Posts by graniteharbor502

cosmicmoose2 said:My whole thing is that I don't give a damn about sector times, and I definitely don't treat them like some crystal ball for probability. You have to drive the entire lap—all three sectors—before you can even start guessing who lands where. If we don't look at it that way, then there's no limit to the endless guessing and theorizing, right?
Look, Max could be half a second faster in Sector 1, but then he hits a massive patch of debris or something in Sector 2 or 3 and ends up with a lockup... suddenly that lap isn't a front-runner anymore.
Impossible? An extreme example? Science fiction? Well, guess what? That’s basically exactly what happened to Perez during the race.

But even if I played by your rules, let's be real: Max's lead over Sainz and Perez in Sector 1 wasn't so massive that it couldn't just vanish in the next two sectors. And just because those two had a slower first sector doesn't mean they were doomed to lose ground in the rest of the lap.

In the opening round at the start of Q3, Perez was faster than Max by 0.088 seconds in the first sector, but by the end of the lap, he was trailing by 0.037 seconds. Consequently, Max was faster through the remainder of the track and had to compensate for the deficit incurred in that first sector, which, as we observed, he successfully did.
What strikes me as particularly ironic in this entire narrative is the notion that Perez committed an error and was somehow rewarded for it. It is highly probable, based on all available indicators, that Max would have driven a faster lap than Perez regardless. Of course, one could argue that aliens might have descended from the heavens to abduct the Formula 1 drivers, but when one draws the final line, the most likely scenario is that Max would have finished ahead of Perez.

stormybadger8 said:Not even close. 🙂🤣

Look, it’s one thing being noticeably slower than Leclerc (since the Ferrari was clearly the faster car compared to the RB), but it’s a massive problem that he was significantly slower than Perez...

If you actually think you're fighting for a championship, getting beaten in Monaco qualifying by your own teammate—especially a teammate who usually struggles in qualifying—is honestly unacceptable.
Go ahead and keep singing those little songs about how Max was the fastest in Monaco qualifying if it makes you feel better. Maybe one day you'll actually believe it yourself...
But don't worry, I'm sure nobody else on the planet is going to buy into that nonsense.

A gap of 37 thousandths is a massive difference in this sport. 🤦

stormybadger8 said:Not even close. 🙂🤣

Look, it’s one thing being noticeably slower than Leclerc (since the Ferrari was clearly the faster car compared to the RB), but it’s a massive problem that he was significantly slower than Perez...

If you actually think you're fighting for a championship, getting beaten in Monaco qualifying by your own teammate—especially a teammate who usually struggles in qualifying—is honestly unacceptable.
Go ahead and keep singing those little songs about how Max was the fastest in Monaco qualifying if it makes you feel better. Maybe one day you'll actually believe it yourself...
But don't worry, I'm sure nobody else on the planet is going to buy into that nonsense.

Where on earth was I ever singing about Max Verstappen being the fastest in the Monaco qualifying? 🙄

Where on earth is that fan Nevenko when you actually need him most?

cosmicmoose2 said:Man, sometimes it’s just impossible to talk to you. "Max wasn't slower in qualifying" but he ended up in fourth? Seriously? Even Christian Horner admitted that grabbing pole wasn't even realistic for Red Bull this weekend. And she's got all the telemetry right there! But sure, in your head, Max would have just cruised into first place. Not the whole weekend leading up to that, not this entire season, and certainly not Horner... none of that supports your little "what if" fantasy.

The user above is making some points. In Monaco, track position is everything, and Max had a rough qualifying session. Those slow laps don't matter much when he basically put himself in 4th place. On the flip side, Leclerc killed it in qualifying and took pole, but ended up 4th because of the team, not because he was 2 or 3 seconds off in tough conditions.

Anyway, this whole argument started over who's really to blame for Leclerc finishing 4th. Honestly, I think it's obvious the Pitwall played the deciding role here. Let's just end the debate there.

Does this support the idea:

cosmicmoose2 said:Man, sometimes it’s just impossible to talk to you. "Max wasn't slower in qualifying" but he ended up in fourth? Seriously? Even Christian Horner admitted that grabbing pole wasn't even realistic for Red Bull this weekend. And she's got all the telemetry right there! But sure, in your head, Max would have just cruised into first place. Not the whole weekend leading up to that, not this entire season, and certainly not Horner... none of that supports your little "what if" fantasy.

The user above is making some points. In Monaco, track position is everything, and Max had a rough qualifying session. Those slow laps don't matter much when he basically put himself in 4th place. On the flip side, Leclerc killed it in qualifying and took pole, but ended up 4th because of the team, not because he was 2 or 3 seconds off in tough conditions.

Anyway, this whole argument started over who's really to blame for Leclerc finishing 4th. Honestly, I think it's obvious the Pitwall played the deciding role here. Let's just end the debate there.

He finished behind Max because of his own slower lap times. The Pitwall cost him first and second place, but he effectively threw away third place himself.

hiddensailor7 said:I disagree. He didn't pass him because Alex Albon intentionally held his ground, probably thinking he couldn't hold him off long-term due to the tire offset. This is his actual quote:

Alex Albon tried to stay ahead of Charles Leclerc after Coming out of The pits this Sunday in Monaco. The Williams F1 driver thought he could break away from the Ferrari, as he had just fitted slicks, while the Ferrari was shod on intermediate tyres.

The Thai confirms that he thought he could get ahead, but he eventually blocked the Ferrari from the Fairmont Hotel hairpin to Sainte Devote on the next lap, when he shot straight into the loophole, which angered Leclerc.

"Come on Alex", he first said on the radio, before getting angry: "What the fuck?" After The EXIT of The Williams, the Monegasque just yelled "Oh! Damn!" in the radio, but his friend denies having acted badly.

"It's tricky because we started on slicks and we had a big pace advantage," explained Alex Albon. "It would have taken me three corners to let him pass and then I would have been quick enough to pass him again."

I guess Max would have likely beaten Carlos Sainz in qualifying if those red flags hadn't popped up, especially since Sainz had such a rough first sector in that final attempt. He was within half a second of Perez, but he wasn't even close to Leclerc.🍿

As the saying goes, it's not about what happened, but how it looks after the fact.🙄
Why don't you go watch the onboard footage of Leclerc's lap following Alex Albon?
But that isn't the only factor either; Leclerc's in-laps and out-laps were actually slower than Max's. He really needed to find more pace there.

hiddensailor7 said:I disagree. He didn't pass him because Alex Albon intentionally held his ground, probably thinking he couldn't hold him off long-term due to the tire offset. This is his actual quote:

Alex Albon tried to stay ahead of Charles Leclerc after Coming out of The pits this Sunday in Monaco. The Williams F1 driver thought he could break away from the Ferrari, as he had just fitted slicks, while the Ferrari was shod on intermediate tyres.

The Thai confirms that he thought he could get ahead, but he eventually blocked the Ferrari from the Fairmont Hotel hairpin to Sainte Devote on the next lap, when he shot straight into the loophole, which angered Leclerc.

"Come on Alex", he first said on the radio, before getting angry: "What the fuck?" After The EXIT of The Williams, the Monegasque just yelled "Oh! Damn!" in the radio, but his friend denies having acted badly.

"It's tricky because we started on slicks and we had a big pace advantage," explained Alex Albon. "It would have taken me three corners to let him pass and then I would have been quick enough to pass him again."

I guess Max would have likely beaten Carlos Sainz in qualifying if those red flags hadn't popped up, especially since Sainz had such a rough first sector in that final attempt. He was within half a second of Perez, but he wasn't even close to Leclerc.🍿

He had managed to get his tires up to the ideal temperature, which is precisely why he exited the pits when he did. It is highly probable that he would have shaved more time off his lap and secured either second or third place. Honestly, if he had taken second, I suspect he still would have fought his way to victory, given the sheer pace he displayed during those decisive laps of the race. Sergio Perez mentioned that he couldn't get his tires up to temp on that final lap, so it would have been a struggle for him to improve his standing.

cosmicmoose2 said:Old man's talking nonsense again:
https://racingnews365.com/marko-beli...fying-incident

Helmut Marko thinks Leclerc should’ve been slapped with a massive penalty just because he bypassed the scales... seriously?

Isn't this just a perfect illustration of everything that feels broken within F1? We constantly see penalties being handed out for these trivialities that have absolutely nothing to do with actual racing on the track. Does anyone actually care if Leclerc missed the scale? If he did, then fine, let them slap him with a fine, but why on earth should they be handing out grid penalties for something like that?

darkmarlin16 said:But when did they actually start counting laps? And why on earth were there only two warm-up laps?

The whole thing just felt incredibly sloppy to me, honestly.

They could've at least managed to put a clock on the screen.

The session began behind the safety car at 16:05—there was an announcement during the broadcast—and, as we know, the decision regarding when the SC clears the track rests entirely with the race directors.

cosmicmoose2 said:Actually, even Leclerc didn't have totally clear air—he was stuck behind that Williams for quite a while too. And get this, just like what happened later with Sainz, that Williams wouldn't budge, even after being waved through with blue flags multiple times. It's ridiculous...
That's why you have to wonder if he ever even got those intermediates up to the right temperature.
Leclerc's tires barely even warmed up before he was hauled into the pits again. That's another massive blunder by the team. If they were going to do that, they should've just skipped the intermediates entirely, especially since Ferrari looked so solid on hard tires.

On the flip side, both Red Bull Racing cars were putting up killer lap times on the inters after just one single lap. That tells me everything I need to know: Red Bull Racing handled those tires way better than Ferrari did.

Look, if the cars ahead are the excuse for Max's slower laps compared to Leclerc, then you’ve gotta apply that same logic after the first pit stop, right? Makes sense...

Yeah, sure, Max spent more time following someone, but in this specific case, the pit stop strategy comes down to one thing: can you actually make those intermediate tires work? That was the whole game. So, messing with Leclerc's rhythm—even for "only" half a lap—definitely played a huge role in those lap times you mentioned above.

That occurred on lap 20. The reason that Williams didn't move is simply because Charles Leclerc was being remarkably sluggish in his attack. He was driving that lap like a complete amateur, if I may say so. Anyone with access to F1TV can verify that for themselves.

cosmicmoose2 said:Actually, even Leclerc didn't have totally clear air—he was stuck behind that Williams for quite a while too. And get this, just like what happened later with Sainz, that Williams wouldn't budge, even after being waved through with blue flags multiple times. It's ridiculous...
That's why you have to wonder if he ever even got those intermediates up to the right temperature.
Leclerc's tires barely even warmed up before he was hauled into the pits again. That's another massive blunder by the team. If they were going to do that, they should've just skipped the intermediates entirely, especially since Ferrari looked so solid on hard tires.

On the flip side, both Red Bull Racing cars were putting up killer lap times on the inters after just one single lap. That tells me everything I need to know: Red Bull Racing handled those tires way better than Ferrari did.

Look, if the cars ahead are the excuse for Max's slower laps compared to Leclerc, then you’ve gotta apply that same logic after the first pit stop, right? Makes sense...

Yeah, sure, Max spent more time following someone, but in this specific case, the pit stop strategy comes down to one thing: can you actually make those intermediate tires work? That was the whole game. So, messing with Leclerc's rhythm—even for "only" half a lap—definitely played a huge role in those lap times you mentioned above.

Both Charles Leclerc and Max Verstappen switched to intermediates on the exact same lap. Max was faster during that initial entry lap by 1.7 seconds. We all know now that they really ought to have been on the hard tires. Even Carlos Sainz knew it. Honestly, who is to blame—the pit wall or Charles Leclerc—for the fact that they were left in the dark?

cosmicmoose2 said:Actually, even Leclerc didn't have totally clear air—he was stuck behind that Williams for quite a while too. And get this, just like what happened later with Sainz, that Williams wouldn't budge, even after being waved through with blue flags multiple times. It's ridiculous...
That's why you have to wonder if he ever even got those intermediates up to the right temperature.
Leclerc's tires barely even warmed up before he was hauled into the pits again. That's another massive blunder by the team. If they were going to do that, they should've just skipped the intermediates entirely, especially since Ferrari looked so solid on hard tires.

On the flip side, both Red Bull Racing cars were putting up killer lap times on the inters after just one single lap. That tells me everything I need to know: Red Bull Racing handled those tires way better than Ferrari did.

Look, if the cars ahead are the excuse for Max's slower laps compared to Leclerc, then you’ve gotta apply that same logic after the first pit stop, right? Makes sense...

Yeah, sure, Max spent more time following someone, but in this specific case, the pit stop strategy comes down to one thing: can you actually make those intermediate tires work? That was the whole game. So, messing with Leclerc's rhythm—even for "only" half a lap—definitely played a huge role in those lap times you mentioned above.

Not quite, though. Sergio Perez clocked a 1:32.1 during his first full lap on the intermediates on lap 17.

cosmicmoose2 said:Actually, even Leclerc didn't have totally clear air—he was stuck behind that Williams for quite a while too. And get this, just like what happened later with Sainz, that Williams wouldn't budge, even after being waved through with blue flags multiple times. It's ridiculous...
That's why you have to wonder if he ever even got those intermediates up to the right temperature.
Leclerc's tires barely even warmed up before he was hauled into the pits again. That's another massive blunder by the team. If they were going to do that, they should've just skipped the intermediates entirely, especially since Ferrari looked so solid on hard tires.

On the flip side, both Red Bull Racing cars were putting up killer lap times on the inters after just one single lap. That tells me everything I need to know: Red Bull Racing handled those tires way better than Ferrari did.

Look, if the cars ahead are the excuse for Max's slower laps compared to Leclerc, then you’ve gotta apply that same logic after the first pit stop, right? Makes sense...

Yeah, sure, Max spent more time following someone, but in this specific case, the pit stop strategy comes down to one thing: can you actually make those intermediate tires work? That was the whole game. So, messing with Leclerc's rhythm—even for "only" half a lap—definitely played a huge role in those lap times you mentioned above.

By the 21st lap, Max found himself stuck behind two backmarkers, whereas if one looks at the cumulative data, Charles Leclerc actually dealt with fewer backmarkers during that specific window. It seems to me that he simply drove worse, both when the track was clear and when he was navigating traffic.

mellowtiger83 said:I believe a 9-second cushion ahead of Sergio Perez—and even more over Max—was quite sufficient, wouldn't you agree?

Max is stuck in that train due to his own error; he was slower during qualifying. Charles Leclerc did nothing wrong through any fault or lack of speed of his own; after all, he has Ferrari strategists who managed to slot him into 4th place.

Just as one might argue Max is leading the championship not by his own merit, we can certainly view it through that lens.

Nine seconds? Where on earth did that number come from? When Charles Leclerc entered the pits, his lead over Max was only 7.6 seconds, and just one lap prior, when Sergio Perez pitted, the gap ahead of him was merely 8.2 seconds.
When racing under such chaotic circumstances, isn't it true that the smallest details become paramount? One must consider how effectively a driver manages their in-laps and out-laps; had Charles Leclerc executed those more precisely, he likely would have finished ahead of Max. Instead, Max secured the position once again, and quite frankly, he earned it through his own merit.

mellowtiger83 said:I believe a 9-second cushion ahead of Sergio Perez—and even more over Max—was quite sufficient, wouldn't you agree?

Max is stuck in that train due to his own error; he was slower during qualifying. Charles Leclerc did nothing wrong through any fault or lack of speed of his own; after all, he has Ferrari strategists who managed to slot him into 4th place.

Just as one might argue Max is leading the championship not by his own merit, we can certainly view it through that lens.

To clarify, Max wasn't actually slower in qualifying; rather, he was forced to abandon his fastest lap because Sergio Perez went off into the barrier.
As I have already demonstrated, Charles Leclerc was the one who lacked pace during those critical moments.

mellowtiger83 said:I believe a 9-second cushion ahead of Sergio Perez—and even more over Max—was quite sufficient, wouldn't you agree?

Max is stuck in that train due to his own error; he was slower during qualifying. Charles Leclerc did nothing wrong through any fault or lack of speed of his own; after all, he has Ferrari strategists who managed to slot him into 4th place.

Just as one might argue Max is leading the championship not by his own merit, we can certainly view it through that lens.

Ha, so now he’s leading because of your fault?🙄

darkmarlin16 said:Wait, when did the race actually start? Why on earth isn't that info posted right there?

What do you mean by that? For all intents and purposes, the official start was set for 3:00 PM.

cosmicmoose2 said:And what happens when you're stuck on wet tires? You just gonna ignore that?
It’s nothing but high-stakes laps between Max Verstappen and Charles Leclerc at this point...

Max is essentially stuck in a train, trailing right behind Carlos Sainz and Sergio Perez. Meanwhile, Charles Leclerc has nothing but clear track ahead of him, allowing him to dictate the entire pace. This was actually a massive opportunity where he could have pulled even further ahead; if he had performed like Kimi Räikkönen once did, he might have built such a substantial gap that he could pit and still rejoin the race in first place.

cosmicmoose2 said:Honestly, I think Sainz's strategy was actually spot on—going from wets straight to hards—but he got totally screwed by some guy in a Williams who wouldn't budge despite the blue flag, which is how Perez managed to jump him.
If that mess hadn't happened, I’m convinced Sainz would’ve taken first place, especially since he was clearly flying past Perez in the later stages of the race.

What they should have done is weigh the speed gap between intermediates and full wets during those few laps... you have to decide if it's better to grab the inters and build enough of a gap to get a "free" pit stop for hards, or just grit it out on wets for a few laps before switching to hards for the finish.
Since both strategies were basically neck-and-neck, fine, maybe we can give Ferrari a pass on that one.
But what I absolutely cannot forgive is how long they spent debating things with Sainz while completely neglecting Leclerc... he ended up doing exactly what Red Bull did, just at a much slower pace. And even worse? That moment they called Leclerc in when there was zero chance of a double stack, leaving him just sitting there like an idiot waiting behind Sainz to get his tires changed.
It’s pure amateur hour... honestly, people should be losing their jobs over this because there's no excuse.
You can see Leclerc is way faster on the inters, he's closing in on Sainz who's still on wets, and it's obvious there won't be time to stack the cars.
Those two massive blunders completely trashed Leclerc's race.
Sainz actually drove a solid race, but he got shafted by Williams.

The clowns on the pit wall certainly cost Charles Leclerc his race, though I suppose he bears some responsibility for certain losses as well.
If we simply compare the pace during those decisive laps between Max Verstappen and Charles Leclerc,
Code:

He drove every single lap slower than Max Verstappen.

Henry Thompson said:It’s actually a good thing some viewer asked on the Formula1.com stream—like, why even bother having wet tires if nobody can actually use them? 😁
They kept delaying the start, then everyone finally rolls out on wets, and three laps later the racing line is bone dry.

And seriously, can someone explain why all the leaders (except for Carlos Sainz) jumped on intermediates just to switch to slicks a few laps later? It’s like they’re driving in Monaco for the very first time or something, as if they don't have access to a basic weather forecast.

Because they are simply incompetent. I am referring, of course, to the race directors and the FIA.

Henry Thompson said:It’s actually a good thing some viewer asked on the Formula1.com stream—like, why even bother having wet tires if nobody can actually use them? 😁
They kept delaying the start, then everyone finally rolls out on wets, and three laps later the racing line is bone dry.

And seriously, can someone explain why all the leaders (except for Carlos Sainz) jumped on intermediates just to switch to slicks a few laps later? It’s like they’re driving in Monaco for the very first time or something, as if they don't have access to a basic weather forecast.

Since there is absolutely no way for anyone to be certain about how quickly the track surface might actually dry out, and considering they really ought to prioritize maintaining their current positions on the circuit just in case the drying process doesn't happen as rapidly as anticipated, wouldn't it make sense to play it safe?
In the view of Hunter, compared to the drivers we see on the grid today like Jenson Button, there was a much greater individual responsibility placed upon a driver when it came to deciding exactly when to switch over to slicks during drying conditions. Is it not true that back then, the driver had to rely more on their own intuition and feel for the asphalt? Conversely, when it comes to those critical moments of transitioning to wet-weather tires, that burden falls much more heavily upon the crew stationed on the pit wall, given that they have the advantage of high-tech radar monitoring everything right in front of them. Does this shift in responsibility not fundamentally change the very nature of how a race is managed?

Is it not remarkable that Carlos Sainz was the only driver among the frontrunners to actually shoulder the responsibility for his tire strategy, effectively salvaging his second-place finish despite the absolute circus occurring on his own pit wall? One has to wonder how such tactical incompetence is even possible at this level, yet he managed to navigate through it all. In my estimation, that kind of decisive leadership and composure under pressure is exactly what defines a true driver of the race.

Amanda Kelly said:Nah, he didn't even touch him. Sergio Perez was the one who wiped him out.

There's no need to make such a scene; we aren't blind or stupid.

I expected you to celebrate or gloat a little. That’s fine. But this level of arrogance? Not so much.
You spend an entire week going to sleep, dreaming all night, and waking up with Charles Leclerc's face burned into your brain. So what?
Personally, I’d just cover my ears and congratulate Charles on a great drive—or better yet, an impressive weekend overall. But apparently, that's asking too much from you.

Charles Leclerc? Indeed. Sergio Perez swept him aside too.

Amanda Kelly said:Nah, he didn't even touch him. Sergio Perez was the one who wiped him out.

There's no need to make such a scene; we aren't blind or stupid.

I expected you to celebrate or gloat a little. That’s fine. But this level of arrogance? Not so much.
You spend an entire week going to sleep, dreaming all night, and waking up with Charles Leclerc's face burned into your brain. So what?
Personally, I’d just cover my ears and congratulate Charles on a great drive—or better yet, an impressive weekend overall. But apparently, that's asking too much from you.

Yes, I suppose I am indulging myself just a little bit. 🙄

It seems to me that Ferrari attempted to divert our attention away from their massive blunder. They had a perfectly clean 1-2 finish within their grasp, didn't they? I mean, surely it was possible for them to slip just slightly and end up with a 1-3, but instead, they somehow managed to tumble all the way down to a 2-4. Now, one can only imagine what might happen if Mercedes actually decided to join this fight for the top spots—which, realistically, might not even occur until the very tail end of the season—but if that were to happen, would we not witness an even more chaotic meltdown within Ferrari?

wiredseal7 said:Ferrari basically just embarrassed themselves by protesting those track limits.
They didn't get anywhere with Sergio Perez:
https://twitter.com/FanaticsFerrari/...Co0ciSpVMSC3WA

As for Max, yeah—there’s actually something there. He pushed a bit harder and might catch a penalty—even if the wet track and slicks make things a little more complicated. Honestly, let them penalize him; it makes the gap to Checo a little smaller anyway. 🤣

If they didn't penalize Lando Norris in Russia due to "excessive force," then how on earth can they expect to penalize anyone else for this?

I feel compelled to offer a correction:
The Forecast
It looks like we should prepare for rain this Sunday.
Red Bull is clearly putting on a masterclass.
And there is Leclerc, seemingly mourning his fate within the confines of the pit box.

swiftmaker12 said:My mind goes straight to Maldonado or Romain Grosjean.

They seemed to have some kind of incident every single race—and I don't just mean at Monaco, but just generally speaking.
Back in my day, Andrea de Cesaris was basically famous for making a mess of things every single F1 weekend.

My goodness, can you even imagine if someone were to suggest that Grosjean or Andrea de Cesaris could sweep the floor under a World Champion? 🥱

swiftmaker12 said:A good number of them will probably end up shifting the barriers at Monaco
They used to bang into them all the time back in the day—so I don't see why they wouldn't now, especially since the cars are about 25% larger than they were a decade ago.

Every legendary driver has rattled those barriers, and if today's soft drivers won't, then who will?

Ayrton Senna during the '88 race, just out of nowhere
Michael Schumacher in '96 during a warm-up lap after taking pole,
Jenson Button in the Wehrlein 2017 era when he was swapping places with Alonso
It doesn't take much deep thinking to realize how easily you can tear through a safety barrier in Monaco.

It seems like none of you sheep have actually been to Monaco during a race weekend, yet here you are talking nonsense and acting like seasoned F1 experts.
In reality, you probably have zero connection to everyday life, let alone the world of racing.

Has anyone here actually spent five races in a row getting intimately acquainted with the barriers?

mellowtiger83 said:Charles Leclerc will likely find himself sitting right on Max Verstappen's bumper in Monaco, and probably Carlos Sainz too. Once we get past the Monaco GP, he’ll be the one leading the championship standings.🙂

Don't worry about it, Fort.

I just find myself hoping you won't end up stuck in some ditch when you inevitably smash the car into a wall🤣

stormybadger8 As requested by:
Does anyone else wonder if Charles Leclerc will also be granted total immunity from his track excursions if he manages to take this year's title? I find myself pondering whether all those instances where he’s collided with the barriers in Monaco, or even his more aggressive run-ins with other drivers—much like how Max Verstappen tends to operate—will simply be swept under the rug by the pundits once he secures the championship? Is that just how the narrative shifts once you reach the top? 🙂

What possible connection could there be between the mediocre performances of a second driver—one who, I might add, has already managed three podium finishes at the Monaco Grand Prix—and the rather troubling reality that Charles Leclerc simply hasn't been able to see a checkered flag since 2017? Is it not a bit of a stretch to link those two entirely separate issues? 🤦

stormybadger8 As I was contemplating the matter earlier, I found myself wondering about what was said...
It seems I am being struck by a sudden sense of déjà vu once again. Is it possible that we have wandered down this exact path before? It feels as though the wheels of fate are turning in such a familiar cycle that one can almost predict the next revolution. 🙄
Should I really find myself engaging in yet another heated debate with DMW? 🤦

What exactly is this supposed to imply? Are we suggesting that Charles Leclerc might actually manage to stay on the track without crashing every single time he races in Monaco? Or is there some other deeper meaning I'm missing?

stormybadger8 said:The shadow of an owl was making fun of him for having a massive head....

I don't feel like doing the math, but honestly, Max could probably hit the wall more often in Monaco than Leclerc does and still be fine.

Leclerc hasn't actually finished a single race in Monaco, even when looking back at his time in the lower tiers of competition. Meanwhile, Max took home the trophy in the last 🙄

Raymond Anderson4 said:The race car was generally uncompetitive, but in Monaco, it was a winner. It showed its potential all weekend long, not just during qualifying.

Furthermore, wasn't it true that Max Verstappen clocked the fastest first sector and seemed perfectly positioned to take pole until Ferrari managed to snatch it away when Leclerc crashed into the wall?

Amanda Kelly said:I’m calling it now: a win for the Monacan.
He’s playing on home turf, and honestly, nobody moves faster than him when he wants to.

Besides, look at last year. He absolutely crushed the field during qualifying, even with a car that was basically a lemon. Sure, there was that one little mistake at the finish, but let's be real.
He didn't lose the race because someone outran him; he lost because he wasn't even on the starting grid.

There truly isn't anyone faster than him when it comes to the wall.🤣