Max Verstappen, Red Bull, Paul Ricard, 2022

2022 French Grand Prix race result

2022 French Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

Max Verstappen has won the French Grand Prix ahead of Lewis Hamilton and George Russell.

11Max VerstappenRed BullRB18
244Lewis HamiltonMercedesW13
363George RussellMercedesW13
411Sergio PerezRed BullRB18
555Carlos Sainz JnrFerrariF1-75
614Fernando AlonsoAlpine-RenaultA522
74Lando NorrisMcLaren-MercedesMCL36
831Esteban OconAlpine-RenaultA522
93Daniel RicciardoMcLaren-MercedesMCL36
1018Lance StrollAston Martin-MercedesAMR22
115Sebastian VettelAston Martin-MercedesAMR22
1210Pierre GaslyAlphaTauri-Red BullAT03
1323Alexander AlbonWilliams-MercedesFW44
1477Valtteri BottasAlfa Romeo-FerrariC42
1547Mick SchumacherHaas-FerrariVF-22
1624Zhou GuanyuAlfa Romeo-FerrariC42
DNF6Nicholas LatifiWilliams-MercedesFW44
DNF20Kevin MagnussenHaas-FerrariVF-22
DNF16Charles LeclercFerrariF1-75
DNF22Yuki TsunodaAlphaTauri-Red BullAT03

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2022 French Grand Prix

Browse all 2022 French Grand Prix articles

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.

56 comments on “2022 French Grand Prix race result”

  1. Despite the pace deficit Mercedes keep bagging the points / podiums

  2. Perez should’ve received a 5-second penalty for gaining a lasting advantage, but fortunately, Russell got past eventually.

    From now on, the only way Leclerc could properly provide a championship challenge anymore is pure luck.

    1. Depends if Ferrari choose to put him first. So far they haven’t. If they do maybe Sainz can take points away from Max, making it possible to win on merit still.

    2. Seriously? Russell divebombs Perez, carries so much speed he pushes Perez off the track, and PEREZ is at fault? He didn’t gain a lasting advantage, he maintained the position he otherwise would’ve lost through an illegal manoeuvre.

      1. @apostle No, he maintained a position by leaving the track & not rejoining correctly.
        Had he done what Gasly did, he wouldn’t have stayed ahead, so lasting advantage by definition.

        1. Maintaining a position is not an advantage; you don’t gain an advantage by staying where you are. Again, he was the VICTIM.

        2. George comes from under the horizon then brakes and sooks it was Perez’s fault!! Seriously ,alonso a is a god put him in a Ferrari

      2. No. Russell was perfectly in the corner, look the replay. He controlled the car fully. It was Perez who didn’t leave enough room and then turned into another driver, hoping to get him a penalty.
        PS: And wasn’t Ricciardo one of such dive-bombers? Somehow, it wasn’t a problem before, but not it is?

        1. Russell ended up on the outer boundary of the corner when he was going down the inside. Please explain how that was possible if Perez left no room. Please explain where Perez could go.

          Ricciardo has always been a divebomber, and I called it out then too. Same with Verstappen and Alonso. I’ve always been a proponent of going by the rules, and the rules dictate that crowing off the track is prohibited. That’s exactly what Russell did.

    3. Russell equally could have received a penalty for driving Perez off the track. He certainly didn’t leave a car width on the outside, did he…

      They cancel each other out – so racing incident.

    4. @jerejj

      Perez should’ve received a 5-second penalty for gaining a lasting advantage

      I disagree. Perez was ahead and Russel didn’t leave him any room. They would’ve collided (more badly) if Perez hadn’t left the track.

      Even Mercedes didn’t seem to think that Perez deserved a penalty and they just told Russell to keep his head down and overtake Perez on track.

      1. @hotbottoms @samuelea
        The reason for leaving the track is irrelevant if one either gains or maintains a position that way.

    5. @jerejj – Pushing someone off the track is a 5s penalty. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Russell lose 3rd later this afternoon.

      1. @petebaldwin I think they looked at it already, no action. Feels about right.

      2. Don’t see it happening as the stewards ruled on it and there is no new evidence Red Bull can bring to appeal it.

    6. I don’t know if Russell realised it at the time, but his coming together with Perez, took a lot of preassure off Hamilton, as Perez was closing down on him at the time. As a result of Perez driving off track that increased the gap to +7 secs.

      You also had Hamilton running wide, loosing 2 and half seconds to Verstappen, at which time Hamilton gave up chasing down Max and decided to preserve his tires and his position.

      Good job by Mercedes driving consistently, some great championship points.

      1. totally false, Lewis did not lose 2.5 seconds plus perez was not catching Lewis who dominated him all race keeping him out of drs range. Also perez GAINED time going off track when he cut the chicane mario kart style so i have no idea where he lost 7 seconds.
        Sure he lost time defending RUS but the only reason why he needed to defend because RUS closed the gap and was in Drs range in the first place…
        Its embarrassing for RB having a number 2 driver in the fastest car on the grid beaten by both Merc drivers in a slower car.

        Perez proved again that he is a wasted a seat at rb (which is fine for Dr sugar water because it is a 1 driver wunderkind team anyway..) :
        out launched by Lewis at the start losing a place
        gapped by LEW keeping him out of drs range on raw pace
        daydreaming and dropped back from Lewis after the sc ended
        Pointless fighting with Carlos when he was on a two stopper costing him time defending
        cut the chicane gaining a lasting advantage when RUS caught him and made an overtake challenge
        caught sleeping again when vsc ended and RUS got the launch on him
        Lost to both Mercs on merit in a far superior car

    7. @jerejj Really? Had Perez not have left the track, Russell would have made heavy contact and taken Perez out of the race. Russell made a very opportunistic manoeuvre and had a near collision due to a very late manoeuvre, despite Perez leaving room.

      1. That is complete and utter BS @jerejj. Just ask Russels OWN TEAM who clearly told him he was not ahead – he actually forced Perez to leave the track to avoid a colission. And no, he did not have to take the same route as Gasly had to take, they were a lot further down the corner.

        I can reccomend J. Palmer for comment (on F1 TV) he tends to see things and call them exactly right real time.

    8. With 10 races remaining and a 63points advantage, a 2022 WDC different from VER would call for something like 3-4 VER’s DNFs and over 5 LEC wins. With another win, VER could finish 2nd the rest of the year and still be the champion – and that is if we saw 9 LEC wins. Two wins and fnishing 3rd is enough for VER. ON the current situation, in which a VER 3rd is a given and RB DNFs are unusual, VER only need to properly beat (finish ahead) LEC 3 or 4 times and the championship is in the bag.

    9. Agree, Perez lives up to his doormat number 2 driver blocking name, he knew RUS was on his inside so PER with ZERO intention to make the corner decided to cut the chicane gaining a lasting advantage.

      maybe RUS should’ve done an Ocon when he divebombed Tsunoda DNF’ing him and only got a laughable 5 second penalty.

      Bizarre how the FIA penalize drivers for going 2 mm over a white line but DNF another car or deliberately cutting a chicane gets little to zero punishment..

      1. INdeed George should get a penaulty of causing a collision that is wat they look at. But (he hit Perez) found not to hard and Perez didn’t lose his spot so no action.

    10. Jere: “Perez should’ve received a 5-second penalty for gaining a lasting advantage”

      I think Russell’s argument was that the rules/guidelines now state that if you are on the inside and your front wheels are ahead of the other car’s rear wheels, the car on the outside has to leave room for you. Since Russell had to put his inner wheels over the kerb, it follows Perez hadn’t left him enough room. However, if you penalise Perez, I don’t see how you cannot penalise Russell too for exactly the same reason. Perez was fortunate that the French circuit is just flat tarmac. A lot of circuits would have seen a high probability of Perez suffering wing or floor damage.

      I think it would be useful if the stewards further reviewed incidents like this after the race, not with a view to applying post-race penalties, but rather to try to explain to drivers what is required of both drivers in situations like this. Was that a legitimate way for Russell to attempt to overtake, or was it not? Was Perez’s defence reasonable, or was it not. Maybe then we’d get less of the undignified wailing over the radios.

  3. Mercedes showing what a tightly-run organisation can do with machinery that isn’t at the peak of the field. Ferrari should be absolutely ashamed today.

    1. +1 Agreed.

    2. Leclerc’s spin wasn’t a team fault and Sainz’s strategy could be handled better at some point, but there was no way he could keep the podium. But agree about Mercedes. One huge aspect to consider is – Mercedes has one DNF this season so far, Ferrari’s got seven. That speaks volumes.

  4. https://www.ferrari.com/en-EN/corporate/career

    I employee all of you to apply for a position. I’m confident anyone posting here can do a better job than the current strategists

    1. *Implore

    2. Just need to understand math and be able to add 5 seconds and then solve for the equation delta lap time multiplied by x where x is number of laps and solve for x given the time gap to the position you want to finish.

    3. @spencer It sounds like it was longevity of the tyre that was a concern, they could have either kept 3rd with high chance of blowout or take certain 5th with FL. Blowout would have not only resulted in no points but also potentially financial implications of demaged car. Given Sainz isn’t in a chamionship fight I understand why they wanted to steal a point from Max and take least risk. Its the timing of their stop that i find issues with, should have been 7-10 laps earlier

      1. Sam (@undercut677)
        24th July 2022, 17:17

        Correct, they had to pit but could have made it to 3rd if they had pit 8 laps earlier before losing all that time before Checo.

        1. They THOUGHT they had to pit @undercut677, @ivan-vinitskyy we do not know whether they were right with that. But Gasly stopped at exactly the same moment onto the same mediums and also fought hard after that but was able to finish and even make moves right up to the end of the race, so it could well be they were just overcautious.

    4. Ambrogio Isgro
      24th July 2022, 18:37

      +1000

  5. BLS (@brightlampshade)
    24th July 2022, 15:46

    Mercedes have such a disparity between quali and race pace, they were still lacking on Ferrari and Red Bull (Max), but by a few tenths not the near second in quali trim.

    Max is charging away into the distance, driving impeccably with a monster of a car. Should tie it up with a few races to spare.

    Ferrari….what?

  6. Christian telling Max great job, maximum points cracked me up. I thought max points included fastest lap and for the weekend, winning pole.

  7. Ferrari- `Should we pit?`

    Binotto- Shakes Magic 8 Ball

  8. I’ve been trying to figure out what Ferrari were doing with Sainz and I honestly still can’t attach any logic to it. They’ve made a lot of stupid decisions over the last few years but at least I can usually understand what they were (wrongly) thinking. I have no idea this time….

    1. You’re all assuming his tyres wouldn’t fall off a cliff in that 10 laps in which case he could have lost far more. Worst case scenario was they lost one place with their call. Worst case staying out was tyres letting go and a retirement.

      1. Sam (@undercut677)
        24th July 2022, 17:14

        That is not the decision. Of course he had to pit but the correct decision is to pit him 6 laps earlier before he lost all that time behind Checo. That was easily the best decision. Also, at one point they did tell Sainz to go to the end shortly after they told him he incorrectly had a stop and go penalty. In other words, Fearri is completely put of their depth.

        1. Oh, but it is….! Read all the comments, some F1 fans say Ferrari has no idea what they are doing regarding the strategy… and they mean by that there was no need to pit SAI anymore, and once he got to 3rd should have continued (on old Mediums) until the end of the race. There was an alternative indeed, but risky and not 100% it would have worked: continue on used Mediums and try opening the 5sec gap necessary to keep 3rd. Following the same logic, I think we can say RBR were amateurs in Austria and threw away the win by not sending VER back on track with Softs after the SC. So, in hindsight, almost always there’re alternatives. Thing is, what matters mostly to Ferrari now is to not let VER gain max points… most likely that being the strategy deployed.

          1. Sam (@undercut677)
            26th July 2022, 0:54

            Not pitting him at all in the end wpuld have been too risky. The correct decision was to pit but do so 6-9 laps earlier. He would have still taken the fastest lap away from Max but finished one or two spots ahead.

      2. @slowmo – I knew he had to pit again as soon as the first safety car came out. It was too long to push a set of mediums but he had to pit early to make the most of the free stop…

        I expected him to pit much earlier instead of being stuck behind slower cars for a load of laps. If they’d have done that, he would have had the same gap to Russell/Perez but would have had many more laps to catch them. Instead, they let him fight Russell and Perez risking damage when their plan all along was for him to be a distant 5th…? Why not just tell him to turn the engine down and take no risks if that was the case?

        1. I posted in the Sainz article but my personal belief is they hoped for a safety car which would have given them a high chance for the podium.

    2. Sainz didn’t had the pace to open a 5-sec gap on those tyres. He would be P5 anyway.

      Ferrari does silly strategic mistakes but today there’s nothing to it. It was the right call. And he bagged the FL point.

    3. @petebaldwin It’s easy to understand when you look at it from Ferrari’s point of view.
      They only cared that Sainz finish in the top 10 with the fastest lap as he took a point from Verstappen. It was all about trying to keep Leclerc in the game. 2nd place in the race for Sainz doesn’t help Leclerc at all if Sainz can’t take fastest lap.

      1. For those that might not agree with me, wait for the radio communication between Ferrari and Sainz to get published. Sainz is begging to pit when he learns he has a 5 second penalty. Ferrari keeps telling him no until they are sure that the gap between VER and HAM is too small for VER to pit. Then as he is just about to pass PER, they tell him to come in.

        1. @jimfromus – Interesting idea. I don’t know if it’s right or not but it’s the first explanation that at least makes sense!

  9. Ferrari really are pitiful at times. Far too many times. They produce a fantastic car, but they keep botching up strategy.

  10. Sam (@undercut677)
    24th July 2022, 16:09

    The whole Sainz strategy back and forth circus only to end up making the obviously incorect decision was a disgrace. F1 is different than it was 20 years ago. There is more money and more brainpower and Ferrari is too insular to be a legitimate contender. Merc and RB keep hiring top international talent and Ferrari just promotes Italians that obviously are not good enough. Russel and Hamilton will win a championship in the future before Leclerc and Sainz.

    1. @undercut677 See my comment above. Ferrari sacrificed Sainz finish to take a point from Verstappen. Sainz finishing 2nd wouldn’t have helped Leclerc.

      1. Sam (@undercut677)
        26th July 2022, 0:56

        @jimfromus

        The correct decision was to pit 6-9 laps before instead of losing all that time behind checo. He still would have gotten fastest lap and gained one or two spots.

  11. That brake test for Seb in the last corner…

    1. Nothing will happen because daddy owns the team. Aston are an embarrassment, are they a serious team? stroll is Latifi tier when it comes to a waste of a seat and wouldn’t be anywhere near F1 machinery on merit . I understand teams needing well funded talentless pay drivers (Maldonado/Latifi – williams, zhou – alfa) to survive but strolls rich billionaire daddy brought a team, builds a new factory and gives a race seat to his talentless son guaranteeing a F1 drive for life but with that guarantee’s that aston are not a serious team and will never challenge for serious points ..

    2. Thanks for posting that. It already seemed something was off with that from the trackside camera’s. What a pointless move.

      Not sure what Vettel stands to gain from sticking with this outfit. The simple fact they keep Stroll’s kid in that car instead of half a dozen other eligible drivers shows they’re not serious about competing in F1.

    3. Loved when Stroll told the team to shut up over the radio.

    4. Ruben, thank you for finding and sharing that clip. In other races I’ve heard ex-drivers use the phrase “parking the car on the apex” to describe defensive driving to prevent an overtake, and I think I remember Alonso doing it not so long ago. But it is just an expression, you are not supposed to put the handbrake on. That was over the top, and when it is your own team-mate behind and you are squabbling for one point, and you have another race in one week’s time, a last corner collision would not have been clever.

Comments are closed.