrari example works both ways. They have been doing the #1 driver thing with Schumacher for years and that worked much better.

            Webber kept close to Vettel only until they really made him the #2 driver (after 2010) because Webber being constantly so close to Vettel was probably considered a nuisance to the team.

            I wonder why they thought that though. Since Webber was also taking points off of Hamilton (when McLaren where the main opponent) and Alonso (when Ferrari was the main opponent) and indeed strategy wise it also helps to have two drivers up front. Still, stuff like Turkey 2010 cost them a lot and Webber actually took more points off of Vettel than he did from Hamilton and Alonso. The constant acrimony in the team would have hurt too.

            But either way, they clearly dropped support for Webber since he never was anywhere near Vettel anymore after 2010.

            Red Bull managed just fine with just focusing on Vettel as #1 too. Better really if you look at the results. 2009 they completely wasted (Vettel crashing 3 times out of the points in the first 6 races) and 2010 they barely won. Yet when they switched to the #1 model, 2011 and 2013 they were miles ahead of everyone else. 2012 I also would say The #1 driver strategy worked better.

            Mercedes didn’t need to focus on one driver while Rosberg was around since they would generally finish both cars on the podium anyway. They just wanted to look “fair”. Since 2017 Ferrari has had the car to beat them, but there is just no driver at Ferrari that can keep up a WDC campaign.

            Although in 2018, Ferrari was actually a lot faster (certainly since Germany) and Mercedes looked genuinely worried. They even started helping Hamilton (in Russia for instance). In hindsight completely unnecessary, but they couldn’t know that Vettel would just keep on crashing his championship away in a faster car.

            So yeah that’s the fine line the other side. If you focus on a #1 driver, he needs to be up to the task even when there is an opponent to worry about.

  4. Oh dear, oh dear!
    Broken endplate on the wing!

    I say protest it immediately! Ban all the sausage curbs and allow unrestricted running off the track!

  5. Judging by the lap times, his damage occurred on lap 50 and cost him about half a second a lap – so overall race time cost was ~10 seconds. He wouldn’t have won the race but could probably have held onto second place.

    1. @davidjwest Exactly. The Verstappen fans rather pretend P2 was never on the cards though.

      1. I am a Verstappen fan, but I actually hope the loss of P2 was due to a driver errror. If it’s all due to the car design we are in for a boring season…

    2. Bottas had a better pace all race, except when Max had just pitted or when he had traffic. Also Max’s laptimes didn’t drop from lap 50, Bottas started tot up his pace.

      If there was a drop, it must have been around lap 57, but that could easily have been the tire dropping.

      1. @anunaki Verstappen was 5 seconds behind Hamilton all race both cruising at laps around 1:08. Yet from lap 50 he started dropping back while Hamilton was keeping the same pace. And then yes a few laps later Verstappen also ruined his tyres and it became even more erratic.

        Either way, It was Verstappen going slower and slower over the last 20 laps which cost him P2.

        Even Albon was 1 to 1.5 seconds a lap faster than Verstappen in the laps before Bottas caught up with Verstappen. Albon was actually even faster than Bottas!

        Also, Verstappen was half a second slower than Sainz when they both went for a fastest lap attempt. Second lap even a full second. Why was Verstappen so much slower then if not the broken front wing?

        So, yes Verstappen WAS going significantly slower.

        1. I try it again, in vain I know but still.
          Every time ver speeded up ham increased his speed and kept the gap. There was no way Ver was able to match that speed. Look at the stats. I know, not your favorite facts :)

          1. erikje Yup the fact that LH was controlling the pace, cruising around without stressing the car, while Max was having to wring everything he could out of his car just to try to keep up, as pointed out by Brundle during the race, is not something some like to consider, but rather like to conveniently ignore, in their effort to try to make Max sound as bad as possible, and also to continually try to downplay Mercedes’ domination.

          2. erikje and @robbie So Hamilton was cruising. That’s your whole point? How does that go against what I said.

            Verstappen was also cruising along behind Hamilton at 5s behind. Both doing the same pace for almost 50 laps. Then suddenly Verstappen goes slower. Few tenths initially and it goes up to seconds at some point.

            Albon was faster than both Bottas and Hamilton at the end of the race. Bottas was not cruising he was beating Verstappen.

            Verstappen was 0.5 seconds slower than Sainz in their fast lap attempt

          3. @f1osaurus And again, LH was cruising, Max was pushing his car to the max, not cruising. How is it not as plain as day that the Mercs are dominant? Oh I know…because you love to make it sound like they are not, or that everyone else is just failing.

          4. @robbie And again, Verstappen was cruising. Albon was pushing his car to the max, not cruising. Albon did a 1:07.5 to 1:07 while Verstappen was doing 1:08 (and Albon also was doing 1:08+ when he was cruising).

            When Bottas and Albon both were pushing, who was fastest of the two do you imagine? Then imagine the mighty Verstappen being a second a lap slower (in fact even 2 seconds or more slower at times). Yet you stick your head in the sand and say he was pushing all along.

            Then finally Verstappen does start pushing and he does a 1:06 on softs (while he was slowed because of he mistimed his fast lap).

            Don’t you get tired of being wrong all the time? You know what would help? You could check your facts. Like I do. Yes it costs some time, but at least I present facts and I have informed opinion.

      2. Actually Bottas was slower than Verstappen for quite a few laps after their stops, possibly due to traffic. Have a look at the interactive lap time graph on this site if you want to check. Lap 43 the gap is 6.6s but by lap 49 it’s nearly 10s.

        Verstappen does seem to drop off his pace noticeably around lap 50, this is relative to Hamilton so it could simply be Hamilton upped the pace but IIRC he was just maintaining his pace and looking after his car, certainly driving within the limits. Bottas does get noticeably closer to Verstappen from lap 50, the gap on lap 50 is 9.4 seconds but by lap 65 he is in DRS range. So in this phase Bottas gained an average of ~0.6s a lap.

        Verstappen needed approximately 0.2s a lap more pace (from lap 50) to hold second place. At that level of pace Bottas would have needed to gain another 3-4s on the last 5 laps or so, not possible without some kind of outside intervention.

  6. Red Bull was mighty when they had 2 top drivers. They need to ditch Albon. Playtime is over. Time to get serious now.

    1. yeah, but who should that second top driver be? Danny Ric is clearly not coming back, Sainz is headed to Ferrari, Vettel is not exactly “top” anymore… the RB academy is rather empty with no-one coming from behind. Maybe Helmuth Marco should be retiring together with Vettel at the end of this season.

      1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
        14th July 2020, 3:30

        You can’t discount Vettel in a Red Bull. For all we know, the extra grip might allow him to go much, much faster.

        1. Vertel is useless, unless when starting from the front row. So a Mercedes can hire him, but for all other teams it simply doesnt make sense. The guy is gast, but cant handle traffic

        2. @freelittlebirds Albon is talking about stability issues over and over. If anyone is unable to deal with those then it would be Vettel.

          1. Michael (@freelittlebirds)
            14th July 2020, 12:04

            @f1osaurus everyone complains about stability especially when they are 40 seconds behind their teammate. You can’t compare Albon to Vettel. You can’t even compare Ricciardo to Vettel.

            When I realized that Vettel was only the 3rd driver in the history of this sport to hit a century of poles and wins, did it dawn on me how difficult it is to do what Vettel has achieved in this sport and he nearly did pull a WDC in the Ferrari.

            I’ve seen two dozen drivers that were labeled WDC champion material and only a few had the ability to pull it off. Winning a WDC in this sport is nearly impossible (ask Rosberg), winning 4 is not a fluke.

            That being said, I’ve been Vettel’s worst critic on this site by quite a margin. He’s one of the most flawed champions there’s been.

          2. @freelittlebirds 30 seconds. But also no, he complains about this during practices.

            True, Ricciardo is miles ahead of Vettel. There is no comparison there whatsoever. Vettel only finished in front of Ricciardo 3 times over a whole season together.

            I don’t see why I can’t compare Vettel and Albon though. They both can’t deal with unstable cars. If anything I’d say Vettel is even worse.

            Vettel winning four WDC’s was no fluke. He’s a decent qualifier. A decent qualifier in the fastest car has 90% of the job done. He then solely needs to keep the car pointing in the right direction and out of the walls (hence 2009, 2017 and 2018 were a bust) but he had enough car advantage for a few years that even his blunders were compensated. Plus no single opponent to attack him. It was usually half a season of Ferrari and half a season of McLaren.

            Massa is also a decent qualifier and in 2008 he had the fastest car. Almost became WDC on that basis too. Well with a lot of help from the FIA steward, but still.

            Seasons like 2008, 2018 and 2019 and things like last Q3 in Austria show the exceptional talents of Hamilton though. Not just his speed, but the fact that he performs to the maximum under almost all conditions. He makes mistakes, but far less than Verstappen.

            They say it’s easy to win in the fastest car, but then Verstappen should have won in Monaco over and over. Plus all races in Mexico. it’s more than that. For instance not breaking your front wing and losing P2 for no good reason in Styrian GP.

          3. Off course 2008 showed the exceptional talent of Hamilton, making ‘blunders’ as you love to call it at Malaysia, Bahrain, France, Fuji, Canada and having the luxury of Ferrari screwing up in Hungary and Singapore.

            Still he only managed to win that championship with just 1 point after another poor Grand Prix in Brazil. If anything, he should have won that championship with 3 races to spare, he was lucky there was no Alonso or Schumacher in a competitive car anymore or he wouldn’t have won it.

            Hamilton matured a lot after 2011, got way more constant and reliable, thinking a lot more. That’s what made the difference in 2017 and 2018, Vettel never learned. Funny even that Hamilton himself said after the first race of 2008 he wasn’t even worried by the pace of the Ferrari’s.

          4. Tim Lemmens Well he made mistakes, but clearly less than the opposition. So yes.

            The point is that he won WDC in a slower car. Plus some of those “blunders” were part of the biased FIA steward/Ferrari consultant.

          5. It had nothing to do with the “bias” of the stewards. Absolutely nothing. He clearly held up other drivers in qualfiying in Malaysia. He clearly messed up his start in Bahrain, he clearly ran plain in the back of Alonso in Bahrain, he clearly ran in the back of Raikkonen with a red light on. He clearly cut the chicane in his overtake on Vettel in France and was given a correct penalty for his mistake in Canada, Rosberg got the same. He clearly ran of the road twice in two corners in Fuji. He clearly drove poorly in Brazil. How does the FIA come in to play in any of them? He made them all by himself. The only real thing the FIA did was penalize him for Belgium and maybe his penalty in Fuji was debatable. On the other hand, he didn’t get penalized in Monza even though he plainly drove Webber and Glock off.

            He didn’t make “clearly less” blunders then the opposition. Kubica, Alonso, Heidfeld all made signifacantly less, but didn’t have the car. Comparing him with Massa and Raikkonen was his luck in 2008, not his driving or his talent.

          6. Tim Lemmens

            It had plenty to do with the bias of Alan Donnelly. Spa and Fuji were utter nonsense. A drive-through for missing a corner in France (while he was already well ahead of Vettel before that).

            You conveniently left all those out in your rant. Sure, not stopping for a red light is dumb, but having a bad start once is a blunder?

            Alonso had himself to blame for not being in that car.

            How about Kubica and Heidfeld were only made to look good by their car? It might have been faster than the Ferrari even. Heidfeld never made much of an impression ever and Kubica was barely faster. In fact over all their seasons together, Kubica was only faster than Heidfeld in 2008.

            Either way, Kubica especially is one of those drivers like Perez that only show a good race now and then. That’s no way to fight for a WDC. On the podium one race and out of the point the next. That’s exactly the exceptional skill that Hamilton DOES have, he’s almost always in contention for a good result.

            Either way, fact remains that Hamilton got the WDC in the second fastest car as pretty much a rookie still. That’s exceptional talent yes.

            Do you see Leclerc or Verstappen doing that? The amount of blunders coming from those two in their second season was way higher than what Hamilton did. And they didn’t even have the pressure of having to fight for a WDC.

          7. Tim Lemmens Also, thanks for actually offering facts in your arguments. Much appreciated that someone on this forum actually posts an informed opinion. Even though I still don’t agree :)

          8. “It had plenty to do with the bias of Alan Donnelly. Spa and Fuji were utter nonsense. A drive-through for missing a corner in France (while he was already well ahead of Vettel before that).”

            I don’t concider Spa a mistake, that’s why I left it out. He made two mistakes in Fuji before he received a penalty, so the penalty had nothing to do with the mistake. Perhaps to the actual result, but not to his mistakes. I can’t find any images anymore with him overtaking Vettel in France.

            “You conveniently left all those out in your rant. Sure, not stopping for a red light is dumb, but having a bad start once is a blunder?”
            The bad start was the intro of crashing into the back of Alonso.

            “How about Kubica and Heidfeld were only made to look good by their car? It might have been faster than the Ferrari even. Heidfeld never made much of an impression ever and Kubica was barely faster. In fact over all their seasons together, Kubica was only faster than Heidfeld in 2008.”
            Both of them will not have been that much worse then Massa. So I think the speeds are very comparable.

            “Either way, fact remains that Hamilton got the WDC in the second fastest car as pretty much a rookie still. That’s exceptional talent yes.”
            I’m sorry but Villeneuve won a championship in his second season, with Michael Schumacher as his opponent. He had a much better car yes, but Hamilton should have won it way sooner.

            “Do you see Leclerc or Verstappen doing that? The amount of blunders coming from those two in their second season was way higher than what Hamilton did. And they didn’t even have the pressure of having to fight for a WDC.”
            Leclerc, no. Verstappen makes mistakes, but his 2016-season was actually really good. He crashed a few times in Monaco, had a bad race in Spa, and Singapore wasn’t great, but overal he drove a very good season.

          9. Tim Lemmens, I can understand why some might be questioning why Alan Donnelly was allowed to act as a steward and whether he was biased, because there were serious questions over financial conflicts of interest raised at the time that resulted in multiple complaints from the teams.

            Back in 2008, Alan Donnelly was the Chairman of Sovereign Strategy, a professional lobbying firm. The clients of Donnelly did not only include the FIA and FOM, it also included Scuderia Ferrari – raising questions about whether Donnelly really should be given the role of steward when one of the teams he would be inspecting was also employing him.

            It wasn’t even the only financial impropriety scandal he was involved in either – in 2009, there was another scandal when it emerged that Donnelly’s company was acting as a public relations company for Manor Racing for free when Manor were bidding to join F1. It’s perhaps not surprising that, in 2010, Donnelly was removed from the stewards panel and given a role that removed all front line motorsport involvement from him.

    2. @spafrancorchamps They did much better with two “decent” drivers and a big car advantage though.

      It’s not like when they had Verstappen and Ricciardo that they were performing much better either. Ricciardo and Verstappen would win the odd race where Red Bull had the best car, but that was only on very specific tracks (like Monaco, Mexico, Malaysia)

  7. I just waited to read something like this: “The damage caused a “significant shift” in the car’s balance, said Horner. “What effect that had on tyre life we need to look closely at the data to understand.”
    However, AMuS quotes Max: “Es fühlte sich nicht viel anders an. Die Balance war immer noch gut. Wir waren über eine Runde einfach zu langsam. Uns fehlt Power und Grip.” === “It didn’t feel much different. The balance was still good. We were just too slow for one lap. We lack power and grip.”
    I believe Horner he’s much better in telling the truth than Max. However, the race result is leaving me perplexed because it seems that Max is telling the truth.

    1. Verstappen is the most honest driver in f1, and I’m serious!

  8. Has Redbull drank their own cool-aid, apparently An unaccomplished,haven’t achieved anything in f1.never fought for championship Max Verstappen is going to or was supposed to take on the entire field by himself……Max the great white hope has a fatal flaw,he is susceptible to pressure, 3yrs with a car capable of pole to become to the youngest pole sitter and every time he fluff it. of course that’s swept under the carpet…..This Redbull is on par with the Mercs Max ,just doesnt know how to take care of his tires,and once MERC realised that they upped the pace and forced him to kill his tires.and offcourse with a 3nd tier driver like Albon anything he does is out drivng the car

    The desperation to elevate Max is getting is getting ridiculous people are actually falling over themselves because Max went side by side with Bottas,Bottas allowed the move because he knows he faster but somehow max is the hero and oh oh he took the fight to Lewis in quali and iof not for the spin he would have been a briliant 0.6

    1. @spactus Wow, just wow. Methinks you need a new hobby. Perhaps try swatting mosquitoes with sledge hammers. Would suit your personality.

    2. Wow, that says a lot about Albon then. He shouldnt be in F1 according to you then, lapping +0,8 behind

      1. So Albon ended the race 30 seconds behind Bottas over a 71 laps race and that makes him 0.8 seconds slower per lap than Verstappen? That’s more like 0.4 of a second.

        Albon was probably cruising for much of the race too. He knew he couldn’t keep up with Bottas in P3 anyway so why bother and wear out the engine and tyres? He sped up to keep Perez behind and at that time was actually 1 to 1.5s a lap faster than Verstappen who was trying to keep a gap to Bottas.

        Sure Albon is too slow overall. However, he keeps complaining the car just doesn’t suit him. While Red Bull make no mention that they are looking into his specific issues with the car.

        Replacing the driver won’t help much in that situation. You’d just get another driver complaining the car doesn’t suit him. That’s the down side of a #1 driver team. As long as Albon doesn’t crash the car (like Gasly did) he’s probably fine there.

        Besides which top driver is going to want to go to a team which stated they are fully behind Verstappen. Ricciardo got out when they said that and probably just in time.

        1. Except that…Albon doesn’t complain about the car not suiting him, and what team wouldn’t be fully behind Max, and at the same time be fully behind his teammates too. Just a bunch more blah blah blah rhetoric from a one hit wonder on this site who reads into quotes whatever suits his tiresome arguments.

          1. @robbie Except that…Albon does complain about stability issues with the car holding him back.

            Just a bunch more blah blah blah rhetoric from a one hit wonder on this site who cannot read/understand anything at all. Honsetly. F1 clearly is not for you. Why not pick up knitting or something?

            Do you ever contribute anything useful here anyway? You just moan and groan. Why bother coming here if all you do is post hollow complaints?

          2. @f1osauros You do yourself such a disservice when you say things like “he keeps complaining the car just doesn’t suit him…” which is just untrue. Please provide a quote on that. You are trying to paint a picture like AA has been hung out to dry in a car built for Max, and there simply isn’t one bit of evidence of that let alone anything from AA or anyone else that supports that. It is simply an invention of yours to try to make some point that doesn’t exist. Then when I challenge you on that you back it up a bit and make it about a complaint about stability, which would be much more reasonable, and which I’m sure most drivers complain about at least several times throughout a season or even throughout a weekend. F1 has clearly been for me since before television coverage even came to Canada in 1978 thanks to Gilles Villeneuve. What is not for me is putting up with lies and misconceptions spewed out with nothing to base them on from the likes of you.

            Your last paragraph, boy oh boy…you’re special.

          3. @robbie Just go play under your bridge, troll.

  9. Well I think Horner is overstating the effect of the broken front wing and trying to down play the Merc dominance. It seems to me that Merc is the best car. Hamilton is driving like a 6 times WDC with all of the style and experience one would expect. RB/Verstappen failed to deliver at their home circuit and the rest of the yr doesn’t look all that promising either. But I think we can look forward to some brilliant mid field action and I think their is some possibilities for both McLarens and Perez in the pink Merc to embarrass RB.
    If Russell can continue to drag that Williams up the field his opportunity for a seat at Merc is going to arrive sooner rather than later.

    1. He is overstating yes, to keep Max onboard. But Max already knows it is not going to happen AGAIN with RedBull. Newey is like Vettel an overestimated force. Once great, now not so much. I hope Mercedes will leave the sport. Imagine F1 without them the last 4 years. It would have been spectacularly competitive

    2. @johnrkh Verstappen lost 10 seconds due to breaking his front-wing. He was even half a second slower than Sainz when both of them went for a fast lap.

      If anything they are downplaying the effect Verstappen’s mistake had and pretending it’s inevitable that the mighty Mercedes scored a 1-2 when they know full well that Verstappen should have finished in P2.

      1. When ver tried his fast lap he was in traffic. I know facts do not suit you, but still.

        1. He was a bit dumb there, should have simply slowed down to leave himself a gap, he was not under any pressure from behind. To be fair the team should have told him that.

        2. and the second lap he was even slower. I know facts do not suit you, but still.

  10. @johnrkh Ever since 2014 Mercedes had the best car out of the box every year, only for Red Bull to play catch up later in the season (but always too little too late). When you compare Austria 2019 with Austria 2020 the gap between Mercedes and Red Bull certainly is a disappointment, but bear in mind these were the first races this season. When you compare the gap between Mercedes and Red Bull every first race of the season, then RB is much closer now than in 2019, 2018 and before. I have no doubt that RB will be closer to Mercedes later this year and fight for wins again (only again too little too late for the championship I’m afraid).

    1. That seems to indeed be the case every year with RBR and until they do something about that they’ll never be champions. They need to get it right (or thereabout) from the first race on to have any chance. This very short season also just compounds the problem. They won’t be able to catch up because of a lack of time and the engine freeze. So I’m afraid of the opposite: no RBR regularly challenging for wins later this year…

      1. Absolutely, you cannot write off Red Bull on the basis of one race (OK two races but at the same track.)

        Let’s see what Hungary brings. THEN write off RB ;-)

    2. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
      15th July 2020, 12:53

      I personally think Ferrari were overall better in 2017 but Hamilton just made Mercedes look better and Vettel underperformed. Bottas also underperformed in the 2nd half, but I don’t think it was unrealistic for Vettel to beat him. I think that in over half the races, the Ferrari was the better car.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.
If the person you're replying to is a registered user you can notify them of your reply using '@username'.