Sometimes I think he has too mush of his dad in him. Jos didn't have Max's skills but the same BS attitude.
Sometimes I think he has too mush of his dad in him. Jos didn't have Max's skills but the same BS attitude.
If I was Ricciardo I would only consider signing a new contract to drive for Red Bull if they shipped Max off to some other team. If they think Max is the future and are willing to stick with him in case he ever grows up and stops driving like a petulant 3 year old, then I would leave and find another team just to get away from that menace.
I dunno, after this he'll maybe be less likely to hit his teammate than anyone else.
Problem is, they say that each time he wrecks Daniel.
In reply to red_stapler :
Interesting. I thought i recalled a time penalty for Gasly in that incident. Either way, before the restart he was in the points. I was cautiously optimistic he'd pick off a few of the backmarkers and still bring home good points for the team.
I'm back and forth on Max. One one hand, he has some impressive skills (the rain race in Brazil in 2016) and his aggressiveness to go for a gap. On the other hand, his aggressiveness to go for a gap and his "bumper car" mentality just don't work for F1. Australian SuperCar racing, sure, but not F1.
I have a theory that it's because he grew up racing modern karts with full bumpers. If you go watch any national kart race these days, bumping, pushing, using the guy on the outside to keep from losing it in a turn, etc. are par for the course. It could be argued that if you're not doing that, you'll quickly get shuffled to the back. Front, rear and side plastic bumpers started in Lewis's era, and kids like Max (and ones racing now) have coaches teaching them now to use the bumpers and side pods to their advantage. To the point that one of the top series is trying to introduce breakaway front bumpers and try to curb the behavior. Basically, the front bumper juts out a bit from the frame so if you bump someone, it'll get pushed back a notch and you're penalized. Of course, if someone brake checks you (no brake lights, so hard to watch for), that can also get you penalized if it gets pushed in.
-Rob
Interesting theory. As someone who doesn't follow karting, it makes sense.
He's also very young and has been celebrated for his aggressiveness since he started F1. The PR job that F1 has done on his behalf is astounding - and potentially backfiring.
The thing I see with Max is that he always takes and never gives, eventually someone decides not to give and there is a crash. If Max was passing Max I think the result would be a crash almost every time.
And Redbull sells more Redbull.
Adam
Great race to watch the cars transition and make some nice turns. Watching them rotate from the Baku camera angles was cool.
I like Ricciardo he usually tries to drive fair even when he knows someone is not. It probably will mean he won't get a championship in his career but I hope his aggressive-clean-ish racing efforts give him a top car in the right season. I know you can't compare year to year but Sergio Perez got a lot of heat and five place penalty for drifting over in front of Massa at the Canadian GP a few years ago. The at fault red bull driver gets a mild reprimand for a clear double move. RB is strangling their drivers as usual, both accept fault and remain on script. In most years it has worked but this is turning into a McLaren 2007 kind of year for them.
Grosjean is a good race driver but he just says dumb things a lot. He is usually honest about things which I value as a good trait.
Hamilton got lucky in a sort of payback for Australia. The MB is on par with Ferrari but with only a few races in it seems that the MB gets faster in the last half of the race. It will be an interesting year.
Bottas got such and unlucky break. Who knows where the debris came from. At 200mph it would be basically invisible. And it is possible that the cars spreading across the track at the restart might have bumped it into the path of the racing line.
Finally got to watch the race last night. Wow, after the first year who would have thought this track could produce two nail bitters in a row.
I'm sorry, I think it's time the other drivers took Mad MAx out behind the bike sheds and taught him a lesson the old fashioned way. No doubt he's one of the fastest raw talents ever, but he's a douche that can't play fair. He might go on to won multiple WDC's, but how many points and $$'s has he cost so far even this year. The guy now has 64 starts under his belt and he's still driving like an 8 year old in Karts. No doubt he did a double weave, once he (illegally) pulled back in front of Danny on the second weave Danny Ric had zero chance. He was traveling at close to 200mph and suddenly had no downforce on his front wing. There was no chance of anything but a crash at that point. Red Bull should have told him to let Danny go many laps before. I think this may have just settled Danny's mind to swap teams after all. Why stay when there are equally fast cars out there and you don't have to deal with a two year old team mate. No matter what Max does, he's in the same category as Senna and Schumacher to me. Extremely talented but dangerous and unsportsmanlike like so will never be true greats.
Other than that gutted for Bottas, even Hammy felt sorry for him. Nice drive by Perez and Kimi.
Lewis was off form (again) but because he's consistent (what's this, his 29th points scoring race in a row?) and never gives up he's now leading the WDC. At least this makes up for him being robbed here last year.
I don't know why Martin Brundle wasn't commentating, but I really really liked Paul Di Resta's insight. Having had such recent F1 experience he had a really good read of the race and what was happening. I really enjoyed him much more than I thought I would.
So did anyone catch why Lewis was late to the podium? His first thing to do was to go see Valteri and console him. Tell him that he deserved to win the race.
Hamilton really does have a heart, and likes his teammate.
Adrian, I agree wholeheartedly about Paul DiResta. Very entertaining and extremely knowledgeable about the current crop of cars/technology. Brundle has good insights too, but it's the same stuff over and over ("the ferrari really carries more speed and sounds faster through this corner"). I liked Paul when he was a driver, not surprised I like him as a commentator.
I saw something in my feed last night about speculation that Perez used DRS illegally twice during the race. Will be interesting to see what comes of that. IIRC, the DRS activation system was broken, so the teams were telling some drivers when they could activate.
In reply to stylngle2003 :
There were several people sited for improper use of DRS, but they've all been let off due to the issue first called by Kimi. They were having to open it manually as the on track sensor wasn't working. The FIA did the right thing and allowed for human error while trying to hit a button at an exact spot while traveling close to 200mph.
alfadriver said:So did anyone catch why Lewis was late to the podium? His first thing to do was to go see Valteri and console him. Tell him that he deserved to win the race.
Hamilton really does have a heart, and likes his teammate.
He also spent his time giving Kimi some congrats in pit lane before talking to the press, so David Coulthard had to interview Perez first 
How did Kimi get to the parc ferme? I didn't see him on the cool down lap at all. Same with Vettel. Did they just bolt?
It was good to see a few errors on the part of the top level drivers - that's what made the race really interesting, they were obviously near their limits. Some of the errors were unfortunate (Red Bull, ahem) some made things interesting (Hamilton near the middle as he was chasing Vettel) and some were critical (Vettel, obviously). But overall, we saw more humanity and fallibility from the drivers than we have in the past. Was it the aero inconsistency from the wind? Tires that just didn't work on that surface?
In reply to Adrian_Thompson :
Ah I didn't catch the fact that the driver system wasn't working. I did question why some cars would use DRS for a second then turn off. And one car seemed to go on off on.
Not a fan of DRS. You get ahead of someone in the race and then you're a sitting duck. Of course I'm old and would rather watch a formula ford race than f1.
JimS said:Not a fan of DRS. You get ahead of someone in the race and then you're a sitting duck. Of course I'm old and would rather watch a formula ford race than f1.
Only if they are actually faster than you. And DRS allows one to pull enough of a gap off the straights to fix it. This isn't like Monza in the early 70's when it was a draft fest the whole time. DRS makes up for the lack of variability in brakes anymore, and lack of variability in tires. Especially the latter when it comes to the interaction with downforce- where you can be stuck behind someone who is very much slower than you in the twisty bits and can't pass due to the total loss of downforce.
YEah, I'm fine with DRS. I don't see it as an inherent evil in itself. I see it as a band aid to allow passes that would be possible if the current aero rules didn't create so much dirty air behind the cars that it was almost impossible to pass without it. Indy car has got it right again (as in a lot of things. Indy car is a better series to watch than F1 right now with equal talent) is that with the new aero kit they are getting far more downforce from under the car, relying much less on upper body aero which is far dirtier.
I know the arguments for it. I just don't like it. I don't see a slower car being the problem. It's when you have two equal cars and you give extra help to the following car. In my mind if you can't pass no matter what the reason then tough luck.
The reason Indy can get it "right" is the spec body. In F1, you've got a mass of engineers optimizing every surface on the car so you're going to get upper body downforce whether you like it or not. Of course, a spec body takes a lot of technical interest out of the sport.
It would be really interesting to know what teams have made the decision to give up 0.5% of clear air speed in order to have 0.2% better grip in dirty air. Or even if they have a choice of body parts to adjust for likely traffic. I know the standard story is that Mercedeses are poor at following other cars, but then you get one working through the entire field, chewing up cars and spitting them out, to disprove that particular chestnut.
Keith Tanner said:The reason Indy can get it "right" is the spec body. In F1, you've got a mass of engineers optimizing every surface on the car so you're going to get upper body downforce whether you like it or not. Of course, a spec body takes a lot of technical interest out of the sport.
F1 could do it easily as well. Maximum of X element wings. Maximum of Ymm^2 wing area. No winglets, simplified end plates, exit vents must point only backwards for Zmm's etc. Not hard and how I hope they will go in the future. It could also help eliminate the need for DRS and possibly prevent the Mad MAx Honey Badger incident from last weekend.
I read something today about 2019 rules changing wings, to limit the spill off the sides and around the tires, which apparently is considered to be a significant part of the disturbance in the air behind.
Adrian_Thompson said:Keith Tanner said:The reason Indy can get it "right" is the spec body. In F1, you've got a mass of engineers optimizing every surface on the car so you're going to get upper body downforce whether you like it or not. Of course, a spec body takes a lot of technical interest out of the sport.
F1 could do it easily as well. Maximum of X element wings. Maximum of Ymm^2 wing area. No winglets, simplified end plates, exit vents must point only backwards for Zmm's etc. Not hard and how I hope they will go in the future. It could also help eliminate the need for DRS and possibly prevent the Mad MAx Honey Badger incident from last weekend.
That's how I see the issue, too. We know what causes the wake so badly that makes it impossible for a faster car to get close enough to pass a slower car, and Indycar has shown a robust way to keep downforce and very much reduce the wake. IMHO, the biggest problems is 1)NIH, and even worse 2) it's how Indycar does it.
When Indycar had multiple manufacturers, they didn't have the passing problem that F1 had.
alfadriver said:Adrian_Thompson said:Keith Tanner said:The reason Indy can get it "right" is the spec body. In F1, you've got a mass of engineers optimizing every surface on the car so you're going to get upper body downforce whether you like it or not. Of course, a spec body takes a lot of technical interest out of the sport.
F1 could do it easily as well. Maximum of X element wings. Maximum of Ymm^2 wing area. No winglets, simplified end plates, exit vents must point only backwards for Zmm's etc. Not hard and how I hope they will go in the future. It could also help eliminate the need for DRS and possibly prevent the Mad MAx Honey Badger incident from last weekend.
That's how I see the issue, too. We know what causes the wake so badly that makes it impossible for a faster car to get close enough to pass a slower car, and Indycar has shown a robust way to keep downforce and very much reduce the wake. IMHO, the biggest problems is 1)NIH, and even worse 2) it's how Indycar does it.
When Indycar had multiple manufacturers, they didn't have the passing problem that F1 had.
Aerodynamics we’re pretty crude by today’s standards and they generated a lot of their downforce from the underbody back then too.
Adrian_Thompson said:Keith Tanner said:The reason Indy can get it "right" is the spec body. In F1, you've got a mass of engineers optimizing every surface on the car so you're going to get upper body downforce whether you like it or not. Of course, a spec body takes a lot of technical interest out of the sport.
F1 could do it easily as well. Maximum of X element wings. Maximum of Ymm^2 wing area. No winglets, simplified end plates, exit vents must point only backwards for Zmm's etc. Not hard and how I hope they will go in the future. It could also help eliminate the need for DRS and possibly prevent the Mad MAx Honey Badger incident from last weekend.
The rules are already very precise on wing area, end plates, even the minimum radius of body lines. You say "not hard", but then you have hundreds of the best aerodynamicists in the business looking for just one more pound of downforce - and they'll get it.
Isn't the problem with relying on underbody aero extreme pitch sensitivity? Ask Mark Webber about that. It's interesting to note that the road course bodywork for Indycars uses much more complex multi-element front wings and big rear wings than the superspeedway configuration - is this so they can get more of their downforce from the wings due to the less consistent surface and kerbs than an oval?
You'll need to log in to post.
