2025 Emilia Romagna Grand Prix weekend F1 driver ratings

60 comments on “2025 Emilia Romagna Grand Prix weekend F1 driver ratings”

1. 

   Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
   19th May 2025, 11:26

   Hamilton 7/10. Please.
   1. 

      An Sionnach
      19th May 2025, 12:34

      Leclerc was the fastest Ferrari driver all weekend. Lewis and some other drivers on the alternate strategy as a result of being the slower in their team benefited from luck. Max was not on the alternate strategy but Red Bull seems to have done its homework and didn’t waver from the superior strategy. Clean air helps, yes, but the drivers behind could always mind their tyres if they think the best race result can be achieved through strategy and having better tyres at the end.
      1. 

         Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
         19th May 2025, 13:57

         Exactly. Being incredibly lucky with the VSC/SC and having tyres for another stop makes his result circumstancial. He was nowhere all weekend.

         Ferrari saved face with a dignified GP, but it was never because of Lewis Hamilton. And in no way was he better than Leclerc who only scored a 6/10.
      2. 

         Coventry Climax
         19th May 2025, 14:29

         Also, Hamilton was helped to his finishing position by Leclerc, instead of on his own merit.
         Leclerc may have given the position back, and played the innocence card, but only after the damage was done and Hamilton already had quite the advantage of distance over Albon.
         In my opinion this was a foul way to play things, by Ferrari.
   2. 

      BasCB (@bascb)
      19th May 2025, 12:43

      Yeah, I was also trying to consider how being elimiated in Q2 behind his teammate and more or less ending up where he was due to luck with the strategy and the one single highlight being his oppertunistic move to take advantage of Leclerc forcing Albon off add up to a 7/10 and him rated above Leclerc
      1. 

         Phil Norman (@phil-f1-21)
         19th May 2025, 16:20

         Well Leclerc was eliminated in P2 as well in case you didn’t notice. I think Lewis kept pace with Leclerc pretty well. He got stuck behind Antonelli when he lost a place at the start. But Leclerc really didn’t look any faster in what I saw. Maybe 7/10 is too high but he had a reasonable race and made the most of his luck.
   3. 

      David
      19th May 2025, 13:06

      Different rules for Hamilton. Every lucky result is down to his skill behind the wheel. I even read a comment under another article that said that Lewis’ pressure on Antonelli caused his car to break down!

      Fact is he was slower than Leclerc by every metric, running 7th out of 8 drivers in the top 4 teams, but got the luckiest breaks from the Safety car timing, and ended up gaining two more places after his teammate forced Albon off the road.
      1. 

         David BR (@david-br)
         19th May 2025, 13:19

         Slower by every metric except passing the finishing line ahead.
         I realize it’s stuck in your head Hamilton is slower/inferior/should be erased from Formula 1 history. But he’s in a new car with little track time still and with real design issues that even the fast and Ferrari-experienced Leclerc has difficulty handling this season. We’ll see by next year who’s quickest.
         1. 

            Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
            19th May 2025, 15:13

            You can’t use the “new car, little track time” card with Hamilton and Ferrari. He’s been behind Leclerc all season so far. See Sainz, he’s had the measure of Albon in qualifying now.
            1. 

               Ajaxn
               20th May 2025, 21:54

               Leclerc has had 4 seasons with the quirks of the Ferrari, and the particular way it has to be finessed around the corners. Hamilton has had less than half a season to break the habits of a life time, and adapt to the engineer expectations of his new car. So yeah, Leclerc should be the better driver.

               As for this race it was a tale of two different strategies. Hamilton and Antonelli, both starting with the hards and forced to drive long. A delightful duel befitting of that Italian stage. Driving long also meant they stood a better than even chance of catching VSC, and also driving better on the mediums with a lighter fuel load when they came to swap tires.

               Its kind of ironic that Hamilton’s pressure on Antonelli might have force his SC. where Russell with similar issues managed to finish the race.

               As for Leclerc, like most of the field, he started on the medium with a full tank, meaning he stood less of chance with that combination of tire and weight. He was always going to pit early.

               I don’t know who decided on the mix strategy but they would have done well to have had both Ferraris start on the hard tires.

               In the end it played out so that the Tifosi won. They got the see their team tantalising close to the podium. Hopefully they’ll make it to the podium for the next great Italian showdown.
      2. 

         Esploratore (@esploratore1)
         19th May 2025, 15:38

         Ahah, that comment about hamilton causing antonelli’s car to break down is pretty funny!
         1. 

            Ajaxn
            20th May 2025, 22:02

            Yeah, that’s why i repeated it here.

            If Antonelli wasn’t placed under pressure he might have manged to cokes the car to the end. Russell on the other hand, drove to finish, not beat his nearest rival.
   4. 

      Ferdi
      20th May 2025, 7:00

      That is a bit steep indeed, but just one point imho. The race was a bit reminiscent of his career; driving skills helped by a vast dosis of luck.
2. 

   pcxmac (@pcxmac)
   19th May 2025, 12:07

   9/10 Albon had a great race. And he’s clearly putting Sainz in to a negative space (denial).
   8/10 Hadjar did a great job showcasing why he is the best rookie in the field despite Mercedes worst efforts on George’s side of the garage.
   8.5/10 Hamilton, great to see him overtaking in the dry this season, consistently. This never really happened at Mercedes except for the rare occasion. Gut wrenching. Guy was only going one direction this race. Pretty cool.
   I would rate Max, but his team won’t allow me to, because they only really support him. So its impossible to tell how good he is.
   1. 

      tielemst
      19th May 2025, 12:13

      I think that last sentence should read “I would rate Max, but I can’t get myself to admit he’s actually the best driver out there for some time now”.
      1. 

         pcxmac (@pcxmac)
         19th May 2025, 12:25

         he has no reference, every other driver has a valid second driver.
         Red Bull has demonstrated clearly that they do not care about their number 2 driver for many years now.
         until Red Bull stop treating Max with undivided attention, and running their #2 like a mule car, its impossible to know how good he is, because the #2 driver will never get with in an ear’s shot.

         oh yeah, last time one did, there was slander in the media and Max’s family went nuts. And that was the end of Checo.
         You decide for yourself.
         1. 

            Coventry Climax
            19th May 2025, 14:46

            Gasly isn’t doing all too bad, in a car that’s not really up to anything.
            Albon is doing quite a decent job, both in helping Williams get back up there as well as increasingly and more consistently appearing top midfield.
            I can name the others, but the point is they’re not all just lousy drivers, certainly not any worse than say, Bottas, and likely more ‘valid second’ drivers than you might like to admit. Yet they were all consistently outpaced by Verstappen.

            I don’t like the guy either, mind you, but that’s no reason to twist reality.
         2. 

            Matn
            19th May 2025, 20:12

            Three of Verstappen former team mates in Q3, Leclerc and Hamilton out in Q2.
            Verstappen beat Hamilton in 2021, beat Leclerc in 2019 and 2022 with a car significantly down on poles.

            Rating Verstappen is the easiest job really
   2. 

      Esploratore (@esploratore1)
      19th May 2025, 15:42

      You can just assume the red bull is roughly on par with the mclaren, in which case verstappen was spectacular here, and even if it was slightly better here in race pace (looked like that, compared to the other races) he was still at least matching the best performance the mclaren drivers did.

      Mclaren drivers are supposed to be top drivers and beat the various tsunoda, gasly, albon, I’d say even sainz.
   3. 

      Esploratore (@esploratore1)
      19th May 2025, 15:43

      Unfortunately none of the red bull drivers since ricciardo really performed there, even perez at his red bull best was pretty average.
3. 

   RBAlonso (@rbalonso)
   19th May 2025, 12:08

   I’m not enamoured with the use of the word cynical to describe Leclerc’s move on Albon in turn 1. I think it was hard racing and that cynical implies something underhand.

   In my view, the first corner incident at the start of the Jeddah race this year is almost identical to Leclerc’s move. The car on the outside trying to overtake is wheel to wheel at the apex. My understanding was that space had to be given to the car on the outside if their mirror is in line with the front axle, in neither example is that the case.

   When Piastri held his line in Saudi, no-one was calling for a penalty for him and if Max had given up the position (obtained illegally), there was no way Oscar would have been given 5s for ‘forcing’ Max off the road.

   To play devil’s advocate to my own point, I think the rules should make Charles give more space. I also think Albon was level at the braking zone and Max was marginally behind in Jeddah. But it’s an existential question for me, if you have a car alongside (which I’d consider as front axle between the other car’s axles) at the 150m board then the driver should be entitled to space.

   However, I can understand why, given numerous examples of Max’s chicane tricks, Leclerc felt that his defence was on the limit and not over it and that if they were racing 10s ahead at the front of the field that he wouldn’t have had to cede position. 10s in Imola would have put him P12, so I understand why Ferrari asked him to move over. But I don’t think it’s a slam dunk, blatent running a driver off the road out of spite which I think cynical implies.
   1. 

      An Sionnach
      19th May 2025, 12:29

      I think he was frustrated and made a clumsy move. It wasn’t cynical. Again, I think Leclerc should have gotten a penalty even after he gave up the position because Albon lost two positions as a result of being forced off. Hamilton would keep his position, but Leclerc would lose his and get a penalty.
      1. 

         RBAlonso (@rbalonso)
         19th May 2025, 12:41

         I think to the letter of the law, Albon wasn’t ‘forced’ off. I have no doubt Albon would have made the corner if Leclerc wasn’t there, but I think it’s a racing incident and Albon knew the risk of going for the move could let Hamilton pass. It’s very marginal in terms of legality, but I think historical precedent and the mirror ahead, means it’s Leclerc’s corner for me. I don’t think it’s clumsy as both remain in total control of their car.

         My point is that Leclerc’s reading of the rule is that he’s entitled to take the racing line in that case and did so. He wasn’t locked up or over the kerbs, he was maybe a bit wide but that’s because he’s defending. I’d like the stewards to give us a definite guideline on whether that would have got a penalty if properly investigated, for me it’s a racing incident and shouldn’t cost Leclerc points in this ranking.
         1. 

            BasCB (@bascb)
            19th May 2025, 12:46

            It was telling that in the F1 post race show Albon himself mentioned that maybe he let himself feel the urge to pass Leclerc soon because he felt the opportunity to have a shot at Piastri ahead and maybe with hindsight it would have been wiser to be a tad more patient to line up a better move.

            I really don’t think there was anything cynical about Leclerc, even though he might have (just) been in the wrong there, it WAS a rather optimistic move from Albon with a low chance of success.
            1. 

               RBAlonso (@rbalonso)
               19th May 2025, 13:26

               Yeah my reading was that with so little time in the race left Albon had to go for it and misjudged it very very slightly due to the desperation of a potential podium. For both him and Williams that was 100% the right course of action. By the time the move was no longer viable, he had already committed. For me it’s a racing incident where no driver was in the wrong and everyone raced hard with the correct intentions. Perhaps if he was told that Piastri was, realistically, out of reach then he’d have been more circumspect and waited for the next lap; Leclerc was only getting slower and slower.
         2. 

            An Sionnach
            19th May 2025, 14:44

            I’ll correct myself on the frustrated and clumsy move part. The way the rules are means you often may not know whether the corner is yours or not. He defended and was later told to give the position back. I do still think that the stewards have to think about the penalty when the result is more than just the loss of a single position. If Albon was ahead at the apex then he was entitled to space. It’s hard to see how he could get it and how Leclerc could have known he would have to give it when they were both racing to it. Whatever the rule is, the stewards will have to be involved when it’s marginal. I think the car on the racing line should have priority when it’s close. I like gravel traps, but perhaps an escape road at a chicane like this could give someone on the racing line a way out if someone holds the inside line and blocks them from making the corner? In that case, I expect Leclerc would have taken the racing line and then the escape road when Albon would attempt to run up the inside. Given the investigation, I expect that Leclerc was in the wrong by the current rulebook.
      2. 

         Keith Campbell (@keithedin)
         19th May 2025, 14:16

         I agree that if Leclerc’s move was illegal, then handing the position back shouldn’t automatically absolve him of all guilt or penalties in these circumstances. In this case he had already pushed Albon into the gravel, potentially damaging his car and tyres, and cost his rival a position to his own teammate. Handing the position back a couple of laps later or whenever it was doesn’t completely undo the damage, and to be honest it wasn’t entirely clear to me that Leclerc was handing the position back and wouldn’t have lost the position anyway (I only watched highlights, so the timing and cuts might have distorted my view here).

         So, i think the stewards should still have had a look at it, and if they deemed Leclerc at fault, they could still consider applying a penalty. Handing the position back could be a mitigating factor, but might only reduce the penalty rather than remove it entirely (reducing from a 10 second to a 5 second penalty for example).
   2. 

      rprp
      19th May 2025, 12:35

      Agree completely. It wasn’t cynical, and had there been a wall there instead of a run off area, I expect Albon would never have gone for it.

      But I don’t have the answer on how to police it. I think this one was a borderline case.

      In Jeddah, I think Max was miles behind, and had no chance of making the corner. He just rolled off the brakes to stick his car in a position where he was momentarily and partly alongside. A slam dunk case.
      1. 

         RBAlonso (@rbalonso)
         19th May 2025, 13:14

         Yeah I agree with that regarding Max in Jeddah although rewatching it prior to commenting I think Max was closer than I remember. He never falls behind Oscar’s sidepod. That said, he should never have expected to go into a corner on the outside and behind and come out ahead.

         But I thought it was an interesting comparison as the narrative then was Max had no chance and should have backed out and this time Alex had a better, but not significantly so, chance and was the victim. I’m also not sure how to police it unless we say the driver on the outside has to have his axle ahead of the front wing at the 150m board or equivalent braking zone entry.
         1. 

            Alonso (@alonshow)
            20th May 2025, 8:03

            Policing this is very easy. You give a crystal clear rule saying exactly when the driver being overtaken has to give space (axle to axle, mirror to axle, whatever). If he doesn’t comply, you don’t give him 5 or 10 seconds. You hand a race ruining 30 seconds (or a stop and go if you prefer). And you always enforce it consistently, whether it’s Verstappen fighting for the championship in the last race of the season or Bortoleto fighting Lawson for P17.

            Do that and you can rest assured that drivers will comply. But it won’t happen, of course, because that would risk having to give a penalty that ruins the race or the championship of the championship leader. Which would in turn risk losing a couple million viewers. And the FIA will never do that.
            1. 

               RBAlonso (@rbalonso)
               20th May 2025, 8:40

               I don’t think that’s a complete solution to be honest.

               In the Imola example, there isn’t a consensus on whether Leclerc should get a penalty or not. My reading is that it’s a racing incident, Keith’s is that it’s a cynical force. Giving a marginal decision a tougher penalty won’t create consensus. If the penalty was harsher, either Leclerc would give up a fair move really early due to fear of officials (which leads to a passive boring sport) or Albon would be more aggressive as he has nothing to lose. Both of these are worse than what we have now.

               The trouble, and Verstappen is the master of this, is that the policing is done using still images at the apex. So as long as Max can produce a photograph of him alongside at the apex and within the white lines on the exit he can justify his position. It’s the same with Leclerc here, by the letter of the law, at the apex Albon is not entitled to racing room.

               For me, the solution is a detailed breakdown of each corner on the calendar and a start, middle and end position justification. Ie for tamburello to overtake on the outside you must be ahead at the 150m board (to prevent the driver getting to the apex by fake braking to hang on knowing they’ll be run out of road); then a middle (apex) where if criteria 1 is fulfilled then if the overtaking driver is wheel to wheel then at the exit space must be given.

               But it’s 200mph on a thin track with literally millimeters between them, it’ll never be clear cut if we judge these at the apex. In my opinion we need more decisions to be viewed more leniently, let the drivers sort out marginal calls themselves rather than hanging around the outside hoping for a penalty.
            2. 

               Alonso (@alonshow)
               22nd May 2025, 22:47

               @rbalonso: I’m replying to you here because for some reason I can’t see a Reply button under your comment (maybe a website glitch?)

               I don’t think you’re really disagreeing with me, at least in the fundamentals. You say the solution is a detailed breakdown of… Which is just a more specific version of what I say: the solution is crystal clear rules. We don’t have that. For starters, we don’t even have a clear definition of where the apex of a corner is. Most overtaking rules make reference to the apex of the corner, which means all those rules are ambiguous. That’s not the only ambiguity, of course, there are also ambiguities in terms like “alongside”, etc. With so much ambiguity, it’s just impossible to police races effectively and consistently. And it’s hard to believe that an organization that creates astonishingly detailed and enforceable rules in other areas, like the size and shape of the components of a car, can’t do the same with overtaking rules.

               It looks like we only disagree on how harsh penalties should be. But your support of leniency seems to contradict your support of clear rules. In your example, Leclerc gives up a fair move early due to fear of officials. But that wouldn’t actually happen because with clear rules there’s no fear of officials. Quite the opposite, you know exactly what officials are going to do because the rules are crystal clear.

               Once again, think about car rules. The penalties are extremely harsh: if your car is half a kilo underweight, you get disqualified and that’s that, even if that half a kilo only gave you a two seconds advantage through the race (I’m making up the numbers, but you get my point). But we’re all happy with those harsh penalties because the rules they enforce are crystal clear. There’s no (good) reason it can’t be the same for overtaking rules.
4. 

   Bruno Alves
   19th May 2025, 12:23

   My god, this might be the worst drivers rankings i’ve ever seen on this site.
   1. 

      S Arkazam
      19th May 2025, 12:45

      I’m baffled as well.
      Norris scored better than Piastri?
      Hamilton better than Leclerc because he was “was closer to Leclerc than usual”!
      etc.
      1. 

         Bruno Alves
         19th May 2025, 13:26

         And the rankings here are usually “okay”, but this weekend is just completely all over the place.
         1. 

            Keith Campbell (@keithedin)
            19th May 2025, 16:06

            It was bound to appear like that regardless of what rankings were actually given. The results were heavily skewed by how the VSC and safety car influenced the race, and that itself was determined by factors such as which tyres were available when those opportunities came up and the exact timings of pitstops etc. Everyone is always going to have a different interpretation of actual driver performance when considering all these external factors outside of the drivers’ control.
      2. 

         Alonso (@alonshow)
         20th May 2025, 8:10

         Rating Hamilton above Leclerc is a joke, of course (and I’m rooting for Hamilton, mind you). But Norris above Piastri is understandable. True, Piastri was stronger than Norris all weekend. But waving Verstappen past was such a blunder, that alone is enough to deduct a couple of points.
   2. 

      Erkr
      20th May 2025, 10:37

      Definitely ridiculously inconsistent. The endless Yuki bashing is comedic
5. 

   Hotbottoms (@hotbottoms)
   19th May 2025, 12:48

   I don’t understand how Piastri is ranked lower than Norris. If McLaren hadn’t pitted Piastri so early, I’m quite certain he would have finished ahead of Norris. Piastri did well to pass cars that hadn’t pitted fairly quickly.
   1. 

      David BR (@david-br)
      19th May 2025, 13:16

      @hotbottoms That’s my impression too, Piastri lost out on the early pit stop. I’d have them equal ranking at least.
      1. 

         baasbas
         19th May 2025, 18:09

         @hotbottoms @david-br
         Fully agree with both. Piastri’s mistake is braking 10m too early into the first corner. Norris pooped quali again. You could argue Piastri complaining about his tires is not a strong point, but the team is responsible to tell him to see if it clears up. Not jump into action and pit him into a sea of cars. The driver can’t know if there is a gap or not to feed in to. You can’t hold that against him. At least not to the point of having Norris score higher in the rating. The quali mistake is a lot bigger I’d say. Consider this: a McLaren front row would likely yield a McLaren 1-2 after the first corner. Norris’ mistake left Piastri vulnerable. With Verstappen 3rd on the road after the first corners, I’d say chances of him winning it would be rather low. Running in free air helped him massively
6. 

   Jere (@jerejj)
   19th May 2025, 13:02

   Most impresssed: VER, ALB, & HAD
   Most disappointing: LEC & TSU
   1. 

      S Arkazam
      19th May 2025, 14:46

      Most disappointing: LEC???????

      Must be your high expectations then!
      1. 

         Esploratore (@esploratore1)
         19th May 2025, 15:45

         Yes, I think it’s too much for leclerc, the others make sense, leclerc was imo a victim of the over-regulations of f1 nowadays, back in the days he’d have kept albon behind and no one would’ve said anything.
      2. 

         Esploratore (@esploratore1)
         19th May 2025, 15:46

         And ofc he was unlucky with the timing of the VSC and SC, so that he ended up with old hard tyres in the end, in fact the SC lasted so long that based on ferrari’s team radio they could’ve given him medium tyres, they were supposed to last 11 laps.
         1. 

            roadrunner (@roadrunner)
            19th May 2025, 18:32

            What did they say exactly? I did not really understand that conversation and thought they talked about the medium tires they had left and the “youngest” already did 11 laps.
7. 

   Edvaldo
   19th May 2025, 14:07

   Alonso 8/10 lol
   It’s way too easy to be Alonso on these rankings. Insane. Yeah, he was affected by a bad strategy, but 8? The same as Max and above everybody else?

   Norris rated higher than Piastri also doesn’t make any sense, Norris underperformed on saturday and did nothing other than the bare minimum on sunday.
   1. 

      Phil Norman (@phil-f1-21)
      19th May 2025, 16:25

      I too am not sure how Alonso got an 8. And stroll a 7. 7 and 6 at best.
   2. 

      Miane
      19th May 2025, 17:20

      And how Bearman got a 7… In this case we can wonder why…
8. 

   Stephen Taylor
   19th May 2025, 14:52

   Come on Keith Leclerc’s move on Albon was far from cynical . Albon not forced off. If anything I think Albon was naive battling Leclerc
9. 

   Richard
   19th May 2025, 16:45

   I watched Sainz in car in Q2, he timed sector 1 to get a slipstream behind a Sauber down the first straight. Probably how he had purple on that lap, you could see both Williams try it in Q3 but didn’t get the timing right because the clock was running out.

   In the race Russel and Sainz tried to cover off the early Leclerc stop and both failed to protect themselves from the undercut but in the end it bit all 3 with the strategy.
10. 

    Miane
    19th May 2025, 17:19

    It’s fun how may drivers ratings are higher because they got lucky with the VSC. Lewis above Leclerc is a joke… Lawson and Antonelli having the same rate as Bortoleto who was on route to beat his teammate (the only reason Hulk finished ahead was luck and strategy). And Bearman 7/10 what??
    1. 

       Erk
       20th May 2025, 10:41

       Like Yuki also getting lucky with the VSC but instead gets 3/10 despite recovering to the points
11. 

    osnola
    19th May 2025, 21:34

    Not sure who did the ranking this time but it seems very off compared to other races.
    Lots of strange ( to say the least) ratings.
    But as always : its someones opinion. But it would be nice it they were a little more consequent.
    1. 

       Ferdi
       20th May 2025, 11:32

       I agree and it seems they switched authors vs previous years of ranking. It does deliver a great insight though and confirms the subjectivity that can often be seen in the articles on this site.
12. 

    Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
    20th May 2025, 9:06

    Both Ferrari and McLaren drivers should have their scores swapped.

    Saying Norris’s only weakness was qualifying 4th, well that was really poor for the car… Piastri’s only weakness was being cautious at turn one in which next to no other drivers aside from Verstappen will have been able to do this….. : “pulled off a superb pass on Piastri”

    I don’t see how what piastri did was so bad to get this description: “shocking lack of awareness at start”

    That was the only minor mistake and Norris’s form in qualifying would have cost him far more.

    It is also strange how Norris gets a ^ for this: Passed Piastri for second place with tyre advantage While Piastri gets a for this > Race was compromised by early pit stop

    Is the reason for this pass not an easy one that should be expected given the circumstances?

    The scores for these two drivers literally should be the other way round.

    Same story for the Ferrari drivers.

    > Early pit stop left him on compromised strategy

    This is basically explaining why Leclerc lost out so badly.

    I do agree that he made a mistake at the end, but he gave the position back.

    This point below is what put Hamilton into play with another advantage of not just gaining time, but getting better tyres vs Leclerc, which was basically the only thing that made him look good this weekend…

    > Made both pit stops while race was neutralised, gaining time

    ^ Passed drivers in last two stints to recover fourth place
    Yes, he passed drivers heavily due to the advantage he had both in gaining time with the point made above, and a strategy advantage.

    He gained a position on Leclerc and Albon only when Leclerc made that error, making them both lose time…

    Simple view on this again is that I feel Leclerc’s and Hamilton’s rankings should be swapped.
    1. 

       Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
       20th May 2025, 9:07

       Some formatting got messed up, but should still be readable!
    2. 

       Ferdi
       20th May 2025, 11:34

       I don’t see how what piastri did was so bad to get this description: “shocking lack of awareness at start”

       That seems just the frustration of Max getting ahead translated into someone else’s (Piastri) score.
       1. 

          Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
          20th May 2025, 12:04

          well yes, if it was such a shocking lack of awareness, it will have been a very easy and not so amazing pass from Verstappen. verstappen is getting plenty of credit for that pass, so Piastri shouldn’t be deemed to have put in a shocking lack of awareness..
13. 

    GechiChan (@gechichan)
    20th May 2025, 9:30

    Max and Albon were great. So happy for Williams, they got the ship pointing in the right direction again.

Comments are closed.