planetf1.com

Why vote for Verstappen when he nearly took himself and the race winner out at the end? It's good to try make overtakes but unnecessary contact is not good driving, just being wreckless. He really needed something extra today. He was unlucky to to pass Bottas safely in the pits I guess.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

Junglist wrote:
Crashed into Bottas in the pit lane (more so teams fault) and he had maybe 2 small lock ups behind Hamilton in the closing stages of the race and then the failed attempt to overtake. He didn’t have a bad race but I just can’t vote for him over a Lewis when Lewis literally made no mistakes whilst being pressured from Max for a large proportion of the race. I think he performed better than Max for those reasons

Of course max had to try. You win some and you lose some. If anything I was impressed by Max’s ability to be patient. He’s certainly getting more experienced.

Monaco is the easiest place on the F1 calendar to defend on. Both Sainz and Kimi also had long trains behind them where they were making themselves impossible to pass but that doesn't even get a mention. Max was having to give it all precisely because of that, whereas all Hamilton had to do was ensure he kept it on the road and stomp on the loud pedal at the exit to every corner to ensure Max couldn't get a look in. You could see that no matter how close Max got on entry to a corner he never had an answer to the Merc's grunt on exit.

Bottom line is it was easier for Hamilton to defend than it was for Max to pass. The fact that Max even got halfway close to making a move was a feat in itself. Bottas, in a car that was considerably faster than the Ferrari in front of him, never had so much as a sniff.

Anybody can make an attempt at a pass at Monaco if they are not too concerned about the outcome damaging their race ask Leclerc.

Because of course they are exactly the same situation

There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out.

He fought for a position which is more than most. At least he tried but the circuit and the Merc's traction meant it was an all but impossible task.

There was absolutely nothing special in defending in Monaco

"There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out."- pokerman

Except that that "nothing special" was about the only at the front of the race to give any excitement for the fans. As usual Monaco was a snoozefest. It is time to move on, the cars have long since passed the course by. Instead F1 gives Monte Carlo the race for free and charges so much for the rest of the schedule that the tracks need government money to survive.

Wasn't Max's finest race. Regardless of team communication he should be well aware that the probability of a car being right alongside him was high, and his move near the end was boneheaded. Nonetheless he was still strong and made things interesting.

Hamilton was spotless, making zero errors despite being much disadvantaged in the corners. I'd rather Ricciardo's predicament from the previous year around Monaco.

They both get votes from me though, and I'll drop Sainz the third.

edit: Regardin Ricc/Ham, only from the standpoint of defending position. I'm sure Ricc's car was 1000% harder to bring to the finish line, and I though Ricc's drive was better overall than Ham's this year. Both very good tho.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote: Anybody can make an attempt at a pass at Monaco if they are not too concerned about the outcome damaging their race ask Leclerc.

Because of course they are exactly the same situation

There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out.

He fought for a position which is more than most. At least he tried but the circuit and the Merc's traction meant it was an all but impossible task.

There was absolutely nothing special in defending in Monaco

You looking to turn this back on Hamilton?

Any driver can go for a dive bomb.

Blake wrote:"There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out."- pokerman

Except that that "nothing special" was about the only at the front of the race to give any excitement for the fans. As usual Monaco was a snoozefest. It is time to move on, the cars have long since passed the course by. Instead F1 gives Monte Carlo the race for free and charges so much for the rest of the schedule that the tracks need government money to survive.

Monaco is still the blue ribbon event of F1 having the biggest tv audience, I daresay bigger than the Indy 500?

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:"There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out."- pokerman

Except that that "nothing special" was about the only at the front of the race to give any excitement for the fans. As usual Monaco was a snoozefest. It is time to move on, the cars have long since passed the course by. Instead F1 gives Monte Carlo the race for free and charges so much for the rest of the schedule that the tracks need government money to survive.

Monaco is still the blue ribbon event of F1 having the biggest tv audience, I daresay bigger than the Indy 500?

It may be the blue ribbon event of F1, but that doesn't mean diddly squat when it comes to quality racing. As I said before, the sport has passed that track by...time for F1 to move on. I have no idea if the GP has a bigger audience than the 500, nor do I care. Having been at the 500 more than once when the croud was in excess of 350,000, having experienced the race weekend activities, and the great on-site racing museum...
I seriously doubt that the Monaco can challene the Indy 500 self-praising claim of being "the Greatest Spectacle in Racing". I can only imagine what it must have been like when the crouds were estimated to be in excess of half a million fans!

Sincerely, you have to experience an Indy 500 in person to really appreciate it,..the incredible speeds (turn 3 is my favorite viewing spot) and all the festivity that is what makes the true spectacle. I have been to 11 F1 races, a few NASCAR races including Watkins Glen and Talledega, The Petit LeMans, multiple US Vintage car racing Championships, NHRA National events...and I have yet to see any of them surpass the excitement of the 500s that I have been fortunate to experience.

Always some good entertainment value on here. I can just imagine the reactions if Hamilton was held up behind someone on the wrong tyre choice for 60 odd laps. Confident he would get crucified by many praising Max. Each to their own though I guess.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote: Anybody can make an attempt at a pass at Monaco if they are not too concerned about the outcome damaging their race ask Leclerc.

Because of course they are exactly the same situation

There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out.

He fought for a position which is more than most. At least he tried but the circuit and the Merc's traction meant it was an all but impossible task.

There was absolutely nothing special in defending in Monaco

You looking to turn this back on Hamilton?

Any driver can go for a dive bomb.

What? Have you even read the posts you've been responding to?

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:"There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out."- pokerman

Except that that "nothing special" was about the only at the front of the race to give any excitement for the fans. As usual Monaco was a snoozefest. It is time to move on, the cars have long since passed the course by. Instead F1 gives Monte Carlo the race for free and charges so much for the rest of the schedule that the tracks need government money to survive.

Monaco is still the blue ribbon event of F1 having the biggest tv audience, I daresay bigger than the Indy 500?

It may be the blue ribbon event of F1, but that doesn't mean diddly squat when it comes to quality racing. As I said before, the sport has passed that track by...time for F1 to move on. I have no idea if the GP has a bigger audience than the 500, nor do I care. Having been at the 500 more than once when the croud was in excess of 350,000, having experienced the race weekend activities, and the great on-site racing museum...
I seriously doubt that the Monaco can challene the Indy 500 self-praising claim of being "the Greatest Spectacle in Racing". I can only imagine what it must have been like when the crouds were estimated to be in excess of half a million fans!

Sincerely, you have to experience an Indy 500 in person to really appreciate it,..the incredible speeds (turn 3 is my favorite viewing spot) and all the festivity that is what makes the true spectacle. I have been to 11 F1 races, a few NASCAR races including Watkins Glen and Talledega, The Petit LeMans, multiple US Vintage car racing Championships, NHRA National events...and I have yet to see any of them surpass the excitement of the 500s that I have been fortunate to experience.

They're two completely different sorts of races. I thoroughly enjoyed both and found them both to be exciting at the weekend.

Rockie wrote:Maybe Max for making it worth watching.

Interesting one this.
I thought, "yes but he also has two penalty points for causing a collision". The unsafe release was the team not him, but the collision was him.

But then, collisions can make interesting watching. They almost always make the highlights reel. Perhaps we should always gives points towards drivers of the day for people who create collisions or do other interesting even if foolish things. Actually make driver of the day more about "who contributed most to the highlights reel"?

Hamilton wining about tyres when his car was superb and we know that he'd have had to make a major mistake to be overtaken - a joke - just did what was needed and seriously not driver of the day

others who did well because of pitstops - also questionable.

Max CLEARLY unsafe release and then ALSO hit Bottas multiple times - causing Bottas to have a puncture and pit again - he SHOULD have got a drive through penalty which would have dropped him to 13th ish - Marko talking about bias is IRONIC - as the BIAS supporting verstappen is unbelievable - at best he should have got the penalty of Giovenassi - seeing the latter got 10 secs for a minor collision that damaged nobody and wasn't an unsafe release - WHY won't the authorities penalise Max appropriately - it may have been more the team's fault -this time - but Max should ALSO have got a penalty for the ridiculous hit on Hamilton late when he hit Hamilton turning in with NO CHANCE of making the corner and clearly a more significant racing incident than Giovenassi - so should have been another 10 sec penalty at minimum or at least grid spot penalties in the next race - yes Marko - WHY is the FIA not penalising Max when it should? Even 4th is a gift to Max and does not deserve any sort of driver of the day

Ricciardo qualified above average, great start - and if they'd kept him out - would probably have finished 5th/6th at worst - and after losing ridiculous time with Norris slowing everyone down - pulled 38 secs on Grosjean in a superior car despite G having the same tyres but 30 laps younger - and did a fantastic last lap on tyres over 50 laps old (the same that Hamilton complained about despite NOT having to follow cars for most of his stint and damage them more) - and pinched 9th place (no doubt with G told to push things up the last laps regardless.

So Dan Ric - IMO clearly best driver of the day given his probably no better than 9th car (less two with issues) and who would have done better without the poor pitstop - none of the other contenders did that

F1Oz wrote:Hamilton wining about tyres when his car was superb and we know that he'd have had to make a major mistake to be overtaken - a joke - just did what was needed and seriously not driver of the day

others who did well because of pitstops - also questionable.

Max CLEARLY unsafe release and then ALSO hit Bottas multiple times - causing Bottas to have a puncture and pit again - he SHOULD have got a drive through penalty which would have dropped him to 13th ish - Marko talking about bias is IRONIC - as the BIAS supporting verstappen is unbelievable - at best he should have got the penalty of Giovenassi - seeing the latter got 10 secs for a minor collision that damaged nobody and wasn't an unsafe release - WHY won't the authorities penalise Max appropriately - it may have been more the team's fault -this time - but Max should ALSO have got a penalty for the ridiculous hit on Hamilton late when he hit Hamilton turning in with NO CHANCE of making the corner and clearly a more significant racing incident than Giovenassi - so should have been another 10 sec penalty at minimum or at least grid spot penalties in the next race - yes Marko - WHY is the FIA not penalising Max when it should? Even 4th is a gift to Max and does not deserve any sort of driver of the day

Ricciardo qualified above average, great start - and if they'd kept him out - would probably have finished 5th/6th at worst - and after losing ridiculous time with Norris slowing everyone down - pulled 38 secs on Grosjean in a superior car despite G having the same tyres but 30 laps younger - and did a fantastic last lap on tyres over 50 laps old (the same that Hamilton complained about despite NOT having to follow cars for most of his stint and damage them more) - and pinched 9th place (no doubt with G told to push things up the last laps regardless.

So Dan Ric - IMO clearly best driver of the day given his probably no better than 9th car (less two with issues) and who would have done better without the poor pitstop - none of the other contenders did that

I'm kind of half tongue in cheek here but I'm having a little chuckle about your post complaining about bias when you're one of the only votes for a driver who happens to be Australian!

Curious what you think of Sainz's overtake at the beginning and what you think Ricciardo did better than him overall?

Zoue wrote:

F1Oz wrote:Hamilton wining about tyres when his car was superb and we know that he'd have had to make a major mistake to be overtaken - a joke - just did what was needed and seriously not driver of the day

others who did well because of pitstops - also questionable.

Max CLEARLY unsafe release and then ALSO hit Bottas multiple times - causing Bottas to have a puncture and pit again - he SHOULD have got a drive through penalty which would have dropped him to 13th ish - Marko talking about bias is IRONIC - as the BIAS supporting verstappen is unbelievable - at best he should have got the penalty of Giovenassi - seeing the latter got 10 secs for a minor collision that damaged nobody and wasn't an unsafe release - WHY won't the authorities penalise Max appropriately - it may have been more the team's fault -this time - but Max should ALSO have got a penalty for the ridiculous hit on Hamilton late when he hit Hamilton turning in with NO CHANCE of making the corner and clearly a more significant racing incident than Giovenassi - so should have been another 10 sec penalty at minimum or at least grid spot penalties in the next race - yes Marko - WHY is the FIA not penalising Max when it should? Even 4th is a gift to Max and does not deserve any sort of driver of the day

Ricciardo qualified above average, great start - and if they'd kept him out - would probably have finished 5th/6th at worst - and after losing ridiculous time with Norris slowing everyone down - pulled 38 secs on Grosjean in a superior car despite G having the same tyres but 30 laps younger - and did a fantastic last lap on tyres over 50 laps old (the same that Hamilton complained about despite NOT having to follow cars for most of his stint and damage them more) - and pinched 9th place (no doubt with G told to push things up the last laps regardless.

So Dan Ric - IMO clearly best driver of the day given his probably no better than 9th car (less two with issues) and who would have done better without the poor pitstop - none of the other contenders did that

I'm kind of half tongue in cheek here but I'm having a little chuckle about your post complaining about bias when you're one of the only votes for a driver who happens to be Australian!

Curious what you think of Sainz's overtake at the beginning and what you think Ricciardo did better than him overall?

Haha, I was thinking the same, but decided against posting it!

Blake wrote:"There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out."- pokerman

Except that that "nothing special" was about the only at the front of the race to give any excitement for the fans. As usual Monaco was a snoozefest. It is time to move on, the cars have long since passed the course by. Instead F1 gives Monte Carlo the race for free and charges so much for the rest of the schedule that the tracks need government money to survive.

It was the best race of the year so far IMO

mcdo wrote:

Blake wrote:"There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out."- pokerman

Except that that "nothing special" was about the only at the front of the race to give any excitement for the fans. As usual Monaco was a snoozefest. It is time to move on, the cars have long since passed the course by. Instead F1 gives Monte Carlo the race for free and charges so much for the rest of the schedule that the tracks need government money to survive.

It was the best race of the year so far IMO

I'll take Bahrain so far personally but this was #2.

mcdo wrote:

Blake wrote:"There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out."- pokerman

Except that that "nothing special" was about the only at the front of the race to give any excitement for the fans. As usual Monaco was a snoozefest. It is time to move on, the cars have long since passed the course by. Instead F1 gives Monte Carlo the race for free and charges so much for the rest of the schedule that the tracks need government money to survive.

It was the best race of the year so far IMO

Then that is not saying much for F1, in my opinion.

Zoue wrote:Max for me, easily. The Merc’s monster traction meant he could get close enough where it mattered but otherwise he put immense pressure in Lewis and the engine made the difference in the end

I don't know anyone could vote for max when he almost took out both Mercedes in the race.

f1madman wrote:

Zoue wrote:Max for me, easily. The Merc’s monster traction meant he could get close enough where it mattered but otherwise he put immense pressure in Lewis and the engine made the difference in the end

I don't know anyone could vote for max when he almost took out both Mercedes in the race.

Does make more sense when you put it like that…..

f1madman wrote:

Zoue wrote:Max for me, easily. The Merc’s monster traction meant he could get close enough where it mattered but otherwise he put immense pressure in Lewis and the engine made the difference in the end

I don't know anyone could vote for max when he almost took out both Mercedes in the race.

Maybe that's a good enough reason itself,

Blake wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:"There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out."- pokerman

Except that that "nothing special" was about the only at the front of the race to give any excitement for the fans. As usual Monaco was a snoozefest. It is time to move on, the cars have long since passed the course by. Instead F1 gives Monte Carlo the race for free and charges so much for the rest of the schedule that the tracks need government money to survive.

Monaco is still the blue ribbon event of F1 having the biggest tv audience, I daresay bigger than the Indy 500?

It may be the blue ribbon event of F1, but that doesn't mean diddly squat when it comes to quality racing. As I said before, the sport has passed that track by...time for F1 to move on. I have no idea if the GP has a bigger audience than the 500, nor do I care. Having been at the 500 more than once when the croud was in excess of 350,000, having experienced the race weekend activities, and the great on-site racing museum...
I seriously doubt that the Monaco can challene the Indy 500 self-praising claim of being "the Greatest Spectacle in Racing". I can only imagine what it must have been like when the crouds were estimated to be in excess of half a million fans!

Sincerely, you have to experience an Indy 500 in person to really appreciate it,..the incredible speeds (turn 3 is my favorite viewing spot) and all the festivity that is what makes the true spectacle. I have been to 11 F1 races, a few NASCAR races including Watkins Glen and Talledega, The Petit LeMans, multiple US Vintage car racing Championships, NHRA National events...and I have yet to see any of them surpass the excitement of the 500s that I have been fortunate to experience.

Apparently to truly appreciate Monaco you have to be there as well, you don't care if Monaco has a far bigger tv audience and the race should be scrapped, well I've watched about 2 Indy 500's in the past 15/20 years whilst I've watched all the Monaco GP's in the same period, we have to appreciate the Indy 500 because of it's tradition but for me it's not much more than just another oval race.

I enjoyed the Monaco race more but then I had more of a vested interest in who actually won the race, I guess it's all horses for courses?

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote: Because of course they are exactly the same situation

There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out.

He fought for a position which is more than most. At least he tried but the circuit and the Merc's traction meant it was an all but impossible task.

There was absolutely nothing special in defending in Monaco

You looking to turn this back on Hamilton?

Any driver can go for a dive bomb.

What? Have you even read the posts you've been responding to?

Fair enough posts get hidden now, but I'm not the one looking to champion Hamilton just questioning your take on Verstappen's dive bomb.

iano wrote:

Rockie wrote:Maybe Max for making it worth watching.

Interesting one this.
I thought, "yes but he also has two penalty points for causing a collision". The unsafe release was the team not him, but the collision was him.

But then, collisions can make interesting watching. They almost always make the highlights reel. Perhaps we should always gives points towards drivers of the day for people who create collisions or do other interesting even if foolish things. Actually make driver of the day more about "who contributed most to the highlights reel"?

It's interesting on the DoTD awards Verstappen placed first and Leclerc third, maybe there should be a campaign to get Maldonado back into F1 if that's what people clamour for?

Zoue wrote:

F1Oz wrote:Hamilton wining about tyres when his car was superb and we know that he'd have had to make a major mistake to be overtaken - a joke - just did what was needed and seriously not driver of the day

others who did well because of pitstops - also questionable.

Max CLEARLY unsafe release and then ALSO hit Bottas multiple times - causing Bottas to have a puncture and pit again - he SHOULD have got a drive through penalty which would have dropped him to 13th ish - Marko talking about bias is IRONIC - as the BIAS supporting verstappen is unbelievable - at best he should have got the penalty of Giovenassi - seeing the latter got 10 secs for a minor collision that damaged nobody and wasn't an unsafe release - WHY won't the authorities penalise Max appropriately - it may have been more the team's fault -this time - but Max should ALSO have got a penalty for the ridiculous hit on Hamilton late when he hit Hamilton turning in with NO CHANCE of making the corner and clearly a more significant racing incident than Giovenassi - so should have been another 10 sec penalty at minimum or at least grid spot penalties in the next race - yes Marko - WHY is the FIA not penalising Max when it should? Even 4th is a gift to Max and does not deserve any sort of driver of the day

Ricciardo qualified above average, great start - and if they'd kept him out - would probably have finished 5th/6th at worst - and after losing ridiculous time with Norris slowing everyone down - pulled 38 secs on Grosjean in a superior car despite G having the same tyres but 30 laps younger - and did a fantastic last lap on tyres over 50 laps old (the same that Hamilton complained about despite NOT having to follow cars for most of his stint and damage them more) - and pinched 9th place (no doubt with G told to push things up the last laps regardless.

So Dan Ric - IMO clearly best driver of the day given his probably no better than 9th car (less two with issues) and who would have done better without the poor pitstop - none of the other contenders did that

I'm kind of half tongue in cheek here but I'm having a little chuckle about your post complaining about bias when you're one of the only votes for a driver who happens to be Australian!

Curious what you think of Sainz's overtake at the beginning and what you think Ricciardo did better than him overall?

Why shouldn't Ricciardo be considered DoTD, he was running best of the rest until Renault did for him with strategy?

Blake wrote:

f1madman wrote:

Zoue wrote:Max for me, easily. The Merc’s monster traction meant he could get close enough where it mattered but otherwise he put immense pressure in Lewis and the engine made the difference in the end

I don't know anyone could vote for max when he almost took out both Mercedes in the race.

Maybe that's a good enough reason itself,

I think you jest but I bet there was a few willing Verstappen to go for it unconcerned about any consequence?

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:

f1madman wrote:

Zoue wrote:Max for me, easily. The Merc’s monster traction meant he could get close enough where it mattered but otherwise he put immense pressure in Lewis and the engine made the difference in the end

I don't know anyone could vote for max when he almost took out both Mercedes in the race.

Maybe that's a good enough reason itself,

I think you jest but I bet there was a few willing Verstappen to go for it unconcerned about any consequence?

Yes, including absolutely everyone who wasn't a Mercedes fan. The belief that Max would go for it at some point was what created tension in the race. If it had been anyone else behind Lewis, that race would have been dead at the halfway point.

Siao7 wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1Oz wrote:Hamilton wining about tyres when his car was superb and we know that he'd have had to make a major mistake to be overtaken - a joke - just did what was needed and seriously not driver of the day

others who did well because of pitstops - also questionable.

Max CLEARLY unsafe release and then ALSO hit Bottas multiple times - causing Bottas to have a puncture and pit again - he SHOULD have got a drive through penalty which would have dropped him to 13th ish - Marko talking about bias is IRONIC - as the BIAS supporting verstappen is unbelievable - at best he should have got the penalty of Giovenassi - seeing the latter got 10 secs for a minor collision that damaged nobody and wasn't an unsafe release - WHY won't the authorities penalise Max appropriately - it may have been more the team's fault -this time - but Max should ALSO have got a penalty for the ridiculous hit on Hamilton late when he hit Hamilton turning in with NO CHANCE of making the corner and clearly a more significant racing incident than Giovenassi - so should have been another 10 sec penalty at minimum or at least grid spot penalties in the next race - yes Marko - WHY is the FIA not penalising Max when it should? Even 4th is a gift to Max and does not deserve any sort of driver of the day

Ricciardo qualified above average, great start - and if they'd kept him out - would probably have finished 5th/6th at worst - and after losing ridiculous time with Norris slowing everyone down - pulled 38 secs on Grosjean in a superior car despite G having the same tyres but 30 laps younger - and did a fantastic last lap on tyres over 50 laps old (the same that Hamilton complained about despite NOT having to follow cars for most of his stint and damage them more) - and pinched 9th place (no doubt with G told to push things up the last laps regardless.

So Dan Ric - IMO clearly best driver of the day given his probably no better than 9th car (less two with issues) and who would have done better without the poor pitstop - none of the other contenders did that

I'm kind of half tongue in cheek here but I'm having a little chuckle about your post complaining about bias when you're one of the only votes for a driver who happens to be Australian!

Curious what you think of Sainz's overtake at the beginning and what you think Ricciardo did better than him overall?

Haha, I was thinking the same, but decided against posting it!

Don't forget the obligatory bashing of any current or past teammate of Ricciardo's.

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1Oz wrote:Hamilton wining about tyres when his car was superb and we know that he'd have had to make a major mistake to be overtaken - a joke - just did what was needed and seriously not driver of the day

others who did well because of pitstops - also questionable.

Max CLEARLY unsafe release and then ALSO hit Bottas multiple times - causing Bottas to have a puncture and pit again - he SHOULD have got a drive through penalty which would have dropped him to 13th ish - Marko talking about bias is IRONIC - as the BIAS supporting verstappen is unbelievable - at best he should have got the penalty of Giovenassi - seeing the latter got 10 secs for a minor collision that damaged nobody and wasn't an unsafe release - WHY won't the authorities penalise Max appropriately - it may have been more the team's fault -this time - but Max should ALSO have got a penalty for the ridiculous hit on Hamilton late when he hit Hamilton turning in with NO CHANCE of making the corner and clearly a more significant racing incident than Giovenassi - so should have been another 10 sec penalty at minimum or at least grid spot penalties in the next race - yes Marko - WHY is the FIA not penalising Max when it should? Even 4th is a gift to Max and does not deserve any sort of driver of the day

Ricciardo qualified above average, great start - and if they'd kept him out - would probably have finished 5th/6th at worst - and after losing ridiculous time with Norris slowing everyone down - pulled 38 secs on Grosjean in a superior car despite G having the same tyres but 30 laps younger - and did a fantastic last lap on tyres over 50 laps old (the same that Hamilton complained about despite NOT having to follow cars for most of his stint and damage them more) - and pinched 9th place (no doubt with G told to push things up the last laps regardless.

So Dan Ric - IMO clearly best driver of the day given his probably no better than 9th car (less two with issues) and who would have done better without the poor pitstop - none of the other contenders did that

I'm kind of half tongue in cheek here but I'm having a little chuckle about your post complaining about bias when you're one of the only votes for a driver who happens to be Australian!

Curious what you think of Sainz's overtake at the beginning and what you think Ricciardo did better than him overall?

Why shouldn't Ricciardo be considered DoTD, he was running best of the rest until Renault did for him with strategy?

I didn't say he shouldn't be considered, I was asking what he did specifically that was better than e.g. Sainz?

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:There was nothing special in what Verstappen did like you are trying to make out.

He fought for a position which is more than most. At least he tried but the circuit and the Merc's traction meant it was an all but impossible task.

There was absolutely nothing special in defending in Monaco

You looking to turn this back on Hamilton?

Any driver can go for a dive bomb.

What? Have you even read the posts you've been responding to?

Fair enough posts get hidden now, but I'm not the one looking to champion Hamilton just questioning your take on Verstappen's dive bomb.

I think the only reason you're upset about it is because it was against Hamilton, tbh. Max tried a move and it didn't pay off. As I said at least he tried and as others have pointed out if he hadn't then it would have been a pretty boring race.

In fact I'd say that this race demonstrates why number of overtakes shouldn't be the holy grail in determining good racing. Max didn't succeed, but the tension that built up around the possibility that he might was what made the race interesting. Vettel and Bottas had more technically perfect drives but you wouldn't exactly say either of them were racing, as such. They were just completing laps. I'd rather have had the Max/Lewis scenario than one where Max powers past unopposed with the benefit of DRS.

f1madman wrote:

Zoue wrote:Max for me, easily. The Merc’s monster traction meant he could get close enough where it mattered but otherwise he put immense pressure in Lewis and the engine made the difference in the end

I don't know anyone could vote for max when he almost took out both Mercedes in the race.

Because he was one of the only ones actually racing, as opposed to simply driving around in circles.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote: He fought for a position which is more than most. At least he tried but the circuit and the Merc's traction meant it was an all but impossible task.

There was absolutely nothing special in defending in Monaco

You looking to turn this back on Hamilton?

Any driver can go for a dive bomb.

What? Have you even read the posts you've been responding to?

Fair enough posts get hidden now, but I'm not the one looking to champion Hamilton just questioning your take on Verstappen's dive bomb.

I think the only reason you're upset about it is because it was against Hamilton, tbh. Max tried a move and it didn't pay off. As I said at least he tried and as others have pointed out if he hadn't then it would have been a pretty boring race.

In fact I'd say that this race demonstrates why number of overtakes shouldn't be the holy grail in determining good racing. Max didn't succeed, but the tension that built up around the possibility that he might was what made the race interesting. Vettel and Bottas had more technically perfect drives but you wouldn't exactly say either of them were racing, as such. They were just completing laps. I'd rather have had the Max/Lewis scenario than one where Max powers past unopposed with the benefit of DRS.

Agree with this 100%.

I didn't vote for Max but at least he actually tried to do something.

Covalent wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1Oz wrote:Hamilton wining about tyres when his car was superb and we know that he'd have had to make a major mistake to be overtaken - a joke - just did what was needed and seriously not driver of the day

others who did well because of pitstops - also questionable.

Max CLEARLY unsafe release and then ALSO hit Bottas multiple times - causing Bottas to have a puncture and pit again - he SHOULD have got a drive through penalty which would have dropped him to 13th ish - Marko talking about bias is IRONIC - as the BIAS supporting verstappen is unbelievable - at best he should have got the penalty of Giovenassi - seeing the latter got 10 secs for a minor collision that damaged nobody and wasn't an unsafe release - WHY won't the authorities penalise Max appropriately - it may have been more the team's fault -this time - but Max should ALSO have got a penalty for the ridiculous hit on Hamilton late when he hit Hamilton turning in with NO CHANCE of making the corner and clearly a more significant racing incident than Giovenassi - so should have been another 10 sec penalty at minimum or at least grid spot penalties in the next race - yes Marko - WHY is the FIA not penalising Max when it should? Even 4th is a gift to Max and does not deserve any sort of driver of the day

Ricciardo qualified above average, great start - and if they'd kept him out - would probably have finished 5th/6th at worst - and after losing ridiculous time with Norris slowing everyone down - pulled 38 secs on Grosjean in a superior car despite G having the same tyres but 30 laps younger - and did a fantastic last lap on tyres over 50 laps old (the same that Hamilton complained about despite NOT having to follow cars for most of his stint and damage them more) - and pinched 9th place (no doubt with G told to push things up the last laps regardless.

So Dan Ric - IMO clearly best driver of the day given his probably no better than 9th car (less two with issues) and who would have done better without the poor pitstop - none of the other contenders did that

I'm kind of half tongue in cheek here but I'm having a little chuckle about your post complaining about bias when you're one of the only votes for a driver who happens to be Australian!

Curious what you think of Sainz's overtake at the beginning and what you think Ricciardo did better than him overall?

Haha, I was thinking the same, but decided against posting it!

Don't forget the obligatory bashing of any current or past teammate of Ricciardo's.

Naaah, everyone loves Hulk!

mikeyg123 wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote: You looking to turn this back on Hamilton?

Any driver can go for a dive bomb.

What? Have you even read the posts you've been responding to?

Fair enough posts get hidden now, but I'm not the one looking to champion Hamilton just questioning your take on Verstappen's dive bomb.

I think the only reason you're upset about it is because it was against Hamilton, tbh. Max tried a move and it didn't pay off. As I said at least he tried and as others have pointed out if he hadn't then it would have been a pretty boring race.

In fact I'd say that this race demonstrates why number of overtakes shouldn't be the holy grail in determining good racing. Max didn't succeed, but the tension that built up around the possibility that he might was what made the race interesting. Vettel and Bottas had more technically perfect drives but you wouldn't exactly say either of them were racing, as such. They were just completing laps. I'd rather have had the Max/Lewis scenario than one where Max powers past unopposed with the benefit of DRS.

Agree with this 100%.

I didn't vote for Max but at least he actually tried to do something.

That's true, I considered that, but left him out for the move on Bottas. The last charge on Hamilton I didn't mind, that was racing incident and in fairness it didn't damage anyone's car, didn't take Hamilton out either. But the move on Bottas was unnecessary and did cost Bottas. So in my view he would have been DOTD if he didn't have the pit lane incident.

Siao7 wrote:

Covalent wrote:

Siao7 wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1Oz wrote:Hamilton wining about tyres when his car was superb and we know that he'd have had to make a major mistake to be overtaken - a joke - just did what was needed and seriously not driver of the day

others who did well because of pitstops - also questionable.

Max CLEARLY unsafe release and then ALSO hit Bottas multiple times - causing Bottas to have a puncture and pit again - he SHOULD have got a drive through penalty which would have dropped him to 13th ish - Marko talking about bias is IRONIC - as the BIAS supporting verstappen is unbelievable - at best he should have got the penalty of Giovenassi - seeing the latter got 10 secs for a minor collision that damaged nobody and wasn't an unsafe release - WHY won't the authorities penalise Max appropriately - it may have been more the team's fault -this time - but Max should ALSO have got a penalty for the ridiculous hit on Hamilton late when he hit Hamilton turning in with NO CHANCE of making the corner and clearly a more significant racing incident than Giovenassi - so should have been another 10 sec penalty at minimum or at least grid spot penalties in the next race - yes Marko - WHY is the FIA not penalising Max when it should? Even 4th is a gift to Max and does not deserve any sort of driver of the day

Ricciardo qualified above average, great start - and if they'd kept him out - would probably have finished 5th/6th at worst - and after losing ridiculous time with Norris slowing everyone down - pulled 38 secs on Grosjean in a superior car despite G having the same tyres but 30 laps younger - and did a fantastic last lap on tyres over 50 laps old (the same that Hamilton complained about despite NOT having to follow cars for most of his stint and damage them more) - and pinched 9th place (no doubt with G told to push things up the last laps regardless.

So Dan Ric - IMO clearly best driver of the day given his probably no better than 9th car (less two with issues) and who would have done better without the poor pitstop - none of the other contenders did that

I'm kind of half tongue in cheek here but I'm having a little chuckle about your post complaining about bias when you're one of the only votes for a driver who happens to be Australian!

Curious what you think of Sainz's overtake at the beginning and what you think Ricciardo did better than him overall?

Haha, I was thinking the same, but decided against posting it!

Don't forget the obligatory bashing of any current or past teammate of Ricciardo's.

Naaah, everyone loves Hulk!

That's true, at least thus far.

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:

f1madman wrote:

Zoue wrote:Max for me, easily. The Merc’s monster traction meant he could get close enough where it mattered but otherwise he put immense pressure in Lewis and the engine made the difference in the end

I don't know anyone could vote for max when he almost took out both Mercedes in the race.

Maybe that's a good enough reason itself,

I think you jest but I bet there was a few willing Verstappen to go for it unconcerned about any consequence?

Yes, including absolutely everyone who wasn't a Mercedes fan. The belief that Max would go for it at some point was what created tension in the race. If it had been anyone else behind Lewis, that race would have been dead at the halfway point.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1Oz wrote:Hamilton wining about tyres when his car was superb and we know that he'd have had to make a major mistake to be overtaken - a joke - just did what was needed and seriously not driver of the day

others who did well because of pitstops - also questionable.

Max CLEARLY unsafe release and then ALSO hit Bottas multiple times - causing Bottas to have a puncture and pit again - he SHOULD have got a drive through penalty which would have dropped him to 13th ish - Marko talking about bias is IRONIC - as the BIAS supporting verstappen is unbelievable - at best he should have got the penalty of Giovenassi - seeing the latter got 10 secs for a minor collision that damaged nobody and wasn't an unsafe release - WHY won't the authorities penalise Max appropriately - it may have been more the team's fault -this time - but Max should ALSO have got a penalty for the ridiculous hit on Hamilton late when he hit Hamilton turning in with NO CHANCE of making the corner and clearly a more significant racing incident than Giovenassi - so should have been another 10 sec penalty at minimum or at least grid spot penalties in the next race - yes Marko - WHY is the FIA not penalising Max when it should? Even 4th is a gift to Max and does not deserve any sort of driver of the day

Ricciardo qualified above average, great start - and if they'd kept him out - would probably have finished 5th/6th at worst - and after losing ridiculous time with Norris slowing everyone down - pulled 38 secs on Grosjean in a superior car despite G having the same tyres but 30 laps younger - and did a fantastic last lap on tyres over 50 laps old (the same that Hamilton complained about despite NOT having to follow cars for most of his stint and damage them more) - and pinched 9th place (no doubt with G told to push things up the last laps regardless.

So Dan Ric - IMO clearly best driver of the day given his probably no better than 9th car (less two with issues) and who would have done better without the poor pitstop - none of the other contenders did that

I'm kind of half tongue in cheek here but I'm having a little chuckle about your post complaining about bias when you're one of the only votes for a driver who happens to be Australian!

Curious what you think of Sainz's overtake at the beginning and what you think Ricciardo did better than him overall?

Why shouldn't Ricciardo be considered DoTD, he was running best of the rest until Renault did for him with strategy?

I didn't say he shouldn't be considered, I was asking what he did specifically that was better than e.g. Sainz?

Nabbed Magnussen off the line. And towards the end of the race he got a hurry on and rapidly closed the gap to Grosjean, knowing that Grosjean was due a 5 sec penalty

Dan and KMag pitted together. Dan finished the race 9th, KMag 14th (12th on the road). He had a really good race

mcdo wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1Oz wrote:Hamilton wining about tyres when his car was superb and we know that he'd have had to make a major mistake to be overtaken - a joke - just did what was needed and seriously not driver of the day

others who did well because of pitstops - also questionable.

Max CLEARLY unsafe release and then ALSO hit Bottas multiple times - causing Bottas to have a puncture and pit again - he SHOULD have got a drive through penalty which would have dropped him to 13th ish - Marko talking about bias is IRONIC - as the BIAS supporting verstappen is unbelievable - at best he should have got the penalty of Giovenassi - seeing the latter got 10 secs for a minor collision that damaged nobody and wasn't an unsafe release - WHY won't the authorities penalise Max appropriately - it may have been more the team's fault -this time - but Max should ALSO have got a penalty for the ridiculous hit on Hamilton late when he hit Hamilton turning in with NO CHANCE of making the corner and clearly a more significant racing incident than Giovenassi - so should have been another 10 sec penalty at minimum or at least grid spot penalties in the next race - yes Marko - WHY is the FIA not penalising Max when it should? Even 4th is a gift to Max and does not deserve any sort of driver of the day

Ricciardo qualified above average, great start - and if they'd kept him out - would probably have finished 5th/6th at worst - and after losing ridiculous time with Norris slowing everyone down - pulled 38 secs on Grosjean in a superior car despite G having the same tyres but 30 laps younger - and did a fantastic last lap on tyres over 50 laps old (the same that Hamilton complained about despite NOT having to follow cars for most of his stint and damage them more) - and pinched 9th place (no doubt with G told to push things up the last laps regardless.

So Dan Ric - IMO clearly best driver of the day given his probably no better than 9th car (less two with issues) and who would have done better without the poor pitstop - none of the other contenders did that

I'm kind of half tongue in cheek here but I'm having a little chuckle about your post complaining about bias when you're one of the only votes for a driver who happens to be Australian!

Curious what you think of Sainz's overtake at the beginning and what you think Ricciardo did better than him overall?

Why shouldn't Ricciardo be considered DoTD, he was running best of the rest until Renault did for him with strategy?

I didn't say he shouldn't be considered, I was asking what he did specifically that was better than e.g. Sainz?

Nabbed Magnussen off the line. And towards the end of the race he got a hurry on and rapidly closed the gap to Grosjean, knowing that Grosjean was due a 5 sec penalty

Dan and KMag pitted together. Dan finished the race 9th, KMag 14th (12th on the road). He had a really good race

Think Sainz's double pass on Albon and Kvyat was better personally. And he finished best of the rest which was pretty special.

Exediron wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Blake wrote:

f1madman wrote:

Zoue wrote:Max for me, easily. The Merc’s monster traction meant he could get close enough where it mattered but otherwise he put immense pressure in Lewis and the engine made the difference in the end

I don't know anyone could vote for max when he almost took out both Mercedes in the race.

Maybe that's a good enough reason itself,

I think you jest but I bet there was a few willing Verstappen to go for it unconcerned about any consequence?

Yes, including absolutely everyone who wasn't a Mercedes fan. The belief that Max would go for it at some point was what created tension in the race. If it had been anyone else behind Lewis, that race would have been dead at the halfway point.

...and conversely gave him DoTD because he went for it?

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

F1Oz wrote:Hamilton wining about tyres when his car was superb and we know that he'd have had to make a major mistake to be overtaken - a joke - just did what was needed and seriously not driver of the day

others who did well because of pitstops - also questionable.

Max CLEARLY unsafe release and then ALSO hit Bottas multiple times - causing Bottas to have a puncture and pit again - he SHOULD have got a drive through penalty which would have dropped him to 13th ish - Marko talking about bias is IRONIC - as the BIAS supporting verstappen is unbelievable - at best he should have got the penalty of Giovenassi - seeing the latter got 10 secs for a minor collision that damaged nobody and wasn't an unsafe release - WHY won't the authorities penalise Max appropriately - it may have been more the team's fault -this time - but Max should ALSO have got a penalty for the ridiculous hit on Hamilton late when he hit Hamilton turning in with NO CHANCE of making the corner and clearly a more significant racing incident than Giovenassi - so should have been another 10 sec penalty at minimum or at least grid spot penalties in the next race - yes Marko - WHY is the FIA not penalising Max when it should? Even 4th is a gift to Max and does not deserve any sort of driver of the day

Ricciardo qualified above average, great start - and if they'd kept him out - would probably have finished 5th/6th at worst - and after losing ridiculous time with Norris slowing everyone down - pulled 38 secs on Grosjean in a superior car despite G having the same tyres but 30 laps younger - and did a fantastic last lap on tyres over 50 laps old (the same that Hamilton complained about despite NOT having to follow cars for most of his stint and damage them more) - and pinched 9th place (no doubt with G told to push things up the last laps regardless.

So Dan Ric - IMO clearly best driver of the day given his probably no better than 9th car (less two with issues) and who would have done better without the poor pitstop - none of the other contenders did that

I'm kind of half tongue in cheek here but I'm having a little chuckle about your post complaining about bias when you're one of the only votes for a driver who happens to be Australian!

Curious what you think of Sainz's overtake at the beginning and what you think Ricciardo did better than him overall?

Why shouldn't Ricciardo be considered DoTD, he was running best of the rest until Renault did for him with strategy?

I didn't say he shouldn't be considered, I was asking what he did specifically that was better than e.g. Sainz?

He was beating Sainz fair and square before Renault did for him with strategy, I voted for Sainz but I can fully understand someone voting for Ricciardo and that being far from biased.

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote:

pokerman wrote:

Zoue wrote: He fought for a position which is more than most. At least he tried but the circuit and the Merc's traction meant it was an all but impossible task.

There was absolutely nothing special in defending in Monaco

You looking to turn this back on Hamilton?

Any driver can go for a dive bomb.

What? Have you even read the posts you've been responding to?

Fair enough posts get hidden now, but I'm not the one looking to champion Hamilton just questioning your take on Verstappen's dive bomb.

I think the only reason you're upset about it is because it was against Hamilton, tbh. Max tried a move and it didn't pay off. As I said at least he tried and as others have pointed out if he hadn't then it would have been a pretty boring race.

In fact I'd say that this race demonstrates why number of overtakes shouldn't be the holy grail in determining good racing. Max didn't succeed, but the tension that built up around the possibility that he might was what made the race interesting. Vettel and Bottas had more technically perfect drives but you wouldn't exactly say either of them were racing, as such. They were just completing laps. I'd rather have had the Max/Lewis scenario than one where Max powers past unopposed with the benefit of DRS.

I only highlighted your reasoning, how about getting 2 penalty points on your license for what the stewards stated as causing an avoidable accident in the pit lane were he damaged his opponents car, ordinarily that would exempt him from the vote?