graniteharbor502 said:Whether it is people insisting Perez will be the primary title contender, or the idea that because he spent half a lap trailing behind Williams Racing, it somehow explains why Charles Leclerc and the others ended up driving slower laps than Max during those decisive final rounds.
This forum exists as a space for the exchange of ideas, which naturally includes presenting one's own vision of alternative scenarios that could have occurred. If you truly believe someone is trolling, please feel free to report such posts.
Honestly, being stuck behind Alexander Albon for even half a lap is enough to cost you a position. The rest was just Ferrari's pit crew messing things up.
Same goes for Perez compared to Carlos Sainz. Maybe just less obvious than what happened to Leclerc.
I wouldn't say Perez won unfairly, but he definitely relied more on luck than actual skill. After the pit stops, he ended up behind Lando Norris. He probably wouldn't have passed him if Lando hadn't pitted and cleared the way.
Enough about Q3; that was five days ago and there are much more interesting things to talk about now.
For instance, we've got Horner trying to convince us that Max and Perez are getting the exact same treatment from Red Bull. "Horner: Red Bull happy for either Verstappen or Perez to win F1 Title" @Motorsport.com
Amanda Kelly said:Just the exact opposite. If you look at the data from almost every session leading up to that final lap in Q3, Sergio Perez was actually outpacing Max Verstappen in Monaco. And that’s even when they were running in nearly identical track conditions. If you actually look at the data and use a little common sense, the logical conclusion is pretty simple: Perez should be ahead of Max Verstappen in qualifying at Monaco.
I'll say it again: Sergio Perez; Just get Max out of my way so I can make this pass.. Bird; Yeah copy Checo. Look, just focus on building that margin on the tire temps for the time being. Brakes are running a little hot. Look, let's just hold steady at two seconds for the moment. We aren't even running the same race as those guys. Sergio Perez; Why won't you just let me through? My tires are practically brand new. I could make the pass in a heartbeat. Bird; Build the margin on the tyre temps, build the margin on the brakes, we’ll get our chance. Sergio Perez. We’re going to end up screwing over our own race at this rate, man. Bird: We've got Leclerc slow in turn 10. ...
Lisa Thomas3 said:I can't have a serious conversation with someone who thinks throwing an FP session at me as "proof" that a driver is actually faster during the weekend is a valid argument...🤦 It’s roughly the same level of logic as looking at preseason testing times and pretending you actually know what the order is going to look like. Are we going to have a serious conversation here, or are we just going to keep throwing around these childish arguments?... Are we actually watching Formula 1 or what? How many times in the last few seasons has Bottas actually clocked better times in FP1, FP2, or FP3—sometimes even through Q1 and Q2—only to have Hamilton absolutely smoke him in Q3 like he was nothing? Honestly, using that as an argument is just unbelievably stupid...
Even during Q1 and Q2, the top guys aren't exactly driving at their absolute limit. When you get to Q3—which is really the only part that matters—was Perez actually faster by that 0.037 in the first sector? Meanwhile, Max was putting down much faster times during those first two stints of the second round... I'm saying it again: my common-sense takeaway is that in a pure qualifying session, Max would have ended up out front. People can draw their own conclusions. If you want to believe he would’ve cooked his tires in the third stint or slammed into a wall, go ahead—that's your business. I’ve stated my position: the most likely and logical scenario is that Max finishes ahead. That's it. I think we've exhausted this topic...
Just a quick summary: in the first stint, Perez was glued to Sainz's gearbox, and Max was stuck right behind Perez. Only Leclerc managed to pull away a bit. As for how fast the Red Bulls actually were, it's hard to say, but we know Perez was complaining over the radio about Sainz holding him up. We also saw evidence earlier in this thread that once Max pitted, he was driving faster than Leclerc during those crucial laps... Basically, if Max had gone into the pits instead of Perez and everything else played out the same way, he would've easily stayed ahead of Perez and likely at least second—maybe even first depending on his pace. Sure, in that scenario, maybe Ferrari reacts differently or the whole thing shifts, but the point remains: it was obvious the inters were the better call right then, and whoever jumped on them first would come out on top. And Red Bull was pretty fair about calling Perez in first... Bottom line: if Red Bull was strictly playing for Max, they definitely would've pulled him in first if they weren't already committed to the hard tire strategy. But Perez was ahead on track and got the pit priority. It’s fair game... Just like in the US, where you dodged the question again about why Red Bull didn't give Max an extra point instead of Perez if he's really their guy. They had the chance, right? But sure, let's keep ignoring that and stick to the fairy tales about what happened in the US...
You’re taking FP out of context. An FP session on its own doesn't prove anything. But when you look at how it fits the speed gap between the Red Bull drivers in Monaco, it starts to make sense. It adds weight to the whole situation, even if I wouldn't have given it much thought otherwise. Take the data from FP and Q that someone posted, then add the race results to it. These were all official sessions held in Monaco. Take a look at the correlation. Those are the numbers. They aren't up for debate. It’s just the facts. If you want to call them childish arguments, go ahead. Be my guest.
Let’s be real: the data shows Perez was actually faster than Max for about 95% of the weekend in Monaco. Now it's up to you—or anyone else, really—to draw your own conclusions. I think my point stands: those numbers from Monaco actually matter. They're telling us something. Some people just won't care about anything else as long as Max is sitting at the top of the standings and looking faster than Perez. That’s all that matters to them.
Tire management. Alonso was on the Mediums, while Lewis (back then) was running Hards. The call was to hold off on any pit stops until the end (Alonso), so he had to nurse those tires. He claimed he felt perfectly comfortable in that position and basically said it wasn't his fault if he slowed Lewis down... adding that there was zero chance of being overtaken. Classy. Ocon was just collateral damage. Edit: late to the party
Linda Peterson43 said:I’m not exactly a Max supporter, but if we’re looking at any realistic scenario for the WDC, Sergio Perez is the only way to make it happen... Max is clearly the superior driver regardless of how you look at it, especially since he’s the clear favorite of those two clowns over at Red Bull Racing...
Nobody was questioning that; honestly, nobody even thought to.
But even Mr. Unbeatable is showing some cracks (even if it seems impossible): - Perez outpaced him in Monaco in terms of pure speed (not talking about the final race result here) - They're already pulling out the team orders back in Barcelona
Lisa Thomas3 said:At the end of the day, Sergio Perez just doesn't have the depth to go toe-to-toe with Max Verstappen over a full season. He's not going to be a legitimate threat for the WDC... The level of dominance Max Verstappen established over the last few seasons—where he was basically playing a different sport than everyone else—was never actually realistic. It’s something we’ve never seen before in the history of the sport. At the end of the day, you have to account for track conditions; some circuits just favor certain drivers more than others... Perez is a solid driver, but he’s up against the toughest competition out there. He knows it, and anyone with half a brain—including the folks over at Red Bull Racing—knows it too... Even this season proves it. The fact that Perez is trailing by "only" 15 points despite having fewer DNFs than Max—and considering the team handed him the win in Monaco instead of giving it to Max—isn't an argument for them being equals. If anything, it proves the exact opposite...😁 So, sure, if his strategy relies on Max picking up five more DNFs when he hasn't had a single one, then fine—maybe he can still dream about the title. But I’m not convinced that’s exactly brilliant math. And what does playing second fiddle at Red Bull actually get him? Getting kicked out of the team (with or without a contract)? What, is Ferrari going to swoop in and hire him just to spite their own roster of jokers? Even that doesn't seem like a solid plan; as much as Ferrari might be fed up with their current drivers, they aren't about to poach a number two driver from a direct rival... 😁 Honestly, he’d be an idiot to do anything other than play ball. He should just take whatever wins the circumstances throw his way—like right now in Monaco—and call it a day. There’s zero chance he lands a seat as the number one driver at another top-tier team at his age, and he simply can't compete with Max Verstappen. Maybe, if he stays in line, Max decides to move on eventually, leaving Perez to inherit the number one spot along with a much weaker teammate. If Red Bull Racing stays strong, that’s his only shot at a title. If we're talking about any realistic scenario where Perez actually wins a championship, that's the only one...
I usually avoid arguing with this troll, but I can't just let this nonsense sit there unrefuted. If someone doesn't set the record straight, people end up swallowing these ridiculous claims and passing them around like truth. Look, at the moment those "team orders" were supposedly happening, Max was nearly a second and a half faster than Sergio Perez on track. It’s a safe bet he would have shaken him off quite easily, so all this math regarding point gaps is complete nonsense. In reality, it wasn't even a classic team order situation. It was just about efficiency—avoiding wasting precious seconds on an internal battle that had a predictable outcome anyway, especially since they were on totally different strategies and running at completely different paces. For anyone peddling this stupidity, the ultimate proof is this: Red Bull didn't pull Max into the pits for a fastest lap right after Sergio Perez, even though they easily could have. Everything about this is clear and logical.
It's about as logical as assuming Max Verstappen would have stayed ahead of Sergio Perez in Monaco qualifying if things had just stayed clean until the end. But hey, if some people want to act dense and argue over nothing, more power to them...
Just the exact opposite. If you look at the data from almost every session leading up to that final lap in Q3, Sergio Perez was actually outpacing Max Verstappen in Monaco. And that’s even when they were running in nearly identical track conditions. If you actually look at the data and use a little common sense, the logical conclusion is pretty simple: Perez should be ahead of Max Verstappen in qualifying at Monaco.
Lisa Thomas3 said:At the end of the day, Sergio Perez just doesn't have the depth to go toe-to-toe with Max Verstappen over a full season. He's not going to be a legitimate threat for the WDC... The level of dominance Max Verstappen established over the last few seasons—where he was basically playing a different sport than everyone else—was never actually realistic. It’s something we’ve never seen before in the history of the sport. At the end of the day, you have to account for track conditions; some circuits just favor certain drivers more than others... Perez is a solid driver, but he’s up against the toughest competition out there. He knows it, and anyone with half a brain—including the folks over at Red Bull Racing—knows it too... Even this season proves it. The fact that Perez is trailing by "only" 15 points despite having fewer DNFs than Max—and considering the team handed him the win in Monaco instead of giving it to Max—isn't an argument for them being equals. If anything, it proves the exact opposite...😁 So, sure, if his strategy relies on Max picking up five more DNFs when he hasn't had a single one, then fine—maybe he can still dream about the title. But I’m not convinced that’s exactly brilliant math. And what does playing second fiddle at Red Bull actually get him? Getting kicked out of the team (with or without a contract)? What, is Ferrari going to swoop in and hire him just to spite their own roster of jokers? Even that doesn't seem like a solid plan; as much as Ferrari might be fed up with their current drivers, they aren't about to poach a number two driver from a direct rival... 😁 Honestly, he’d be an idiot to do anything other than play ball. He should just take whatever wins the circumstances throw his way—like right now in Monaco—and call it a day. There’s zero chance he lands a seat as the number one driver at another top-tier team at his age, and he simply can't compete with Max Verstappen. Maybe, if he stays in line, Max decides to move on eventually, leaving Perez to inherit the number one spot along with a much weaker teammate. If Red Bull Racing stays strong, that’s his only shot at a title. If we're talking about any realistic scenario where Perez actually wins a championship, that's the only one...
I usually avoid arguing with this troll, but I can't just let this nonsense sit there unrefuted. If someone doesn't set the record straight, people end up swallowing these ridiculous claims and passing them around like truth. Look, at the moment those "team orders" were supposedly happening, Max was nearly a second and a half faster than Sergio Perez on track. It’s a safe bet he would have shaken him off quite easily, so all this math regarding point gaps is complete nonsense. In reality, it wasn't even a classic team order situation. It was just about efficiency—avoiding wasting precious seconds on an internal battle that had a predictable outcome anyway, especially since they were on totally different strategies and running at completely different paces. For anyone peddling this stupidity, the ultimate proof is this: Red Bull didn't pull Max into the pits for a fastest lap right after Sergio Perez, even though they easily could have. Everything about this is clear and logical.
It's about as logical as assuming Max Verstappen would have stayed ahead of Sergio Perez in Monaco qualifying if things had just stayed clean until the end. But hey, if some people want to act dense and argue over nothing, more power to them...
I'll say it again: Sergio Perez; Just get Max out of my way so I can make this pass.. Bird; Yeah copy Checo. Look, just focus on building that margin on the tire temps for the time being. Brakes are running a little hot. Look, let's just hold steady at two seconds for the moment. We aren't even running the same race as those guys. Sergio Perez; Why won't you just let me through? My tires are practically brand new. I could make the pass in a heartbeat. Bird; Build the margin on the tyre temps, build the margin on the brakes, we’ll get our chance. Sergio Perez. We’re going to end up screwing over our own race at this rate, man. Bird: We've got Leclerc slow in turn 10. ...
The stats show that Leclerc has actually overtaken Max Verstappen in total Pole Positions, with both sitting at 14 now. They're currently splitting the 22nd to 27th spots on the all-time list. Not that any of this matters, really—just a little something to kill time while I wait to see what kind of questionable decisions the geniuses over at Ferrari announce next. Mind you, Leclerc’s conversion rate per start is looking better at 16 to 9.5.
Almost forgot: George Russell is back in the top 5. Mr Consistency strikes again. 👍
I should probably add, I think Norris deserved that P5 more, but that's just how things go in Monaco. At least Fernando Alonso gave him a massive boost with that pit stop strategy.
Leclerc finished the race in Monaco. And Max doesn't have every single race won anymore. I guess miracles (finally) happen.
For Leclerc, this is a massive shift. Especially considering how much confidence and raw speed he’s been showing lately.
Nothing too shocking for Max, though he was trailing Perez in every single session—which isn't something we're used to seeing. Plus, I don't think Perez lacks ambition; a loss like this might actually sting.
graniteharbor502 said: Schedule Practice 1: Friday 14:00-15:00 Practice 2: Friday 17:00-18:00 Practice 3: Saturday 13:00-14:00
Qualifying: Saturday 16:00-17:00
Race: Sunday 15:00-17:00
Tire Compounds Hard Medium SoftHard Medium SoftHard Medium Soft
Forecast Rain is expected on Sunday, isn't it? Max Verstappen will likely be putting on a masterclass. And one can only wonder if Charles Leclerc will find himself mourning his fate against a wall once again.
graniteharbor502 said:There truly isn't anyone faster than him when it comes to the wall.🤣
graniteharbor502 said:I just find myself hoping you won't end up stuck in some ditch when you inevitably smash the car into a wall🤣
graniteharbor502 said:Has anyone here actually spent five races in a row getting intimately acquainted with the barriers?
graniteharbor502 said: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? 🥱
Nah, he didn't even touch him. Sergio Perez was the one who wiped him out.
graniteharbor502 said: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 🙄
graniteharbor502 said: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.
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.
cosmicmoose2 said:Man... If they actually had the kind of advantage Mercedes-Benz had back in 2016, maybe the championship would actually be interesting. Maybe they wouldn't even blow it... It’s just pathetic. These drivers grind all weekend long—every single practice session, qualifying, then the actual race—only to walk away with second and fourth. Just awful.😵
That's an understatement.
cosmicmoose2 said:Man... If they actually had the kind of advantage Mercedes-Benz had back in 2016, maybe the championship would actually be interesting. Maybe they wouldn't even blow it... It’s just pathetic. These drivers grind all weekend long—every single practice session, qualifying, then the actual race—only to walk away with second and fourth. Just awful.😵
The issue is the championship contender. The guy who's faster than everyone else and fighting for the title. A driver who was absolutely dominating right up until his pit stop. It’s unacceptable when a team drops a driver from 1st down to 4th. There weren't a hundred different scenarios at play, just a few. Things happen. An unexpected variable pops up, an opponent outmaneuvers you, or the track conditions shift. You lose a spot. It sucks, but it isn't a tragedy. But for the fastest driver on track to lose the win and three positions? That's a disaster.
And honestly, it’s probably better for Charles Leclerc that he didn't even make the podium.
That’s putting it lightly. Every time I think they've actually figured things out or made some progress, they find a way to completely blow it. Not much of a consolation, but I’d love to know which genius at Ferrari called the shots on those box stops.
Lawrence Garcia5 said:It’s probably about time we said goodbye to Daniel Ricciardo. I’m betting both he and Pierre Gasly are out once this season wraps up. As for Gasly, I’m pretty sure he’s gone unless something massive changes.
+1 He’s just standing there smirking while Lando Norris cleans up the mess behind him. He’s been getting outclassed by Lando in both qualifying and race pace on basically every track. Same thing happened to Carlos Sainz with Charles Leclerc.
Raymond Anderson4 said:https://twitter.com/hotlapmode/statu...671808/photo/2
Check out this tweet analyzing how Ferrari and Red Bull Racing stack up against each other. If you look closely at the data, the conclusion is pretty obvious: Ferrari is the clear favorite on this track, and honestly, anything other than a pole position would be a massive shock.
A technical glitch robbed Charles Leclerc of a Grand Slam in Barcelona. Monaco is his next shot. He’s cleared the first two hurdles, which were the toughest. I think he might actually pull it off.
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.
I figured I’d jump back into this thread (it arrived right on cue). I need to spec out two different machines—basically acting as the consultant/advisor here. I’ll be leaning heavily on the advice already posted in this thread. But I have a few questions for the folks here who actually know what they’re doing.
a) Budget: $2,000 total for the PC and monitor. The software is Agisoft Metashape, and the user will supposedly be doing 3D modeling. The explicit recommendation is an Intel 8-Core + 64 GB RAM + some kind of Nvidia RTX.
Regarding graphics: "1 - 2 NVIDIA or AMD GPUs with 1920+ CUDA cores / shader processor units (For example: GeForce RTX 2080 Ti or Radeon VII)"
I’m not really a graphics person—does that mean multiple cards, or are we talking about the number of cores per card?
Also, does the platform combo even matter? Like, should I go Intel CPU + Nvidia GPU or AMD + Radeon? Since Metashape specifically mentions Intel + Nvidia in two examples, I can't tell if it's better to just chase higher Tflops or if there's a specific reason Intel is preferred. What do the people actually running this stuff think?
b) The second build is $1,500, just for the computer itself. This one is for processing drone footage. I have no clue which software they'll use.🤔 They might be using whatever came with the drone, or maybe something pro. The user is an amateur and doesn't know, 🤦 and honestly, I don't particularly care. What would be a smart move here? Should I just scale down the hardware proportionally to the price, or is there something else I should be looking out for?
And how many sprint races have actually happened in history? It’s nothing to write home about, really. Winning all those listed trophies without even having a sprint in the mix is a category that’s been around forever. And honestly, that's worth noting because it doesn't happen often. But personally, I wouldn't go around calling something "the first in history" if it's only happened a handful of times. Just my two cents.
What I actually find interesting is that this is the first time since 1979 that we've seen two drivers pull off a Grand Slam in the same season.
