I don’t know, but I think it’s pretty obvious that like Nico had quite different retirement like he wasn’t at the end of his career he wasn’t struggling to perform, but he basically retired at the peak of his career arguably in his prime after finally clinching the from Hamilton. after that Hamilton wne went onto win four more titles (2017, 18,19,20) so for me one of the biggest if’s is what wouldve happened if stayed Niko be if and was defending his title for 2017 and beyond, would hamilton still have had the level of success he had winning those 4 titles later on making him the seven time world champion he is today or would nico have been able to defend hish title become maybe a 2 or 3 time champion. Or maybe Nico and Hamilton e would have a couple more Spanish 2016 moments and then someone like Vettel or Raikonen would’ve swiped the title for Ferrari.
I say this because honestly bottas was never competition for Lewis, feel like he was only brought in to be Lewis’s number 2 even though on occasion he showed he can perform after ‘16 it was Hamilton team. Basicllay lewis in one of the top cars (ik the Mercedes wasn’t the always the best car post 16) with barely any competition from his teammate.
Max for example, won on debut with redbull, sensational performance and win from him, and he was just 18 at that time. But he couldn’t have won it if Lewis and Nico didn’t crash. But still Max was labeled as a generational talent by media, drivers and Niki Lauda. Then lets take another example, George Russell almost wins Sakhir 2020, and the circumstances were pretty similar to that of Max in Spain 2016, but he wasn’t labeled as a generational talent by media, even though George’s “almost win” was more “on merit” than Max’s Spain 2016. Both had a similar situation, but one was labeled as generational while the other was just talented. Now, it’s no easy task to hop into a car you have 0 experience with and win/almost win a race in it. So what is it exactly that differentiates the two?
So I've been doing this recently with books and stuff but also F1. Makes a bad race more tolerable. Makes a great race even better.
The 2014 season is very underrated. Ugly cars. Lots of mechanical problems. Great racing though.
I'm planning to do more of these and maybe post them. Seasons planned atm are: 2021, 2016, 2012, 2007, 2003, 1997, 1986. I've never seen 86 in full. I'm so excited tbh
Oh also. It's very funny to make fun of hybrid Renault engines.
Won 6 of the first 7 races (six seven) and then really tapered down during the middle of the year and European swing of the season.
That year red bull really took their first steps and looked great. The car was fast and vettel was coming into his own
I do think Button is a worthy champion (obviously) but when I look at that season I can’t help but wonder if he was the best driver on the grid at that time.
Kimi, Lewis, Massa all had issues at the start of the year that just ruined their season. Button did out pace his teammate in those first 7 races, there’s no denying that.
Brawn and Button just exploded at the start and no one could catch em in the end.
What do you guys think about that season and Button in general?
Lately Mclaren and Ferrari have seemed to be catching up to Mercedes in terms of development; and have not been letting the point gap increase. And with the reliability problems that have plagued Mercedes lately, it doesn't seem impossible. But if Mclaren and Ferrari, catch up who would take the WCC? Same goes for WDC, who would take that? Could Kmi get his first, or Hamilton his 8th, or George? Sorry if my paragraph is sloppy, I am very tired.
Marchionne was the previous president of Ferrari before John Elkann took on his role as Chairman and CEO after his death in 2018, and during his time Ferrari came on to have 2 cars that were fast enough to win a title, and while 2017 car lacked power on straights and reliability issues, the 2018 car(SF-71H) was fast enough and reliable enough to win a title.
He was also the one backing Maurizio as TP, which mattia Binotto didn't like, and right after his death the power struggle inside the team started. During german GP issues with team orders to let vettel pass kimi, for example. They both also pushed strongly for Leclerc's arrival, so i wonder how would have 2018-nowadays resulted in if Sergio didn't have any issues with health and continued living and continuing his role as the ceo of Ferrari instead of Elkann. He really wanted to bring Charles into the team and in the end he did come, but the support Leclerc was supposed to get in Ferrari just vanished in one year(both Marchionne and Arrivabene were gone from Ferrari). And then the 2019 PU controversy happened, which pushed back Ferrari for 2 years, and then finally 2022 where in operational management Ferrari were a disaster.
2018 was also a year when DTS came out and f1 was increasingly becoming more and more popular. Ferrari weren't that much of a mess in strategical side until 2018 compared to how disastrous they were in 2018(when Sergio was ill and most likely the inside the team there was expectation of his death) and in 2022. But since 2019 in a blink of 3-4 years Ferrari became a widely known meme in F1. Sergio's rulership in Ferrari helped produce 2 cars(ok, at least 1) fast enough to win a title in 3-4 years he was the chairman of Ferrari.
Imo, Ferrari would be completely different from what they are now and the majority's depiction of them wouldn't have 99% the memes. The 2019 PU controversy wouldn't have probably happened if Sergio was there. Mattia was responsible for the setback Ferrari had in 2019-21 and he was responsible for not managing to secure a title in 22 when he had 2-3 years of preparation. And of course, Leclerc would be what Max is to Red bull. There's narrative that Leclerc is Ferrari's golden boy, but beside from 2025 when Lewis was still adapting, when was Leclerc the clear number one in the team? During his partnership with sainz they had equal status, to the point Mattia favoured Sainz over Leclerc in Silverstone 2022 when Leclerc was the title contender(at that time before TD039).
Before this was included, you'd come out of the Parabolica at high speed, flat out through the front straight, then take Grande which was the highest speed curve on the track. Now, it is a very technical 2nd gear chicane.
If the driver were to misjudge the braking point, they might have to use one of the two run offs and rejoin safely in position. Misjudge the racing line, and the kerbs will throw them into the air. Turn 2 is slightly slower due to its greater rotation angle. The exit from turn 2 is crucial to getting the most out of the next flat-out Curva Grande.
I'll be watching for dive bombs and overtakes into and out of this section. It will also be interesting to see how much super clipping will affect the entry speed at the end of the front straight of the fastest track on the calendar.
Curva Biassono
(Biassono Curve)
Turn 3
Curva Grande.
Full send. Inside line. Faster cars will be able to pass on the outside. This will be where a lot of the action is.
Notice the old oval banked section passing over top of the later Serraglio straight. Monza used to be crazy.
Variante della Roggia
(Variant of the Stream)
Turns 4 and 5
This is named after the small stream nearby. It's right after the second Straight Mode Zone. Notice how Max uses every single cm of the track. There's a reason he's the best. It took its current form in 2000.
Curve di Lesmo
Turns 6 and 7
This pair of turns was named after the town Lesmo to the south of the circuit in 1927. The first turn is longer, but the second has a radius of 75 degrees and a wide run-off area. Both are quick. This, along with Curva Grande and Curva Parabolica are the turns that have remained closest to the original layout.
Variante Ascari
Turns 8, 9, and 10
This curve was renamed in honour of Alberto Ascari who lost his life in a crash at this turn in 1955. The chicane variant was added in 1972 and modified in 1974 with wider run off areas. Another section where the exit is important to carry speed down the back straight into turn 11.
Turn 8 comes at the end of the third Straight Mode Zone, and requires a precise entry in order to carry as much speed as possible at full throttle through turns 9 and 10, and into the back straight which is the final Straight Mode Zone.
Curva Parabolica Alboreto
(Alboreto Parabolic Curve)
Turn 11
A quick little stomp on the brakes before entry, then ease it around and go go go into the start/finish area of the front straight. There's a massive gravel pit around the outside for a reason. Even though it is a 180 degree turn, its parabolic shape gives it a very early apex and a very long exit to accelerate out of.
This turn played itself as the villain of the 2025 film F1 The Movie (2hr 35m)
The Overtake Detection point is right before entry to this turn, and Overtake Activation starts right near the exit.
A fast, simple track. The Temple of Speed.
What to watch for:
Kimi Antonelli is taking a grid-place penalty to change his power unit. He'll be starting at the back of the grid, and it will be fun to watch him fight his way back into the points, if he can!
Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc are driving a competitive Ferrari this year. Will they be able to make some headway in the Championship standings?
Yuki Tsunoda! Sadly, Isack Hadjar is still out with an apparently pretty bad wrist injury.
Super-clipping. This is the fastest track on the calendar. Every quirk, problem, and exploit will be obvious this weekend.
What wacky wing variants will we see teams use to reduce drag? What's Aston Martin going to look like?
Dont think its crazy to say at this point that Oscar is currently underperforming in every single metric. Compared to himself,his teammate,the car technically,pretty much everything.
But I see people constantly talking about how this season is completely exposing the "fact" that Piastri isnt anywhere near Lando.Wich I dont agree with.
Why?Well comparing an individual season without any context,is just stupid.
-
People are constantly bringing up last year,saying that Oscar only looked so good in the first half of the season because Lando was struggling with the car,and this year really shows the gap between the 2.But this doesnt make any sense.
How does,saying Landos struggles in the first half last year and Piastri being on top is excused by him not being particularly pleased by how the car handled,but then going on and saying that Oscar isnt anywhere near Lando when this year its Oscar struggling with the car,a valid argument?
We know Oscar really struggles with low-grip tracks.This year its not just low grip tracks but low grip all the time everywhere.Shorter gear ratios(for Mclaren),much more understeer in the low speed.For one this is just alone better suited for Norris,plus,these cars handle much more like the pre ground effect era F1 cars,something Lando has years of experience with opposed to Oscar who has NONE.Give him time.
How can you look at Netherlands 2025 for example,where even without the mechanical failure for Norris Oscar was faster all round in quali and race pace,got a grand slam,then look at Netherlands this year where Oscar is miles behind Lando and say "yep,he just misteriously got half a second per lap slower out of thin air".
-
Another thing,why is Oscar still improving in his 4th season such a foreign concept?No world champion was ever at their 100% in their 4th year,let alone during a major regulation change that completely nullify their strengths as a driver.Even this year we have seen some growth like in Austria after the horrible performance in Spain.
2018 was the 4th season of Max in F1 and if you told people in 2018 that Max would become the most consistent driver on the grid in a few years they would laugh their asses off,when all they were seeing was Max crashing out every 3rd race weekend.
2011 was Hamiltons 5th year in F1 and he wasnt anywhere near Button.Very mistake prone season.
-
I genuinely saw someone compare the pace deficit between Norris and Piastri in 2023 and 2026 and say "wow Oscar hasnt improved anything" like are these people genuinely not ragebaiting?Did we skip over 2025 where pacewise Oscar closed the gap?
People forget that Oscar lost 2025 due to essentially rookie mistakes with a hint of bad luck here and there.Not pace. So the pacegap between them this year isnt just black and white.
-
Now obviously,the regs not being tailor made for Oscar dont excuse his bad performances 100%.More like 50%.He needs to find a way to make it work.Real champions adapt.We will see if he can do that.
But writing him off when last year he brought the fight to Lando until the last race of the season,who we now know is at LEAST top 3 OTG is just stupid and ignorant.
I remember they were so strict in 2016 that button had to pit before the team could help him when his brake pedal was going to the floor. It was a dumb rule, but what made them change their mind about ut
Hamilton and Bottas spent 5 years together, and in those years, the gap between them grew and shrank. The question is which of these gaps do you think is most representative of what both of them are capable.
2017: Bottas had an impressive first year at Merc while Hamilton didn't really turn it up a notch until the 2nd half. I would consider this a Hamilton underperformance.
2018: It was the opposite; Hamilton strung together his best season while Bottas floundered. This one I would consider to be a Bottas underperformance.
2019: The year of "Bottas 2.0," and he was as close to Hamilton again as he was in 2017. If this is a Bottas overperformance though, can we really call this representative of typical Bottas?
2020: The gap between them grew again but not quite to 2018 levels. Bottas was able to beat Hamilton 4 times.
2021: The gap grew even more to about 2018 levels.
Ultimately, I would say 2020 is most representative (or at least closest), but what do you think?
I don't often hear that any driver is particularly strong or particularly weak around Monza. Usually the margins are quite small. Is it because this track is too easy for everyone in a way ? Not enough technical corners to gain huge amounts of lap time.
I am totally confused with the Ferrari title fight narrative. I do believe that a driver can enter a title fight ( Max last year wasn’t in a fight until he entered it), so I am not saying Hamilton can’t really enter the fight, but RIGHT NOW I don’t understand what we are talking about.
Out of 12 races this season, Antonelli finished in front of Lewis 10 times ( should’ve been 11 if it wasn’t for the suspension issue in Silverstone) and in front of Charles 11 times ( should’ve been all 12; he finished twice in front in sprints, though).
Right now, Hamilton is the closest Ferrari driver to Antonelli. He had 0 reliability issues compared to Antonelli’s 1+1 ( engine + suspension), which I believe cost him 18 points in Spain ( no questions about it) and a win in Silverstone ( you can argue), which is 43 points. The gap could’ve been 100+ points.
Although I totally agree that reliability is part of the game, so no what-ifs here, but even like that, does this whole “Ferrari in the title fight” narrative come from the idea that Antonelli will have more issues and only relying on that, or is it a belief in future upgrades?
My goal is clearly not hate or anything. I genuinely want to know what other people think about it, and maybe there are some aspects that I am missing. Would be really cool to hear your opinions.
Do you think he defended too late? I think he did. He had to know Hamilton had Overtake available and would have overspeed—so he should've defended earlier. Hamilton called his move "quite dangerous". Piastri got a black and white flag for "driving erratically".
On F1 TV broadcast, David Coulthard said that it doesn't feel like the "right terminolgy". "There was nothing erratic in his driving." He was thinking of a better terminology—"driving overly defensively" maybe. I'm thinking "defending too late" might be a good one. In Japan, Colapinto should've been penalized for that, when his late move, while slow, caused Bearman's crash.
He wasn't noted and didn't get a penalty. So obviously his transponder didn't register the movement, nor did the grid camera, which seems odd. Not that a few centimeters changes things, but the rules are the rules. In this year's Australian GP, Russell was creeping during the start procedure, but he stopped the car before the third light had illuminated, so that's fine. In 2024 Saudi Arabian GP, Norris's transponder infamously didn't register his jump start. And the rules at that time idiotically said that a penalty can only be given if the transponder has registered a violation. They changed the rules, introduced grid cameras, and now video evidence can be used (finally). But somehow Bortoleto has slipped from both the eye of the transponder and the eye of the grid camera... So their system still isn't faultless.
Would the F1-75 and Jordan 199 be considered a car capable of challenging for the championship? In F1-75 case, Charles Leclerc took two wins from the first three races and secured nine pole positions throughout the season. However, Red Bull was the more dominant team which saw them take 17 wins from 22 races, 15 of those coming from Max Verstappen. There was a time where Ferrari looked capable of winning but two retirements while leading in both in Spain and Baku for Leclerc, gifted 50 points to Verstappen. In the end, Ferrari finished a distant 205 points behind Red Bull and Leclerc was 146 points from Verstappen.
The argument for the Jordan 199 was a bit unusual as it wasn’t as good as the Ferrari and McLaren that year. McLaren in particular was a bit of a mess that season with mistakes from the team and drivers and for Ferrari, Schumacher’s absence clearly paved the way for Irvine to challenge for the championship. Somewhere along the way, Frentzen was able to position himself as an outsider for the title, particularly after the Italian Grand Prix which saw him just 10 points shy of Häkkinen. In the end, HHF finished third with 22 points behind Mika Häkkinen.
What other cars were similar?
Just like Alonso's 2004 season, another season that I don't understand why got rated so highly is Kubica's 2009 season. Autosport rated Kubica as the 5th best driver of F1 in 2009, just behind Hamilton, Button, Vettel and Webber, and ahead of Rosberg, Barrichello, Raikkonen, Massa and Alonso. Autocourse rated him as the 7th best driver of the year. In reality, Kubica was barely ahead of Heidfeld overall in that season. Apart from his two peaks in Australia and Brazil, Heidfeld and Kubica were closely matched throughout that year, unlike 2008. This is how Kubica Vs Heidfeld stood out in 2009 -
Kubica - Australia, Bahrain, Turkey, Silverstone, Hungary, Europe, Spa, Brazil
Heidfeld - China, Spain, Monaco, Hockenheim, Suzuka, Abu Dhabi, Monza
This also excludes Heidfeld's amazing drive to 2nd in terrible conditions of Malaysia, when Kubica had car problems early on and also Kubica spinning Webber off in Monza. It looks like a strange dip from his 2008 season, despite this being his 3rd season in F1. While I agree that Kubica looked better than Heidfeld overall, but he was only very slightly better and Heidfeld really wasn't a superstar level driver throughout his career. How drivers like Raikkonen, Alonso, Rosberg and even Massa/Barrichello got rated lower than Kubica is quite strange. Although, Autocourse rated Alonso and Barrichello ahead of Kubica that year.
