2025 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[euv2]

https://i.imgur.com/cuSiyvP.jpeg

Apparently, for the inside car, having the front axel at least alongside the wing mirror is enough.

You know, Max pulled exactly what Oscar pulled here to Lando last year in Texas right? And Max did exactly what Lando did, he overtook off the track.

Lando got a penalty last year, that was fair.

But now because Max is on the receiving end, it’s unfair?

Ok, explain MEX turn 4 then, Max front axle is alongside NOR wing mirror, MAX keeps his car fully inside the white line, 10 sec penalty.

[f1isgood]

https://i.imgur.com/cuSiyvP.jpeg

Apparently, for the inside car, having the front axel at least alongside the wing mirror is enough.

You know, Max pulled exactly what Oscar pulled here to Lando last year in Texas right? And Max did exactly what Lando did, he overtook off the track.

Lando got a penalty last year, that was fair.

But now because Max is on the receiving end, it’s unfair?

I am not sure what the fuss is. Car on the inside can push car to the outside. Has been the rules like forever. There's a reason why you are not supposed to stick it on the outside mostly.

Oscar though, if we are being very fair, just barely made it. He was clever with his move there and fair enough, Max deserved what he got.

[f1isgood]

https://i.imgur.com/cuSiyvP.jpeg

Apparently, for the inside car, having the front axel at least alongside the wing mirror is enough.

You know, Max pulled exactly what Oscar pulled here to Lando last year in Texas right? And Max did exactly what Lando did, he overtook off the track.

Lando got a penalty last year, that was fair.

But now because Max is on the receiving end, it’s unfair?

Ok, explain MEX turn 4 then, Max front axle is alongside NOR wing mirror, MAX keeps his car fully inside the white line, 10 sec penalty.

I think the second Mexico one baffled me as well but can we move on? None of this discussion will ever be productive. In the end, Max got a penalty that lost the race that we should have won. That's all there is.

[napoleon1981]

We just need gravel traps. Piastri knew Max would yield, and drove in very hot himself. With a gravel trap there and no place to go for Max that corner would have been totally different.

No, we just need drivers accepting when they are beaten and play by the rules. It works just fine for other drivers. It was the most straight forward racing scenario ever, and yet Max manages to create a controversy from it and get penalized once again.

Not really, there use to be a rule that you had to leave a cars width. Tbh the outside line was not a bad one, given that it would be the inside in t2, the second part of the chicane. However now with the runoff, you just send it deep and run your own car half off track, and turn the wheel as minimally as you can. All of this has little to do with racing.

I have seen you trying to push your narrative everywhere you can with passion on the forum, it doesn't mean it's right.

[euv2]

https://i.imgur.com/cuSiyvP.jpeg

Apparently, for the inside car, having the front axel at least alongside the wing mirror is enough.

You know, Max pulled exactly what Oscar pulled here to Lando last year in Texas right? And Max did exactly what Lando did, he overtook off the track.

Lando got a penalty last year, that was fair.

But now because Max is on the receiving end, it’s unfair?

Ok, explain MEX turn 4 then, Max front axle is alongside NOR wing mirror, MAX keeps his car fully inside the white line, 10 sec penalty.

I think the second Mexico one baffled me as well but can we move on? None of this discussion will ever be productive. In the end, Max got a penalty that lost the race that we should have won. That's all there is.

We can move on, I was only trying to point out the inconsistency in stewarding. We don't have to take their document and reasoning as gospel, these are the same stewards that gave Lawson one of the most underserved 10 sec penalties today and still justified it in their document.

Oscar did what any other driver would have done, including Max. He is not to blame, just the inconsistent stewards.

[Emag]

https://i.imgur.com/cuSiyvP.jpeg

Apparently, for the inside car, having the front axel at least alongside the wing mirror is enough.

You know, Max pulled exactly what Oscar pulled here to Lando last year in Texas right? And Max did exactly what Lando did, he overtook off the track.

Lando got a penalty last year, that was fair.

But now because Max is on the receiving end, it’s unfair?

Ok, explain MEX turn 4 then, Max front axle is alongside NOR wing mirror, MAX keeps his car fully inside the white line, 10 sec penalty.

Well, reading the document again, it specifically mentions the overtake attempt by car “81”. So to maintain consistency between decisions, then it must be that the *overtaking car* must have its front axle at least alongside the defending car’s wing mirror to be entitled space and not necessarily the “car on the inside”.

In that case, Lando was entitled racing room at Mexico, but Max pushed him off-track, hence the penalty.

[f1isgood]

Ok, explain MEX turn 4 then, Max front axle is alongside NOR wing mirror, MAX keeps his car fully inside the white line, 10 sec penalty.

I think the second Mexico one baffled me as well but can we move on? None of this discussion will ever be productive. In the end, Max got a penalty that lost the race that we should have won. That's all there is.

We can move on, I was only trying to point out the inconsistency in stewarding. We don't have to take their document and reasoning as gospel, these are the same stewards that gave Lawson one of the most underserved 10 sec penalties today and still justified it in their document.

Oscar did what any other driver would have done, including Max. He is not to blame, just the inconsistent stewards.

I mean stewards are dumb. The rules are dumb. Every time someone does something people have their forks out. I am just so tired of this whole cyclical thing lol.

[Paa]

Re Penalty: Fair but I would 100 percent do what Max did by taking an advantage for a penalty. Red Bull couldn't have known the car would actually be good.

I don't get the logic. I would think, that the worse the car the more you would like to avoid the penalty.

If Max had terrible deg, he would have been overtaken on track by Piastri, and he wouldn't have been able to create a gap to Russell/Charles so he would have just lost position to them as well with the penalty. Vs giving back 1 place to Piastri, losing 1 place and 1.5 sec in the process, then try to keep Merc/Ferrari behind on track.

Sticking to a penalty only makes sense if you have a very quick car and you believe, you can create the penalty gap in free air.

[Paa]

I read somewhere that after the race Max was referring to that the rules are different this year to last year explaining why he was angry with the decision. But he didn't go into details what changed and how.
Is this really happened, and if so do you know that what he was referring to? I was not aware of any major change of rules of engagement.

[AR3-GP]

I cannot find any official comments about the car. Did the upgrades work? What was different?

[Paa]

I cannot find any official comments about the car. Did the upgrades work? What was different?

There is a suggestion of internal cooling layout change in the car thread, but I assume you saw that? Also there were rumours about internal weight distribution change as well, which would be connected to the cooling change, I assume.
But officially they only confirmed setup changes from Friday to Saturday.

Anyway, anything they did gives me slightly more confidence for the Miami-Imola package.

[AR3-GP]

I cannot find any official comments about the car. Did the upgrades work? What was different?

There is a suggestion of internal cooling layout change in the car thread, but I assume you saw that? Also there were rumours about internal weight distribution change as well, which would be connected to the cooling change, I assume.
But officially they only confirmed setup changes from Friday to Saturday.

Anyway, anything they did gives me slightly more confidence for the Miami-Imola package.

Yes I saw that, but I was wondering what Marko (or anyone) had to say about why they were so fast. Race sims on friday were awful. Sunday was even hotter than Friday. Was it the upgrades that delivered more than they expected? Setup direction?

[AR3-GP]

Mintzlaff

He emphasizes that while Red Bull has benefited enormously from Verstappen, on the other hand, Verstappen also owes a lot to Red Bull. "Of course, we're going through a difficult phase at the moment, but I don't have the feeling that Max doubts that," he says.

"As long as the attitude is lived that we want to build the best car in the world, he will pull together with us. This is the only way we can be successful again. And we will. A long-term partnership also includes sticking together in difficult times."

https://www.motorsport-total.com/forum/ ... hp?t=95319

[AR3-GP]

[Tvetovnato]

We just need gravel traps. Piastri knew Max would yield, and drove in very hot himself. With a gravel trap there and no place to go for Max that corner would have been totally different.

No, we just need drivers accepting when they are beaten and play by the rules. It works just fine for other drivers. It was the most straight forward racing scenario ever, and yet Max manages to create a controversy from it and get penalized once again.

Not really, there use to be a rule that you had to leave a cars width. Tbh the outside line was not a bad one, given that it would be the inside in t2, the second part of the chicane. However now with the runoff, you just send it deep and run your own car half off track, and turn the wheel as minimally as you can. All of this has little to do with racing.

I have seen you trying to push your narrative everywhere you can with passion on the forum, it doesn't mean it's right.

Pushing narrative All I’m doing is reinforcing the opinion shared by many that what Verstappen is doing is wrong and that if he falls in line and accepts racing rules like other drivers, we would not see this farce. The penalties he receives speaks for themselves, and yet we see attempts over and over to justify what he does here, which creates the ”passionate” discussions. We don’t need to adapt the surroundings and change tracks to prevent one driver from doing what he does, we just need to continue to enforce penalties, and we are all good.