planetf1.com

iano wrote:

oz_karter wrote:
I don’t think those figures are anywhere near accurate.

Maybe some of the drivers are getting close to those numbers with race win bonuses, etc.

Kimi, for one, was on a 7M or 8M per year deal i thought? With performance based bonuses. This seems to be part of the reason they can afford Vettel but weren’t prepared to pay Ricciardo what he wanted.

I think Max’s salary is correct there - 10M. I also think this is probably what Red Bull were offering Ricciardo.

It you take all that is said as true(and that Horner actually said he was offered same as Verstappen which may not be exactly what he said) ..... then it is possible to interpret Ricciardo as being offered the same as Verstappen, or less than Verstappen, depending on how you read the clauses and conditions. Which why there are different answers from people who should know, and perhaps even from the same people. It may depend on the impression they desire to give at the time.

Horner stated quite categorically that they offered Ricciardo everything he asked for. There's no ambiguity in that statement. In that case, what Max is earning is largely irrelevant as if Ricciardo wanted earning parity then he likely would have asked for it, whatever the figure was. If he didn't ask for parity and instead demanded a specific figure that turned out to be less, well, then that's down to his negotiating skills, really. There's no need to dissect clauses and conditions

Zoue wrote:

iano wrote:

oz_karter wrote:
I don’t think those figures are anywhere near accurate.

Maybe some of the drivers are getting close to those numbers with race win bonuses, etc.

Kimi, for one, was on a 7M or 8M per year deal i thought? With performance based bonuses. This seems to be part of the reason they can afford Vettel but weren’t prepared to pay Ricciardo what he wanted.

I think Max’s salary is correct there - 10M. I also think this is probably what Red Bull were offering Ricciardo.

It you take all that is said as true(and that Horner actually said he was offered same as Verstappen which may not be exactly what he said) ..... then it is possible to interpret Ricciardo as being offered the same as Verstappen, or less than Verstappen, depending on how you read the clauses and conditions. Which why there are different answers from people who should know, and perhaps even from the same people. It may depend on the impression they desire to give at the time.

Horner stated quite categorically that they offered Ricciardo everything he asked for. There's no ambiguity in that statement. In that case, what Max is earning is largely irrelevant as if Ricciardo wanted earning parity then he likely would have asked for it, whatever the figure was. If he didn't ask for parity and instead demanded a specific figure that turned out to be less, well, then that's down to his negotiating skills, really. There's no need to dissect clauses and conditions

Respectfully: Disagree. Someone can offer you something and say "here, this is the exact equivalent to that". They then can say "I offered him the equivalent". Does not mean everyone agrees it is equivalent. I wanted a certain type of cake with my coffee the other day, but they were sold out. They suggested, here have one of these, it is every bit as good", but actually, it was not what I wanted. They aren't offering Max's contract, they are offering an 'equivalent' contract (so they say).

From my perspective the one area where there is no ambiguity is that Ricciardo decided that everything he wants was not on offer from Red Bull. Perhaps what he wants includes things he did tell Red Bull like "I want not to be in the same team as Max anymore". Perhaps Ricciardo was so unimaginative he could not list a set of conditions under which he would stay.. certainly there would be some conditions under which he would stay. But more likely they offered what they say delivered what he asked for, and he did not feel it is what he asked for.

iano wrote:

Zoue wrote:

iano wrote:

oz_karter wrote:
I don’t think those figures are anywhere near accurate.

Maybe some of the drivers are getting close to those numbers with race win bonuses, etc.

Kimi, for one, was on a 7M or 8M per year deal i thought? With performance based bonuses. This seems to be part of the reason they can afford Vettel but weren’t prepared to pay Ricciardo what he wanted.

I think Max’s salary is correct there - 10M. I also think this is probably what Red Bull were offering Ricciardo.

It you take all that is said as true(and that Horner actually said he was offered same as Verstappen which may not be exactly what he said) ..... then it is possible to interpret Ricciardo as being offered the same as Verstappen, or less than Verstappen, depending on how you read the clauses and conditions. Which why there are different answers from people who should know, and perhaps even from the same people. It may depend on the impression they desire to give at the time.

Horner stated quite categorically that they offered Ricciardo everything he asked for. There's no ambiguity in that statement. In that case, what Max is earning is largely irrelevant as if Ricciardo wanted earning parity then he likely would have asked for it, whatever the figure was. If he didn't ask for parity and instead demanded a specific figure that turned out to be less, well, then that's down to his negotiating skills, really. There's no need to dissect clauses and conditions

Respectfully: Disagree. Someone can offer you something and say "here, this is the exact equivalent to that". They then can say "I offered him the equivalent". Does not mean everyone agrees it is equivalent. I wanted a certain type of cake with my coffee the other day, but they were sold out. They suggested, here have one of these, it is every bit as good", but actually, it was not what I wanted. They aren't offering Max's contract, they are offering an 'equivalent' contract (so they say).

From my perspective the one area where there is no ambiguity is that Ricciardo decided that everything he wants was not on offer from Red Bull. Perhaps what he wants includes things he did tell Red Bull like "I want not to be in the same team as Max anymore". Perhaps Ricciardo was so unimaginative he could not list a set of conditions under which he would stay.. certainly there would be some conditions under which he would stay. But more likely they offered what they say delivered what he asked for, and he did not feel it is what he asked for.

You're making an awful lot of assumptions here. Horner literally says they offered Dan everything he asked for. We don't need to try and work out what that means. It's completely explicit.

iano wrote:

Zoue wrote:

iano wrote:

oz_karter wrote:
I don’t think those figures are anywhere near accurate.

Maybe some of the drivers are getting close to those numbers with race win bonuses, etc.

Kimi, for one, was on a 7M or 8M per year deal i thought? With performance based bonuses. This seems to be part of the reason they can afford Vettel but weren’t prepared to pay Ricciardo what he wanted.

I think Max’s salary is correct there - 10M. I also think this is probably what Red Bull were offering Ricciardo.

It you take all that is said as true(and that Horner actually said he was offered same as Verstappen which may not be exactly what he said) ..... then it is possible to interpret Ricciardo as being offered the same as Verstappen, or less than Verstappen, depending on how you read the clauses and conditions. Which why there are different answers from people who should know, and perhaps even from the same people. It may depend on the impression they desire to give at the time.

Horner stated quite categorically that they offered Ricciardo everything he asked for. There's no ambiguity in that statement. In that case, what Max is earning is largely irrelevant as if Ricciardo wanted earning parity then he likely would have asked for it, whatever the figure was. If he didn't ask for parity and instead demanded a specific figure that turned out to be less, well, then that's down to his negotiating skills, really. There's no need to dissect clauses and conditions

Respectfully: Disagree. Someone can offer you something and say "here, this is the exact equivalent to that". They then can say "I offered him the equivalent". Does not mean everyone agrees it is equivalent. I wanted a certain type of cake with my coffee the other day, but they were sold out. They suggested, here have one of these, it is every bit as good", but actually, it was not what I wanted. They aren't offering Max's contract, they are offering an 'equivalent' contract (so they say).

From my perspective the one area where there is no ambiguity is that Ricciardo decided that everything he wants was not on offer from Red Bull. Perhaps what he wants includes things he did tell Red Bull like "I want not to be in the same team as Max anymore". Perhaps Ricciardo was so unimaginative he could not list a set of conditions under which he would stay.. certainly there would be some conditions under which he would stay. But more likely they offered what they say delivered what he asked for, and he did not feel it is what he asked for.

And if Horner had said "we gave him more or less everything he asked for," or "the equivalent of what he asked for," I'd agree. But he didn't. He was quite specific that Red Bull met all of Ricciardo's terms. There's no reason to add different possible interpretations to that as it's fairly black and white. If people still feel that Red Bull were holding something back then I'd suggest that'd be more down to people wanting Red Bull/Horner to be lying. The statement as it stands is unambiguous and I don't see any reason to question it unless Ricciardo himself stands up and says it's not true.

It puts the ball firmly back in Ricciardo's court. If they offered him everything he asked for and he still chose to leave, then the only possible conclusion I can think of is that he'd already made up his mind to leave and what they offered him was always going to be irrelevant (unless he couldn't secure something elsewhere). And I don't see how he could have said "I don't want to be in the same team as Max anymore," for two reasons: firstly, as then Horner wouldn't be able to say they gave him everything he asked for; and secondly, such a clearly ridiculous request would likely have been mentioned by Horner in his interview. Instead of speculating that Ricciardo may have been wary of Max, it would seem far more logical for Horner to state quite categorically that Ricciardo felt he couldn't work with Max anymore. We don't need to make up reasons when the simplest explanation rules them out.

I really can't see there's any reason to ignore what Horner said, at least until Ricciardo comes up with a different version. It's just looking for intrigue where there is none

They could probably offer him concrete promises regarding money and working conditions, but perhaps what they couldn't offer him was 'the belief' that he would be treated fairly when it came to race day.

As far as I know, Massa was always told that he was on equal terms with Schumacher and that he started every season with a genuine chance, all he had to do was outscore Schumacher and if it came to it the full weight of the team would be put behind him. But I think he was the only person who ever actually believed it. I think it's the case that yes, if Massa had ever been a contender and it was statistically impossible for Schumi to win the title then yes they would back him, but it would have to get to that point, whereas they would always back Schumi from as early as possible if it was the other way around... and it wasn't just Schumacher was it, Germany 2010 was mid summer.

That's the sort of distinction I think Ricciardo wanted to avoid being on the wrong end of, because nothing kills your career quicker than being another driver's 'b1tch'. Actually, that's not true, it doesn't kill your career, but it does kill your chances of being taken seriously.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/motorsport ... a67c4048bf

Interesting article on some more details on what exactly was pitched to riccardo which was “We sold him the goal of fighting for championships in 2021, and to start winning, I hope, in 2020, but not before,” Abiteboul said.”

Mayhem wrote:https://www.foxsports.com.au/motorsport ... a67c4048bf

Interesting article on some more details on what exactly was pitched to riccardo which was “We sold him the goal of fighting for championships in 2021, and to start winning, I hope, in 2020, but not before,” Abiteboul said.”

Everyone would know this is the case though with Renault given where they are with both their power unit and chassis.

It would be Abiteboul and co. showing Ricciardo what they are actually doing/planning on doing to achieve that that would be more important IMO then just selling him when he will fight for championships.

v@sh wrote:

Mayhem wrote:https://www.foxsports.com.au/motorsport ... a67c4048bf

Interesting article on some more details on what exactly was pitched to riccardo which was “We sold him the goal of fighting for championships in 2021, and to start winning, I hope, in 2020, but not before,” Abiteboul said.”

Everyone would know this is the case though with Renault given where they are with both their power unit and chassis.

It would be Abiteboul and co. showing Ricciardo what they are actually doing/planning on doing to achieve that that would be more important IMO then just selling him when he will fight for championships.

Yes, knowing how they sold him on this, would be more useful than this statement which is more about saying they did not exaggerate in their pitch.

iano wrote:Yes, knowing how they sold him on this, would be more useful than this statement which is more about saying they did not exaggerate in their pitch.

I think the promise of investment from Renault to match the budget of Ferrari/Mercedes must have been the pitch. Otherwise, I can't imagine how they would have convinced him they were actually going to be fighting for championships in 2021.

So, now we have another "when and where. will Ricciardo move".

I think it makes sense from a Red Bull perspective to promote Gasly for some drives before year end. Probably not until later in the year and a few more things are settled on the outcome for this year... but who knows. And what does Ricciardo do for those races? I do not think they would put him a Toro Rosso so I guess put his shoeys up?

iano wrote:So, now we have another "when and where. will Ricciardo move".

I think it makes sense from a Red Bull perspective to promote Gasly for some drives before year end. Probably not until later in the year and a few more things are settled on the outcome for this year... but who knows. And what does Ricciardo do for those races? I do not think they would put him a Toro Rosso so I guess put his shoeys up?

I doubt they have the option to shelve Ricciardo mid-season. He doesn't have a junior contract like Kvyat had, he has a few months remaining on a full-fledged, highly paid F1 contract. Maybe they could pay him not to drive for those remaining races, but they certainly can't stick him in a Toro Rosso, and I doubt they're allowed to give someone else his seat, either.

Exediron wrote:

iano wrote:So, now we have another "when and where. will Ricciardo move".

I think it makes sense from a Red Bull perspective to promote Gasly for some drives before year end. Probably not until later in the year and a few more things are settled on the outcome for this year... but who knows. And what does Ricciardo do for those races? I do not think they would put him a Toro Rosso so I guess put his shoeys up?

I doubt they have the option to shelve Ricciardo mid-season. He doesn't have a junior contract like Kvyat had, he has a few months remaining on a full-fledged, highly paid F1 contract. Maybe they could pay him not to drive for those remaining races, but they certainly can't stick him in a Toro Rosso, and I doubt they're allowed to give someone else his seat, either.

Agree. They didn't park Vettel when he signed for Ferrari though I do expect him, & rightly so, to very much be the team #2 for the remainder of the season.

The though did cross my mind that a mid season swap could've happened if RB decided to bring Sainz back. I think a swap could've been on the cards there but I doubt they'll send Ricciardo off to learn the finer points of Horticulture.

Jezza13 wrote:

Exediron wrote:

iano wrote:So, now we have another "when and where. will Ricciardo move".

I think it makes sense from a Red Bull perspective to promote Gasly for some drives before year end. Probably not until later in the year and a few more things are settled on the outcome for this year... but who knows. And what does Ricciardo do for those races? I do not think they would put him a Toro Rosso so I guess put his shoeys up?

I doubt they have the option to shelve Ricciardo mid-season. He doesn't have a junior contract like Kvyat had, he has a few months remaining on a full-fledged, highly paid F1 contract. Maybe they could pay him not to drive for those remaining races, but they certainly can't stick him in a Toro Rosso, and I doubt they're allowed to give someone else his seat, either.

Agree. They didn't park Vettel when he signed for Ferrari though I do expect him, & rightly so, to very much be the team #2 for the remainder of the season.

The though did cross my mind that a mid season swap could've happened if RB decided to bring Sainz back. I think a swap could've been on the cards there but I doubt they'll send Ricciardo off to learn the finer points of Horticulture.

I think it would be great if Daniel upped his game and beat Max conveniently in the last few races. I do not think that they would bench him though.

Jezza13 wrote:

Exediron wrote:

iano wrote:So, now we have another "when and where. will Ricciardo move".

I think it makes sense from a Red Bull perspective to promote Gasly for some drives before year end. Probably not until later in the year and a few more things are settled on the outcome for this year... but who knows. And what does Ricciardo do for those races? I do not think they would put him a Toro Rosso so I guess put his shoeys up?

I doubt they have the option to shelve Ricciardo mid-season. He doesn't have a junior contract like Kvyat had, he has a few months remaining on a full-fledged, highly paid F1 contract. Maybe they could pay him not to drive for those remaining races, but they certainly can't stick him in a Toro Rosso, and I doubt they're allowed to give someone else his seat, either.

Agree. They didn't park Vettel when he signed for Ferrari though I do expect him, & rightly so, to very much be the team #2 for the remainder of the season.

The though did cross my mind that a mid season swap could've happened if RB decided to bring Sainz back. I think a swap could've been on the cards there but I doubt they'll send Ricciardo off to learn the finer points of Horticulture.

i think Vettel was different because they were never that excited about the prospects of his replacement. But I do agree they would not drop Ricciardo at this point. I think it possible that far later in the season if positions are locked in anyway, that we could see Gasly promoted for a race or two... but certainly not an immediate parking of Ricciardo, that would be a PR disaster.

Exediron wrote:

iano wrote:Yes, knowing how they sold him on this, would be more useful than this statement which is more about saying they did not exaggerate in their pitch.

I think the promise of investment from Renault to match the budget of Ferrari/Mercedes must have been the pitch. Otherwise, I can't imagine how they would have convinced him they were actually going to be fighting for championships in 2021.

Budget caps, fairer distribution of prize money?

They will keep Ricciardo in the main Redbull and just make the car second best so Max handily beats him, raising Max's confidence. Or they won't and Max handily beats him. We will never know either way. But Max beating Ricciardo is the only outcome from the rest of this year.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/motorsp ... 4zz08.html

The old Marko/Red Bull head games begin. They are happy to treat drivers in any manner they wish but as soon as they don't get their way they.................

backdoc wrote:https://www.theage.com.au/sport/motorsp ... 4zz08.html

The old Marko/Red Bull head games begin. They are happy to treat drivers in any manner they wish but as soon as they don't get their way they.................

Don't see what's so controversial about these comments. He said more or less what Horner did and that Ricciardo leaving was a bombshell. What's to get upset about?

Red Bull are doing what they usually do - handle drivers poorly. They had a falling out with Webber because they committed everything to Vettel when he came along. They lost Vettel because they committed just about everything to Ricciardo when he came along. Now they've lost Ricciardo because they've committed just about everything to Verstappen since he's come along.

In their heads they might think they're doing the right thing, but history will show they've lost two top-tier drivers in four years over poor driver management. Some might say Vettel left because he was beaten by Ricciardo - and that's fair enough - but I don't doubt they could have done a lot more to keep him happy and with the team.

It's the same ruthless philosophy that dictates their junior program selections, but time will show keeping it as ruthless as it is in F1 - especially as a top-three team - is going to cause you some pain in time.

Toby. wrote:Red Bull are doing what they usually do - handle drivers poorly. They had a falling out with Webber because they committed everything to Vettel when he came along. They lost Vettel because they committed just about everything to Ricciardo when he came along. Now they've lost Ricciardo because they've committed just about everything to Verstappen since he's come along.

In their heads they might think they're doing the right thing, but history will show they've lost two top-tier drivers in four years over poor driver management. Some might say Vettel left because he was beaten by Ricciardo - and that's fair enough - but I don't doubt they could have done a lot more to keep him happy and with the team.

It's the same ruthless philosophy that dictates their junior program selections, but time will show keeping it as ruthless as it is in F1 - especially as a top-three team - is going to cause you some pain in time.

This just isn't true. They had . falling out with Webber because he couldn't handle being worse than Vettel and tried to blame it on everything but himself. That was all him. Losing Vettel had nothing to do with committing everything to Ricciardo - Ricciardo beat Vettel fair and square and Vettel leaving was not prompted by any falling out that was ever made public. There was never any indication that Vettel was unhappy with the team. And until Ricciardo says otherwise we have no ideas whether him leaving was because of them committing everything to Max.

I don't see how any of the above shows a ruthless policy (although they've certainly showed that at other times) . Red Bull tend to hang onto their drivers for quite a long time so they must be doing something right.

Toby. wrote:Red Bull are doing what they usually do - handle drivers poorly. They had a falling out with Webber because they committed everything to Vettel when he came along. They lost Vettel because they committed just about everything to Ricciardo when he came along. Now they've lost Ricciardo because they've committed just about everything to Verstappen since he's come along.

In their heads they might think they're doing the right thing, but history will show they've lost two top-tier drivers in four years over poor driver management. Some might say Vettel left because he was beaten by Ricciardo - and that's fair enough - but I don't doubt they could have done a lot more to keep him happy and with the team.

It's the same ruthless philosophy that dictates their junior program selections, but time will show keeping it as ruthless as it is in F1 - especially as a top-three team - is going to cause you some pain in time.

At least, they do promote young drivers. Other than Ferrari that keep sticking to underperforming stars from yesterday year after year after year after ...

Toby. wrote:Red Bull are doing what they usually do - handle drivers poorly. They had a falling out with Webber because they committed everything to Vettel when he came along. They lost Vettel because they committed just about everything to Ricciardo when he came along. Now they've lost Ricciardo because they've committed just about everything to Verstappen since he's come along.

In their heads they might think they're doing the right thing, but history will show they've lost two top-tier drivers in four years over poor driver management. Some might say Vettel left because he was beaten by Ricciardo - and that's fair enough - but I don't doubt they could have done a lot more to keep him happy and with the team.

It's the same ruthless philosophy that dictates their junior program selections, but time will show keeping it as ruthless as it is in F1 - especially as a top-three team - is going to cause you some pain in time.

I don't get this rep RBR get with being harsh to young drivers. They give them more opportunities than anybody else. Ferrari have never run an academy graduate and Mclaren dumped one of the three they have had after just one season.

backdoc wrote:https://www.theage.com.au/sport/motorsp ... 4zz08.html

The old Marko/Red Bull head games begin. They are happy to treat drivers in any manner they wish but as soon as they don't get their way they.................

I am not sure about that being head games. It is very likely that Ricciardo told them he planned to sign, not because he was actually thrilled with the deal, but because he felt at the time it was the best he had. But then thinking it over he couldn't go through giving in the Red Bull deal just because of lack of options, or Renault came to the party with something new.

I think most people tell the truth as they see it most of the time, but the reality can be very different when looked at from different perspectives. I mean if Ricciardo says "can you give me some commitment I in some form I can rely on you will not favour Max?" Red Bull: "Sure, we never have and never will, you have our word, so what do you need next?"

Red Bull reality: "we gave him everything he asked"
Ricciardo Reality: "I go nothing, and the more I thought about it the more I felt I had to check other options again"

Red Bull need not be playing games, just telling it from their perspective. I think they felt they had offered Ricciardo what was needed for him to stay, but he was giving feedback from the perspective of someone with few options.

Zoue wrote:

Toby. wrote:Red Bull are doing what they usually do - handle drivers poorly. They had a falling out with Webber because they committed everything to Vettel when he came along. They lost Vettel because they committed just about everything to Ricciardo when he came along. Now they've lost Ricciardo because they've committed just about everything to Verstappen since he's come along.

In their heads they might think they're doing the right thing, but history will show they've lost two top-tier drivers in four years over poor driver management. Some might say Vettel left because he was beaten by Ricciardo - and that's fair enough - but I don't doubt they could have done a lot more to keep him happy and with the team.

It's the same ruthless philosophy that dictates their junior program selections, but time will show keeping it as ruthless as it is in F1 - especially as a top-three team - is going to cause you some pain in time.

This just isn't true. They had . falling out with Webber because he couldn't handle being worse than Vettel and tried to blame it on everything but himself. That was all him. Losing Vettel had nothing to do with committing everything to Ricciardo - Ricciardo beat Vettel fair and square and Vettel leaving was not prompted by any falling out that was ever made public. There was never any indication that Vettel was unhappy with the team. And until Ricciardo says otherwise we have no ideas whether him leaving was because of them committing everything to Max.

I don't see how any of the above shows a ruthless policy (although they've certainly showed that at other times) . Red Bull tend to hang onto their drivers for quite a long time so they must be doing something right.

I agree. Vettel came along in 2009 and established himself as the fastest driver on pure speed. I think wasn't before 2010 that we heard of Vettel's preferential treatment

mikeyg123 wrote:

Toby. wrote:Red Bull are doing what they usually do - handle drivers poorly. They had a falling out with Webber because they committed everything to Vettel when he came along. They lost Vettel because they committed just about everything to Ricciardo when he came along. Now they've lost Ricciardo because they've committed just about everything to Verstappen since he's come along.

In their heads they might think they're doing the right thing, but history will show they've lost two top-tier drivers in four years over poor driver management. Some might say Vettel left because he was beaten by Ricciardo - and that's fair enough - but I don't doubt they could have done a lot more to keep him happy and with the team.

It's the same ruthless philosophy that dictates their junior program selections, but time will show keeping it as ruthless as it is in F1 - especially as a top-three team - is going to cause you some pain in time.

I don't get this rep RBR get with being harsh to young drivers. They give them more opportunities than anybody else. Ferrari have never run an academy graduate and Mclaren dumped one of the three they have had after just one season.

I think the weirdest thing is how the other teams never pick the dropped drivers up. I reckon a number of Toro Rosso's discarded juniors still had a lot to offer Formula 1. But the other teams seem to look at it as "you're not good enough for Red Bull, you're not good enough for us"

mcdo wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Toby. wrote:Red Bull are doing what they usually do - handle drivers poorly. They had a falling out with Webber because they committed everything to Vettel when he came along. They lost Vettel because they committed just about everything to Ricciardo when he came along. Now they've lost Ricciardo because they've committed just about everything to Verstappen since he's come along.

In their heads they might think they're doing the right thing, but history will show they've lost two top-tier drivers in four years over poor driver management. Some might say Vettel left because he was beaten by Ricciardo - and that's fair enough - but I don't doubt they could have done a lot more to keep him happy and with the team.

It's the same ruthless philosophy that dictates their junior program selections, but time will show keeping it as ruthless as it is in F1 - especially as a top-three team - is going to cause you some pain in time.

I don't get this rep RBR get with being harsh to young drivers. They give them more opportunities than anybody else. Ferrari have never run an academy graduate and Mclaren dumped one of the three they have had after just one season.

I think the weirdest thing is how the other teams never pick the dropped drivers up. I reckon a number of Toro Rosso's discarded juniors still had a lot to offer Formula 1. But the other teams seem to look at it as "you're not good enough for Red Bull, you're not good enough for us"

Maybe. I just think if you don't have a generous backer you have to be very good to stay in F1 and the drivers cast aside just haven't been as good as that. Vergne I would say is the pick of the bunch.

mikeyg123 wrote:

mcdo wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Toby. wrote:Red Bull are doing what they usually do - handle drivers poorly. They had a falling out with Webber because they committed everything to Vettel when he came along. They lost Vettel because they committed just about everything to Ricciardo when he came along. Now they've lost Ricciardo because they've committed just about everything to Verstappen since he's come along.

In their heads they might think they're doing the right thing, but history will show they've lost two top-tier drivers in four years over poor driver management. Some might say Vettel left because he was beaten by Ricciardo - and that's fair enough - but I don't doubt they could have done a lot more to keep him happy and with the team.

It's the same ruthless philosophy that dictates their junior program selections, but time will show keeping it as ruthless as it is in F1 - especially as a top-three team - is going to cause you some pain in time.

I don't get this rep RBR get with being harsh to young drivers. They give them more opportunities than anybody else. Ferrari have never run an academy graduate and Mclaren dumped one of the three they have had after just one season.

I think the weirdest thing is how the other teams never pick the dropped drivers up. I reckon a number of Toro Rosso's discarded juniors still had a lot to offer Formula 1. But the other teams seem to look at it as "you're not good enough for Red Bull, you're not good enough for us"

Maybe. I just think if you don't have a generous backer you have to be very good to stay in F1 and the drivers cast aside just haven't been as good as that. Vergne I would say is the pick of the bunch.

I agree about JEV. And I thought Buemi and Agluersuari were worthy of another race seat. And it's possible that another environment could have extracted more from Kvyat (that one's debatable)

No, that bit about Kvyat ISN'T debatable in my mind.

He was doing well at Red Bull alongside Ricciardo and the demotion to a lesser, more problematic car along with losing the wind in his sails made the transition back to the B team difficult.
I think Kvyat still has lots to give/show but he needs the opportunity and proper support. It's a freakin' JOKE that he's out of F1 and Hartley has a seat.

My biggest wonder currently is who the hell are Toro Rosso going to have driving for them next year!!!

F1 MERCENARY wrote:No, that bit about Kvyat ISN'T debatable in my mind.

He was doing well at Red Bull alongside Ricciardo and the demotion to a lesser, more problematic car along with losing the wind in his sails made the transition back to the B team difficult.
I think Kvyat still has lots to give/show but he needs the opportunity and proper support. It's a freakin' JOKE that he's out of F1 and Hartley has a seat.

My biggest wonder currently is who the hell are Toro Rosso going to have driving for them next year!!!

Kvyat performed worse than Hartley for a long time. Red Bull gave him a lot of time to try and turn things around and he failed. He doesn't deserve to be in F1 because he didn't perform well enough. He had three team mates and looked worse than all of them.

mcdo wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

mcdo wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

Toby. wrote:Red Bull are doing what they usually do - handle drivers poorly. They had a falling out with Webber because they committed everything to Vettel when he came along. They lost Vettel because they committed just about everything to Ricciardo when he came along. Now they've lost Ricciardo because they've committed just about everything to Verstappen since he's come along.

In their heads they might think they're doing the right thing, but history will show they've lost two top-tier drivers in four years over poor driver management. Some might say Vettel left because he was beaten by Ricciardo - and that's fair enough - but I don't doubt they could have done a lot more to keep him happy and with the team.

It's the same ruthless philosophy that dictates their junior program selections, but time will show keeping it as ruthless as it is in F1 - especially as a top-three team - is going to cause you some pain in time.

I don't get this rep RBR get with being harsh to young drivers. They give them more opportunities than anybody else. Ferrari have never run an academy graduate and Mclaren dumped one of the three they have had after just one season.

I think the weirdest thing is how the other teams never pick the dropped drivers up. I reckon a number of Toro Rosso's discarded juniors still had a lot to offer Formula 1. But the other teams seem to look at it as "you're not good enough for Red Bull, you're not good enough for us"

Maybe. I just think if you don't have a generous backer you have to be very good to stay in F1 and the drivers cast aside just haven't been as good as that. Vergne I would say is the pick of the bunch.

I agree about JEV. And I thought Buemi and Agluersuari were worthy of another race seat. And it's possible that another environment could have extracted more from Kvyat (that one's debatable)

I think JEV was better than both Buemi and Alguersuari. To be fair who knows how good they were as we only really saw them against each other. They could be the best two drivers of the decade or the worst two for all we know. They did have a bit of fatal combination though. An unrated team mate that could match them and a car that didn't give them an opportunity to grab headlines.

red_alert wrote:They will keep Ricciardo in the main Redbull and just make the car second best so Max handily beats him, raising Max's confidence. Or they won't and Max handily beats him. We will never know either way. But Max beating Ricciardo is the only outcome from the rest of this year.

When Hamilton decided to leave McLaren, the next 2 races his car had strange things happening like suspension bolts left loose.

Toby. wrote:Red Bull are doing what they usually do - handle drivers poorly. They had a falling out with Webber because they committed everything to Vettel when he came along. They lost Vettel because they committed just about everything to Ricciardo when he came along. Now they've lost Ricciardo because they've committed just about everything to Verstappen since he's come along.

In their heads they might think they're doing the right thing, but history will show they've lost two top-tier drivers in four years over poor driver management. Some might say Vettel left because he was beaten by Ricciardo - and that's fair enough - but I don't doubt they could have done a lot more to keep him happy and with the team.

It's the same ruthless philosophy that dictates their junior program selections, but time will show keeping it as ruthless as it is in F1 - especially as a top-three team - is going to cause you some pain in time.

How many times did they change Vettel's chassis because they couldn't understand why Ricciardo was beating him, strange way to be committing everything to Ricciardo?

mikeyg123 wrote:

F1 MERCENARY wrote:No, that bit about Kvyat ISN'T debatable in my mind.

He was doing well at Red Bull alongside Ricciardo and the demotion to a lesser, more problematic car along with losing the wind in his sails made the transition back to the B team difficult.
I think Kvyat still has lots to give/show but he needs the opportunity and proper support. It's a freakin' JOKE that he's out of F1 and Hartley has a seat.

My biggest wonder currently is who the hell are Toro Rosso going to have driving for them next year!!!

Kvyat performed worse than Hartley for a long time. Red Bull gave him a lot of time to try and turn things around and he failed. He doesn't deserve to be in F1 because he didn't perform well enough. He had three team mates and looked worse than all of them.

He was performing respectably well against Ricciardo and the initial contact with Vettel in Russia was his fault but the subsequent contact in the next series of corners was COMPLETELY down to Vettel, whom strangely slowed considerably in a HIGH ACCELERATION ZONE. Any driver giving chase as closely as Kvyat was would have smashed into him just the same. The fact that Red Bull USED that as an excuse to promote Verstappen was horse manure because Verstappen was being courted mighty heavily by other teams so they made the decision to swap their drivers from the A-Team to the B-Team so as to ensure they wouldn't lose Verstappen.

Nothing more, nothing less. In over 40 years of watching motorsport I have never seen a guy finish on the podium, only to be tossed aside 2 races later, in any series.

pokerman wrote:

red_alert wrote:They will keep Ricciardo in the main Redbull and just make the car second best so Max handily beats him, raising Max's confidence. Or they won't and Max handily beats him. We will never know either way. But Max beating Ricciardo is the only outcome from the rest of this year.

When Hamilton decided to leave McLaren, the next 2 races his car had strange things happening like suspension bolts left loose.

Unlike before he decided to leave, when McLaren were operationally perfect? They must have caught wind he was deciding to leave right at the start of the year, I guess....

F1 MERCENARY wrote:

mikeyg123 wrote:

F1 MERCENARY wrote:No, that bit about Kvyat ISN'T debatable in my mind.

He was doing well at Red Bull alongside Ricciardo and the demotion to a lesser, more problematic car along with losing the wind in his sails made the transition back to the B team difficult.
I think Kvyat still has lots to give/show but he needs the opportunity and proper support. It's a freakin' JOKE that he's out of F1 and Hartley has a seat.

My biggest wonder currently is who the hell are Toro Rosso going to have driving for them next year!!!

Kvyat performed worse than Hartley for a long time. Red Bull gave him a lot of time to try and turn things around and he failed. He doesn't deserve to be in F1 because he didn't perform well enough. He had three team mates and looked worse than all of them.

He was performing respectably well against Ricciardo and the initial contact with Vettel in Russia was his fault but the subsequent contact in the next series of corners was COMPLETELY down to Vettel, whom strangely slowed considerably in a HIGH ACCELERATION ZONE. Any driver giving chase as closely as Kvyat was would have smashed into him just the same. The fact that Red Bull USED that as an excuse to promote Verstappen was horse manure because Verstappen was being courted mighty heavily by other teams so they made the decision to swap their drivers from the A-Team to the B-Team so as to ensure they wouldn't lose Verstappen.

Nothing more, nothing less. In over 40 years of watching motorsport I have never seen a guy finish on the podium, only to be tossed aside 2 races later, in any series.

Yes, that happened and then he was given a whole 18 months to display to the F1 world that he deserved to be there and didn't. You can't dine out on what was only ever a qualified success for ever. And a driver being dumped because the team has someone better to bring in is hardly an original story.

You’re not a racing driver so you won’t ever understand. These guys drive all their lives sacrificing everything, even a normal childhood in the hopes that one day they’ll get a shot in the bigtime. Kvyat achieved that and made it to a jr team and worked diligently to impress even further and eventually was awarded the promotion to the Sr team and though it wasn’t without its hiccups, he was doing pretty well. Then one night from out of nowhere, while watching TV at home, receives a phone call letting him know he was demoted and his seat was given to Verstappen.

I ask you, would you be pleased in that scenario?

And while soooo many people rush to throw the Grow up and Mature card, and say he SHOULD just suck it up and get in with the program, just stop it. He’s a human being and he has these things called FEELINGS and NO ONE can tell me they’d have been accepting of the scenario and would have gotten on with the program. Please, I’ve been alive long enough to have not only seen this happen with others, but have endured things like this myself and regardless of what others say or think, things don’t just leave your mind and resentment is a feeling and emotion that is extremely difficult to get over.

I sincerely gets another shot to drive in F1 again. Being Vettel’s teammate is the irony in all this but maybe Ferrari can help him get into a Sauber or Haas. At least that’s my hope.

F1 MERCENARY wrote:You’re not a racing driver so you won’t ever understand. These guys drive all their lives sacrificing everything, even a normal childhood in the hopes that one day they’ll get a shot in the bigtime. Kvyat achieved that and made it to a jr team and worked diligently to impress even further and eventually was awarded the promotion to the Sr team and though it wasn’t without its hiccups, he was doing pretty well. Then one night from out of nowhere, while watching TV at home, receives a phone call letting him know he was demoted and his seat was given to Verstappen.

I ask you, would you be pleased in that scenario?

And while soooo many people rush to throw the Grow up and Mature card, and say he SHOULD just suck it up and get in with the program, just stop it. He’s a human being and he has these things called FEELINGS and NO ONE can tell me they’d have been accepting of the scenario and would have gotten on with the program. Please, I’ve been alive long enough to have not only seen this happen with others, but have endured things like this myself and regardless of what others say or think, things don’t just leave your mind and resentment is a feeling and emotion that is extremely difficult to get over.

I sincerely gets another shot to drive in F1 again. Being Vettel’s teammate is the irony in all this but maybe Ferrari can help him get into a Sauber or Haas. At least that’s my hope.

Of course I wouldn't be happy. I would be extremely disappointed in myself if it was still effecting me that much 18 months later though. A lot of drivers suffer major dissapointment at some stage. Look at Hulk. Dumped out of F1 for pay driver, Perez ditched by McLaren, Ocon beat Verstappen to F3 championship but no F1 drive etc... I could go on and on and on.

As for resentment I don't even know where to start. Red Bull as an organisation did more for Kvyat's career than anyone else ever will. They funded his way up the junior ranks, gave him a drive over Antonio Felix Da Costa who was considered favourite for the drive and then promoted him to the senior team despite getting out scored by his team mate. Red Bull gave him many more chances than most talented young drivers will ever be given. He just didn't quite take them.

You miss the point.

F1 MERCENARY wrote:You’re not a racing driver so you won’t ever understand. These guys drive all their lives sacrificing everything, even a normal childhood in the hopes that one day they’ll get a shot in the bigtime. Kvyat achieved that and made it to a jr team and worked diligently to impress even further and eventually was awarded the promotion to the Sr team and though it wasn’t without its hiccups, he was doing pretty well. Then one night from out of nowhere, while watching TV at home, receives a phone call letting him know he was demoted and his seat was given to Verstappen.

I ask you, would you be pleased in that scenario?

And while soooo many people rush to throw the Grow up and Mature card, and say he SHOULD just suck it up and get in with the program, just stop it. He’s a human being and he has these things called FEELINGS and NO ONE can tell me they’d have been accepting of the scenario and would have gotten on with the program. Please, I’ve been alive long enough to have not only seen this happen with others, but have endured things like this myself and regardless of what others say or think, things don’t just leave your mind and resentment is a feeling and emotion that is extremely difficult to get over.

I said at the time that he should have just told Red Bull **** you and refused to drive for Toro Rosso, and I still hold to that. As soon as he accepted that demotion he was done, mentally and from a career point of view.

If Red Bull tried to demote Verstappen to Toro Rosso now, can you see him actually going there?

F1 MERCENARY wrote:You miss the point.

I understand the point I'm making perfectly.