When, and to where, will Ricciardo move? [A: 2019, Renault]

[mikeyg123]

USA, Ricciardo out qualified him by 2 places anyway.

Verstappen was definitely quicker but better involves a lot more. I personally think Max is the better driver because the type of driver he is he just needs refining and he will comfortably beat Ricciardo. But in 2017 its debatable who was better, a lot of Verstappens issues were made by himself. 2018, Ricciardo is superior now. Verstappen has made more errors in half a season than a top level driver makes in 2-3 seasons. But he is young, he has time and the talent.

It's noticeable though when Verstappen can keep it clean how often he beats Ricciardo, [instagram]3 times in the last 4 races.

Tbf, last 2 races riccardo wasn’t 100%. Had setup issues in Canada and front wing damage in France. Also Versteppens huge cut across the track greatly aided his track position. Yes, Max did out qualify him in France w/o riccardo having any issues but we all know over one lap max is faster majority of the time but you don’t get trophies on saturdays.....

Monaco would have been the best measure and we didn’t get to see that fight.....

Now back on topic, I believe riccardo will stay put at Redbull, personally I would love to see him @ Ferrari but realistically I don’t believe that will happen.

BIB is untrue. Verstappen went off track behind Hamilton (not counting the spinning Vettel and Bottas) and resumed behind Hamilton. He stayed in the same position. Verstappen was quicker until the front wing issues as well. Ricciardo was never going to beat Verstappen in France.

I think it would be fair to say that when Verstappen has a clean weekend he usually beats Ricciardo. He just hasn't had many of those this season.

[Exediron]

Versteppens huge cut across the track greatly aided his track position.

BIB is untrue. Verstappen went off track behind Hamilton (not counting the spinning Vettel and Bottas) and resumed behind Hamilton. He stayed in the same position. Verstappen was quicker until the front wing issues as well. Ricciardo was never going to beat Verstappen in France.

It's true in the same way that a driver who would have run into a gravel trap benefits by there not being one - Max benefited by being able to keep second position, when he otherwise would have lost quite a few places if he had had to rejoin the track where he left it.

[mds]

Versteppens huge cut across the track greatly aided his track position.

BIB is untrue. Verstappen went off track behind Hamilton (not counting the spinning Vettel and Bottas) and resumed behind Hamilton. He stayed in the same position. Verstappen was quicker until the front wing issues as well. Ricciardo was never going to beat Verstappen in France.

It's true in the same way that a driver who would have run into a gravel trap benefits by there not being one - Max benefited by being able to keep second position, when he otherwise would have lost quite a few places if he had had to rejoin the track where he left it.

How could he even have "rejoined where he left it"? Park it for a bit until Bottas and Vettel had cleared the road?

Pretty much the entire top 10 left the track, and all of them in function of where they found themselves relative to the incident. Verstappen was one of the only ones to the right of the incident, so he skipped right. Others went left, but most of them went off-track and did not rejoin where they left.

This "rejoin where you left" has never been a rule - or if it is it has never been an enforced rule (except for Senna?) - so I don't really understand where this is coming from now. In the end after T1 he was exactly where he was before T1, but minus two cars that crashed. That's not "greatly benefiting".

[mikeyg123]

Versteppens huge cut across the track greatly aided his track position.

BIB is untrue. Verstappen went off track behind Hamilton (not counting the spinning Vettel and Bottas) and resumed behind Hamilton. He stayed in the same position. Verstappen was quicker until the front wing issues as well. Ricciardo was never going to beat Verstappen in France.

It's true in the same way that a driver who would have run into a gravel trap benefits by there not being one - Max benefited by being able to keep second position, when he otherwise would have lost quite a few places if he had had to rejoin the track where he left it.

I don't understand your last sentence? He went off in Front of Ricciardo and came back on in front of Ricciardo.

Saying you can't count Verstappen's win against Ricciardo because he went off track and maintained position is like saying you can't count it because if Verstappen had been unlucky Ricciardo would have beaten him. Well yeah, no fairy cakes.

[Mod Titanium]

USA, Ricciardo out qualified him by 2 places anyway.

Verstappen was definitely quicker but better involves a lot more. I personally think Max is the better driver because the type of driver he is he just needs refining and he will comfortably beat Ricciardo. But in 2017 its debatable who was better, a lot of Verstappens issues were made by himself. 2018, Ricciardo is superior now. Verstappen has made more errors in half a season than a top level driver makes in 2-3 seasons. But he is young, he has time and the talent.

It's noticeable though when Verstappen can keep it clean how often he beats Ricciardo, [instagram]3 times in the last 4 races.

Tbf, last 2 races riccardo wasn’t 100%. Had setup issues in Canada and front wing damage in France. Also Versteppens huge cut across the track greatly aided his track position. Yes, Max did out qualify him in France w/o riccardo having any issues but we all know over one lap max is faster majority of the time but you don’t get trophies on saturdays.....

Monaco would have been the best measure and we didn’t get to see that fight.....

Now back on topic, I believe riccardo will stay put at Redbull, personally I would love to see him @ Ferrari but realistically I don’t believe that will happen.

BIB is untrue. Verstappen went off track behind Hamilton (not counting the spinning Vettel and Bottas) and resumed behind Hamilton. He stayed in the same position. Verstappen was quicker until the front wing issues as well. Ricciardo was never going to beat Verstappen in France.

I think it would be fair to say that when Verstappen has a clean weekend he usually beats Ricciardo. He just hasn't had many of those this season.

agreed, Stayed ahead of riccardo where he was but what other track can you Go off track full speed and rejoin full speed. Pretty much every track that has a turn 1 run off has curbs or barriers a driver must navigate to discourage off track escapes.

Also riccardo lost time due to sainz being between himself and max. Yes Versteppen was faster before riccardo’s pace significantly dropped off due to the increased damage but riccardos strength is the 2nd stint of the race. Having the front wing damage negated one of his main strength’s during the race.

[mikeyg123]

USA, Ricciardo out qualified him by 2 places anyway.

Verstappen was definitely quicker but better involves a lot more. I personally think Max is the better driver because the type of driver he is he just needs refining and he will comfortably beat Ricciardo. But in 2017 its debatable who was better, a lot of Verstappens issues were made by himself. 2018, Ricciardo is superior now. Verstappen has made more errors in half a season than a top level driver makes in 2-3 seasons. But he is young, he has time and the talent.

It's noticeable though when Verstappen can keep it clean how often he beats Ricciardo, [instagram]3 times in the last 4 races.

Tbf, last 2 races riccardo wasn’t 100%. Had setup issues in Canada and front wing damage in France. Also Versteppens huge cut across the track greatly aided his track position. Yes, Max did out qualify him in France w/o riccardo having any issues but we all know over one lap max is faster majority of the time but you don’t get trophies on saturdays.....

Monaco would have been the best measure and we didn’t get to see that fight.....

Now back on topic, I believe riccardo will stay put at Redbull, personally I would love to see him @ Ferrari but realistically I don’t believe that will happen.

BIB is untrue. Verstappen went off track behind Hamilton (not counting the spinning Vettel and Bottas) and resumed behind Hamilton. He stayed in the same position. Verstappen was quicker until the front wing issues as well. Ricciardo was never going to beat Verstappen in France.

I think it would be fair to say that when Verstappen has a clean weekend he usually beats Ricciardo. He just hasn't had many of those this season.

agreed, Stayed ahead of riccardo where he was but what other track can you Go off track full speed and rejoin full speed. Pretty much every track that has a turn 1 run off has curbs or barriers a driver must navigate to discourage off track escapes.

Also riccardo lost time due to sainz being between himself and max. Yes Versteppen was faster before riccardo’s pace significantly dropped off due to the increased damage but riccardos strength is the 2nd stint of the race. Having the front wing damage negated one of his main strength’s during the race.

But you can't be seriously suggesting that we somehow can't count that as Verstappen beating Ricciardo?

[iano]

USA, Ricciardo out qualified him by 2 places anyway.

Verstappen was definitely quicker but better involves a lot more. I personally think Max is the better driver because the type of driver he is he just needs refining and he will comfortably beat Ricciardo. But in 2017 its debatable who was better, a lot of Verstappens issues were made by himself. 2018, Ricciardo is superior now. Verstappen has made more errors in half a season than a top level driver makes in 2-3 seasons. But he is young, he has time and the talent.

It's noticeable though when Verstappen can keep it clean how often he beats Ricciardo, [instagram]3 times in the last 4 races.

Tbf, last 2 races riccardo wasn’t 100%. Had setup issues in Canada and front wing damage in France. Also Versteppens huge cut across the track greatly aided his track position. Yes, Max did out qualify him in France w/o riccardo having any issues but we all know over one lap max is faster majority of the time but you don’t get trophies on saturdays.....

Monaco would have been the best measure and we didn’t get to see that fight.....

Now back on topic, I believe riccardo will stay put at Redbull, personally I would love to see him @ Ferrari but realistically I don’t believe that will happen.

BIB is untrue. Verstappen went off track behind Hamilton (not counting the spinning Vettel and Bottas) and resumed behind Hamilton. He stayed in the same position. Verstappen was quicker until the front wing issues as well. Ricciardo was never going to beat Verstappen in France.

I think it would be fair to say that when Verstappen has a clean weekend he usually beats Ricciardo. He just hasn't had many of those this season.

That is the profile of running at a higher risk level....and being more on the edge..... when nothing 'breaks' your are the fastest.... but there is a lower percentage of times when nothing 'breaks' ..... however I suspect in the case with Max there is also an element of 'a bad run' shakes your confidence - and that extends the bad run

However he has broken the bad run now.

To me, both Red Bull drivers are very impressive, perhaps even the most impressive on the grid. But that level means they put such pressure on each other that either driver is then vulnerable to a dip in confidence resulting in a string of performances below what there capability

The new contract for Ricciardo will play into that dynamic unless they both have equal pay...and that seems unlikely.

[pokerman]

Also Versteppens huge cut across the track greatly aided his track position.

No it didn't. He was in fourth, two drivers crashed out, he found himself in second.

Yeah I don't think that Verstappen actually gained any places, in respect to that I would be wondering how Sainz ended up in 3rd place?

[Lotus49]

USA, Ricciardo out qualified him by 2 places anyway.

Verstappen was definitely quicker but better involves a lot more. I personally think Max is the better driver because the type of driver he is he just needs refining and he will comfortably beat Ricciardo. But in 2017 its debatable who was better, a lot of Verstappens issues were made by himself. 2018, Ricciardo is superior now. Verstappen has made more errors in half a season than a top level driver makes in 2-3 seasons. But he is young, he has time and the talent.

It's noticeable though when Verstappen can keep it clean how often he beats Ricciardo, [instagram]3 times in the last 4 races.

Tbf, last 2 races riccardo wasn’t 100%. Had setup issues in Canada and front wing damage in France. Also Versteppens huge cut across the track greatly aided his track position. Yes, Max did out qualify him in France w/o riccardo having any issues but we all know over one lap max is faster majority of the time but you don’t get trophies on saturdays.....

Monaco would have been the best measure and we didn’t get to see that fight.....

Now back on topic, I believe riccardo will stay put at Redbull, personally I would love to see him @ Ferrari but realistically I don’t believe that will happen.

BIB is untrue. Verstappen went off track behind Hamilton (not counting the spinning Vettel and Bottas) and resumed behind Hamilton. He stayed in the same position. Verstappen was quicker until the front wing issues as well. Ricciardo was never going to beat Verstappen in France.

I think it would be fair to say that when Verstappen has a clean weekend he usually beats Ricciardo. He just hasn't had many of those this season.

Dan was actually quicker in France in the first stint, once he was passed Sainz he closed the gap from 5s to 2.3s and was quicker in all but 1 lap after passing Sainz. (16-8 to Dan in terms of who had the fastest lap before Max boxed and he was stuck behind Sainz for 7 of the 24).

Debris happened just before the first stop so I'm not convinced Max would've had it his own way if Dan hadn't been left out too long and had that debris. Catching ain't passing so Max would be the favourite but pace wise Dan was technically quicker until the debris.

[mds]

agreed, Stayed ahead of riccardo where he was but what other track can you Go off track full speed and rejoin full speed. Pretty much every track that has a turn 1 run off has curbs or barriers a driver must navigate to discourage off track escapes.

Mexico (see Hamilton in 2016) and Brazil immediately spring to mind in allowing this kind of excursions. Monaco, to a lesser extent. Singapore has corners like it and we've seen people make use of it to actually gain places.

Would have to check all tracks specifically to get a complete answer.

riccardos strength is the 2nd stint of the race

Yeah let's not do this discussion again...

[Exediron]

How could he even have "rejoined where he left it"? Park it for a bit until Bottas and Vettel had cleared the road?

What would he have done if there was a concrete wall separating turn one from the portion after turn two? Whatever that is, I'm guessing the answer is not run straight into the wall, so he'd have found a way.

Pretty much the entire top 10 left the track, and all of them in function of where they found themselves relative to the incident. Verstappen was one of the only ones to the right of the incident, so he skipped right. Others went left, but most of them went off-track and did not rejoin where they left.

No argument there - the entire thing was a farce. The few drivers who stayed on the track lost out, and everyone else benefited.

This "rejoin where you left" has never been a rule - or if it is it has never been an enforced rule (except for Senna?) - so I don't really understand where this is coming from now. In the end after T1 he was exactly where he was before T1, but minus two cars that crashed. That's not "greatly benefiting".

I have to assume you're being deliberately obtuse here. Verstappen found himself in a very unfortunate situation, being - as you stated - one of the few cars to the right of the collision. In a walled circuit, he would have either DNF'd himself (if the wall was too close) or been forced to slow almost to a stop and thread his way back on track. He would have lost numerous places. By being able to straight-line the runoff, he gained massively relative to that. Therefore, he benefited greatly from the runoff - being able to keep his position was much better than what would have happened otherwise.

[mds]

What would he have done if there was a concrete wall separating turn one from the portion after turn two? Whatever that is, I'm guessing the answer is not run straight into the wall, so he'd have found a way.

Yeah, and what would he have done if a dinosaur appeared?
...

But OK, I'll answer: he would probably have crashed with Vettel and Bottas since he was caught on the wrong side of the accident and probably unable to come to a halt, so Vettel and Bottas would have ended up in that wall leaving nowhere to go for Verstappen.

This "rejoin where you left" has never been a rule - or if it is it has never been an enforced rule (except for Senna?) - so I don't really understand where this is coming from now. In the end after T1 he was exactly where he was before T1, but minus two cars that crashed. That's not "greatly benefiting".

I have to assume you're being deliberately obtuse here. Verstappen found himself in a very unfortunate situation, being - as you stated - one of the few cars to the right of the collision. In a walled circuit, he would have either DNF'd himself (if the wall was too close) or been forced to slow almost to a stop and thread his way back on track. He would have lost numerous places. By being able to straight-line the runoff, he gained massively relative to that. Therefore, he benefited greatly from the runoff - being able to keep his position was much better than what would have happened otherwise.

I'm not being obtuse and I resent the implication I am. I'm making a very valid point, all of a sudden "rejoining where you leave" is an argument while literally every race (OK, maybe some street tracks not) multiple drivers leave the track and rejoin in another place where they left. It's a nonsensical argument.

But OK, I take it that it would have been "just" that Verstappen, through an incident and no fault of his own, would have lost an inherited P2 and ended up somewhere in P-stupid because that bad luck was "just" and dealing with the bad luck in a way that every racer would deal with is "unjust".

[Exediron]

I'm not being obtuse and I resent the implication I am. I'm making a very valid point, all of a sudden "rejoining where you leave" is an argument while literally every race (OK, maybe some street tracks not) multiple drivers leave the track and rejoin in another place where they left. It's a nonsensical argument.

But OK, I take it that it would have been "just" that Verstappen, through an incident and no fault of his own, would have lost an inherited P2 and ended up somewhere in P-stupid because that bad luck was "just" and dealing with the bad luck in a way that every racer would deal with is "unjust".

I don't care the slightest bit if it would have been just or not, which is a hangup some people seem to have when debating incidents. He benefited from being able to run off track without penalty, and that seems pretty clear cut.

[mds]

I'm not being obtuse and I resent the implication I am. I'm making a very valid point, all of a sudden "rejoining where you leave" is an argument while literally every race (OK, maybe some street tracks not) multiple drivers leave the track and rejoin in another place where they left. It's a nonsensical argument.

But OK, I take it that it would have been "just" that Verstappen, through an incident and no fault of his own, would have lost an inherited P2 and ended up somewhere in P-stupid because that bad luck was "just" and dealing with the bad luck in a way that every racer would deal with is "unjust".

I don't care the slightest bit if it would have been just or not, which is a hangup some people seem to have when debating incidents. He benefited from being able to run off track without penalty, and that seems pretty clear cut.

He had no other choice than to run off track. He didn't gain an advantage in the series of events. And that seems pretty clear cut.

The only technicality that can be debated is where and how fast he could have rejoined. Pointless debate though. He was P4, 2 cars crashed out which impacted his ability to take the circuit in a normal fashion along with many others and in the end he was P2 as those 2 cars were removed from the order.

The idea that a part of the events in which he was unlucky to get caught in benefited him... Come on mate. Be reasonable.

[Exediron]

I'm not being obtuse and I resent the implication I am. I'm making a very valid point, all of a sudden "rejoining where you leave" is an argument while literally every race (OK, maybe some street tracks not) multiple drivers leave the track and rejoin in another place where they left. It's a nonsensical argument.

But OK, I take it that it would have been "just" that Verstappen, through an incident and no fault of his own, would have lost an inherited P2 and ended up somewhere in P-stupid because that bad luck was "just" and dealing with the bad luck in a way that every racer would deal with is "unjust".

I don't care the slightest bit if it would have been just or not, which is a hangup some people seem to have when debating incidents. He benefited from being able to run off track without penalty, and that seems pretty clear cut.

He had no other choice than to run off track. He didn't gain an advantage in the series of events. And that seems pretty clear cut.

The only technicality that can be debated is where and how fast he could have rejoined. Pointless debate though. He was P4, 2 cars crashed out which impacted his ability to take the circuit in a normal fashion along with many others and in the end he was P2 as those 2 cars were removed from the order.

The idea that a part of the events in which he was unlucky to get caught in benefited him... Come on mate. Be reasonable.

Did the VSC benefit Sainz? He was unlucky to need that benefit at all, but it still seems clear that it did. It was poor luck to have his engine fail so close to the end, but without the intervention of the VSC he would have finished outside the points. Does that make him ultimately lucky? No. Did he 'deserve' to finish outside the points? Who cares. But he was prevented from losing more by the VSC, and Verstappen was prevented from losing more because he could cut the corner and not suffer any negative effects.

If you don't see it that way, I suppose that's where we'll have to end this rather than running around in circles. I'm not trying to make any sort of value judgment on Verstappens' race: I thought he drove well, and better than Ricciardo in the balance of things. But I can't see any way that he (and about half the rest of the field, as you said) didn't benefit from the generous runoffs at the track.

[mds]

Did the VSC benefit Sainz? He was unlucky to need that benefit at all, but it still seems clear that it did. It was poor luck to have his engine fail so close to the end, but without the intervention of the VSC he would have finished outside the points. Does that make him ultimately lucky? No. Did he 'deserve' to finish outside the points? Who cares. But he was prevented from losing more by the VSC, and Verstappen was prevented from losing more because he could cut the corner and not suffer any negative effects.

If you don't see it that way, I suppose that's where we'll have to end this rather than running around in circles. I'm not trying to make any sort of value judgment on Verstappens' race: I thought he drove well, and better than Ricciardo in the balance of things. But I can't see any way that he (and about half the rest of the field, as you said) didn't benefit from the generous runoffs at the track.

No objection there but it all started with a comparison between Verstappen and Ricciardo, with the argument that cutting the track was a factor in this comparison, ignoring the fact that he would have been damn unlucky if he had ended up behind Ricciardo to begin with. I thought that was some very flawed reasoning which is why I jumped in, which took us to where we are now.

I don't think the luck he had in being able to cut the corner should be separated from the bad luck that was the incident, and then used as an argument to say that Verstappen was lucky to be in front of Ricciardo and maybe wouldn't have been in front otherwise.

[mikeyg123]

I'm not being obtuse and I resent the implication I am. I'm making a very valid point, all of a sudden "rejoining where you leave" is an argument while literally every race (OK, maybe some street tracks not) multiple drivers leave the track and rejoin in another place where they left. It's a nonsensical argument.

But OK, I take it that it would have been "just" that Verstappen, through an incident and no fault of his own, would have lost an inherited P2 and ended up somewhere in P-stupid because that bad luck was "just" and dealing with the bad luck in a way that every racer would deal with is "unjust".

I don't care the slightest bit if it would have been just or not, which is a hangup some people seem to have when debating incidents. He benefited from being able to run off track without penalty, and that seems pretty clear cut.

He had no other choice than to run off track. He didn't gain an advantage in the series of events. And that seems pretty clear cut.

The only technicality that can be debated is where and how fast he could have rejoined. Pointless debate though. He was P4, 2 cars crashed out which impacted his ability to take the circuit in a normal fashion along with many others and in the end he was P2 as those 2 cars were removed from the order.

The idea that a part of the events in which he was unlucky to get caught in benefited him... Come on mate. Be reasonable.

Did the VSC benefit Sainz? He was unlucky to need that benefit at all, but it still seems clear that it did. It was poor luck to have his engine fail so close to the end, but without the intervention of the VSC he would have finished outside the points. Does that make him ultimately lucky? No. Did he 'deserve' to finish outside the points? Who cares. But he was prevented from losing more by the VSC, and Verstappen was prevented from losing more because he could cut the corner and not suffer any negative effects.

If you don't see it that way, I suppose that's where we'll have to end this rather than running around in circles. I'm not trying to make any sort of value judgment on Verstappens' race: I thought he drove well, and better than Ricciardo in the balance of things. But I can't see any way that he (and about half the rest of the field, as you said) didn't benefit from the generous runoffs at the track.

I think you're missing the point. This conversation started because it was stated that we couldn't compare Verstappen and Ricciardo in France because Verstappen gained an advantage by cutting the corner. I think both me and Mds believe that line of reasoning to be false.

[Ocon]

So Ricciardo beat Vettel because driver performances vary? Ok.

So a forum is about quickly jotting down a stupid oneliner that doesn't capture the essence of what was said? Ok.

You answered to a post which claimed that Ric is better than Vettel because he beat him that year, and you said that driver performances vary. The rest of your post is irrelevant. I'm not gonna go into a discussion about this because it's been discussed ad naseum.

[mds]

So Ricciardo beat Vettel because driver performances vary? Ok.

So a forum is about quickly jotting down a stupid oneliner that doesn't capture the essence of what was said? Ok.

You answered to a post which claimed that Ric is better than Vettel because he beat him that year, and you said that driver performances vary. The rest of your post is irrelevant. I'm not gonna go into a discussion about this because it's been discussed ad naseum.

"ad nauseam". And if you don't want to go into a discussion, then don't jot down stupid oneliners either just to provoke or ridicule posters.

The discussion revolved around Ricciardo being a better shot at winning titles than Vettel, I did not categorically refute that idea, instead I answered to that that he is yet to prove himself in the high-stress situation of a year-long title battle. That's what this discussion revolved around.

I never said "Ricciardo beat Vettel because driver performances vary". I said driver performances vary because they do. Now Ricciardo beat Vettel, that is a fact, the reason why isn't even important in this discussion. He might be a much better driver, or Vettel might have slacked that year. Maybe in the future we'll see a rematch. It wasn't central to the debate, which was about who would be the best shot at winning titles.

Say what you want, but Ricciardo is very much unproven in that situation.

[Ocon]

So Ricciardo beat Vettel because driver performances vary? Ok.

So a forum is about quickly jotting down a stupid oneliner that doesn't capture the essence of what was said? Ok.

You answered to a post which claimed that Ric is better than Vettel because he beat him that year, and you said that driver performances vary. The rest of your post is irrelevant. I'm not gonna go into a discussion about this because it's been discussed ad naseum.

"ad nauseam". And if you don't want to go into a discussion, then don't jot down stupid oneliners either just to provoke or ridicule posters.

The discussion revolved around Ricciardo being a better shot at winning titles than Vettel, I did not categorically refute that idea, instead I answered to that that he is yet to prove himself in the high-stress situation of a year-long title battle. That's what this discussion revolved around.

I never said "Ricciardo beat Vettel because driver performances vary". I said driver performances vary because they do. Now Ricciardo beat Vettel, that is a fact, the reason why isn't even important in this discussion. He might be a much better driver, or Vettel might have slacked that year. Maybe in the future we'll see a rematch. It wasn't central to the debate, which was about who would be the best shot at winning titles.

Say what you want, but Ricciardo is very much unproven in that situation.

I'm not trying to provoke. I think the problem is that some people get easily offended anytime someone puts Vettel below the best drivers. Like I said, it has been discussed to death and there's no need to get into that, especially to not derail this thread.

I didn't know that the discussion was about who is more capable of winning the WDC. I still don't see how that's relevant as a response to his post though, which was pretty straight forward. It said that Ric was better because he beat Vettel over a season, no ifs and buts. Is it not understandable why your claim sounded ridiculous to me? Yeah I know that you didn't specifically say that's why, but you implied it only by mentioning it. It's pretty convenient that his performance dipped the only time he was up against someone capable of challenging him. It's wishful thinking imo.

And feel free to correct my spelling again, I don't mind.

[mds]

I didn't know that the discussion was about who is more capable of winning the WDC. I still don't see how that's relevant as a response to his post though, which was pretty straight forward. It said that Ric was better because he beat Vettel over a season, no ifs and buts. Is it not understandable why your claim sounded ridiculous to me?

Given the context of the discussion, no I don't think it is understandable why my post sounded ridiculous, especially given that I never wanted to prove (or necessarily believe for myself) that Vettel only lost out to Ricciardo because he wasn't at his best that year.

It's pretty convenient that his performance dipped the only time he was up against someone capable of challenging him. It's wishful thinking imo.

It's only wishful thinking when one believes that to be the only option. I'm open about it and am perfectly willing to consider all the options, and one of them is Ricciardo simply being the better driver.

[Ocon]

I didn't know that the discussion was about who is more capable of winning the WDC. I still don't see how that's relevant as a response to his post though, which was pretty straight forward. It said that Ric was better because he beat Vettel over a season, no ifs and buts. Is it not understandable why your claim sounded ridiculous to me?

Given the context of the discussion, no I don't think it is understandable why my post sounded ridiculous, especially given that I never wanted to prove (or necessarily believe for myself) that Vettel only lost out to Ricciardo because he wasn't at his best that year.

It's pretty convenient that his performance dipped the only time he was up against someone capable of challenging him. It's wishful thinking imo.

It's only wishful thinking when one believes that to be the only option. I'm open about it and am perfectly willing to consider all the options, and one of them is Ricciardo simply being the better driver.

I know you didn't directly say that Ric isn't better because Vettel just happened to have a bad year. I assumed that's what you were implying though since I have seen you argue Vettel's case plenty of times in the past. I'm sorry if my assumption was wrong.

You don't necessarily have to believe it to be the only option for it to be considered wishful thinking. You could acknowledge there being several options, but if the chances are small enough that it's true and yet you make it sound like it's a big factor, then that's self-deception.

[mds]

You don't necessarily have to believe it to be the only option for it to be considered wishful thinking. You could acknowledge there being several options, but if the chances are small enough that it's true and yet you make it sound like it's a big factor, then that's self-deception.

True, but there's good enough chance that it's true to take it into account. We've seen in the past that Vettel needs the car to be a certain way, I will certainly admit that he's sensitive to car characteristics. So I have to take onboard that the RB14 might not have given him what he wants from a car and that he faltered as a consequence.

Why not consider this as a viable possibility? It's not that outlandish, right?

[Ocon]

You don't necessarily have to believe it to be the only option for it to be considered wishful thinking. You could acknowledge there being several options, but if the chances are small enough that it's true and yet you make it sound like it's a big factor, then that's self-deception.

True, but there's good enough chance that it's true to take it into account. We've seen in the past that Vettel needs the car to be a certain way, I will certainly admit that he's sensitive to car characteristics. So I have to take onboard that the RB14 might not have given him what he wants from a car and that he faltered as a consequence.

Why not consider this as a viable possibility? It's not that outlandish, right?

It should be taken into account, I just don't think it's likely. That's just my opinion though. Like I said, it has been discussed countless times and I have never seen the sides come to an agreement. And let's not derail this thread further. We can agree to disagree for now and revisit this topic in the right place next time.

[mds]

You don't necessarily have to believe it to be the only option for it to be considered wishful thinking. You could acknowledge there being several options, but if the chances are small enough that it's true and yet you make it sound like it's a big factor, then that's self-deception.

True, but there's good enough chance that it's true to take it into account. We've seen in the past that Vettel needs the car to be a certain way, I will certainly admit that he's sensitive to car characteristics. So I have to take onboard that the RB14 might not have given him what he wants from a car and that he faltered as a consequence.

Why not consider this as a viable possibility? It's not that outlandish, right?

It should be taken into account, I just don't think it's likely. That's just my opinion though. Like I said, it has been discussed countless times and I have never seen the sides come to an agreement. And let's not derail this thread further. We can agree to disagree for now and revisit this topic in the right place next time.

[Mercedes-Benz]

Ricciardo will definitely stay in RBR. Mercedes and Ferrari were not even his options I guess. IMO he is better than MV. Whoever qualifies ahead usually will finish ahead because there is not much between them in race or qualifying. Though I am sure had Ricciardo been ahead in Baku he would have got out of DRS zone.

[DOLOMITE]

With the Leclerc rumours gathering pace its looking like the Ferrari door is closing. If so, it's a shame I would like to have seen that. Not a done deal yet though and it would be a bold new move for Ferrari as they've not been one for signing drivers with such inexperience.

[UnlikeUday]

With the Leclerc rumours gathering pace its looking like the Ferrari door is closing. If so, it's a shame I would like to have seen that. Not a done deal yet though and it would be a bold new move for Ferrari as they've not been one for signing drivers with such inexperience.

Leclerc is faring beyond expectations & not even half the season is over. Ferrari want a young driver as most of their competitors either have young guns or will be hiring soon (Mercedes - Ocon, Russell etc. Red Bull - Verstappen, Sainz, Gasly etc. McLaren - Norris etc.)

[DOLOMITE]

With the Leclerc rumours gathering pace its looking like the Ferrari door is closing. If so, it's a shame I would like to have seen that. Not a done deal yet though and it would be a bold new move for Ferrari as they've not been one for signing drivers with such inexperience.

Leclerc is faring beyond expectations & not even half the season is over. Ferrari want a young driver as most of their competitors either have young guns or will be hiring soon (Mercedes - Ocon, Russell etc. Red Bull - Verstappen, Sainz, Gasly etc. McLaren - Norris etc.)

Not saying they won't just pointing out what a change it would be.

[Mort Canard]

With the Leclerc rumours gathering pace its looking like the Ferrari door is closing. If so, it's a shame I would like to have seen that. Not a done deal yet though and it would be a bold new move for Ferrari as they've not been one for signing drivers with such inexperience.

Yeah, more and more of the press are claiming this to be a done deal.

Niki Lauda also said in an interview that Hamilton and Bottas were the Mercedes drivers for next year. (Not yet officially verified) So that closes the Silver and Red doors for Daniel. That only leaves his current seat at RBR and an option at MacLaren for Daniel. The only reason I could see to go to MacLaren would be if Daniel was either very tired of dealing with Max or had absolutely no confidence in the new Honda power unit. I don't see it happening.

[Jezza13]

With the Leclerc rumours gathering pace its looking like the Ferrari door is closing. If so, it's a shame I would like to have seen that. Not a done deal yet though and it would be a bold new move for Ferrari as they've not been one for signing drivers with such inexperience.

Yeah, more and more of the press are claiming this to be a done deal.

Niki Lauda also said in an interview that Hamilton and Bottas were the Mercedes drivers for next year. (Not yet officially verified) So that closes the Silver and Red doors for Daniel. That only leaves his current seat at RBR and an option at MacLaren for Daniel. The only reason I could see to go to MacLaren would be if Daniel was either very tired of dealing with Max or had absolutely no confidence in the new Honda power unit. I don't see it happening.

The more I think about it, if the opportunity's there, id like to see Ricciardo go to Renault as #1.

They're getting the right people in place, he knows the Renault engine, Honda is still not there & there's no guarantee they will get there & I think long term it'd be the better call. I can't see anyone challenging Merc or Ferrari for championships until the new regs in 2021, especially with the change in aero regs coming in next year which will probably reduce RB's advantage in that area.

[veffy]

With the Leclerc rumours gathering pace its looking like the Ferrari door is closing. If so, it's a shame I would like to have seen that. Not a done deal yet though and it would be a bold new move for Ferrari as they've not been one for signing drivers with such inexperience.

Yeah, more and more of the press are claiming this to be a done deal.

Niki Lauda also said in an interview that Hamilton and Bottas were the Mercedes drivers for next year. (Not yet officially verified) So that closes the Silver and Red doors for Daniel. That only leaves his current seat at RBR and an option at MacLaren for Daniel. The only reason I could see to go to MacLaren would be if Daniel was either very tired of dealing with Max or had absolutely no confidence in the new Honda power unit. I don't see it happening.

The more I think about it, if the opportunity's there, id like to see Ricciardo go to Renault as #1.

They're getting the right people in place, he knows the Renault engine, Honda is still not there & there's no guarantee they will get there & I think long term it'd be the better call. I can't see anyone challenging Merc or Ferrari for championships until the new regs in 2021, especially with the change in aero regs coming in next year which will probably reduce RB's advantage in that area.

I'm feeling the same way, it's a gamble but I think being able to lead and build a team around himself is exactly what Dan needs at this stage in his career.

[iano]

But Red Bull are really rolling out the red carpet to show him how Max will get no favouritism... in that environment why consider going elsewhere?

[Jezza13]

With the Leclerc rumours gathering pace its looking like the Ferrari door is closing. If so, it's a shame I would like to have seen that. Not a done deal yet though and it would be a bold new move for Ferrari as they've not been one for signing drivers with such inexperience.

Yeah, more and more of the press are claiming this to be a done deal.

Niki Lauda also said in an interview that Hamilton and Bottas were the Mercedes drivers for next year. (Not yet officially verified) So that closes the Silver and Red doors for Daniel. That only leaves his current seat at RBR and an option at MacLaren for Daniel. The only reason I could see to go to MacLaren would be if Daniel was either very tired of dealing with Max or had absolutely no confidence in the new Honda power unit. I don't see it happening.

The more I think about it, if the opportunity's there, id like to see Ricciardo go to Renault as #1.

They're getting the right people in place, he knows the Renault engine, Honda is still not there & there's no guarantee they will get there & I think long term it'd be the better call. I can't see anyone challenging Merc or Ferrari for championships until the new regs in 2021, especially with the change in aero regs coming in next year which will probably reduce RB's advantage in that area.

I'm feeling the same way, it's a gamble but I think being able to lead and build a team around himself is exactly what Dan needs at this stage in his career.

Honestly if he's after a WDC, I can't see how it's any bigger gamble than staying with RB & Honda and at least it'd be his team but it sounds like he's going to stay with RB so it sounds like the info he has about the RB Honda relationship is quite positive and he's confident he can match Verstappen.

Then again, he could be picking RB over Renault because Renault just aren't interested in Ricciardo and haven't made an offer.

I have this vision of Daniel sitting by his phone for the last month or two excited about the imminent calls from Toto, Maurizio and maybe Cyril. He sits waiting, waiting, reading all the press about him being the most in demand driver in F1 and of how Merc & Ferrari will surely be embroiled in a bidding war for his services. He's certain the calls will start flooding in any time now.

Days pass the weeks with no calls until eventually the phone rings. He starts to shake in anticipation. "This is it" he thinks to himself, "i'm off to the factory guy's". He hesitantly picks up the phone and in a gentle,soft, faltering voice he whispers "Hello".

Then, from the other end of the line he hears the words " Daniel........... Zac Brown here."

[Exediron]

I have this vision of Daniel sitting by his phone for the last month or two excited about the imminent calls from Toto, Maurizio and maybe Cyril. He sits waiting, waiting, reading all the press about him being the most in demand driver in F1 and of how Merc & Ferrari will surely be embroiled in a bidding war for his services. He's certain the calls will start flooding in any time now.

Days pass the weeks with no calls until eventually the phone rings. He starts to shake in anticipation. "This is it" he thinks to himself, "i'm off to the factory guy's". He hesitantly picks up the phone and in a gentle,soft, faltering voice he whispers "Hello".

Then, from the other end of the line he hears the words " Daniel........... Zac Brown here."

[BMWSauber84]

Renault are still a long way away. He can't afford to waste years of his career away from the top of the grid at this crucial time in his career. And as for Mclaren; no top driver with half a brain would touch them with a barge pole right now.

A two year deal with Red Bull is the only sensible option for both parties.

[iano]

Renault are still a long way away. He can't afford to waste years of his career away from the top of the grid at this crucial time in his career. And as for Mclaren; no top driver with half a brain would touch them with a barge pole right now.

A two year deal with Red Bull is the only sensible option for both parties.

sounds like mclaren is a serious possibility.....and that Red Bull maybe after only 1 high profile driver at this stage and given the contract with Max perhaps they don't really need Daniel either

[Zoue]

Dutch TV reporting strong rumour in the paddock that Ric has signed again with Red Bull this morning.

[Huw]

Found here - http://paddocktalk.com/news/html/story-321929.html: "I spoke with the big boss (Dietrich Mateschitz), who I like a lot," the 28-year-old driver is quoted by Corriere dello Sport.

"It's a pity he doesn't run the team alone because everything is easier with him," Ricciardo smiled.

Nice little dig at dear Herr Marko methinks.

[jono794]

The question Ricciardo needs to ask himself is do any of his options for 2019 have a chance at the title? At this point with the Ferrari door closing the answer is probably no. Honda are better this year for sure, but in the overall scheme of things they are still by far the weakest PU, both in terms of performance and reliability. To turn things around in time for a Red Bull title run they would need to show a rate of improvement they have not yet demonstrated.

So if 2019 is a write-off title wise, Renault starts to look pretty good. They've shown gradual but consistent improvement since the factory came back in 2016, and now any step forward they make is eating into the advantage of the top three. At this rate there's no reason they won't be a contender in 2020, especially with full benefit of all the Renault investment only just now starting to kick in. A move there now could be a very shrewd one...