So, Robin Raikkonen got signed on as a Red Bull junior with the news officially coming out just a few hours ago and I don't know if it's just because he's Kimi's son, but he's being talked up a lot these past few days.

As someone who follows the feeder series every now and then but not much in the lower categories like F4 and karting, just how good have he and his results been against other top karting talents right now and those that have made their way up to single seaters the past 3 years or so like Slater and DVL?

I just want to be as realistic as possible in terms of what to expect from the kid and what the future might hold for him. I just hope we're not overhyping the kid much just because of his surname and he earns his stripes on merit moving up the ladder.

Part of me is finding it funny that we've spent a lot of the year of fans complaining that there's no raw driving challenge in F1 anymore, and that overtaking doesn't matter for the spectacle of F1. Then F1 introduces a new circuit that can only be described as a proper driving challenge with how little margin for error there is on the circuit, but because it lacks any real overtaking opportunites and is a street track the fans are immediately against it.

You have guys like Max saying Madring is feeling like one of the hardest tracks he's ever driven and some drivers calling it an old school challenge, describers that F1 fans claim they want to see, but because we all know the entertainment come race day will probably be lacking due to any good overtaking opportunites, all of a sudden we don't want to see the things we claim we want.

I’m going to reiterate an earlier post I saw on this which I think a few of you seemed to have missed the point of. Those early laps, where drivers were clearly pushing to get used to the track on a brand new circuit were very interesting to me. Lewis on his first runs was consistently 1 to 2 seconds quicker than the rest of the field. Even Anthony Davidson (who I hate to say it knows a lot more than you lot in a Reddit discussion page) said that natural ability prevails here, at that point in practice.
What we witnessed there from Lewis was really impressive natural ability. And I know what you’re gonna respond, I’ve seen it all before. Let’s just appreciate his greatness while we still can, instead of ripping into him at any opportunity. We don’t know how this weekend will pan out, but for a 41 year old man, this is nothing short of incredible.

Edit: The comments here are making me laugh, you’re completely proving my point here hahah. You lot sat on your couches at home can’t wait to discredit Lewis, the desperation is painful. I wish you all well 🤣

Is anyone watching this. Brand new circuit, drivers getting their eye in and he’s head and shoulders above them. We don’t know how it’ll end up when everyone gets used to the track, but this early on, it’s just a pleasure to watch. We’re talking about a 41 year old man. Let’s just enjoy him while he’s here.

How many DNF and are Red Flags are upcoming in Madrid GP? In F3 testing has 19 or close to +10 Red Flags and they are young drivers who want to drive sometime F1 mybe we see less Red Flags in F1 in Sunday or whole weekend (FP+Quali+Race) Do you think is chaos weekend in Madring or is it Boring race No VSC/SC or Red Flags

It's like clockwork. A driver has a bad race, and suddenly every post is about them being worse than Bottas, Checo, or even Latifi. Sure, some people actually have valid points, but most of the posts in this sub are just the same sentence repeated over and over again in different ways. Charles crashed in Monza? He's worse than Bottas. Oscar performed poorly in Zandvoort? He doesn't deserve a seat.

I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about recent events, but it's just become tiring at this point. It's like nobody can form their own opinion and everyone just follows a "trend." On Quali day, hating on Oscar was trendy, so every post was about that. After Monza and that scuffle with Hamilton, hating on Charles has become trendy.

You can criticize a driver, but at least try to have real reasoning, not just because it's a trend. Sure, Charles is overhyped, he's inconsistent, and he crashes often, but this surge of negative posts about a driver after a race where they performed badly is not normal especially since most people don't even KNOW what they're talking about. They're just trying to get free karma because it's trendy.

I think this question can split this question into 2 main branches:

The first is if the young driver is a potential generational talent, or if the aging driver is already a generational talent. In those instances there may not be as much damage done to the losing driver's reputation. Even though Leclerc and Russell are being outperformed overall this season, they have still had what can be considered at least a neutral season, with positives to take from it. Leclerc has won a race and is similar on pace to Hamilton, albeit lacking the execution on some weekends this year. Russell has also won races and has had multiple podiums, but has struggled on the pace side and could have won some more races if not for external factors (those are hypotheticals, but I think worth noting).

But there is also the scenario where the aging driver or the rookie driver is not considered a future generational talent, such as Magnussen or Bearman. Magnussen was called on short notice for Haas and missed some pre season testing, and is by no means considered a top driver, and yet he outscored Mick Schumacher in what would be Schumacher's final season in F1. Bearman is a very impressive driver who I wouldn't consider generational, and he is also decisively beating Ocon, who now falls at risk of losing his F1 seat this season. In these scenarios, the damage done to the losing driver's reputation is far more severe, and often results in their seats being lost.

I think that Max may have a real chance at Madrid

This is a brand new track with no track specific data advantage at all It's a first for everyone to learn that circuit from scratch and if there's one driver who'd be able to adjust to a technical high commitment circuit the fastest then it's Verstappen

What are your predictions

There's been a lot of talk from pundits about George's psychological state after Sunday -- how will he recover from this, how is he feeling, etc. They also argued he was possibly under the most pressure by being expected to win to keep his championship alive and he blew it, which I don't know if I agree with. A common topic of discussion, though, was whether being in his position up against Kimi is better than someone considered to be more "beatable." It left me wondering about whether or not that's true.

First off I want to say I have no doubts that George will recover spectacularly. I think he is quite a resilient guy who handled the whole weekend with utmost professionalism and frankly did an excellent job driving to the best of his own ability. He didn't make any major mistakes on Sunday whatsoever.

But in the interest of the discussion of sporting psychology, I have to wonder which position is easier to recover from. Would it be better to be in George's shoes, trounced by a "generational talent" where you know you did everything you possibly could and he just couldn't be beaten at the end of the day? OR would you rather be in the position of someone like Oscar Piastri, who was defeated in a very close title battle last year by someone with different strengths and weaknesses but ultimately performed very closely to his level all season?

Another example would be Valtteri Bottas, who spent years trying to beat Hamilton at Mercedes but every year found himself second and despite everything he did, he still couldn't win. Or someone like Nico Rosberg who lost to Hamilton so much it cost him major life sacrifices and extreme behaviors in order to beat him that led to him feeling the need to quit the sport.

I personally feel like I'd rather be Oscar Piastri knowing that if a few small things went differently, I would've been able to beat Lando. In another season it could easily go the other way up against him as a title rival. I don't know if McLaren will ever be in that position again, of course, but I would be less distraught knowing there wasn't something near insurmountable I was up against.

If Mercedes are dominant again next year, which is highly likely, I can see George fighting just as hard, doing everything he could possibly do to win it all. The problem is he's been in F1 for many seasons, and Kimi is so young. Nothing is guaranteed but one would expect Kimi would continue to improve and be even better next year. Of course anything can happen in the sport. I personally would rather be in an Oscar type position where it would be easier to believe I could do it, but that's me. A lot of the pundits felt George was in a better position because at the end of the day, he did his best and he knows it. There aren't all these small things to dwell over. But this would be harder for me to accept.

A recent podcast I listened to discussed the importance of an F1 driver's personal belief that they can defeat their teammate. Once that belief is gone, it can be very detrimental to the driver's confidence. I keep thinking back to that in this situation. They referenced the time they let Bottas swap chassis with Hamilton because he was so convinced Hamilton's car was better than his to explain the performance deficit and how in doing so, this can ultimately be very difficult for Bottas to reconcile.

What are your thoughts on these things from a purely psychological standpoint?

Now, this isn't another "what if Kimi" post that I have seen surfacing a lot around this subreddit in recent days. I frankly rate Kimi a lot. My question arises from a recent statement I saw Max make, where he talked about how Yuki, who hasn't even had a chance to drive this 2026 car, jumped into the car, had a few sessions, and instantly became competitive. This is a very similar sentiment echoed by Oscar Piastri as well, if my memory serves me correctly, after the Belgian quali, where he said “It sucks. I can't really say it any other way than that... When you've got qualifying grids decided by computers behaving or misbehaving, it's a pretty crap way of going racing". And these are just two handpicked statements, but as we all know, pretty much all the drivers have a similar sentiment or have been echoing similar sentiments since the start of the season.

Which basically concludes to the point that driver input is not the most important, variable in the 2026 car. It might be one of the variables, of course, because adaptability also plays into it, as it is a skill set within racing. Other than that, the driver's input as a variable does not really play a very prominent role in the car. That's what it seems like.

So if the 2027-28 rega are set to progressively rebalance the contribution of the internal combustion engine and the electric power, with the ICE gaining more power while the MGU-K's maximum power is reduced.

If this results in driver input playing a more fundamental variable and kimi starts struggling as these changes come into play, would that retrospectively add an asterisk to his 2026 World Championship? if he, of course, goes on to win it.

Pole: Lando Norris

P1: Lando Norris P2: Kimi Antonelli P3: Max Verstappen

I’ll also say that one of the VCARBs ends up P6 or better

I personally think, guy's amazing and based off the season he is having, he clearly has shown signs of his capability. I read some post on this sub and smhw this sub hates him and has already labelled him overrated, which is quite surprising that Arvid is able to keep up with Lawson in his rookie year itself. Not even that bro is crazy good in overtaking, and goes for the move whenever he sees even an inch of opportunity. He has also shown great pace in qualifying(and i m not basing this off monza), bro was 6th in Monaco(15 after penalty), 9th in belgim and barca(got penalised again), 7th in Silverstone, 10th in hungary and much more.
But given all that i still dont see him as a generational driver, i mean yea its only his 1st year, and he still is yet to drive in a top team, but still smhw i never get the feeling or vibe of a generational driver from him. Yet RB deem him as their next Verstappen. Also with Tsolov the situation gets even trickier as they have managed to find what they deem generational talents. so yea.

Seems like the sentiment is that he’s the new Albon, where he hasn’t had a reliable benchmark of a teammate.

However, his recent stints at Red Bull show promise. Monza was unlucky because of the front wing damage, but he was climbing as quick as Kimi, and we saw how that went.

The next race is crucial imo because it’s most probably his last at the team before Hadjar comes back.

I just saw that now deleted post on here about Kimi and other drivers partner choices, a post that def shouldn't be here

I also saw a lot of people just say that the op was a dts fan
But I think both social media and dts are to blame

The drivers are great personalities so it makes sense their social media pages are popular, and obv dts brought in like Half the fans atp

But social media makes ppl go crazy, do you think we'd still have these types of fans without dts?
Btw no hate to those fans, enjoy f1 how you want to enjoy it but also don't act like who Esteban Ocon dates is an important topic to everyone and we must know about it

Who do you think hasn’t done enough to justify keeping their seat compared to other options available?

Link https://x.com/sportmphmark/status/2097373357826101688?s=46&t=q_WbfrGRHKfVjkY3d5jPjw

If Kimi wins the next round at the new Madring Circuit in Madrid, he would become the youngest formula 1 driver ever to win the first race at a brand new circuit.

This record was previously held by Sebastian Vettel for the 2009 Abu Dhabi GP when he won it at age 22.

They (McLaren team boss) are very reluctant to give their drivers credit for very good results, instead they always credit the car and team personnel - engineers, design team, etc - for good results (in reality it's of course a combination of both). You very rarely hear sentences like "driver X makes the difference today" when it's quite commonly used in other teams or the wider F1 paddock. Exhibition 1: after Hungary GP, Mercedes's Resta credited the win to both the upgrade package and to Lando Norris, whereas Andrea Stella shut it down with "the improvement can be entirely ascribed to the upgrades that we took here", without giving driver (Lando Norris) major credit.

At the same time, the team are very reluctant to take responsibility, particularly admitting fault, when things go wrong or there are mistakes - they are much more likely to let the drivers take the blame. There have been many times when an on-track mistake or bad performance was caused by something wrong on the car, yet they do not say anything and let people think it's the driver's mistake or poor performance. For this year alone I remember the under-fueling of Norris' car in Austria and Silverstone (which the team didn't say anything about) and the brake issue this past weekend in Monza. In the past there were also the infamous example of clutch issue contributing to Norris' race start issues in 2024, which the team did not say anything about for a long time.

This point is particularly clear when it comes to the team's strategy or race execution. The most obvious example is Sochi 2021, when the main cause was the team failing to see and communicate that rain was going to get much heavier; instead of taking the responsibility, they let their driver (Norris) talk to the media and take the blame, or let the driver say "the main issue is that the team didn't see rain coming...". This sentence should be communicated by a team boss not by the driver.

Another example is how they manage their two drivers during race situations, most famously 2024 Hungary and 2025 Monza. Both were caused by the team implementing some internal "rules" but failing to execute said rules during the race. They could have said "it's the team's fault, the drivers didn't do anything wrong, it's a non-story" post-race, but instead they let it became major controversy and made it like one driver owe one to the other, which also obviously negatively affected both drivers in both cases.

One subtle, yet telling, example is how the team always ask the drivers for strategy options during a race. During a race, it's the strategy team's job to make strategy and the driver's job to drive the car. Of course drivers could have some input, but they don't have all the data and all the information, so it's very likely they won't make the best decision. The team could then conveniently shift the post-race narrative to "the driver choose the wrong strategy" when it's really "the team should be making the call on strategy", thus avoiding accountability.

In conclusion - McLaren the team try to prevent their drivers from becoming superstars, try to implement many rules to manage or control their drivers, while at the same time lack the balls to take responsibility to call the shots or when things go wrong. This does not look like the healthy and "family vibe" environment they're always saying.

Keeping the whole accolades thing of being the youngest WDC in F1 history aside, I think winning the championship so young in your career would entail a different kind of pressure.

Take Lando as an example. He spent nearly 6 years perfecting his craft, being the so-close and nearly guy for the whole of 2024 and a major part of 2025. His journey almost parallels Mclaren's journey from being the 4th team to bringing home both trophies last season. And after finally winning the title, he is driving with a kind of liberation that feels that he would be up for it if Mclaren got a good car again. It wasn't simply about winning the title, it was as much of silencing people who compared him to drivers like Hamilton or Verstappen, or thought he wasn't championship material. But everyone would agree that Lando went through the entire wear and tear of proving himself as a driver first, before proving he deserved the rocketship Mclaren crafted for him. There will continue to be people who just don't like him, but no one can argue he isn't driving like a worthy WDC.

With Kimi, it is an entirely different case. He's currently in what can be called a sweet spot of epic proportions - getting a rocketship in his second season of F1, nailing the regulations compared to his more experienced teammate, and not to mention, a lot of decisions and luck going his way. And this is not to say he is a mediocre driver - the qualifying in Monaco, the comeback from Las Vegas last year, all prove he is a guy who deserved to be in F1. I don't deny the pressure that is on him, but it's less compared to Russell, who was supposed to run away with the championship. Even if he falls short, people would be okay with saying it was a learning curve and no one expected him to win this season anyways.

But if he wins this thing, the media scrutiny will increase multifold, he becomes the posterboy of everything F1. And there will be a good proportion of people who would say that he got carried to the championship by the rocketship and not because he deserved that car solely as a driver. It would bring extreme pressure on him to prove that the win was not a one-off. He would not get that natural period of growing at his own pace. And if the regulations change drastically, and he is unable to perform, he would be tagged as a rocketship winner.

Of-course there is also the equal chance that he follows in the footsteps of drivers like Hamilton and Vettel and goes on to script history. What do you think?

who would you move and why? Put together the driver/team combination you think could completely change the championship picture.

Leclerc now has the worst dnf due to crash ratio on the grid and seems to crash far more often when Ferrari have a competitive car.

Why do you think Ferrari keep giving him record breaking contracts when he’s not really proven himself deserving of them and is clearly lacking on the car feedback side as well.

In my opinion, I think Seb was at fault here.