Do Red Bull get the credit they deserve for their unrivalled success?

Round Table

Posted on

| Written by

Last weekend Red Bull have clinched the first of the two world championship titles available in 2023, sealing the constructors’ trophy last weekend at Suzuka.

They did so having dropped only one race victory the entire season. Max Verstappen is virtually guaranteed to secure his third consecutive drivers’ title at the sprint race in Qatar.

But are they getting the credit that they should for their run of dominance? RaceFans’ writers have their say:

Fans seldom cheer those on top

Since their penalty for exceeding the budget cap by £1.8m in 2021, the team has faced a tough sell. Fans at Silverstone were heard shouting ‘cheat’ at Verstappen and Perez earlier in the year whilst the pair were on stage. Despite their clear dominance in the sport also a result of many talented people working behind the scenes too, it feels like Red Bull have to work twice as hard to impress those are not fans of the team.

Michael Schumacher, Ferrari, Suzuka 2004
Even Schumacher’s dominance turned fans off
Their reputation has not been helped by some of motorsport advisor Helmut Marko’s comments, including his recent offensive remarks about Perez. Despite team principal Christian Horner explaining that Marko is “not an employee of Red Bull Racing,” and the Austrian apologising, it is clear fans don’t take well to someone so closely associated with the brand regularly making critical comments of their own drivers.

But this shouldn’t take away from what they have achieved in the past two years. The success on and off track is undeniable and it’s not something we haven’t seen before from this team, who reeled of a quartet of consecutive championships during the Sebastian Vettel era.

Michael Schumacher’s reign of dominance was the bane of many fans when he was routinely winning almost every single race in his Ferrari. Lewis Hamilton had viewers turning off when Mercedes were on top.

At the core of it, fans and the media don’t crave dominance – they crave excitement. Often the hard work put in by the hundreds who make up the trackside and factory teams will be overlooked by those who just want to see more excitement, more battles, more competition for wins. The sport never favours those on top, as history shows.

Excellence in sport can look very boring. But if people do not enjoy it, that does not always mean they don’t want to give credit where credit is due.

Claire Cottingham

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Perez’s underperforming

I think Red Bull’s current form would garner more affection if it was being achieved with two drivers rather than one. That’s often the issue with dominant teams. There should be at least two cars capable of competing for any grand prix win, particularly if one team has a clear advantage on the rest, and when there is just one in that position it becomes about one driver’s success rather than the team’s.

Suzuka was another tough weekend for Perez
The drivers’ championship takes precedence over the constructors’ championship for many fans, and in recent years Formula 1’s promotional strategy has leaned on any battles it can find between people, rather than brands. If Ferrari were regularly challenging Red Bull for wins, then the focus would more likely be put on Verstappen versus Charles Leclerc or Carlos Sainz Jnr rather than the teams.

And we can’t point to a Verstappen versus Perez fight at the front being served up by Red Bull, because Verstappen is already 177 points clear of his team mate. That’s a considerably larger gap than what separates Perez’s second place in the standings and McLaren’s Lando Norris down in seventh.

That may make F1 more predictable and less appealing to watch, but how does it take away from Red Bull’s ongoing achievements? It’s the way other drivers have fallen at the wayside. Red Bull have a record of letting go of younger drivers who can be developed, but are now sticking with an older driver who is clearly underperforming in a car Verstappen has won 13 races in.

If Red Bull were winning and Verstappen was being kept on his toes by, or crushing, a rising talent as a team mate, then it would be easier to emotionally invest in Red Bull’s success. That applies to the previous two years, as well as the dominant 2023.

Ida Wood

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

What’s in a name?

The team currently known as Red Bull is on its third identity since its foundation. Broadly, those three names have reflect each of the different kinds of identities Formula 1 teams tend to go by.

Red Bull has never been subtle in marketing
Three-times world champion Jackie Stewart founded the team under his name and entered it into F1 in 1997. Many other F1 constructors acquired their monikers this way, from success stories like McLaren and Williams to those which passed on but are still recalled with affection, like Minardi and Jordan – all of which were on the grid that year.

Those teams were named for their founders who created them to prove they could take on the world’s best car builders. They are imbued with that competitive spirit. The new owners of Williams understood the value of this when they bought the team from the family which created it but kept its historic name.

Stewart sold his team to Ford who rebranded it as Jaguar in 2000. This name had an obvious appeal too, as a prestige car manufacturer whose presence in the pinnacle of motorsport served a logical purpose: That its success on the track would inspire people to buy its road cars. It may not have succeeded, but the ‘win on Sunday, sell on Monday’ aspirations of car manufacturers competing in motorsport is easily appreciated and has been tried in F1 from Ferrari to Honda to Aston Martin.

Red Bull, which took over in 2005, is the third kind of brand, one which lacks an obvious association with motorsport. And this mundane reason is partly why it doesn’t command the kind of affection or inspire the same respect as many of its peers on the grid.

Simply put, Red Bull exists to sell soft drinks. They may not be the first team to use the sport to sell something entirely disconnected from motor racing, nor even the first to win championships while doing so, but their name is an inescapable reminder they came to F1 to sell cans of fizzy pop.

None of this is to say that soft drinks are bad or Red Bull is bad or Red Bull don’t deserve their success. Christian Horner has built a formidable racing operation which has reduced its rivals to bit-players over the past 12 months. But their successes, the huge sums they’ve poured into many levels of motor racing and their new commitment to build their own F1 power units can’t change the fact Red Bull existed as an energy drink first and a motor racing team second.

That said, at least it’s a better name than ‘Racing Point’.

Keith Collantine

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Time for Red Bull’s rivals to step up

As a founder member of the international support group ‘F1 Fans Against Restricted Competition and Entertainment’ (FFARCE – meetings every Monday evening), this last season-and-a-half has been especially fruitful for recruiting new members.

Mercedes are used to finishing behind Verstappen
Nothing is as effective at snuffing out that ‘it’s race week’ adrenaline rush quite like the spoiler of knowing who will triumph days before a car has even turned a wheel. And in F1’s ground effect era – the one that was supposed to hail in a brave new vision for what racing at the sport’s highest level could be – Red Bull’s relentless success has killed so much of the magic that draws fans to sports like ours.

But the reality is, the world champions’ stranglehold over Formula 1 is only half the story. Yes, Red Bull are the best in the world at what they do right now, but make no mistake – they are only as good as their competition allows them to be.

At some point, Mercedes and Ferrari must be held accountable for their failure to reel in their rivals. Mercedes bet on the wrong horse over back-to-back years as far as their car design goes and their hubris has been their undoing. Ferrari have few excuses either. They entered this new age of F1 with superior speed to Red Bull, only to implode under the pressure of maintaining that form over the months ahead.

Make no mistake – Red Bull’s success reflects the mastery of their management and the elite talent of their lead driver. But even in a budget cap era, the fact neither Mercedes nor Ferrari have been able to exploit their wealth of resources and talent to offer any genuine challenge to the champions should be to their shame.

While first it was Aston Martin and now McLaren who have stepped up as the champions’ closest competition, it’s hard not to begrudge a fallible Ferrari and milquetoast Mercedes for allowing Red Bull to run rings around them in back-to-back seasons.

Will Wood

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Over to you

Do you agree or disagree with our writers? Do Red Bull deserve more credit for their achievements? Have your say in the comments.

Round Table

Browse all Round Table articles

Author information

Will Wood
Will has been a RaceFans contributor since 2012 during which time he has covered F1 test sessions, launch events and interviewed drivers. He mainly...

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

111 comments on “Do Red Bull get the credit they deserve for their unrivalled success?”

  1. Simply put, Red Bull exists to sell soft drinks.

    How’s that different to Renault or Mercedes, who only exist to sell cars, most of the mainstream ones? I don’t think it’s fair on Red Bull right now. Maybe that argument was valid in 2010, but after years of sucess, the word “Red Bull” probably resonates more to a lot of people as Red Bull, the F1 team rather than Red Bull, the fizzy drink.

    Back when they started after taking over Jaguar, yeah, you’d think what are they in this for? But when you add the investment, the resources, their willingness and finally their sucess, Red Bull isn’t “that marketing thingy” anymore.

    1. Sponsors of various motorsports and teams. Also “adrenaline sports”.
      I don’t care if the money they spread around sports globally comes from fizzy drinks or mass produced passenger vehicles.

      1. I positively associate the Red Bull brand with a wide range of sports. Far more so than various oil companies and financial investors

    2. To be fair to Renault and Mercedes – at least they invest in, develop and manufacture their own products, rather than merely marketing outsourced product.
      And Red Bull’s investment in an F1 team is still only for one thing – to sell more of that product. It would make their brand look pretty ordinary if they were running around at the back of the pack all the time, wouldn’t it. They need to be at the front, or their marketing investment in wasted – and to be at the front, they need huge financial investment. You’ve got to spend money to make money, as they say.
      It follows their sponsorship in every other area too – they don’t put their brand on losers or mediocre stuff, but typically only on leaders in their respective fields.

      And it’s always worth remembering that F1 is actually pretty cheap advertising given the exposure it produces – especially now that an established, successful team can basically run sustainably without any externally sourced sponsorship at all….

    3. Yes, I didn’t even SEE a red bull drink since it was new, as it was very popular back then, and I doubt I ever drank one, so I definitely associate red bull with one of the strongest teams f1 ever had, along with mercedes; I know ferrari, mclaren and williams have a lot of championships, but that’s cause they’ve been around a lot, and ever since merc and red bull hit their stride (again, considering merc were also strong in the 50s) I didn’t see any team realistically able to challenge them that is not red bull or merc yet.

    4. I totally agree.

      Red Bull existed as an energy drink first and a motor racing team second.

      That goes for Mercedes, Ferrari & Alpine too. And in all honesty all sports RedBull enters as sponsor or event organiser sees the athletes they support win. So I would say it is a quality label by now and certainly not an one off. Their whole approach is based on sports and competition. Much more so than car manufacturers. I personally would love F1 to get back to chassis builders only, excluding Mercedes, Renault and Ferrari. But given the legacy off the latter I can not imagine F1 without them.

      1. Not quite true, Ferrari existed as a racing team first and started manufacturing road cars to fund it.

      2. Ferdinand, I am not sure what you mean by “chassis builders only, excluding Mercedes, Renault and Ferrari”. I thought those three built their own chassis anyway, so really not sure which current teams you want included and which you want excluded.

        1. No road car chassis manufacturers. No road car engine manufacturers.

        2. I understand this has gotten a lot of grey area over time. What I mean is Williams, RedBull and then I would say McLaren albeit they now also produce road cars … hence the complexity. But what I mean at heart is the origins of Williams, McLaren, RedBull: get a bunch of people together, build a chassis, go shop for an engine and let’s compete. Not having 100 years of experience and big factories somewhere with tons of proven ground of building engines and cars, which to me provides an unfair competitive advantage. Having said that, I know it’s a dream in todays revenue and entertainment driven society.

    5. the word “Red Bull” probably resonates more to a lot of people as Red Bull, the F1 team rather than Red Bull, the fizzy drink.

      It’s “Red Bull the fizzy drink which is plastered on everything even remotely sport-ish” to me. Oh, and it’s also the terrible smell spreading in the room when someone opens a can.

      1. A cold Red Bull doesn’t reek as much as a roomtemperature one. The tast of a cold one is also much beter then a warmer one but it does one thing good It lessen your thirst by cooling your body (when it’s cold). It’s does the same but much stronger when you after a football match take a icecold beer.

        But before the drink i thought of red Bull as a sponsor of motor and extreme sports sponsor. I remember my son doing the national championship Laserquest and it was all sponsored by RedBull.

    6. If Red Bull hadn’t enjoyed early success when they took over the team, and if they hadn’t been able to throw maoney at the problem and give Newey the things he wanted to get him away from McLaren (or was it Williams), would they have stayed in F1? I’m not sure they would. If the top peopel in the company retire and it slumps to an also ran, will Red Bull still want to be in F1? Again, chances are they wouldn’t, they’d head for the hills, although they’d position it as “we’ve achieved everything we set out to achieve, we’ve been the most successful team of all time, it is time for us to move onto other sports which need us”. I have huge respect for Williams and McLaren which have been through difficult times, and still stuck to their guns of being an F1 team come what may.

      1. BMW, Honda, Toyota are some examples of what you describe. Either the angle is for the love of the game or to achieve some exposure. Or a current (temporarily?) third; the financial reward system that makes it interesting just to linger around for some (hence the objection to dilution by new entries). If you stay around for the love of the game without success some may call it idiocy, other might find it romantic.

  2. Nobody ever does, that’s just the way of things

    1. Although true, this case has a lot more going against it as mentioned in the article. 2021 and the way it ended, max and his driving is clearly irksome to many.. example Brazil last season. Could be said about Christian too and as mentioned Helmut. Again as mentioned the cost cap infringment ribbed many the wrong way too. Then the lack of a battle between team mates, the lack of any real challenges at all let alone other winners and it all makes sense really. It’s fair to say that mercedes era had a lot more going on and although it’s only been two seasons it seems unlikely it’s going to change untill 2 more seasons pass. Not to mention mercedes had rules changed early on to try and reduce their advantage, even large regulatory changes. But so far nothing against red bull and the coming 2026 changes were already due to be for then.

      It’s easy to see why they haven’t gotten much credit but pretty understandable too. They’ve certainly done a great job on many fronts but nobody truly cares to see it do they.

      This however isn’t a problem for F1 as a whole. It’s a known thing amoungst regular and keen fans that teams dominate here. Add to the fact that F1 has a strong base that doesn’t rely on good racing and it’ll only put the numbers through the roof when eventually there’s more on track battles for the win. Hopefully this turns out to be a legitimate fight though rather than 1 dominance to the next.

      In the end I just don’t see anyone challenging redbull untill 2026. I’d be confident they coukd give alpha tauri this year’s car for next season, some personal that know how to make it work. And theyd very likely finish 2nd to redbull every race.

      Now many people will agree that 2021 was a freak year that is a rare occurrence. I strongly believe that it was a freak year also simply for having a title battle to the very end.

      Just one reason being that the probability is greatly reduced simply by virtue of the current 27gp’s worth of points on offer over a season.

      1. Any article about RB or Merc, even if about car updates or anything anout them seems to bring up 2021 Abu Dhabi after 6 or 7 posts. Its like a form of Godwins law, maybe we should call it Masi’s law?

        1. Lol perhaps. In the world of F1 and really into wider sports it was a huge moment. I don’t believe we’ve seen the end of it either.

      2. Checo put his car in the wall in Monaco, on purpose, the telemetry was quite clear and certainly within the team they have even more details then the convincing data we already got. Max was on a pole lap. Checo wins the race and party’s like it 1999 (cheats on his wife too that day). Then later on in Brazil Max is on merit in front of Perez and eventhough he clearly asked his team not to ask it of him openly they do ask over the radio to please let Checo have the spot. Max says no. Would you and do you think that is reasonable to ask. I will agree RBR handled it badly, but to call this unsympathetic goes far. I fully understand Max.

  3. Rightly or wrongly, Red Bull are perceived as the “villains” of F1. There are quite a few people who still haven’t got over Hamilton being pipped to the post for the 2021 championship, and their frustration can only be compounded by the fact that neither their favoured driver nor his team have been very competitive in the years since. Add to that the controversy over Red Bull’s budget cap breach in the same year, and you have a recipe for resentment.

    But part of that is cultivated by Red Bull themselves. Being seen as mavericks and disruptors is part of their brand image. So it does not necessarily hurt them, from a marketing point of view, when some futile sore losers (I hesitate to call them “fans”) get into a pointless rage about them and their success.

    So, do Red Bull deserve more credit for their success? Maybe. Do they care? Probably not.

    1. It’s not being a sore loser when the post was moved into the hands of the competitor. Had it been the other way around it’s obvious that the “sore losers” would have been louder than the sport itself.

      1. This kind of thing got very old very quickly in the immediate aftermath; to still be banging on about it now is just sad.

        1. You’re the one who brought it up. You know that it’s still a sore point to many, make a point of mentioning it frequently, and then use the inevitable responses to denigrate those who make them. I can only assume you’re doing it on purpose at this point, that you enjoy upsetting people and then laughing at their upset.

        2. This kind of thing got very old very quickly in the immediate aftermath; to still be banging on about it now is just sad.

          The continuing denial of the inherent wrongness of AD21 is a mega yawn.
          Why don’t you do what Horner did during 2022 and acknowledge it was wrong?

          At work, I was always the lone Hamilton fan, but in the days immediately after that criminal rip-off I found that everyone said it was wrong and even the two RBR fans said the actions of Massi were the biggest pile of bul****t they’d even seen in their lives.

          Some of those people stopped following F1.

          1. ILoveConspiracyTheories
            27th September 2023, 21:30

            Then they should have stopped following F1 much earlier. The whole season was seasoned with big piles of b*llsh*t by stewards and race director, not only AD21. Also the case of Massa and his “lost” title comes from this same pile of sh*t in F1.

            It is an iilusion to think that F1 is a fair SPORT. It’s not for nothing that the owners, TP’s etc. refer to improving the SHOW. Too many strange things has happenend in F1 and just for 1 reason, Money! And as long that will be around, more strange things will happen.

            Why do I keep watching? Because this show is a million times better then keeping up with the Kardashians or similar crap of reality soaps.

    2. Of course there are those that are sore about 2021, but surely there are at least as many die-hard Verstappen fans.

      I think the bigger reasons for Red Bull’s unpopularity are those that Ida and Claire stated in the article:

      1. Dominant teams are never popular, because they make the championship boring. Ferrari wasn’t popular in the early 2000s and neither was Mercedes during their dominance.

      2. Perez is underperforming, so there isn’t a battle for drivers’ championship either. Similarly Ferrari’s unpopularity was compounded by Schumacher’s dominance.

      But all in all, I would say that Red Bull do get the credit they deserve for their dominance: does anyone really question that their success in 2022 and 2023 is simply due to them performing much better than everyone else? Whether that makes them popular is another matter.

      1. But all in all, I would say that Red Bull do get the credit they deserve for their dominance: does anyone really question that their success in 2022 and 2023 is simply due to them performing much better than everyone else?

        It should be noted that a lot of us predicted Adrian Newey would produce something that utilised all the previous ground effect era experience he had, enhanced by modern tech. We were right.

    3. I partly agree. To the extent RB is seen as the villain by some, it does indeed not hurt their brand at all. The whole saga did hurt the Mercedes brand though. They failed to capitalise on winning their 8th (!) WCC in a row but instead went into complaining mode and took it -imho- too far. I understand the disappointment and strange scene of events in that last race, but we all know a season is not a single race and the whole 2021 campaign was rigged and controversial, not just this last race. So there comes a moment when you have to stop whining. They deliberately kept it going, even until today – while not doing themselves a favour and helping RB. Holding your head up as 8 WCC and 7 times WDC would have far been the better option. Further on content the cost cap thing is really something created by Mercedes. It was so marginally (0,8%) that it is impossible to get any advantage out of it. Was it a fault? Yes. Has it been punished? Yes. So overall I would say there is a large fanbase and sympathy for RedBull out there, just not in some geographic area of the world, which is totally understandable, but getting a bit silly by now. It is only because a lot of the narrative and coverage comes from the same group that we keep being dragged in to it. The rest of the world has moved on already for quite some time.

  4. “There are quite a few people who still haven’t got over Hamilton being pipped to the post for the 2021 championship”

    I’m one of them, and that’s probably one of the worst ways you could describe what happened in 2021. Complete blinkers.

    1. Or you simply have to look over the season and find the most deserving driver, not just the last race.

      1. Which again would be Hamilton. Verstappens crash in Silverstone was partly his own fault, je deliberately took Hamilton out in Monza, tried the same in Brazil and Jeddah, and got gifted points for no race in Spa.

        1. Peak TeamLH moment. My idol can do no wrong.

        2. @madmax if you still believe that Verstappen was at fault for Hamilton understeering into him whilst he was still largely behind Verstappen, then you’re just plain wrong.

    2. Still not sure which race was the worst… Silverstone 21 or AD21..
      Both resulted in a non deserved win according to lots of people…
      In the end the best won..

      1. @seth-space to compare Silverstone to Abu Dhabi is absurd. Who was at fault at Silverstone? Certainly not Lewis. Max is the one who cut across and tried to correct but was too late. Lewis just drove his line and gave Max 9,000 miles of space – I think Christian Horner admitted it was the most space ever given by another driver in the history of racing and Max cut him expecting the full track. I think the stewards asked Lewis to give the entire track in their statement – it was a complete breach of every racing regulation…

        But go on believe that Lewis was at fault. The stewards should have given Lewis a penalty of -10 seconds – I think that would have been more fair at Silverstone…

        1. @freelittlebirds. I agree AD and Silverstone are incomparible but Lewis was predominantly at fault at Copse. It was a late move, squeezed against the barrier and he took too much speed in and was drifting wide on the exit. He would require Verstappen’s line to be over the exit kerbing which was never going to happen. Max left space, Lewis had aerowash and understeered across the road into him. When making the move later in the race on Leclerc he takes an entirely different approach.

          Lewis was at fault.

          That in no way justifies Max’s frankly disgraceful driving in Monza, Jeddah and Brazil, where he was way over the line and the stewards should have policed it more effectively. But Max lost a huge amount of points in Baku and Silverstone that year too, so I consider them both worthy of that years title – neither were perfect wheel-to-wheel.

          1. @rbalonso Actually, let’s dissect this – heading into Copse, Max squeezed Lewis to the right with a double move and that essentially automatically meant that Lewis was not going to be able to take the same angle as Max who swept all the way to the left side.

            There was no understeer, no drifting at the point of contact – we all know Lewis was going to make that car as wide as possible coming out of the corner which is what all drivers would do, but Max hit him way before the end of the corner so we didn’t see how that would have played out.

            Lewis kept his line and he didn’t make Max’s life easy if that’s what you mean. Would it have been nice if Lewis had conceded heading into the corner? Sure, if he was a Red Bull or Alpha Tauri driver maybe that’s what the team would have expected of him.

            You can clearly see Max’s reaction from the onboards when he realized that Lewis had not conceded and turning left to correct but too little too late.

            As Lewis said, Max turned into him and very aggressively so.

            It’s one of the clearest racing incidents and if you’re looking for a technical mistake, Max’s cornering was too aggressive and clearly did not account for another car being there. If it was Alonso, I would not have given him a penalty but Max’s driving is so egregious and dangerous that the stewards should always penalize him like Maldonado.

          2. I agree with a few elements of your analysis but I’m not sure it was a double move. In any event, Max moving him to the right was to make Lewis back out, when Lewis committed he had to be tight to the right hand side, as he was in the Leclerc overtake. Lewis gambled on Max giving him more space than he was legally due. Max satisfied the rule to leave the space and even opens the steering mid corner to leave more. Lewis’ opinion on it is entirely irrelevant. The technical mistake is on Lewis for a shallow line which was always going to the end up on the exit kerb.

            I can understand Max expected Lewis to back out – and squeezed him to make that obvious. I can’t understand where Lewis expected Max to go. The onus is on the driver on the inside not to slide into the driver ahead and Max was ahead going into the corner.

            I think it can be a racing incident and have someone who makes a mistake and is predominantly at fault. I personally wouldn’t have given a 10s penalty for this incident but given the championship consequences I can understand why the decision was made. But I think to say Lewis was in no way at fault is blinkered.

          3. @rbalonso

            Lewis gambled on Max giving him more space than he was legally due.

            I don’t understand the logic that Max was legally due more space – he has space, he just had to match Lewis’ angle and speed – that’s the whole point of wheel-to-wheel racing. All Lewis needs to provide is space and that’s it and he did.
            He doesn’t need to provide the space that Max Verstappen wants, or find the angle that suits Verstappen or anything like that. He’s going in the direction and he’s not deliberately turning into Max or anything like that. He’s just going about his business and Max then smashes into him.

          4. It’s not that Max is legally due more space, it’s that he has provided Lewis with the legal amount to make Lewis responsible in the event of contact.

            Let’s look at it as a racing thesis away from Silverstone 2021 for a minute. If a driver is on the racing line 2 car lengths ahead of the driver behind and ahead approaching a corner, it’s the lead driver’s right to take their chosen line, obviously. In the event that a car is alongside, i.e. the trailing driver’s front axle is between the lead driver’s axles, on the inside, then the lead driver should leave a car’s width gap on corner entry. If the driver behind manages to pull alongside and have his front axle ahead of the lead driver’s front axle then he assumes the corner and the driver who was initially in front should concede now that the he is both behind and on the outside line.

            Returning to Silverstone, exiting Luffield Max is wide and knows he will be caught in the slipstream so moves over to make the angle acute enough that Lewis should really back out. But, Lewis is a racer and want to compete for the corner. Max recognises he is there, moves to the left to allow Lewis the legal amount of room. The crucial element here is that as Lewis commits to Copse he is in line with Max, millimetres behind. Therefore, he should take a tight line allowing Max the racing line, so long as Max has given the car’s width on entry – which he did. If contact happens thereafter it is due to Lewis being on the shallower line with excessive speed to make the trajectory through the corner that Max takes. Hence why Lewis backs out and we have a front to rear contact. Had Max pinched him to the apex, ala Senna-Schumacher Kylami, Max would be at fault.

            The entire premise of this, from a technical standpoint, is that Lewis gambled exiting Luffield that he would have his front axle ahead of Max’s. He missed by millimetres, mainly due to the longer line he had to take because Max squeezed him, which is why Max squeezed him. As a result, Lewis had thousandths of a second to make a millimetre based calculation and/or hope that Max gave him generous space. Max, for right or wrong, doesn’t give generous space.

            In an ideal World where both driver’s conduct themselves in a gentlemanly manner, Max would have not squeezed Lewis as much, Lewis would have been ahead on entry and Max would have been forced to match Lewis’ line, probably running off the track on exit, but with side-to-side contact at best. Unfortunately for Lewis, the rules and etiquette of racing as they currently stand meant that Max gave Lewis everything he should have and Lewis should’ve recognised the move would always lead to contact and backed out earlier. But, he is certainly not driving merrily along and Max smashes into him; Lewis makes a technical error following a depth misjudgement at top speed in a high pressure environment at home. People make mistakes, even the best.

          5. @rbalonso I get the sense that you’re trying to convince yourself, not me. There are no chosen lines or anything like that. Max’s chosen line did not include Lewis and would have taken the entire track so technically you’re saying that Lewis should not have been racing Max.

            The complexity of the arguments being made here to support Max show that his move was too aggressive and a mistake. All Lewis did was hold his line – in fact, had Lewis not conceded more space heading into the corner, Max would have fully broad-sided Lewis’s car as opposed to simply clipping his tire and leading to Max spinning and losing control.

            It was yet another ridiculously uncontrolled “all or nothing” racing move by Max which happens anytime he’s under pressure and the result matters.

          6. To be honest, the burden of proof doesn’t lie with me here. The objective reality of the situation is that Hamilton received a penalty for the incident for the reasons I’ve outlined above. Hamilton then altered his actions in an almost identical move later in the race. The consensus of RaceFan contributors thought that Lewis was 60% responsible for the crash, 20% thought Max was, from a poll in September that year.

            it’s not a complex argument, it’s simply the rules of the sport. Your entire point revolves around Max being aggressive which is not up for debate – Max was aggressive but he’s allowed to be. Lewis was on the wrong line and instigated contact. What technical aspects did Max do incorrectly?

            Lewis at no point concedes space, the can’t as he’s on the inside. Look at the still images of his front right wheel when passing Leclerc (where it’s on the right rumble strip) and then passing Max (when he’s a metre to the left of that). Lewis may have held his line but it was the wrong, high line as he was behind on corner entry. As I say above, it’s objectively wrong to state that Hamilton is not at fault here, he’s committed the same “all or nothing” move that Max did, he just got it wrong.

      2. Monza, Jeddah, Brazil… And silly Verstappen fan boys always bring up Silverstone, where Verstappen was partly to blame himself. Racers like Alonso, who surely dont have much sympathy for Hamilton called it a racing incident. You Verstappen fan boys sound a bit silly here…

        1. You still have some egg on your face 😜

        2. @madmax

          Racers like Alonso, who surely dont have much sympathy for Hamilton called it a racing incident. You Verstappen fan boys sound a bit silly here…

          I didn’t know he’d said that – if he said it, the stewards have nowhere to hide.

          It was at worst a racing incident and imo a penalty for Verstappen. It was probably one of the worst calls in terms of assigning blame because the wrong driver was penalized.

    3. F1 is not a decent drivers championship in the first place. It is a manufacturer’s championship first and foremost, by rule(s). In spite of most coverage, and most fans, inferring some sort of sporting-ness at the drivers level (except between teammates), it is not that. Watch tennis for that. Or almost any other racing.

      Arguing over drivers in F1 is no better than reading tea leaves. (again, except teammates)

      1. And I watch and love watching F1. But I do not lie to myself that answering any driver vs driver question matters in F1. It is fun to watch anyway.

  5. No, which is probably down to the budget cap breach & Checo’s performance level.
    Btw, the ‘cheater’ chants are from COTA rather than Silverstone.

  6. The short answer is yes. Perhaps its unfortunate that any team that has success draws the ire of some portion of the fan base and it’s usually a larger portion than those cheering for the team. It’s not unique to F1 either as the same exists in other sports, as usually the teams that have been the most successful draw the most hate. If people were not hating Red Bull then I would say that something was wrong and perhaps people didn’t appreciate how good they have been.

  7. If “Red Bull’ is a bit of an odd name, then surely ‘F1 Fans Against Restricted Competition and Entertainment’ outdoes that.
    Where the first is firstly just a name, nothing else, even if it started out for ‘just a fizzy drink’ years ago, the second is rather presumptuous. What vision and, more importantly, definitions are behind ‘restricted competition’? And is it ‘against restricted competition’ as well as ‘against entertainment’ in general, or is it ‘against restricted entertainment‘? I suggest an item for their next meeting, within a week: Get your name sorted.

    It’s hard to determine whether fans appreciate Red Bulls achievements. First, there’s the big shouters these days, but it’s unclear how many loudspeakers make up for the big noise, from where the majority can’t be heard anymore. Going by the number of attendants isn’t straightforward either, with Covid, inflation, soaring admittance prices, as well as the dilution of the events with band and DJ performances. TV audience numbers should be easier to obtain, but what F1 themselves claim them to be can’t be trusted. Then there’s the definition of ‘fan’ itself, that’s under constant change. Is the opinion of the casual, DTS attracted ‘fan’, of the same value as that of a diehard fan for many years?

    I appreciate the opinions and effort made by the authors here, but let’s face it; Only time will tell.

  8. Well done Red Bull

    1. On the back of blowing over the budget cap by a few million. Yes great job.

      1. Budget cap 2021: 145 m $, according to what I find on the internet.
        Overspend Red Bull, according to this article: 1.8 m BP. At average rate for ’21 less than 2.4 m $, meaning 1,66% or less.
        Also, according to several articles -here as well I believe- it’s turned out to be a tax refund timing issue, which is beyond Red Bull’s influence.
        My conclusion: They did not knowingly and willingly cheat, and the overspend does not account for their level of dominance for this or last year.

  9. In terms of image, Red Bull combine a ruthless desire to win (admirable in a sometimes slightly chilling way) and, as Keith says, the fact they’re selling drinks. Is that different from selling an elite car brand like Jaguar or Ferrari (or Mercedes, kind of)? Obviously it’s different. So it’s easy to see their competitiveness on track as merely an aid to selling soft drinks. Clearly that’s not ‘fair’ as the talent they have in their design, race strategy and main driver is huge and entirely focused on racing. But the drinks bit never really goes away. Imagine if it was a global fast food outlet. Red Bull is essentially the drink equivalent.

    Do they deserve more credit is another question. Did Verstappen ‘deserve’ the 2021 title? You can make a case that he drove more consistently over a season and lost points not through his own doing. But no. He didn’t deserve the title as it was given to him by Masi at Abu Dhabi. As FIA more or less acknowledge in their admission of ‘human error.’ And obviously that has carried over to 2022 and 2023, compounded by their ‘overspend’, which – it could be argued – allowed them a head start in the new car era from which the other teams will always be playing catch up in far more restricted conditions than in the past.

    Still, they designed easily the best car and have exploited to a full the second most talented driver on the grid, maximizing his potential. That deserves credit. But until we see a genuine title battle between Verstappen and either the second Red Bull driver or another team, the fact will still linger that the one time Verstappen won a title in a real battle, he should have lost. I’m guessing saying that won’t go down too well with some people. I’m a fan of Verstappen but that’s my assessment.

    1. People conveniently forget his many mistakes and misjudgments in the last 4 races. So to say he was the better if the two isn’t that easy. Lewis’s errors and lack of performance in Monaco just turned out to be more costly. Also I cannot consider Baku his error or a mistake per say. No matter the driver I would consider that just an unfortunate even. Sure if he had left it on then a clear mistake.

      When you consider to add into the pot Max’s awful driving standards at times, ands unenforced bullying nature of racing (as he himself admitted in Monza 21 and Brazil 22) it’s feasible to say they were pretty equal over the season as drivers. If max deserved the title then by the shambles of the final race, so did Lewis

      1. I was saying Verstappen was better, I just recognised that some people would make an argument that he was. I think Verstappen was more consistent up until the final races, though their driving was evenly matched (exceptional from both of them, but with a more aggressive Verstappen winning several bouts). But Hamilton when he was good was better and dealt with the end of season pressure far better. Interlagos was the big turning point, brilliant recovery from Lewis from last to first, via the sprint race, and Max cracking with his defensive driving that the race director and stewards – absurdly – allowed him to get away with (albeit to no effect). Even worse, Saudi Arabia and the brake testing, a huge no-no. Verstappen was out of control there. By Abu Dhabi the wild driving had been reined in, but then the ending… But for me that showed (a) Lewis was still the better driver under real pressure, and faster, and (b) Verstappen succumbed to that pressure. Would the same happen now? Perhaps not. The problem is we won’t know until Max faces that kind of intense pressure for the title again.

        1. Sorry, I *wasn’t* saying VER was better…

        2. The problem is we won’t know until Max faces that kind of intense pressure for the title again.

          I think you got a glimpse of the underlying Max at Singapore. As soon as the pressure was on, the censors “beep” was working overtime, and his performance dropped further as the toys left the pram. The in-lap during qualifying could have done with a better tune – those beeps were all the same note.
          I think he got his head together in the mid-to-late race period when the car behaved better. Meanwhile we got to watch some decent racing at the front.

          1. Was verstappen underperforming in singapore for the car he had? He got an 8 in the ranking here, which is very high, beat his team mate in quali, even though perez is relatively ok in street tracks, then he (verstappen) was the one able to come back through the field more convincingly on race day and had good pace and caught leclerc at 4 sec a lap towards the end. Maybe an 8 was a bit much in relation to other drivers\races this year with this ranking system, but if you have to describe verstappen’s performance that weekend as good or bad it’d be good.

          2. Strange.. Singapore showed the kind of driver Max really is. He drove an mediocre car ( the fastest car did not won btw) but created a great result nevertheless.
            of course the tension rose when the team missed the setup so he was unable to reach Q3.
            But after the race he was at ease and composed.. great stuff

          3. He drove the best car this season, got the setup wrong and was lacking performance for overdriving the car and was swearing all over the place. Yeah in the biased rating on this site he got an 8, tough a 3 or 4 would be deserved.

        3. It’s easy to come out as the better driver when you have a rocketship, isn’t it? Hamilton did the last 4 races, especially in brazil, I’m just not able to say hamilton had higher highs than verstappen in 2021 when they had evenly matched cars.

  10. Well a lot of the success is down to Adrian isn’t it. They were brave taking Honda, and they’re really well organised, and they got Max and are keeping him, so it’s a nice virtuous circle and obviously a great team to be in. But – do we LIKE them?

    They don’t come across as especially sporting, modest or generous. Christian has the smartest mouth around, Max is a complete boi who only does and says boi things, with that ridiculous fail if-only beard and a dubious partner-in-law, and they promote a fairly fake product that isn’t especially good for you. And Helmut with his ethnicity issues. And all the ists and their multiple accounts have attached themselves to them being Lewis’ nemesis, tho that’s not their fault really but they’re not that generous towards him are they. Or to anyone really.

    So probably they could get more credit, if they were more likeable.

    1. It’s a matter of taste. I like them.

      1. I’d say it’s a matter of values, Mister Bond

        1. people who push heir “values” on others are seldom honest..

          or to quote

          Don’t be like narcissists who think their beliefs and values are the ideal for everyone to follow.

  11. In 3 years we could all be thanking our lucky stars (or LKYSTRZ) for sensible team names like Red Bull Racing. At least they haven’t confused and cheapened it with multiple rebrandings like their junior team.

  12. If you cut through the rabid tribalist fans to the real F1 fans, fans of the sport – then yes I think that they do get credit.

  13. The sport never favours those on top, as history shows.

    There’s a bit more to it. Yes, prolonged periods at the top – and even worse sheer dominance – does tend to rally the opposition, as it were. It gives everyone who is dissatisfied a single target for their discontent. More so than when two teams are duking it out at the front, and a person’s favourite is just not able to join in.

    But there is also a huge part of the audience that flocks to the winners so they can vicariously enjoy the success. They, for whatever reason, crave that feeling and will gladly change in their McLaren banners for Red Bull banners – or whatever. The bandwagon effect is definitely real in sports. It was the same when Mercedes became a much more popular team in the various polls between 2014 and 2018, and when F1 became huge in Spain and Poland when Alonso and Kubica were at their peak.

    1. It was the same when Mercedes became a much more popular team in the various polls between 2014 and 2018, and when F1 became huge in Spain and Poland when Alonso and Kubica were at their peak.

      I rather wonder who those fans were watching before their current hero came forth.
      I wonder how many people remember seeing that LH Blue Peter appearance live, how many saw the junior formula performances, how many recall the LH F2 (was it GP2 then?) chase through the field with the commentary describing the difficulty of passing and where LH’s next pass would be and gasp and mumble when it was at the next corner rather than 3-5 further round.

      How many Max fans recall the nickname he picked up in his first seasons? (Although, fair’s fair, his dad had that tag before him)

      1. The 2021 Fan Survey found that there was ‘a sharp increase in the percentage of participants following F1 for five years or fewer: this has tripled from 11.7% in 2017 to 34% in 2021.’ And that’s ‘of the sample’, so one has to account for long-standing followers being more likely to participate in these surveys to begin with.

        Even sports that grow their audience still lose a lot of people. The trick is to get enough new ones in to keep the net result positive. No doubt many people who got into F1 because it became popular on the back of a particular driver will sort of drift off over time, while a part will become fans of the sport as a whole. Every race is someone’s first, and that’s great.

  14. A big part of the credit goes to the geniuses at Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault who agreed to make engines a non-factor in the premier motorsport competition on the planet. If there were Razzies for sports, they’d go to Wolff, Binotto and whoever was doing the talking on behalf of Renault.

    For these and other reasons, Red Bull’s current success (and to a large extent also that of Mercedes previously) is incomparable to the early 2000s when Ferrari won six titles in a row. Back then F1 still attracted manufacturers from all over the world and was a competition between them, the chassis makers, and the tyre manufacturers, etc. within regulations that look like a little leaflet compared to today’s 183 page tome of highly prescriptive technical regulations.

    Additionally, modern F1 has spec tyres, BoP engines, BoP testing time allocation, and a near total ban on real world testing. So it’s hard to give the same credit to whoever comes out on top as was given to those who won in the past. F1 still offers some fun racing every two weeks (often best watched as highlights), but it’s just not the same game, and the achievement of winning it is lesser for it.

    1. A big part of the credit goes to the geniuses at Mercedes, Ferrari and Renault who agreed to make engines a non-factor in the premier motorsport competition on the planet.

      Woah there, are you referring to the PU development freeze instituted 2 years ago, which was only rolled out for the good of the sport amid pleas from Red Bull that two teams would be without an motor after 6 years of dragging one supplier through the dirt – a joke that went so far that they literally rebranded the engine – and then totally ignoring the replacement in marketing, so much so that said new supplier announced they were quitting, only to quickly backtrack once they conned the rest of the field (and the governing body) into announcing a development freeze, with a date that conveniently allowed them to bring several key updates whilst rivals were already scaling back development?

      1. Wow, when you put it that way I suppose RB does not get enough credit after all. What a masterstroke!

  15. I can’t really say whether they get the credit (you think) they deserve, but I’m pretty sure they do deserve all the hate they are getting.
    They are extreme hypocrites, their two best drivers are among the most unlikable characters ever, they absolutely lack humility in victory while at the same time being quite a sore losers.
    And while the “sporting” and “fair play” may be somewhat abstract concepts, you can bet there isn’t a single F1 fan who’d say Red Bull is the most fair play team of them all.

    Their team principal is double-talking hypocrite.
    Their Chief-Eugenics-Officer is an obvious racist and a bigot.
    Their two all-time best drivers, who happen to be the most liked by their “CEO”, are quite unlikable.
    They appear extremely slimy in the way they keep dodging penalties for all of their transgressions, from the minor ones, all the way to the huge ones, like exceeding the budget in the year they barely won the WDC.
    They are the only team that has a second team which is complete conflict of interest, and is always a source of controversy.
    They treat their second drivers worse then Ferrari in their Barrichello days.
    They are always lobbying for rule changes when they can’t outcompete someone.
    And the list goes on…

    So, yeah, isn’t not so much about getting respect, as it is about bringing all the hate on themselves, all by themselves.

    1. Their Chief-Eugenics-Officer is an obvious racist and a bigot.

      A wonderfully polished phrase, naming no names, and yet we all know who. Brilliant.

    2. When using the word “hate” in a topic its clear, its a distracted “fan” talking.
      Always a pity a sport attracts these kind of “fans”.

    3. It’s hard to argue against that – these are not opinions as much as they are facts.

  16. Will Honda though?

  17. It takes time to appreciate greatness. I was annoyed by the dominance of Schumacher, Vettel and Hamilton when it happened, but when it was over I realized how special it was. Fellow racefanatic Alan Dove or AlanD (pretty sure it’s the same guy) already mentioned a few times that dominance is actually good for the sport in a way that it creates legends. And legends are vital for the popularity of the sport. Al popular sports have had dominant forces that became legends that experienced a lot of criticism when they were dominant.

    1. @matthijs Maybe dominance creates legends, but there are exceptions: Senna and Prost? Imagine Ferrari equal to Red Bull now: we’d be in the midst of an epic Verstappen versus Leclerc battle (with Sainz in the mix) as briefly seemed possible in early 2022. Surely if that was sustained for a few years, with both winning titles, they’d both become legends too? Sure Verstappen is a legend in the making, no question. Just that it doesn’t need to be exclusive.

      1. I agree. Federer versus Nadal versus Djokovic, Messi versus Ronaldo, you want a proper rivalry. But Hamilton and Schumacher have gone through years of no opposition and still became legends.

        1. @matthijs Hamilton had 3 years of pretty intense competition with his team mate. He even lost one of those championships…

          1. It’s laughable when people say this. I assume they watched the sport back then but also somehow didn’t lol. 2 of the first 3 years the title went to the end. Then Lewis h fought vettel for 2 years for around 2/3 of the season until either driver or team couldn’t sustain against him and Merc. And there was 2021.

            So that’s 5 out of 8 seasons with solid competition.

            2015 he was simply better than rosberg over the course yet failed to win 9 races. Hmm no competition there.

            2019 was simply a reversal of 2017 and 18. So with a good start instead of of end to the season. In other words a competitive end. There was no title challenge.

            2020 stands out as the only season Lewis had no competition. So 1 out of 8 seasons

          2. I forgot to add. One thing that made Lewis a legend was his exceptional stand out performances. 2018 Singapore qualifying, Brazil 2021, daring overtake during frought title battles.. there’s an endless list of exceptional performances from him not to mention that he always found a way of hitting hard when his back was against the wall. The kind of stuff that makes greats. Champions aren’t made from their easy wins and but from those performances Lewis made all too often. As did Schumacher.

            When verstappen is challenged and he does those kind of feats and comes out on top maybe he will get more credit. So far he’s fought once for a title and shown it to be false that he matured to be a calm unsurmountable driver less than one year after 2021 finale.

            I’m sure he enjoys being away from the intensity of 2021 but I can imagine the total lack of competition is not what he wants

        2. The 2002 and 2004 seasons were not why Schumacher became a legend; he already was one before that.

          For years he was the stand-out performer in the sport. All the way from 1993 through that 2000 Ferrari title, F1 was to a large extent about Schumacher. First as the vanguard of the new generation taking the fight to Prost and Senna, then as the nemesis of Williams (1994, 1995, 1997), a three year long struggle against McLaren (1998, 1999, 2000), an emphatic win in 2001 and dominant one in 2002 – and then a sort of role reversal as the next gen’s biggest stars Räikkönen (2003) and Alonso (2006) battled with him to the final race of the season.

          Even in 1996, Schumacher won arguably the best races of the season – demonstrating that while the Williams duo might decide the title, neither of them was on Schumacher’s level. And in 2005, with Bridgestone missing the mark on the single-tyre rules, Schumacher still finished 3rd in the WDC.

        3. It’s laughable when people say this. I assume they watched the sport back then but also somehow didn’t lol. 2 of the first 3 years the title went to the end. Then Lewis h fought vettel for 2 years for around 2/3 of the season until either driver or team couldn’t sustain against him and Merc. And there was 2021.

          So that’s 5 out of 8 seasons with solid competition.

          2015 he was simply better than rosberg over the course yet failed to win 9 races. Hmm no competition there.

          2019 was simply a reversal of 2017 and 18. So with a good start instead of of end to the season. In other words a competitive end. There was no title challenge.

          2020 stands out as the only season Lewis had no competition. So 1 out of 8 seasons

          One thing that made Lewis a legend was his exceptional stand out performances. 2018 Singapore qualifying, Brazil 2021, daring overtake during frought title battles.. there’s an endless list of exceptional performances from him not to mention that he always found a way of hitting hard when his back was against the wall. The kind of stuff that makes greats. Champions aren’t made from their easy wins and but from those performances Lewis made all too often. As did Schumacher.

          When verstappen is challenged and he does those kind of feats and comes out on top maybe he will get more credit. So far he’s fought once for a title and shown it to be false that he matured to be a calm unsurmountable driver less than one year after 2021 finale.

          I’m sure he enjoys being away from the intensity of 2021 but I can imagine the total lack of competition is not what he wants

          1. I think it’s important to apply some context for casual fans. Lewis did not have 1 season without competition across 8 seasons. He had 3. Of the remaining 5, he had 3 intra-team against a guy he should beat and lost 1, and 2 external fights, 1 he won and 1 he lost, since 2014.

            2017 was certainly a tense fight but 18, 19 and 20 were total dominance.

            In 2018, the start to middle of the campaign were hard fought but in the last 8 races he went from being 17 points ahead to 88 and won the title with 2 rounds to spare.

            In 2019, I’m not even sure who the title rival would be? By round 8 he was already 36 points clear and finished behind Bottas 3 times in the first 16 rounds. Again he won the title by 87 points with 2 rounds to spare.

            2020 was clearly a walkover, he won the title by 124 points, nearly five wins, despite missing a round.

            We need to accept that F1 more often than not offers dominant results by it’s nature. Lewis was unbelievable over his Mercedes career, particularly his peak around 2017-2020. But there’s no need to invent competition for him that wasn’t there at the time.

    2. It’s an argument that’s been made, but it’s not really how the perception of Vettel and – increasingly – Hamilton has developed. No doubt Verstappen in due time will be noted to have won only a handful of races before he landed himself in a dominant car.

      Battles create legends because they’re what sports is all about; conflict, bouncing back, victory against the odds, bitter defeats, the emotional involvement etc. Seeing someone cruise to another, near guaranteed, race win unopposed is not the stuff that people talk about years down the road. If it was, Prost would be hailed as a legend for his 1993 title. But it’s rarely mentioned.

      1. Yes, I guess it would be more of a handful because there was 2021 and part of 2022 too, it’d probably be similar to hamilton, who had 20 wins before getting a dominant car, however verstappen didn’t start out with it, he had to deal with a decent car for several years before even getting a title contender.

      2. more than a handful*

  18. There is a difference these days, and that is the cost cap.
    RBR blew through it and got a slap on the wrist and all the other teams cannot spend money to catch up even if they know where their failings are, because they know the FIA are watching even closer and they would get a hefty penalty if they copy the RBR overspend and data collection.

    1. You do know the real “overspending” was less then 400.000 euro and the rest a tax rule FIA did not know and reacted wrong.
      If on a budget 145 million such a small overspending results in this mega result you can ask yourself if the 8 worldchampionships by Mercedes who spend more then any team are right…

      1. You do realise it’s been proven that this isn’t correct and the true figure is the 1.8million?

        If the FIA did apparently not know they would ha e clarified but they did not because it’s included

        Not to mention in essence it ms more than the 1.8, no team plans to spend 1 dollar below the cap. Red bull went over their limit and then the budget cap.

        There’s no way they didn’t benefit on track from it. If it’s such a small insignificant amount then why not lett every other team but redbull spend over by that amount? But of course it must also be during a close fought title battles in similarly paced cars and the year before a major reg change.

        1. If it’s such a small insignificant amount then why not lett every other team but redbull spend over by that amount?

          Every other team (that can afford to) can spend that much extra – but they’d also be susceptible to the same previously-agreed list of potential penalties as a result of doing so.
          If they thought they’d gain even a measurable amount of time/performance, they’d be seriously considering it.

          Unsurprisingly, nobody is doing it….

  19. As a drink, I can’t stand Red Bull! I have been a fan of Red Bull Racing since they started. No matter how many records RBR take, I still would not be looking to drink Red Bull.

    1. I still would not be looking to drink Red Bull.

      If that alone is a deciding factor, you’ll be celebrating your 90th with a full set of teeth.

    2. It’s really all marketing. It’s unhealthy and tastes awful too. Taking advantage of human nature as all companies do to sell. Red bull shit

  20. With no disrespect to the technical and mechanical teams in Milton Keynes, I have a pathalogical adversion to Red Bull Racing because of 3 reasons:

    – Their Management Team
    – Their (distinct lack of) Sportsmanship
    – Their (proven and suspected) Cheating

    1. Almost sums up my feelings as well.

  21. Red Bull are ultimate expression of British racing excellence. They are the straw that stirs the drink no pun intended. “ Garagistes” as Enzo would have referred to them. The closest thing to pure privateer racing throwbacks like the old pre Bahrain sovereign wealth fund McLaren. Much like McLaren they have primary role as the marketing arm (Marlboro in McLarens case) to their largest backer. Exceptionally well managed. Driver development beyond any team (half of the grid owes their start to Red Bull). Supreme technical prowess. I’m not sure what many members of this site will do if their engine proves to be a success and they continue to dominate post 2026. at that point, we will be mentioning them with the likes of Ilmor or Cosworth.

    1. They’re near guaranteed to win untill the new regs come anyway so I can imagine many will have already switched off before then. I hope for one or the other and no in-between though. Either redbull continue like 2023 to force the fia’s hand or some solid competition arises for a legitimate title bout to the end. A year and a half into the hybrid era it was very different against mercedes, not though from seem content to not attempt to peg back redbull. Perhaps because F1 doesn’t rely on the actual sportimg aspect itself to attract eyeballs anymore as much as in the past

  22. Timothy Otto Sperisen
    26th September 2023, 21:46

    I think that Red Bull as an Organisation deserves all the respect for having achieved what they achieved.
    In terms of how they deliver, they have a clear Mantra, which is good for the team spirit of their respective Wunderkind but not for the spectator. You always know in advance which Red Bull driver is going to win (only exception 2010, at least from the outside). But they are not alone with that. Ferrari with Schumacher/Barrichello and Merc with Hamilton/Bottas was the same.
    The only constellations that deserve much more credit for how (but not what) they delivered their dominance were Mercedes 2014-16 with Hamilton/Rosberg, Williams 1996 with Hill/Villeneuve and McLaren 1988-89 with Senna/Prost. There you really didn’t know who would come out on top because the teams avoided a clear Nr1/Nr2 driver mantra. But everyone as they please.

  23. Cost cap breaches
    Gifted 2021 title via Masi
    Racist language being used freely by those associated with the team (Marko, Juri Vips, Nelso Piquet etc)

    What’s their to like about this team? I can’t wait for ANY team to knock them off their pedestal

  24. Red Bull get the credit they deserve from me. They designed and built one heck of a car. The pit crew is fast and consistent. The team’s strategists make great decisions at every race. The team goes out and gets the best talent. Their A driver is a great racer. BUT,

    Everything I said above is true which is why there is no way Red Bull botched the car setup at Singapore to where it was undriveable. No way! The team is just too good. The car is just too good. The driver is just too good. No way, they have that poor of a performance without trying to have that poor of a performance. Heads would have rolled. They wouldn’t just shrug and say we’ll get them next week. I expect to see them win the next few races comfortably and then possibly throw the last few races. Why? Because teams like Mercedes, Ferrari, McLaren, AM, but especially Mercedes will believe that they have it figured out. I think this happened the year prior as Mercedes went into the off-season believing they had it figured out and started this season with the same horrendous design they had in 2022.

  25. F1 would be a lot more boring without the brigade foaming in the mouth about everything related to RBR and Max

  26. Of course they do. They probably don’t get the credit on some places where you just have people coping all the time unable to come in terms with reality…. predominantly the UK but they tend to forget f1 has grown far and beyond the island and that there are plenty of people who can recognize their success.

    Horner is the best TP on the grid

    Verstappen might be the best driver of all time

    For years people.have been fed the merc Kool aid and Hamilton goat ideas that it is hard for them to admit anything else.

    As simple as that.

  27. Lets remember how toxic Red Bull was when Mercedes was the dominating team, they constantly accused Mercedes with cheating, called them “unraceable”, threatened to quit if things dont change to their liking. Now they not even getting enough credit when they are winning.

  28. Sure, Red Bull have done well but I blame the FIA and F1 for the Farce it’s become.

    To implement a cost cap requires all teams to have the same opputunities to win. Does Williams have the same facilities that Red Bull have, the same structures, software etc. Before these cost caps, the FIA should have implemented a level up of all teams.

    Also, with Red Bull pushing the boundaries on the salary cap and the feeble punishment given, they are still reaping the rewards.

    They will continue to win the 24 and 25 seasons. A few changes to powertrains for 26 may slip them up.

  29. It is remarkable how negative people react on a winning team when their team is nothing more than field filling. Due to their own failure by the way. On the other hand it suprises me that there a so few of “anything else than RB” are left. I think they went to the “abandon all hope”group. Also succes draws fans.

  30. I always like to hear what Keith has to say and his opinions are bang on more often than not but this just read like a cheap shot. I am sure it’s not intended but the way he’s described Red Bull completely negates their achievements over the years. It completely ignores how much they have done for motorsports in general – not just sponsorship wise but actually investing in talent and having the guts to take on formidable car brands and beating them at their game. Pretty poor and just not reasonable.

Comments are closed.