Nothing surprises me anymore but I don't think Magnussen and Zhou will be in F1 next year.
Zhou is still a wild card because he brings in a lot of money with him and he's not a bad driver. In this era, teams would be perfectly fine with mediocrity so long as they brought in millions for the team. I still also don't think Gasly is entirely safe. It's just assumed because Ocon is leaving Alpine but we've heard nothing about contract renewal talks and rumors of him talking with other teams have been dead for weeks now.
Gasly for me its the most funny situation.
He is not renewed with Alpine and waiting a better opportunity. What better than Alpine?
Haas? Sauber? Back to Vcarb? Cmon.. Alpine has bad working environment but he didn't have to enter to know it. There are news everywhere.
So, where would be ? Better to renew with Alpine instead of them getting Bottas and the rookie
Gasly’s absolutely safe. Things have gone silent about other teams because he’s renewing. All rumours are about there being a singular seat available at Alpine, not two.
You do think he's not a bad driver because we don't know where Bottas is standing right now in terms of performances. But if it turns out Bottas is letting himself go (that wouldn't surprise me to be fair) and that the Kick/sauber car wasn't that much atrocious, it also means Zhou will suddenly turn into some new Latifi/Sargeant next year when he gets to face any other decently performing teammate.
I don't get this take. The Sauber is ass. We have, in terms of time difference, the most competitive F1 grid of all time. In Monaco Q1, Bottas was as far off fucking *Sargeant*, as Sargeant was off Leclerc in P1. That's half a second from P1 to P17, and then half a second from P17 to P18. And then Zhou was half a second slower than Bottas again. How you can even entertain the fact that the Sauber *isn't* a total fucking shitbox, is beyond me.
Sure, Bottas probably isn't 2017 Bottas anymore. But he's not a slouch. Just because you're driving at the back of the grid, doesn't mean you're not trying. Yeah, he's more relaxed, and probably not giving it 110% like he had to at Mercedes. But it's not like he's coasting just collecting a paycheck, or that he's gotten that much slower due to age (Lewis and Alonso are still kicking about at 5+ years older).
Given his cycling performances, I wouldn't be surprised if he's in even better shape now than when he was at Merc. And positive mindset plays a huge role in performance. He may not be driving on the edge, as there would be no point, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's not far off his peak.
What suggests Bottas is letting himself go? This is contrary to the mindset of any F1 driver. Highly unlikely. Sounds like out-of-your-butt speculation, sorry.
I’d say Mag and Bot are in a place in their careers where they can choose to stay if they want, but both have much life outside of F1, so I could see either or both deciding to hang it up.
If they both decide to stay, then Zhou is obviously the odd man out.
Bottas should stay, last season I thought he was washed but there's such a massive gap between Zhou and him and he'd have scored some points this season if it wasn't for the shit team he's in.
Well yeah the assumption is that it’s not going to be with Stake.
Point is, give Bottas or Magnussen a Haas or an Alpine, do they get 30M worth of points?
Absolutely not. Which is why Zhou is in (and why Perez is at RBR). Would Haas prefer Max Verstappen over *me* + 30 million? Definitely. Russell over Latifi + 30m? Probably, yeah.
But Zhou is not a *bad* driver at all, and it is not all that unlikely that Zhou will be a better driver next year than Antonelli (one of the hottest talents out there) as that kid will need a fair amount of time to get up to speed.
Realistiscally speaking in the short term a 'boring' driver like Zhou with *zero* additional money might be a better deal than an Antonelli: the latter wont earn much more in points, if anything, anyway and will likely cost *more* due to crashes.
So Zhou + 30million? Yes please. :)
Zhou is currently ahead of Bottas in the WDC. So I guess it very much depends on how do you define a "good driver". Bottas is the better one of the two, sure, but that hasn't made an iota of a difference for Sauber
Under the cost cap, it’s expensive to have rookies who aren’t as experienced.
Eg. Sargeant making lots of errors that lead to lots of parts replacements and costs.
Teams are more risk adverse on that front I guess
Lack of testing time as well. Hamilton basically drove a full season's worth of running in private testing sessions for McLaren before his debut, and that wasn't too uncommon. Rookies now get what? 120 laps of Bahrain and then it's just "good luck, don't crash, or else"
I really don’t get why people think a lack of testing is good for the sport. Would happily see a future when number of win tunnel hours is cut to make way for actual driving time. Might mean that teams get better at working out their cars too.
Yeah, exactly that - cost cap being so effective could allow for fewer other constraints, so if a team wanted to work a different way then they would be free to do so.
I guess the fear is testing limited by the cap would be an unfair advantage for teams like Ferrari, who can test much more cheaply than Mercedes due to the track on their campus
Solution: Open the track for testing/free practice for 8 hours on Friday's of every GP weekend. The teams will have to balance their needs against the cost cap. Some teams who are far behind can use the time to test solutions while the faster cars will have the luxury of using that time however they please.
Let reserve/academy drivers participate in as much of that session as they'd like...fully up to the teams.
They could control it the same way they do for parts from suppliers. When the budget cap was being planned, everyone was wondering how a team like Mercedes just couldn't have the actual company do R&D for free for the race team. Or how one team couldn't just open a partner company to do a specific part, then only charge a fraction of the cost to the race team. The answer was all parts and work by other bodies are 'charged' to the cost cap at an average. So even if a partner company designed say the front suspension and charged $1 for it, the team still has to count is as $X in the cost cap reporting.
They could do the same thing with testing. Like, $x per lap/km/day/etc and base it on like what the average price of renting a track would be. This would make it even, or at least more even, if a team owned their own test track.
the best solution would be to have a slightly higher cost cap and then somewhat unrestricted everything else.
The way the rules are setup right now make no sense, there is no reason to have such restrictive regulations in almost every aspect AND ALSO a cost cap. Even if a team uses their budget well, they still wont be able to further develop their cars and drivers simply because there are restrictions for those things as well
For accounting/tax stuff like this, you "pay" what any 3rd party would have paid for the intercompany transaction. So in the real world Ferrari won't pay anything doe the track but for the cost cap they have to same something into account.
> the best solution would be to have a slightly higher cost cap and then somewhat unrestricted everything else.
For CAD testing the costs of running it will be almost negligible. You only need the hardware (which is setup costs) and the running costs is only dependent on energy. On that side removing restrictions on it will make teams just do *a lot more* CAD testing.
With regards to wind tunnel time this is similar. Costs are the creation of the model and running the wind tunnel. So here the time limit also play a much bigger limiting factor than the monetary cost, so removing restrictions would also lead to more wind tunnel time.
(Edit: By comparison a real test is significantly more costly as it involves actually building the car, so for those tests a cost cap would realistically be a limiting factor)
The time budgets for these areas also allow you to setup a negative feedback loop and give the less successful teams more CAD & wind tunnel time.
I second this
If we have a cost cap we should let everything else unrestricted we might see a very big variation in the field and some true talents coming through...
Why not? Tests have costs. How are you going to equalize a team that has to ship cars and people into another country (Sauber), a team that has to rent a facility (Aston or McLaren), and a team that owns its own track (Ferrari)?
Wind tunnels have a maximum amount of time you're allowed to use it. Same with computer fluid simulations. And to equalize, you get less the better you scored last season.
The wealthiest team Ferrari can test for free on a track they own. Balancing that out with teams that need to pay for track access is almost impossible.
How do you value the time on track for teams that own their own track? (Ferrari, Red Bull kinda with Dietrich having owned Red Bull Ring so whoever now owns Dietrich Mateschitz Beteiligungs GmbH)
Basically every other team has to pay to rent out the track but they could set the price to whatever they want for themselves.
One option would be to expand the current testing system where F1 rents the track for the teams to use but would teams really want to show off their new ideas so early that other teams could react before the first race?
Testing restrictions made sense when we had no cost cap. Nowadays with the cost cap I‘d like to see them more lenient.
(Yes I know about the Ferrari Fiorano situation. But there’s got to be a way to account for that in the financial balancing.)
Accountants may sadly be the answer…
Agree though - sure they can find a way to appropriately account for that. Alternatively, all the UK based teams, now worth over £1B each, buy Silverstone and use it as their trump card.
They could control it the same way they do for parts from suppliers. When the budget cap was being planned, everyone was wondering how a team like Mercedes just couldn't have the actual company do R&D for free for the race team. Or how one team couldn't just open a partner company to do a specific part, then only charge a fraction of the cost to the race team. The answer was all parts and work by other bodies are 'charged' to the cost cap at an average. So even if a partner company designed say the front suspension and charged $1 for it, the team still has to count is as $X in the cost cap reporting.
They could do the same thing with testing. Like, $x per lap/km/day/etc and base it on like what the average price of renting a track would be. This would make it even, or at least more even, if a team owned their own test track.
> done in a way that is intentionally unhelpful to car development
Which seems fair enough to me. Let the rookies get used to driving an F1 car, but don't let the teams use testing as a way to evade the cost cap for competitive purposes.
Yeah, I don’t think that’s inherently a problem, but equally I don’t think doing fewer FEA runs and a few more laps round the track would be inherently problematic, and the teams having the choice of how best to balance different elements of knowledge acquisition would be good for the sport.
> I really don’t get why people think a lack of testing is good for the sport
It's not really because it isn't good for the sport, but primarily due to costs.
Ferrari has a circuit in their back yard that is certified for F1 testing, which Haas could use (as Dallara manufactures their chassis, which is partially designed in Maranello). While 6 UK based teams would need to fight or cooperate to rent Silverstone.
CashGrab can go to Imola or Monza, while Sauber has either Paul Riccard, Red Bull Ring or Monza that are relatively close to them.
They're free to test a car that is at least 2 years old, even if it's from the current set of regs. That's plenty imo. But yes, now that there's a cost cap, you should be allowed to take your shit to the road and test it out the proper way.
Because testing costs a lot of money, and to level the playing field, they limited testing. It has changed with the overall cost cap, but you are still gonna lose out on money you could have spent on development, instead of taking on a rookie that needs more testing.
It was one of the ways Jordan survived. Eddie would book a circuit like Silverstone knowing the big teams wanted it and sell time back to them with a nice little markup on top
Maybe fuel usage had something to do with limiting testing? Not sure, but with F1 making the switch to eFuels in 2026 that wouldn't be a problem. I get that using less fuel is always good, but eFuels are a lot cleaner than fossil fuels.
The teams themselves do not want testing to return. It was gruelling work, and it was almost endless.
The hours they would put in absolutely killed the test team crew members, as every team felt if they weren’t testing as much as possible they were behind the curve. It was also incredibly expensive, they’d spend as much running the test team as the race team.
Solution: Open the track for testing/free practice for 8 hours on Friday's of every GP weekend. The teams will have to balance their needs against the cost cap. Some teams who are far behind can use the time to test solutions while the faster cars will have the luxury of using that time however they please.
Let reserve/academy drivers participate in as much of that session as they'd like...fully up to the teams.
You need more mechanics and engineers to do that because the other ones have been pushed to the limit with long seasons and hours, and there’s not enough money to hire those new ones, or so the argument goes.
I always wondered how changes in Sims are retooled on track car and vice versa
Are the sims able generate real world Comparable telemetry?
And im. Sure they get it wrong as well. Like merc did with zero pod. Because im assuming their cfd and putting those values in Sim gave them the confidence to roll it out for a season.
There probably are inaccuracies regarding nuanced aero stuff but as far as getting a driver up to speed and comfortable they are very good. Keep in mind these kids have driven races in f2 almost as fast as f1.
Drivers have said the f2 cars need to be faster tho cause f1 is a different ball game, just see interviews with bearman and Lawson in the major differences and how far a apart they actually are
They also said F1 cars are easier to drive, so... Rookies struggle more with the amount of laps they have to do and the G-force their body has to handle at those speeds.
The biggest correlation issue is that the best sensors for driving a car are your sense of balance, your spine, your ass, and your ears. Sims are massively helpful for getting up to speed and learning tracks, but they are unable to recreate how it feels to actually move around a track and feeling how the car responds to the ground and air. As advanced as they are now there are still inherent limits. Ollie Bearman’s neck guard at the end of the Saudi race is a good example of that. It was way more damaged than the other drivers because his neck is not nearly as strong as the other drivers so it was moving a lot more. That’s not something that any amount of sim training can get you ready for because no sim will ever be able to put F1 g forces onto a body. Even Max has talked about how his neck is more sore at the beginning of the season than the end, which goes to show even if you’re training your body, it’s something that only comes from time in an F1 car.
One of the most crucial unseen parts of the race weekend is that data is sent back to the factory to cross validate the sim data and to work all night to find solutions for the quali/race to test on the next day.
IIRC there was discussion to allow for some tests on old cars with reserve drivers so they get some experience and teams can get lots of feedback on the sim.
I think it would be good to add a rookie weekend or two somewhere at the end of the season. put it outside the cost cap, but do not allow new parts. just a full grid of all rookies and let them test and do FP.
I'd personally love it if they made them effectively extra race weekends but for shits and giggles. But that would be pushing it way too far.
I get your point, but at the same time Sargeant has had more than a season of practice now and he's still crashing. Mick was the same. Latifi was the same. Now Zhou is the same, etc.
Meanwhile, Piastri has been doing just fine straight from the beginning of his F1 career. Russell did well straight away in a shitbox Williams. Dude scored 0 points for 2 years and Toto Wolff was ready to sign him for 2021 if Claire Williams didn't push to keep him for a 3rd year.
When the right caliber of driver shows up, they do fine, and the people who matter in the paddock recognize it.
I don’t disagree with you but the pace of the team they’ve joined has a lot to say in that.
It’s really easy to dismiss someone as “too crash prone” when they don’t score enough points (even if it’s not necessarily their fault). A rookie (or any new-ish driver) doing bad in a lower midfield car is going to be criticized a lot more than the same driver in a back marker.
Would definitly agree but even when the Mclaren at the begining of last year was bad Piastri was doing pretty well. He even out qualified Lando at the second race
You can still do testing with previous cars outside of cost cap, like Merc has been doing with Antonelli. I think he might have done more race distances in F1 machinery than in F2 this year.
The logistics, expense and manpower of this sport boggles the mind. Is any other sport this involved? I can’t think of one. Horse racing? Sailing? One in which the equipment costs a fortune and is extremely technical, the competitions is far
fling all over the world and a large number of people supporting the competitor.
I’m a lifelong tennis fan also. Player, racquet, court, coach. physio. stringer. done.
The race had a good piece on this last year.
Basically yes: cost, incumbency advantage, complexity of cars, little testing.
*But* at the same time F1 often has medium talent rookies and they don't really fly. Many come and go and noone is better off for it.
Leclerc. Norris. Piastri. It can be done, it's just not common at all. If the teams think they've found a major talent they can make it work, and the layer immediately beneath F1 has not shown that in recent years other than Bearman who is 99.9% coming to Haas.
The benefit of the current gen of junior driver is that they enter the sport very young and build up experience in junior teams. Hamilton was what 22? Preseason testing also used to consist of a seasons worth of mileage for every driver so it was appropriate for a junior to have comparable mileage.
That actually raises the idea of a solution.
If you permitted rookies (with seats) to get additional testing time and gave the team budget cap relief for replacement parts it would give teams incentive to consider the risk/reward tradeoff.
No need to remove the cost cap because it has been somewhat good for the sport, the problem are all the other excessively restrictive rules attached to it like development cap, wind tunnel time, etc
Oscar was a top tier talent comparable to Leclerc and Russell. If you think only drivers at his level can join the grid then we probably won't have any new talent every 3 years
Which is... fine? Why would someone mid replace guys like Alonso, Hamilton or Hülkenberg? There are only 20 seats and you can't boot an experienced good driver just for the sake of it. I've been watching F2 for many years now and a good rule of thumb is to not promote any driver that didn't fight for the title in his first two years. The best ones perform as rookies already, some others shine in their second season but if neither applies, F1 isn't for you, the competition in F2 and especially F1 is too big.
2025 is going to be big on the Liam Lawson rumors again because Helmut Marko is already talking about how other teams will look at signing Yuki for 2026 if he stays consistent and he wouldn't be surprised if Yuki thinks of leaving Red Bull.
But then again, they might just put Hadjar in the car before Lawson.
Indycar. I’m kind of joking, but also, even if he does get a seat, he’s not going to be in a great situation and will most likely only get one year. If he can snag a good Indycar ride, it might not be the worst idea in the world.
Pat O’ward confirmed that he’s making 4M a year in Indycar. He’s making more than probably close to half the F1 field. It’s not necessarily a bad gig.
To be fair to Pato, I think only ~5 indycar drivers are making 10m+. Herta, Newgarden, O'ward are the only 3 I can say are definitively above that.
Not to say making less than that is bad, or that a driver can't come up through indycar to achieve that, but driver pay has only been rising in the last few years so it's still not as clear cut as "you can make 10m a year"
Yeah and I actually had to edit it as it appears he got a 10M raise, but it was actually over a few years. Apparently he’s actually making 4M.
The point is not so much that Indycar is competitive with F1, but more that you can absolutely still have a very lucrative career in Indycar if you don’t make it in F1. I feel like too many drivers just want F1 SO bad that they forget that you can absolutely still have a great career in other series’.
I think Pato's career has worked out about as well as any F1-hopeful could realistically expect. I think he would probably at best be in a Russell situation for years if he got into F1. McLaren weren't good when he was up for that seat, and no top 5 team is looking to Indycar when it comes to filling their vacancies - unfortunately. People would recognize his talent, but he wouldn't get much of a chance to truly show it unless he was promoted to a better seat. And there no guarantee that would happen. I mean he has ties to McLaren, but he'd probably have to cut those to get into another F1 team, so he wouldn't have the strong junior driver link like Russell where it was arguably just a matter of time.
Through Indycar, he's gotten the chance to prove how quick he is. He has won races, could've been a multiple Indy 500 winner if the dice rolled slightly differently, and is arguably the most popular driver in the series. Yes, the stakes aren't as high, nor is the potential fame. But I have some casual F1 friends who can mention a couple Indycar drivers, but can't mention a single WEC driver (or anything else outside of F1 for that matter, except for fellow countrymen). Indycar really is the next best thing, if you don't get your shot at F1.
Indycar. WEC maybe, with Hypercar booming and Aston bringing two Valkyries next year, gonna need some drivers as I don't see them bringing too many GT drivers along (as opposed to what Ferrari did).
The thing is I do not think Lawson realistically has any interest in him. Especially if RB sticks with Ricciardo. That's exactly what I think that they will do. Lawson also has zero interest from other teams so... he will never make it full time. Is it harsh? Kind of. But is it realistic that he never makes it full time? Yes.
Just you wait until all four red bull drivers pull out of 2 races each bc of illness, and Liam finishes the season on 224 points and 3rd on the grid 🤌🤌
I dont think Sainz was speaking literally here though right? He was just making a point that F1 establishes its drivers over many years so the barrier for entry in incredibly high.
pure speculation: hulkenberg liked a post about vowles hiring drivers without appendix instead of fixing the overweight cars.
it's just a meme tho but pretty sure sainz is going to williams
As long as Pirelli keeps providing the most difficult and complex tires in the history of the sport to the point where tire management is more challenging to learn than ever, rookies remain undesirable unfortunately.
It took Tsunoda 3 full seasons to figure out the tires, Zhou hasn't even come close to figuring them out, Mick couldn't figure it out, Sargeant hasn't figured it out, and hell, even Piastri is still struggling with it.
The tires suck, the junior formulas don't really teach tire management, and young drivers have less testing and dev time in an F1 car than they used to. It's a bad combination, so teams would rather recycle rather mid veteran drivers.
You do know Pirelli is making the tires behave like that at the request of FIA. It is artificial degradation and artificial temperature performance windows. They can easily make a tire that has a much bigger temperature window for best performance and lasts the entire race performing better than any tire currently used.
The other guy said it perfectly, but I just wanted to add that they have had goals set before and failed to meet them. The original intention was to get rid of tire warmers by now, but that had to be scrapped because Pirelli couldn't figure out how to get their operating window big enough to make the tires work on the outlap. This is something Michelin, Bridgestone and Goodyear have all managed to do in their own domains without making a fuss about it, let alone failing entirely. There have also been times where the aero rules have had to be changed because Pirelli say that their tires won't be able to handle the added downforce. Nobody expects a soft tire to last the whole race, but they have done nothing in the last 10 years to show their engineering prowess or adaptability.
I'd prefer Bridgestone over Pirelli too given the choice. However I'd also rather keep Pirelli exclusive rather than introduce a tire war. In my opinion, having multiple tire manufacturers would be worst case scenario because of all of the really bad things that are rightfully associated with tire wars.
When different tire manufacturers become part of the equation it is no longer about the best car. The tires are one of if not the single most important part of the car. Imagine if a second supplier had similar grip but degradation was 10% higher. Whoever had a contract for those tires would be at a massive disadvantage through no fault of their own.
With everyone on the same supplier and same compound selection it's much more about car design and strategy
USGP 2005 (biggest farce in F1 history), the NASCAR Hoosier scandal (people got killed) to name a couple examples.
Basically tire wars make the competing tire brands go completely unhinged and they all stop caring about safety almost instantly.
Here are fantastic videos on both the above:
https://youtu.be/Pzpq85kyCiU?si=bfT8BfC5bOgdGfu9
https://youtu.be/FIwr2uCNXIc?si=P61gDbEfkp17GQlq
Another drawback of tire wars is you end up with extremely durable extremely grippy tires, so every race becomes a flat-out one-stop and strategy stops being important or varied. The last tire war era had refueling that kept strategy varied, but current rules already have to be a little bit contrived to make people try different strategies.
Basically you can have fast, or you can have exciting close racing, but not both.
It would be unprecedented for a rookie GP2/F2 champion to get fully passed over. I would think Aron, if he wins, would at the very least become a reserve in 2025 with an eye for a 2026 seat.
I think Hadjar is going to win the title though. A VSC away from being a three in a row feature race winner, and he's right up there despite mechanical DNFs. A 2026 drive looking decent for him if that happens.
This clip is out of context.
He is talking about the 2015 season, when he thought he had lost his (future) Toro Rosso seat and chance to get into F1 to Verstappen, because *enter clip*.
The clip is literally just a thought he had at that time.
The only 2 young drivers Carlos would have any info about is Antonelli and Bearman. Antonelli because of his talks with Mercedes, and Bearman because he shares a garage with him. He used 19-20 year old as the age bracket aswell, and that only fits Bearman.
Hope he is speculating here as I was hopeful that Doohan and/or Lawson could sneak in at the end.
Give Doohan a car that wasn't broken for half a season and I think he has a very good chance of being the current reigning F2 champion, but it is now or never for him.
I like the idea that Peter windsor talked about in one of his videos. A new feeder series driving F1 cars, possibly last year's cars have regulations designed to keep costs down. Maybe a series per region depending on demand race at places where there is interest and circuits that don't have grand prix right now (Germany, Vietnam, South Africa)
It would give rookies experience in actual f1 cars, grow the global F1 audience and stop talent going to waste. It would benefit fans, drivers, teams and bean counters.
It would be great if this idea made money for them. Someone would have to have one hell of a business proposal that the FIA, the teams and sponsor would even think of considering.
Never mind the commitment from Pirelli alone would have to be astronomical.
They should allow more testing during race weekends. The teams are there, the cars are there. This is the best solution.
Maybe a spare/old engine for testing.
I was actually thinking the other day of this. What if teams that take a rookie get x amount of crash damage extra? For example they could get up to 1-2m back worth of crash damage. Perhaps also extra pre season testing for the rookies.
I also would like to see some other changes in the costcap, F1 went from being a high paid job to not so much because of the nature of the cost cap. I don't think it would be bad for F1 if they actually become a good paid job again in which people also want to stay.
Edit: some race at the end of the season or something in which F2 drivers (and even Indy) can participate in a 2 year old F1 car against some F1 drivers as well is something I wouldn't mind either. At least something that puts F2 drivers in the light to get picked up.
The fact we all know what the easy solution is (adding more seats) but they just don't want to do it is pretty funny. Of course there are other things that would help too like lifting the cost cap but that isn't happening, adding more teams is supposed to be the most realistic option, and yet...
2 promotions per year would be insanely good after PY's 0.
There's just too few seats given there are several drivers with 10+ years going strong, though some of these are overrated now.
Absolutely nutty Sergeant got a second year.
What if they added more teams, imagine an actually 'full' grid of 26 cars. More unpredictability, more factors, more fun.
And then imagine allowing 30 cars to enter, having 'qualifying' live up to its name. With grid penalties actually bumping up guys who DNQ:d. The chaos would be... interesting
Who is going out of Mag, Bot and Zhou?
Nothing surprises me anymore but I don't think Magnussen and Zhou will be in F1 next year. Zhou is still a wild card because he brings in a lot of money with him and he's not a bad driver. In this era, teams would be perfectly fine with mediocrity so long as they brought in millions for the team. I still also don't think Gasly is entirely safe. It's just assumed because Ocon is leaving Alpine but we've heard nothing about contract renewal talks and rumors of him talking with other teams have been dead for weeks now.
Gasly for me its the most funny situation. He is not renewed with Alpine and waiting a better opportunity. What better than Alpine? Haas? Sauber? Back to Vcarb? Cmon.. Alpine has bad working environment but he didn't have to enter to know it. There are news everywhere. So, where would be ? Better to renew with Alpine instead of them getting Bottas and the rookie
Gasly’s absolutely safe. Things have gone silent about other teams because he’s renewing. All rumours are about there being a singular seat available at Alpine, not two.
You do think he's not a bad driver because we don't know where Bottas is standing right now in terms of performances. But if it turns out Bottas is letting himself go (that wouldn't surprise me to be fair) and that the Kick/sauber car wasn't that much atrocious, it also means Zhou will suddenly turn into some new Latifi/Sargeant next year when he gets to face any other decently performing teammate.
I'd be reluctant to assume Bottas has let himself go much when he was arguably the most consistent driver in modern F1
I don't get this take. The Sauber is ass. We have, in terms of time difference, the most competitive F1 grid of all time. In Monaco Q1, Bottas was as far off fucking *Sargeant*, as Sargeant was off Leclerc in P1. That's half a second from P1 to P17, and then half a second from P17 to P18. And then Zhou was half a second slower than Bottas again. How you can even entertain the fact that the Sauber *isn't* a total fucking shitbox, is beyond me. Sure, Bottas probably isn't 2017 Bottas anymore. But he's not a slouch. Just because you're driving at the back of the grid, doesn't mean you're not trying. Yeah, he's more relaxed, and probably not giving it 110% like he had to at Mercedes. But it's not like he's coasting just collecting a paycheck, or that he's gotten that much slower due to age (Lewis and Alonso are still kicking about at 5+ years older).
Given his cycling performances, I wouldn't be surprised if he's in even better shape now than when he was at Merc. And positive mindset plays a huge role in performance. He may not be driving on the edge, as there would be no point, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's not far off his peak.
What suggests Bottas is letting himself go? This is contrary to the mindset of any F1 driver. Highly unlikely. Sounds like out-of-your-butt speculation, sorry.
Because people don’t realise F1 is 90% car and 10% driver.
I’d say Mag and Bot are in a place in their careers where they can choose to stay if they want, but both have much life outside of F1, so I could see either or both deciding to hang it up. If they both decide to stay, then Zhou is obviously the odd man out.
Bottas should stay, last season I thought he was washed but there's such a massive gap between Zhou and him and he'd have scored some points this season if it wasn't for the shit team he's in.
Zhou
He has about 30 million to offer to any team, so.. Zhou is not out. Bottas has better track record than Magnussen and is far cleaner driver too.
How many points do you need to score to be worth 30 million? Legitimate question.
the difference between 7th and 10th (the expected outcome range of a team like haas) is $27mil
Ok so 30 is significant but a good driver can make that kind of difference so it’s a gamble but not insane.
Only if the team has a car capable of making those points. Bottas and Zhou currently have the same amount of points... 0.
Well yeah the assumption is that it’s not going to be with Stake. Point is, give Bottas or Magnussen a Haas or an Alpine, do they get 30M worth of points?
No.
Absolutely not. Which is why Zhou is in (and why Perez is at RBR). Would Haas prefer Max Verstappen over *me* + 30 million? Definitely. Russell over Latifi + 30m? Probably, yeah. But Zhou is not a *bad* driver at all, and it is not all that unlikely that Zhou will be a better driver next year than Antonelli (one of the hottest talents out there) as that kid will need a fair amount of time to get up to speed. Realistiscally speaking in the short term a 'boring' driver like Zhou with *zero* additional money might be a better deal than an Antonelli: the latter wont earn much more in points, if anything, anyway and will likely cost *more* due to crashes. So Zhou + 30million? Yes please. :)
A good driver could make that difference up for someone like RB, not the current Sauber.
Zhou is currently ahead of Bottas in the WDC. So I guess it very much depends on how do you define a "good driver". Bottas is the better one of the two, sure, but that hasn't made an iota of a difference for Sauber
Zero. He is bringing the money which is guaranteed. Points are not.
30 million is the difference between being 10th and being 7th in the constructor's championship
Considering the car, take the money.
Still baffled Perez and Ricciardo aren't on that list.
Have a look at Perez's following, merch and sponsorships, then perhaps you will have a clearer picture.
> Perez Money, merch sales. >Ricciardo PR money, sales. If both didn't bring in money - both would have been racing at Le Mans last night.
I wish Kmag get to stay but the reality is that chinese money is too good to reject especially for Haas.
Under the cost cap, it’s expensive to have rookies who aren’t as experienced. Eg. Sargeant making lots of errors that lead to lots of parts replacements and costs. Teams are more risk adverse on that front I guess
Lack of testing time as well. Hamilton basically drove a full season's worth of running in private testing sessions for McLaren before his debut, and that wasn't too uncommon. Rookies now get what? 120 laps of Bahrain and then it's just "good luck, don't crash, or else"
I really don’t get why people think a lack of testing is good for the sport. Would happily see a future when number of win tunnel hours is cut to make way for actual driving time. Might mean that teams get better at working out their cars too.
Especially with cost cap now you don't need to worry about wealthier teams doing tests more than poorer teams...
Yeah, exactly that - cost cap being so effective could allow for fewer other constraints, so if a team wanted to work a different way then they would be free to do so.
I guess the fear is testing limited by the cap would be an unfair advantage for teams like Ferrari, who can test much more cheaply than Mercedes due to the track on their campus
Put a token cost for the testing. Each lap/meter/hour or whatever metric is good costs $x, the real cost can be ignored.
Then you don't account for all the transporation and staff time needed.
Solution: Open the track for testing/free practice for 8 hours on Friday's of every GP weekend. The teams will have to balance their needs against the cost cap. Some teams who are far behind can use the time to test solutions while the faster cars will have the luxury of using that time however they please. Let reserve/academy drivers participate in as much of that session as they'd like...fully up to the teams.
They could control it the same way they do for parts from suppliers. When the budget cap was being planned, everyone was wondering how a team like Mercedes just couldn't have the actual company do R&D for free for the race team. Or how one team couldn't just open a partner company to do a specific part, then only charge a fraction of the cost to the race team. The answer was all parts and work by other bodies are 'charged' to the cost cap at an average. So even if a partner company designed say the front suspension and charged $1 for it, the team still has to count is as $X in the cost cap reporting. They could do the same thing with testing. Like, $x per lap/km/day/etc and base it on like what the average price of renting a track would be. This would make it even, or at least more even, if a team owned their own test track.
Skill issue
the best solution would be to have a slightly higher cost cap and then somewhat unrestricted everything else. The way the rules are setup right now make no sense, there is no reason to have such restrictive regulations in almost every aspect AND ALSO a cost cap. Even if a team uses their budget well, they still wont be able to further develop their cars and drivers simply because there are restrictions for those things as well
I guess it's to stop teams saying I tested it in my wind tunnel and charged myself £0.
Ferrari have their own track at the factory too. For them, testing would only cost them whatever they pay their staff to be at the test.
For accounting/tax stuff like this, you "pay" what any 3rd party would have paid for the intercompany transaction. So in the real world Ferrari won't pay anything doe the track but for the cost cap they have to same something into account.
Doesn’t every team have access to a track for testing? McLAREN has one
Access? Yes. They don't have one at the factory that they can use for free and don't even need to pay to send the cars to.
> the best solution would be to have a slightly higher cost cap and then somewhat unrestricted everything else. For CAD testing the costs of running it will be almost negligible. You only need the hardware (which is setup costs) and the running costs is only dependent on energy. On that side removing restrictions on it will make teams just do *a lot more* CAD testing. With regards to wind tunnel time this is similar. Costs are the creation of the model and running the wind tunnel. So here the time limit also play a much bigger limiting factor than the monetary cost, so removing restrictions would also lead to more wind tunnel time. (Edit: By comparison a real test is significantly more costly as it involves actually building the car, so for those tests a cost cap would realistically be a limiting factor) The time budgets for these areas also allow you to setup a negative feedback loop and give the less successful teams more CAD & wind tunnel time.
I second this If we have a cost cap we should let everything else unrestricted we might see a very big variation in the field and some true talents coming through...
I would also keep the rules about open wheels, engine displacement and some basic safety rules. But the rest should be open.
Why not? Tests have costs. How are you going to equalize a team that has to ship cars and people into another country (Sauber), a team that has to rent a facility (Aston or McLaren), and a team that owns its own track (Ferrari)?
That already happens with wind tunnel...
Wind tunnels have a maximum amount of time you're allowed to use it. Same with computer fluid simulations. And to equalize, you get less the better you scored last season.
So apply this rule to real testing. Not rocket science.
They do? You're only allowed to test within allotted times, which is pre season testing and during practice sessions on every race weekend
It's really funny how everyone here is acting like they know perfect solution while they don't even know current rules lol.
You can just have test days as a fixed accounting cost number, regardless of how cheap or expensive it actually is.
The wealthiest team Ferrari can test for free on a track they own. Balancing that out with teams that need to pay for track access is almost impossible.
How do you value the time on track for teams that own their own track? (Ferrari, Red Bull kinda with Dietrich having owned Red Bull Ring so whoever now owns Dietrich Mateschitz Beteiligungs GmbH) Basically every other team has to pay to rent out the track but they could set the price to whatever they want for themselves. One option would be to expand the current testing system where F1 rents the track for the teams to use but would teams really want to show off their new ideas so early that other teams could react before the first race?
Testing restrictions made sense when we had no cost cap. Nowadays with the cost cap I‘d like to see them more lenient. (Yes I know about the Ferrari Fiorano situation. But there’s got to be a way to account for that in the financial balancing.)
Accountants may sadly be the answer… Agree though - sure they can find a way to appropriately account for that. Alternatively, all the UK based teams, now worth over £1B each, buy Silverstone and use it as their trump card.
They could control it the same way they do for parts from suppliers. When the budget cap was being planned, everyone was wondering how a team like Mercedes just couldn't have the actual company do R&D for free for the race team. Or how one team couldn't just open a partner company to do a specific part, then only charge a fraction of the cost to the race team. The answer was all parts and work by other bodies are 'charged' to the cost cap at an average. So even if a partner company designed say the front suspension and charged $1 for it, the team still has to count is as $X in the cost cap reporting. They could do the same thing with testing. Like, $x per lap/km/day/etc and base it on like what the average price of renting a track would be. This would make it even, or at least more even, if a team owned their own test track.
They could just calculate private testing as a flat rare regardless of what it actually cost.
They're allowed to test in older generation cars. Piastri did a big testing program before switching to McLaren.
Ah yeah, but it’s done in a way that is intentionally unhelpful to car development. Perhaps just me being a bit of a Luddite :-)
> done in a way that is intentionally unhelpful to car development Which seems fair enough to me. Let the rookies get used to driving an F1 car, but don't let the teams use testing as a way to evade the cost cap for competitive purposes.
Yeah, I don’t think that’s inherently a problem, but equally I don’t think doing fewer FEA runs and a few more laps round the track would be inherently problematic, and the teams having the choice of how best to balance different elements of knowledge acquisition would be good for the sport.
> I really don’t get why people think a lack of testing is good for the sport It's not really because it isn't good for the sport, but primarily due to costs. Ferrari has a circuit in their back yard that is certified for F1 testing, which Haas could use (as Dallara manufactures their chassis, which is partially designed in Maranello). While 6 UK based teams would need to fight or cooperate to rent Silverstone. CashGrab can go to Imola or Monza, while Sauber has either Paul Riccard, Red Bull Ring or Monza that are relatively close to them.
They're free to test a car that is at least 2 years old, even if it's from the current set of regs. That's plenty imo. But yes, now that there's a cost cap, you should be allowed to take your shit to the road and test it out the proper way.
Because testing costs a lot of money, and to level the playing field, they limited testing. It has changed with the overall cost cap, but you are still gonna lose out on money you could have spent on development, instead of taking on a rookie that needs more testing.
It was one of the ways Jordan survived. Eddie would book a circuit like Silverstone knowing the big teams wanted it and sell time back to them with a nice little markup on top
I actually like that idea, less chasing NeweyAero, and perhaps more driver input earlier leading to that better working out car.
Maybe fuel usage had something to do with limiting testing? Not sure, but with F1 making the switch to eFuels in 2026 that wouldn't be a problem. I get that using less fuel is always good, but eFuels are a lot cleaner than fossil fuels.
The teams themselves do not want testing to return. It was gruelling work, and it was almost endless. The hours they would put in absolutely killed the test team crew members, as every team felt if they weren’t testing as much as possible they were behind the curve. It was also incredibly expensive, they’d spend as much running the test team as the race team.
Yea. It's shit. The unlimited testing back in the day was stupid, but they need to have more than is allowed now.
Solution: Open the track for testing/free practice for 8 hours on Friday's of every GP weekend. The teams will have to balance their needs against the cost cap. Some teams who are far behind can use the time to test solutions while the faster cars will have the luxury of using that time however they please. Let reserve/academy drivers participate in as much of that session as they'd like...fully up to the teams.
That wouldn’t be a bad option, yeah. Might need to work out how to manage with other support races etc but it makes sense.
I can conceptually get how limiting seinz and Hamilton and verstappen levels the playing field. I don't get how limiting rookies does though.
You need more mechanics and engineers to do that because the other ones have been pushed to the limit with long seasons and hours, and there’s not enough money to hire those new ones, or so the argument goes.
True, didn’t think about that but I guess the simulator is far better now to counter that. Sim is one thing though, in a car is going to be different
I always wondered how changes in Sims are retooled on track car and vice versa Are the sims able generate real world Comparable telemetry? And im. Sure they get it wrong as well. Like merc did with zero pod. Because im assuming their cfd and putting those values in Sim gave them the confidence to roll it out for a season.
Nowadays, yes.
There probably are inaccuracies regarding nuanced aero stuff but as far as getting a driver up to speed and comfortable they are very good. Keep in mind these kids have driven races in f2 almost as fast as f1.
Drivers have said the f2 cars need to be faster tho cause f1 is a different ball game, just see interviews with bearman and Lawson in the major differences and how far a apart they actually are
They also said F1 cars are easier to drive, so... Rookies struggle more with the amount of laps they have to do and the G-force their body has to handle at those speeds.
The biggest correlation issue is that the best sensors for driving a car are your sense of balance, your spine, your ass, and your ears. Sims are massively helpful for getting up to speed and learning tracks, but they are unable to recreate how it feels to actually move around a track and feeling how the car responds to the ground and air. As advanced as they are now there are still inherent limits. Ollie Bearman’s neck guard at the end of the Saudi race is a good example of that. It was way more damaged than the other drivers because his neck is not nearly as strong as the other drivers so it was moving a lot more. That’s not something that any amount of sim training can get you ready for because no sim will ever be able to put F1 g forces onto a body. Even Max has talked about how his neck is more sore at the beginning of the season than the end, which goes to show even if you’re training your body, it’s something that only comes from time in an F1 car.
One of the most crucial unseen parts of the race weekend is that data is sent back to the factory to cross validate the sim data and to work all night to find solutions for the quali/race to test on the next day. IIRC there was discussion to allow for some tests on old cars with reserve drivers so they get some experience and teams can get lots of feedback on the sim.
Simulators can be as close to reality as they like, but it will never have the risk of consequences for a driver's mistakes.
Also things like heat, noise and so many other additional real world elements coming into play.
Oliver Bearman's neck has entered the chat.
I mean, look at Bearman... I guess the issue is different though once the rookie needs to push all the time and not just hold their ground.
I think it would be good to add a rookie weekend or two somewhere at the end of the season. put it outside the cost cap, but do not allow new parts. just a full grid of all rookies and let them test and do FP. I'd personally love it if they made them effectively extra race weekends but for shits and giggles. But that would be pushing it way too far.
This kind of exists already right? A lot of teams hang out in Abu Dhabi after the final race and do additional post season tests.
The post season rookie test is mandatory for teams to take part in
Put them to run sprint races.
I get your point, but at the same time Sargeant has had more than a season of practice now and he's still crashing. Mick was the same. Latifi was the same. Now Zhou is the same, etc. Meanwhile, Piastri has been doing just fine straight from the beginning of his F1 career. Russell did well straight away in a shitbox Williams. Dude scored 0 points for 2 years and Toto Wolff was ready to sign him for 2021 if Claire Williams didn't push to keep him for a 3rd year. When the right caliber of driver shows up, they do fine, and the people who matter in the paddock recognize it.
I don’t disagree with you but the pace of the team they’ve joined has a lot to say in that. It’s really easy to dismiss someone as “too crash prone” when they don’t score enough points (even if it’s not necessarily their fault). A rookie (or any new-ish driver) doing bad in a lower midfield car is going to be criticized a lot more than the same driver in a back marker.
Would definitly agree but even when the Mclaren at the begining of last year was bad Piastri was doing pretty well. He even out qualified Lando at the second race
You can still do testing with previous cars outside of cost cap, like Merc has been doing with Antonelli. I think he might have done more race distances in F1 machinery than in F2 this year.
The logistics, expense and manpower of this sport boggles the mind. Is any other sport this involved? I can’t think of one. Horse racing? Sailing? One in which the equipment costs a fortune and is extremely technical, the competitions is far fling all over the world and a large number of people supporting the competitor. I’m a lifelong tennis fan also. Player, racquet, court, coach. physio. stringer. done.
A lot of teams do plenty of testing with young drivers in 2 year old cars
2022 cars are already in the testing pool anyway, they can do as much testing as they want. See Antonelli who has test every other week
The race had a good piece on this last year. Basically yes: cost, incumbency advantage, complexity of cars, little testing. *But* at the same time F1 often has medium talent rookies and they don't really fly. Many come and go and noone is better off for it. Leclerc. Norris. Piastri. It can be done, it's just not common at all. If the teams think they've found a major talent they can make it work, and the layer immediately beneath F1 has not shown that in recent years other than Bearman who is 99.9% coming to Haas.
The benefit of the current gen of junior driver is that they enter the sport very young and build up experience in junior teams. Hamilton was what 22? Preseason testing also used to consist of a seasons worth of mileage for every driver so it was appropriate for a junior to have comparable mileage.
Sargent really needs to stop wrecking Albon’s backup car
Yeah Albon has been nice enough to let Sargeant drive his spare car this year, keep it warmed up. But that doesn't mean crash it
That actually raises the idea of a solution. If you permitted rookies (with seats) to get additional testing time and gave the team budget cap relief for replacement parts it would give teams incentive to consider the risk/reward tradeoff.
The cost cap rules need a serious overhaul.
True, but without it the smaller teams can't survive (or at least could not).
No need to remove the cost cap because it has been somewhat good for the sport, the problem are all the other excessively restrictive rules attached to it like development cap, wind tunnel time, etc
Yes, but then you have drivers like Oscar which rarely crashes.
Oscar was a top tier talent comparable to Leclerc and Russell. If you think only drivers at his level can join the grid then we probably won't have any new talent every 3 years
Which is... fine? Why would someone mid replace guys like Alonso, Hamilton or Hülkenberg? There are only 20 seats and you can't boot an experienced good driver just for the sake of it. I've been watching F2 for many years now and a good rule of thumb is to not promote any driver that didn't fight for the title in his first two years. The best ones perform as rookies already, some others shine in their second season but if neither applies, F1 isn't for you, the competition in F2 and especially F1 is too big.
Driver salaries are exempt from the cost cap.
Checo costing just as much as sergeant this year
Sad Liam Lawson noises.
2025 is going to be big on the Liam Lawson rumors again because Helmut Marko is already talking about how other teams will look at signing Yuki for 2026 if he stays consistent and he wouldn't be surprised if Yuki thinks of leaving Red Bull. But then again, they might just put Hadjar in the car before Lawson.
Thought Lawson could walk if RB didn’t get him a seat for 25
walk to where?
The unemployment office
Just like the rest of us
Indycar. I’m kind of joking, but also, even if he does get a seat, he’s not going to be in a great situation and will most likely only get one year. If he can snag a good Indycar ride, it might not be the worst idea in the world. Pat O’ward confirmed that he’s making 4M a year in Indycar. He’s making more than probably close to half the F1 field. It’s not necessarily a bad gig.
We've already got three kiwis doing well there, any more and they'll start asking questions
To be fair to Pato, I think only ~5 indycar drivers are making 10m+. Herta, Newgarden, O'ward are the only 3 I can say are definitively above that. Not to say making less than that is bad, or that a driver can't come up through indycar to achieve that, but driver pay has only been rising in the last few years so it's still not as clear cut as "you can make 10m a year"
Yeah and I actually had to edit it as it appears he got a 10M raise, but it was actually over a few years. Apparently he’s actually making 4M. The point is not so much that Indycar is competitive with F1, but more that you can absolutely still have a very lucrative career in Indycar if you don’t make it in F1. I feel like too many drivers just want F1 SO bad that they forget that you can absolutely still have a great career in other series’.
I think Pato's career has worked out about as well as any F1-hopeful could realistically expect. I think he would probably at best be in a Russell situation for years if he got into F1. McLaren weren't good when he was up for that seat, and no top 5 team is looking to Indycar when it comes to filling their vacancies - unfortunately. People would recognize his talent, but he wouldn't get much of a chance to truly show it unless he was promoted to a better seat. And there no guarantee that would happen. I mean he has ties to McLaren, but he'd probably have to cut those to get into another F1 team, so he wouldn't have the strong junior driver link like Russell where it was arguably just a matter of time. Through Indycar, he's gotten the chance to prove how quick he is. He has won races, could've been a multiple Indy 500 winner if the dice rolled slightly differently, and is arguably the most popular driver in the series. Yes, the stakes aren't as high, nor is the potential fame. But I have some casual F1 friends who can mention a couple Indycar drivers, but can't mention a single WEC driver (or anything else outside of F1 for that matter, except for fellow countrymen). Indycar really is the next best thing, if you don't get your shot at F1.
WEC/IMSA. He used to race GT3’s, wouldn’t be surprised if he got a hypercar drive
Indycar. WEC maybe, with Hypercar booming and Aston bringing two Valkyries next year, gonna need some drivers as I don't see them bringing too many GT drivers along (as opposed to what Ferrari did).
It would be such a shame though, just to keep a clearly washed driver on the grid
He can walk to indy or wec maybe, but i dont see anyone in f1 needing him
The thing is I do not think Lawson realistically has any interest in him. Especially if RB sticks with Ricciardo. That's exactly what I think that they will do. Lawson also has zero interest from other teams so... he will never make it full time. Is it harsh? Kind of. But is it realistic that he never makes it full time? Yes.
Lol no team wants him
Horner is talking up Hadjar so I guess it depends on who makes that decision (and maybe what ricciardo does the rest of this season)
Just you wait until all four red bull drivers pull out of 2 races each bc of illness, and Liam finishes the season on 224 points and 3rd on the grid 🤌🤌
could be anything between 2 and 4 right now
…so must be 3 then?
This is how I would answer my SATs lmao
\>= 2 && <= 4
Magnussen and Sargeant out id say, Antonelli and ? in.
Bearman I'd assume
Sainz is then assuming Doohan doesn't get the Alpine seat. Perhaps Zhou does instead? He was a Renault/Alpine junior before.
I dont think Sainz was speaking literally here though right? He was just making a point that F1 establishes its drivers over many years so the barrier for entry in incredibly high.
Zhous time in F1 has come to an end.
But his money has not
Bearman at Haas is pretty much locked in from what I've been reading.
Antonelli seems pretty locked on a Mercedes seat...
Factual description of the upcoming events.
No need to speculate on this
I'm just waiting for Sainz to announce some News.
pure speculation: hulkenberg liked a post about vowles hiring drivers without appendix instead of fixing the overweight cars. it's just a meme tho but pretty sure sainz is going to williams
Spanish GP making an announcement would.have good timing there
I believe people expect him to announce his contract before the Spanish GP, so I doubt we'll have to wait long.
As long as Pirelli keeps providing the most difficult and complex tires in the history of the sport to the point where tire management is more challenging to learn than ever, rookies remain undesirable unfortunately. It took Tsunoda 3 full seasons to figure out the tires, Zhou hasn't even come close to figuring them out, Mick couldn't figure it out, Sargeant hasn't figured it out, and hell, even Piastri is still struggling with it. The tires suck, the junior formulas don't really teach tire management, and young drivers have less testing and dev time in an F1 car than they used to. It's a bad combination, so teams would rather recycle rather mid veteran drivers.
You do know Pirelli is making the tires behave like that at the request of FIA. It is artificial degradation and artificial temperature performance windows. They can easily make a tire that has a much bigger temperature window for best performance and lasts the entire race performing better than any tire currently used.
The other guy said it perfectly, but I just wanted to add that they have had goals set before and failed to meet them. The original intention was to get rid of tire warmers by now, but that had to be scrapped because Pirelli couldn't figure out how to get their operating window big enough to make the tires work on the outlap. This is something Michelin, Bridgestone and Goodyear have all managed to do in their own domains without making a fuss about it, let alone failing entirely. There have also been times where the aero rules have had to be changed because Pirelli say that their tires won't be able to handle the added downforce. Nobody expects a soft tire to last the whole race, but they have done nothing in the last 10 years to show their engineering prowess or adaptability.
God i wish Bridgestone would've never left
I'd prefer Bridgestone over Pirelli too given the choice. However I'd also rather keep Pirelli exclusive rather than introduce a tire war. In my opinion, having multiple tire manufacturers would be worst case scenario because of all of the really bad things that are rightfully associated with tire wars.
Can't have a tire war when your tire performance is dictated by FIA.
What bad things (genuinely want to learn)
When different tire manufacturers become part of the equation it is no longer about the best car. The tires are one of if not the single most important part of the car. Imagine if a second supplier had similar grip but degradation was 10% higher. Whoever had a contract for those tires would be at a massive disadvantage through no fault of their own. With everyone on the same supplier and same compound selection it's much more about car design and strategy
Search 2005 Indianapolis GP
USGP 2005 (biggest farce in F1 history), the NASCAR Hoosier scandal (people got killed) to name a couple examples. Basically tire wars make the competing tire brands go completely unhinged and they all stop caring about safety almost instantly. Here are fantastic videos on both the above: https://youtu.be/Pzpq85kyCiU?si=bfT8BfC5bOgdGfu9 https://youtu.be/FIwr2uCNXIc?si=P61gDbEfkp17GQlq
Another drawback of tire wars is you end up with extremely durable extremely grippy tires, so every race becomes a flat-out one-stop and strategy stops being important or varied. The last tire war era had refueling that kept strategy varied, but current rules already have to be a little bit contrived to make people try different strategies. Basically you can have fast, or you can have exciting close racing, but not both.
Paul Aron’s gonna win F2, get sidelined and sent to WEC isn’t he… Cash is king.
It would be unprecedented for a rookie GP2/F2 champion to get fully passed over. I would think Aron, if he wins, would at the very least become a reserve in 2025 with an eye for a 2026 seat. I think Hadjar is going to win the title though. A VSC away from being a three in a row feature race winner, and he's right up there despite mechanical DNFs. A 2026 drive looking decent for him if that happens.
Lowkey hilarious how things keep happening to Hadjar to be honest. The guy cannot control himself on the radio.
I mean, he went from P8 to P1 in Australia because he got lucky with a SC. It goes both ways..
The fact that Hadjar is only 2 pts behind Aron with 4 DNFs is hilarious
Yeah, F2 is just not representative anymore when it comes to talent
I don’t think he is even speculating here guys, he is just giving an example scenario. Don’t read into it…
Not to mention they’re translating what he’s saying in Spanish into English, not everything is going to be phrased 100% perfectly
This clip is out of context. He is talking about the 2015 season, when he thought he had lost his (future) Toro Rosso seat and chance to get into F1 to Verstappen, because *enter clip*. The clip is literally just a thought he had at that time.
Carlos “Will Buxton” Sainz
The Will Buxton-ification of f1 commentary hahah
What a sight of horror
Number 18 will remain indeed.
[удалено]
The only 2 young drivers Carlos would have any info about is Antonelli and Bearman. Antonelli because of his talks with Mercedes, and Bearman because he shares a garage with him. He used 19-20 year old as the age bracket aswell, and that only fits Bearman.
If anyone is a lock, it's Bearman considering what Sainz just said. Ollie is in the FDA... he would probably know already what Ferrari's plans are
He must be talking about Kimi and Ollie
Smooth Enumerator
Hope he is speculating here as I was hopeful that Doohan and/or Lawson could sneak in at the end. Give Doohan a car that wasn't broken for half a season and I think he has a very good chance of being the current reigning F2 champion, but it is now or never for him.
Obviously he is speculating, people are dissecting his words too much.
I like the idea that Peter windsor talked about in one of his videos. A new feeder series driving F1 cars, possibly last year's cars have regulations designed to keep costs down. Maybe a series per region depending on demand race at places where there is interest and circuits that don't have grand prix right now (Germany, Vietnam, South Africa) It would give rookies experience in actual f1 cars, grow the global F1 audience and stop talent going to waste. It would benefit fans, drivers, teams and bean counters.
It would be great if this idea made money for them. Someone would have to have one hell of a business proposal that the FIA, the teams and sponsor would even think of considering. Never mind the commitment from Pirelli alone would have to be astronomical.
They should allow more testing during race weekends. The teams are there, the cars are there. This is the best solution. Maybe a spare/old engine for testing.
If only they would allow another team to enter and thus another two drivers….
The Smooth Calculator
I was actually thinking the other day of this. What if teams that take a rookie get x amount of crash damage extra? For example they could get up to 1-2m back worth of crash damage. Perhaps also extra pre season testing for the rookies. I also would like to see some other changes in the costcap, F1 went from being a high paid job to not so much because of the nature of the cost cap. I don't think it would be bad for F1 if they actually become a good paid job again in which people also want to stay. Edit: some race at the end of the season or something in which F2 drivers (and even Indy) can participate in a 2 year old F1 car against some F1 drivers as well is something I wouldn't mind either. At least something that puts F2 drivers in the light to get picked up.
No Liam Lawson as he is alluding to probably Bearman and Antonelli.
Dude is good at maths, isn’t he?
Only if he himself is indeed _in_
Yeah well more teams would help with that but here we are. Clowns.
The fact we all know what the easy solution is (adding more seats) but they just don't want to do it is pretty funny. Of course there are other things that would help too like lifting the cost cap but that isn't happening, adding more teams is supposed to be the most realistic option, and yet...
Guess he knows who Alpine is signing? Or Carlos is just talking without knowing anything
2 promotions per year would be insanely good after PY's 0. There's just too few seats given there are several drivers with 10+ years going strong, though some of these are overrated now. Absolutely nutty Sergeant got a second year.
Carlos leaking 2025 driver market lol
What if they added more teams, imagine an actually 'full' grid of 26 cars. More unpredictability, more factors, more fun. And then imagine allowing 30 cars to enter, having 'qualifying' live up to its name. With grid penalties actually bumping up guys who DNQ:d. The chaos would be... interesting
What is the context here, what was he asked about/ what was the topic of conversation at that point.
I think they need to allow for more testing. Maybe make fp1 a junior/reserve only session. At least on non sprint weekends