2024 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[avantman]

Leclerc is generally thought to be the single best qualifier in F1.

By who?

[avantman]

Sainz would be a genuine problem for Max in quali, and has proven he isn’t often willing to play the team game. He wouldn’t let Red Bull make him a 2nd driver, and he’d be closer to Max than Rubens or Bottas ever were to Schumacher or Hamilton. He’s too good to be a 2nd driver, but not good enough to be a long term first driver in a top team.

this all is very interesting but simply completely wrong, because of the fact we know for certain red bull did their absolute best to sign Norris from 2025 onwards. There is nobody in their mind in F1 paddock who would put Sainz above Norris today on quali or race pace. Except maybe few diehard Ferrari fans who consider Charles an absolute God.

[bananapeel23]

Leclerc is generally thought to be the single best qualifier in F1.

By who?

I'd argue the broad consensus is that Leclerc is the outright fastest qualifier in F1. In most discussions you will see people argue between Leclerc or Max, but usually give the edge to Leclerc due to his ridiculous qualifying record and the downright stupid amount of pole positions he has managed to rack up compared to his teammates.

I think it would be stupid to argue Lewis is the best qualifier at this point. An argument could be made for Russell though, but given he has only had one teammate worth discussing, I think it's hard to really get a good grasp of just how good he is, with Hamilton clearly struggling with cars from this regulation set.

Still, Leclerc is undeniably a top 3 qualifier and in my opinion, has a qualifying record that really stands out compared to Russell and Verstappen. His reputation for insane 2nd Q3 runs is a thing for a reason. The man is incredibly fast. To me the argument is between Max and Leclerc, but the fact that Leclerc has gotten so many poles the car just didn't deserve (Monaco 21, Baku 21, Baku 23, Spa 23, Spa 24) and his absurd domination on the most technical tracks (Monaco 2022, Monaco 2024) pushes me over the edge.

Now I've only really shared my own opinion, but generally in discussions of who the best qualifier is, you will usually see Leclerc or Verstappen as the top 2. Of course Leclerc has the benefit of mostly having driven shitty race cars, but great quali cars, which certainly flatter his qualifying a bit, but still. It's very close, and I'd argue its about a 50/40/10 split between people who consider Leclerc/Max/Russell to be the best in quali.

[bluechris]

It's very close, and I'd argue its about a 50/40/10 split between people who consider Leclerc/Max/Russell to be the best in quali.

How on earth Russell is compared with Max & Leclerc in quali?

[bananapeel23]

It's very close, and I'd argue its about a 50/40/10 split between people who consider Leclerc/Max/Russell to be the best in quali.

How on earth Russell is compared with Max & Leclerc in quali?

Generally because he's beating Hamilton and Hamilton has the most pole positions ever in F1 history, as well as his reputation for absolutely crushing his teammates in Williams. Personally I think it's very difficult to judge Russell. He could be on par with Max/Leclerc or he could be a bit worse, it's very difficult to tell with how much Hamilton has been struggling with this regulation set and how terrible his cars and teammates were in Williams.

Personally I'd put Russell behind Max and Leclerc; probably on par with, or slightly faster than Norris and Sainz. I do belive some people really consider Russell to be the best in quali, however. 50/40/10 might be generous, and it might be closer to 53/42/5 or something, but those people do exist and Russell really does have quite an amazing qualifying record, albeit one that deserves an asterisk.

If you don't agree with the Russell comparison. That really only leaves Leclerc and Verstappen as the people you could reasonably argue are the best qualifiers. Does that make Leclerc as the consensus fastest qualifier that unreasonable?

this all is very interesting but simply completely wrong, because of the fact we know for certain red bull did their absolute best to sign Norris from 2025 onwards. There is nobody in their mind in F1 paddock who would put Sainz above Norris today on quali or race pace. Except maybe few diehard Ferrari fans who consider Charles an absolute God.

Leclerc is an absolute monster in quali. If he isn't the best outright, he's narrowly 2nd best at worst. That isn't even up for discussion. The man is rapid and Sainz is close. Sainz doesn't quite have the "it" factor that Leclerc does with the disgusting second Q3 runs Leclerc can manage sometimes, but he is seriously fast and people underestimate just how good his quali is.

Remember that Sainz beat Verstappen in the 2015 quali head-to-head and beat Norris in quali in 2019 and was very even with him in 2020. Obviously 2015 Verstappen and 2019/2020 Norris are not 2024 Verstappen and Norris, but Sainz has been consistently good in quali his whole career. Is he as good as Norris or Verstappen? Absolutely not. Is he as good in qualifying as Norris. I'd argue they would be incredibly close, easily the closest on the grid in the same car, like +-0.05 or so in average quali gap across a season.

Quali tier list:

Best of the Best: Leclerc >= Verstappen
Amazing: Russell > Norris >= Sainz
Great: Hamilton > Piastri
Good: Alonso, Hülkenberg, Albon

[avantman]

Sainz did not beat Verstappen in 2015. It's false narrative pushed by some people that counted even qualis where Max had technical issues and couldn't put a lap in in Sainz favor. Truth is, starting with mid-season, Hungary 2015 Sainz outqualified Max on merit (meaning where neither of them had any technical issues in quali and could put a lap in) just on two occasions, that includes 2nd half of 2015 and 4 qualis in 2016. Once in 2015 - (Abu-Dhabi) and once in 2016(China). Basically almost all of Sainz quali wins came in the first part of 2015, where Max was complete rookie in car racing almost, and Franz Tost was talking on how tough it was for him in the beginning. So, Max in fact outqualified Sainz both in terms of H2H and even more so based on average lap time, it was massively in his favor. when Sainz beat him it was not by much, whereas Max was sometimes a lot faster. Racefans has it as 0.2s in Max favor on average in 2015, although I haven't double checked these numbers myself.
Also, based on direct comparison of Perez and Sainz with the same teammate Hulkenberg, Perez in fact was closer to Nico and more successful qualifier. You assumptions that Sainz would now run Max close over one lap is truly laughable, particularly in a RB cars of recent years, which were 'on the nose'. Leclerc wasn't nearly as good in qualifying as Max neither in karting, nor in F3 prior to F1. There us no single evidence to suggest he is either faster over one lap, or better and more consistent qualifier overall. The dude couldn't even progress into Q3/Q2 on couple of occasions. He might be indeed better than Max on few very particular circuits, some of his favorites, such as Baku, or say Singapore. Max is on the opposite side of the spectrum in terms of the preferences, he hates city circuits (leclerc said multiple times he loves them). Max would destroy Leclerc over one lap or race distance on pure drivers tracks, all greats loved the most - Spa and Suzuka. This is unbiased reality.

[bluechris]

Generally because he's beating Hamilton and Hamilton has the most pole positions ever in F1 history, as well as his reputation for absolutely crushing his teammates in Williams. Personally I think it's very difficult to judge Russell. He could be on par with Max/Leclerc or he could be a bit worse, it's very difficult to tell with how much Hamilton has been struggling with this regulation set and how terrible his cars and teammates were in Williams.

ah ok, i thought generally, thx

[bananapeel23]

Also, based on direct comparison of Perez and Sainz with the same teammate Hulkenberg, Perez in fact was closer to Nico and more successful qualifier. You assumptions that Sainz would now run Max close over one lap is truly laughable, particularly in a RB cars of recent years, which were 'on the nose'. Leclerc wasn't nearly as good in qualifying as Max neither in karting, nor in F3 prior to F1. There us no single evidence to suggest he is either faster over one lap, or better and more consistent qualifier overall. The dude couldn't even progress into Q3/Q2 on couple of occasions. He might be indeed better than Max on few very particular circuits, some of his favorites, such as Baku, or say Singapore. Max is on the opposite side of the spectrum in terms of the preferences, he hates city circuits (leclerc said multiple times he loves them). Max would destroy Leclerc over one lap or race distance on pure drivers tracks, all greats loved the most - Spa and Suzuka. This is unbiased reality.

You're seriously underselling Leclerc. Even the most pessimistic people would not put Leclerc below narrowly 2nd best in quali. Leclerc is filthy quick. He's 25-7 in terms of pole positions against his teammates. He has never lost a quali H2H against a teammate. Him being quick at street tracks is not a point against him, it's quite the opposite, given that street tracks are the most technical and are generally considered to be more "driver oriented".

Verstappen is lighting quick, and almost certainly the better driver overall, but in terms of quali pace you would struggle to argue he's clearly better than Leclerc. Vettel is a 4 time champion and was always considered a quali specialist, yet got absolutely crushed in quali in 2019 by a 21 year old Leclerc in his sophomore season (7 poles against 2). Vettel is the best teammate either of them has faced.

Sainz is within a tenth of Leclerc this season, and has consistently lost about 2:1 in the quali head to head against Leclerc over their 4 years. He's quick enough to trouble Leclerc, and thus quick enough to trouble Max.

[AR3-GP]

Horner says they first started to see the issues last year.

"There's a disconnect in the balance that just isn't working, and as soon as you get into that situation, you demand more from the tyres to compensate, you change the balance, and to solve one problem, you create another. Therefore, you end up entering a vicious circle."

Horner declared the issues have "been there for some time", initially indicating that after going through the data, they were "there at the beginning of the year".

He added: "Others have obviously made a step, and as we've pushed the package harder, it has exposed the issue."

Significantly, he then revealed: "Even if you go back [further] in the data, there were a few races last year where we started to see this in Austin, and so on.

"It's a characteristic we know we have to address, and full focus in the factory of Milton Keynes to do that."

https://racingnews365.com/horner-makes- ... t=13783412

He added: "Others have obviously made a step, and as we've pushed the package harder, it has exposed the issue."

This is the most important thing. When no one else brought a real car, it's difficult to say that you are doing the wrong thing when you are winning. You just keep going. As soon as someone else developed a car with the same performance but with better characteristics, the limitations of the Red Bull design are exposed.

If everyone was slower than Williams, Williams would think there design was good and their drivers wouldn't complain.

[Dunlay]

Sainz did not beat Verstappen in 2015. It's false narrative pushed by some people that counted even qualis where Max had technical issues and couldn't put a lap in in Sainz favor. Truth is, starting with mid-season, Hungary 2015 Sainz outqualified Max on merit (meaning where neither of them had any technical issues in quali and could put a lap in) just on two occasions, that includes 2nd half of 2015 and 4 qualis in 2016. Once in 2015 - (Abu-Dhabi) and once in 2016(China). Basically almost all of Sainz quali wins came in the first part of 2015, where Max was complete rookie in car racing almost, and Franz Tost was talking on how tough it was for him in the beginning. So, Max in fact outqualified Sainz both in terms of H2H and even more so based on average lap time, it was massively in his favor. when Sainz beat him it was not by much, whereas Max was sometimes a lot faster. Racefans has it as 0.2s in Max favor on average in 2015, although I haven't double checked these numbers myself.
Also, based on direct comparison of Perez and Sainz with the same teammate Hulkenberg, Perez in fact was closer to Nico and more successful qualifier. You assumptions that Sainz would now run Max close over one lap is truly laughable, particularly in a RB cars of recent years, which were 'on the nose'. Leclerc wasn't nearly as good in qualifying as Max neither in karting, nor in F3 prior to F1. There us no single evidence to suggest he is either faster over one lap, or better and more consistent qualifier overall. The dude couldn't even progress into Q3/Q2 on couple of occasions. He might be indeed better than Max on few very particular circuits, some of his favorites, such as Baku, or say Singapore. Max is on the opposite side of the spectrum in terms of the preferences, he hates city circuits (leclerc said multiple times he loves them). Max would destroy Leclerc over one lap or race distance on pure drivers tracks, all greats loved the most - Spa and Suzuka. This is unbiased reality.

I always wonder how people develop this feeling that one driver can destroy the other, without ever having watched them race in the same car (perfectly configured to individual preferences). What's the science behind saying such a thing. Can one say Leclerc destroyed Max last sunday in Monza? Qualified in better position and won the race. It defies logic. Imagine if Leclerc has a car that is better than the one Max has for a couple of years, where Leclerc continuously puts it on pole and wins races with margin. Would than then qualifies to call, "Leclerc destroyed Max"?

[Paa]

Horner says they first started to see the issues last year.

[...]
Significantly, he then revealed: "Even if you go back [further] in the data, there were a few races last year where we started to see this in Austin, and so on.

"It's a characteristic we know we have to address, and full focus in the factory of Milton Keynes to do that."

https://racingnews365.com/horner-makes- ... t=13783412

He added: "Others have obviously made a step, and as we've pushed the package harder, it has exposed the issue."

This is the most important thing. When no one else brought a real car, it's difficult to say that you are doing the wrong thing when you are winning. You just keep going. As soon as someone else developed a car with the same performance but with better characteristics, the limitations of the Red Bull design are exposed.

If everyone was slower than Williams, Williams would think there design was good and their drivers wouldn't complain.

This is admitting that the writing was on the wall all along. It had signs, it is in the data.
They just chose to ignore it, because they could live with it.

This is getting comfortable at the top, 101.

One of the reasons I like Red Bull as they usually go for last possible gain, maximizing everything, which is really satisfying to watch, so this overlook by them is kind of disappointing.

[woocasz]

Also, based on direct comparison of Perez and Sainz with the same teammate Hulkenberg, Perez in fact was closer to Nico and more successful qualifier. You assumptions that Sainz would now run Max close over one lap is truly laughable, particularly in a RB cars of recent years, which were 'on the nose'. Leclerc wasn't nearly as good in qualifying as Max neither in karting, nor in F3 prior to F1. There us no single evidence to suggest he is either faster over one lap, or better and more consistent qualifier overall. The dude couldn't even progress into Q3/Q2 on couple of occasions. He might be indeed better than Max on few very particular circuits, some of his favorites, such as Baku, or say Singapore. Max is on the opposite side of the spectrum in terms of the preferences, he hates city circuits (leclerc said multiple times he loves them). Max would destroy Leclerc over one lap or race distance on pure drivers tracks, all greats loved the most - Spa and Suzuka. This is unbiased reality.

You're seriously underselling Leclerc. Even the most pessimistic people would not put Leclerc below narrowly 2nd best in quali. Leclerc is filthy quick. He's 25-7 in terms of pole positions against his teammates. He has never lost a quali H2H against a teammate. Him being quick at street tracks is not a point against him, it's quite the opposite, given that street tracks are the most technical and are generally considered to be more "driver oriented".

Verstappen is lighting quick, and almost certainly the better driver overall, but in terms of quali pace you would struggle to argue he's clearly better than Leclerc. Vettel is a 4 time champion and was always considered a quali specialist, yet got absolutely crushed in quali in 2019 by a 21 year old Leclerc in his sophomore season (7 poles against 2). Vettel is the best teammate either of them has faced.

Sainz is within a tenth of Leclerc this season, and has consistently lost about 2:1 in the quali head to head against Leclerc over their 4 years. He's quick enough to trouble Leclerc, and thus quick enough to trouble Max.

Don't listen to this man, if you look at his previous posts about Ferrari/Charles. he is Leclerc's number 1 hater. Look what happened to Red bull/Max. They have lost a bit of race pace, the car is more understeer, Max is clearly having problems controlling this understeer and that is why we have these results. Mediocre car = mediocre driver.

[Xyz22]

https://x.com/F1BigData/status/1830594746315600022

[Paa]

Max in a McLaren would probably already have equal points as Norris in a Red Bull.

[Vettel165]

Max in a Mclaren would probably have 50 point lead now and destroy the field in the last races . When he has a car he just always deliver with a solid front-end.