Monaco GP - May 29, 2022 @ 3:00 PM

Lisa Thomas3 said:The situation was pretty messy. As much as I hate making excuses for Ferrari and their incompetence, it’s just not true to say they single-handedly cost Leclerc three spots and leave it at that.
For starters, I listened to the team radio. Unlike Sainz, Leclerc didn't make his tire preferences clear. When asked about switching straight to hards, he just mumbled, "maybe, but not now," and then went silent. I wouldn't completely rule out his own responsibility here.
Leclerc is leading on track, but behind him, Sainz is dead set on jumping straight to hards, Perez blinked first and pitted for inters, and Verstappen is his main threat whose strategy is still anyone's guess. So what is Ferrari supposed to do? If they cover Perez immediately, they likely lose out to both Sainz and Verstappen (since he'll probably go straight to hards too). If they wait for Verstappen, they lose to Perez and probably Sainz as well. No matter who they try to cover, they’re likely a lap behind the action...
It isn't that simple. Even with Leclerc in the lead, everyone behind him is playing their own game, so he was likely losing two positions regardless. Sure, they lost everything in the end because of indecision, but that's beside the point.

The only way Leclerc could have held onto first place was if he had his own plan and dictated the pace.
He should have just said, "I want this and that, I'm making the move first," and called it a day. That’s the only way to take that kind of risk. But he didn't show that level of decisiveness.
If Ferrari had put him straight on hards without him confirming the track conditions were ready, the media would have absolutely torn them apart.

The best way to defend a position is to think ahead and build a gap before the pit stops. Why wasn't there better communication from the team? Why didn't they tell him to push harder? Or maybe he just didn't have the pace—that might be the real root of the problem.

👍
I thought it would take a few weeks for the "geniuses" to come out with the theory that "Perez was faster than Verstappen in Monaco qualifying," but apparently, one day was enough. 🙏
Perez is the reason RB finished 3rd and 4th in qualifying. Based on his pace during that fast lap, Verstappen would have been P2. They likely would have taken 2nd and 3rd. Instead, Perez crashed and ruined the lap for both himself and Max, right when Ferrari were sitting pretty in 1st and 2nd.
Then you get the idiots counting qualifying gaps and claiming Perez was faster in Monaco just because he crashed. It's just people who don't even watch the races talking nonsense...

Look, until a driver actually completes a full lap—all three sectors—it’s impossible to say if they were actually faster. Just because someone flies through the first sector doesn't mean they aren't going to tank the next two. Maybe the tires overheat by the third sector and suddenly that pace drops way below their PB... or maybe they don't even finish the damn lap at all! So, honestly, only total idiots are out here automatically handing Max the Pole Position just because he had one fast opening sector followed by two incomplete ones where anything could've happened...

As for that Ferrari strategy... yeah, look, I get it, it wasn't an easy call to make. But honestly? The Pitwall absolutely choked it later on. They made two massive blunders afterward that there's just no excuse for... seriously...

Lisa Thomas3 said:The situation was pretty messy. As much as I hate making excuses for Ferrari and their incompetence, it’s just not true to say they single-handedly cost Leclerc three spots and leave it at that.
For starters, I listened to the team radio. Unlike Sainz, Leclerc didn't make his tire preferences clear. When asked about switching straight to hards, he just mumbled, "maybe, but not now," and then went silent. I wouldn't completely rule out his own responsibility here.
Leclerc is leading on track, but behind him, Sainz is dead set on jumping straight to hards, Perez blinked first and pitted for inters, and Verstappen is his main threat whose strategy is still anyone's guess. So what is Ferrari supposed to do? If they cover Perez immediately, they likely lose out to both Sainz and Verstappen (since he'll probably go straight to hards too). If they wait for Verstappen, they lose to Perez and probably Sainz as well. No matter who they try to cover, they’re likely a lap behind the action...
It isn't that simple. Even with Leclerc in the lead, everyone behind him is playing their own game, so he was likely losing two positions regardless. Sure, they lost everything in the end because of indecision, but that's beside the point.

The only way Leclerc could have held onto first place was if he had his own plan and dictated the pace.
He should have just said, "I want this and that, I'm making the move first," and called it a day. That’s the only way to take that kind of risk. But he didn't show that level of decisiveness.
If Ferrari had put him straight on hards without him confirming the track conditions were ready, the media would have absolutely torn them apart.

The best way to defend a position is to think ahead and build a gap before the pit stops. Why wasn't there better communication from the team? Why didn't they tell him to push harder? Or maybe he just didn't have the pace—that might be the real root of the problem.

👍
I thought it would take a few weeks for the "geniuses" to come out with the theory that "Perez was faster than Verstappen in Monaco qualifying," but apparently, one day was enough. 🙏
Perez is the reason RB finished 3rd and 4th in qualifying. Based on his pace during that fast lap, Verstappen would have been P2. They likely would have taken 2nd and 3rd. Instead, Perez crashed and ruined the lap for both himself and Max, right when Ferrari were sitting pretty in 1st and 2nd.
Then you get the idiots counting qualifying gaps and claiming Perez was faster in Monaco just because he crashed. It's just people who don't even watch the races talking nonsense...

Well, as usual, you're the only one talking nonsense here. ☕
Just like how you missed the detail in Miami where Perez was driving most of the race with a 30 bhp deficit, it seems you clearly didn't watch the qualifying session either.

If Perez hadn't crashed, it still would have been a Ferrari 1-2 because Alonso hit the wall almost at the exact same time as Perez on the other side of the track. There would have been a red flag regardless. I guess you missed that little detail too, despite how closely you supposedly follow the "races."

Perez was faster than Max all Saturday, through FP3 and almost all the qualifying laps.
In the first part of Q3, Perez was faster. Max decided to go for a two-lap attempt during his final run in Q3. Fast lap, cool down, then another fast lap. In that first flying lap, he was still slower than Perez, and by the final lap, they were within half a tenth of a second when Perez crashed.

So yes, Perez was fast in qualifying, especially considering it's Monaco where you always expect someone to kiss the wall eventually. You can't pin everything on a third flying lap when a whole pack of cars is chasing that final time—there's always such a high chance something goes wrong (even a yellow flag in a sector is enough to ruin a qualifying lap).

It's true that he potentially messed things up for himself and several other drivers (Max, Ocon...) by hitting the wall, but we saw later that it didn't matter much since Alonso hit the wall at the same time or immediately after him.

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?

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?

graniteharbor502 said:Does this support the idea:


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.

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.

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.

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?

I watched it, and honestly, what do you expect him to do in that situation? Should he have attacked a driver in Monaco who clearly wasn't going to let him through, even though they are technically supposed to? Even if he had tried, he probably wouldn't have cleared him immediately, and being that stubborn and selfish ended up costing Leclerc about 2 to 3 seconds—which was just enough to lose the gap he needed to get ahead of Max Verstappen after the two stops.

Max Verstappen came out behind decent Mick Schumacher, who, as soon as the radio informed him about the blue flags for Max Verstappen behind him, practically came to a halt at the penultimate corner, moved all the way to the left, and let Max Verstappen through.
That is exactly what Alex Albon should have done, instead of worrying about his own race and what might happen if he got stuck behind Leclerc on intermediates while on fast slicks and ruined his entire weekend.

And regarding his pace, the team gave him the gaps and times over the radio and told him, "you're doing a good job." That suggests they were actually satisfied with his pace—the same crew that warned him things would be tight with Sergio Perez on the exit from the pits, even though Perez was already 5 seconds ahead. 🤣

graniteharbor502 said:Does this support the idea:


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.

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.

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.

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?

I agree with this; in perfect conditions, the grid probably would have looked like:
1. Leclerc, 2. Max Verstappen, 3. Checo Perez, 4. Carlos Sainz.

But in Monaco, things often go sideways, so it's vital to set a fast lap in Q3 as early as possible. If it weren't for Perez crashing, then Fernando Alonso crashed. Without Alonso, we have no way of knowing if someone else might have triggered a yellow or red flag in the meantime.
Everyone knows this and talks about it before qualifying; you need to get those fast laps in early rather than waiting until the end when the track is at its fastest—Checo Perez and Leclerc were doing that throughout qualifying, but Max Verstappen wasn't.

hiddensailor7 said:I watched it, and honestly, what do you expect him to do in that situation? Should he have attacked a driver in Monaco who clearly wasn't going to let him through, even though they are technically supposed to? Even if he had tried, he probably wouldn't have cleared him immediately, and being that stubborn and selfish ended up costing Leclerc about 2 to 3 seconds—which was just enough to lose the gap he needed to get ahead of Max Verstappen after the two stops.

Max Verstappen came out behind decent Mick Schumacher, who, as soon as the radio informed him about the blue flags for Max Verstappen behind him, practically came to a halt at the penultimate corner, moved all the way to the left, and let Max Verstappen through.
That is exactly what Alex Albon should have done, instead of worrying about his own race and what might happen if he got stuck behind Leclerc on intermediates while on fast slicks and ruined his entire weekend.

And regarding his pace, the team gave him the gaps and times over the radio and told him, "you're doing a good job." That suggests they were actually satisfied with his pace—the same crew that warned him things would be tight with Sergio Perez on the exit from the pits, even though Perez was already 5 seconds ahead. 🤣

I agree with this; in perfect conditions, the grid probably would have looked like:
1. Leclerc, 2. Max Verstappen, 3. Checo Perez, 4. Carlos Sainz.

But in Monaco, things often go sideways, so it's vital to set a fast lap in Q3 as early as possible. If it weren't for Perez crashing, then Fernando Alonso crashed. Without Alonso, we have no way of knowing if someone else might have triggered a yellow or red flag in the meantime.
Everyone knows this and talks about it before qualifying; you need to get those fast laps in early rather than waiting until the end when the track is at its fastest—Checo Perez and Leclerc were doing that throughout qualifying, but Max Verstappen wasn't.

Was Mick being a total sweetheart during the 2021 USGP too? You know, when he blocked Max—who had Lewis Hamilton breathing down his neck—in the exact same way, using the exact same number of blue flags (16) right at the end of the race?

graniteharbor502 said: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.

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.

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Lisa Thomas3 said:The situation was pretty messy. As much as I hate making excuses for Ferrari and their incompetence, it’s just not true to say they single-handedly cost Leclerc three spots and leave it at that.
For starters, I listened to the team radio. Unlike Sainz, Leclerc didn't make his tire preferences clear. When asked about switching straight to hards, he just mumbled, "maybe, but not now," and then went silent. I wouldn't completely rule out his own responsibility here.
Leclerc is leading on track, but behind him, Sainz is dead set on jumping straight to hards, Perez blinked first and pitted for inters, and Verstappen is his main threat whose strategy is still anyone's guess. So what is Ferrari supposed to do? If they cover Perez immediately, they likely lose out to both Sainz and Verstappen (since he'll probably go straight to hards too). If they wait for Verstappen, they lose to Perez and probably Sainz as well. No matter who they try to cover, they’re likely a lap behind the action...
It isn't that simple. Even with Leclerc in the lead, everyone behind him is playing their own game, so he was likely losing two positions regardless. Sure, they lost everything in the end because of indecision, but that's beside the point.

The only way Leclerc could have held onto first place was if he had his own plan and dictated the pace.
He should have just said, "I want this and that, I'm making the move first," and called it a day. That’s the only way to take that kind of risk. But he didn't show that level of decisiveness.
If Ferrari had put him straight on hards without him confirming the track conditions were ready, the media would have absolutely torn them apart.

The best way to defend a position is to think ahead and build a gap before the pit stops. Why wasn't there better communication from the team? Why didn't they tell him to push harder? Or maybe he just didn't have the pace—that might be the real root of the problem.

👍
I thought it would take a few weeks for the "geniuses" to come out with the theory that "Perez was faster than Verstappen in Monaco qualifying," but apparently, one day was enough. 🙏
Perez is the reason RB finished 3rd and 4th in qualifying. Based on his pace during that fast lap, Verstappen would have been P2. They likely would have taken 2nd and 3rd. Instead, Perez crashed and ruined the lap for both himself and Max, right when Ferrari were sitting pretty in 1st and 2nd.
Then you get the idiots counting qualifying gaps and claiming Perez was faster in Monaco just because he crashed. It's just people who don't even watch the races talking nonsense...

😍
Oh sure, it's totally obvious Max finished behind Perez in qualifying because Perez crashed...
Just like Max finished behind Perez in Q2 because Perez crashed at the end of Q3,
or he finished behind Perez in his first fast lap in Q3 because Perez crashed at the end of Q3...
But wait, there's more. 🙂
Max was slower than Perez in FP3 by 0.4 seconds because Perez crashed at the end of Q3. 🙏🤣

All Saturday, Max had exactly one single lap that was faster than Perez's—one in Q1... and barely.
But thanks for explaining to us how he definitely would've been faster if Perez hadn't hit the wall...
And I guess Fernando Alonso wouldn't have hit the barrier if Perez hadn't crashed, and it wouldn't be raining if Perez hadn't crashed...
Who knows, maybe today wouldn't even be Tuesday if Perez hadn't crashed. 😁

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? 🙄

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.

You are really exaggerating here.

Max is leading the championship, and he's doing it despite having two DNFs. If it weren't for those DNFs, he would have had a podium in every single race. He would have three wins, two second-place finishes, and one third. But sure, let's pretend Monaco is a preview of how the whole championship will end up.

What does it matter if he was slower than his teammate this weekend, or if there will be more races like this? And why does it matter that it happened in Monaco, where a win carries such huge weight for the standings?

What if Max had crushed him in Monaco, only for Perez to beat him in the next race in Baku? Is that not a problem then?

graniteharbor502 said:Does this support the idea:


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.

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.

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.

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?

It's all "what ifs."
To me, that doesn't mean anything. We have no way of knowing if the rest of the lap would have stayed competitive.

It's not like he absolutely demolished the first sector by being three tenths faster than everyone else; he was faster by a tenth or less. Given how he drove the whole weekend, it's entirely possible he would have lost that time later on and ended up finishing 3rd or 4th anyway.

graniteharbor502 said:Does this support the idea:


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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

I’m completely with you on this. I used to be one of those people arguing that we need to keep it just for the sake of tradition—but honestly, this is a total disaster. Once you reach a point where you can't even attempt an overtake despite being three seconds faster, you've got a massive problem on your hands.

Get the Monaco GP off the calendar as soon as possible.

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.

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.

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.

Amanda Kelly said: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.

Sure, Leclerc is arguably the better driver over a single lap. My take is that Max Verstappen's struggle often comes down to whatever tire temperature he's dealing with when he goes for a flyer. He mentioned that was an issue for him in Monaco too.

Amanda Kelly said: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.

So, I just read today that Red Bull extended Perez's contract through 2024. Combine that with the fact that he's only 15 points behind Max, and you could potentially see a massive internal battle brewing. If that happens, it’ll be wild to see if Perez actually follows team orders blindly or goes rogue...
I honestly get the feeling this is the year for Red Bull, but also for Ferrari to snag both the constructors' and drivers' titles. Mercedes took a hit with that little stumble, but there's zero chance they stay weak next season.
What am I getting at here? Basically, this might be the best shot Perez—and maybe (sadly) Leclerc and Sainz too—has ever had at becoming world champion. In a setup like this, the team shouldn't just push Perez aside to help Max unless the gap becomes huge.
And being only 15 points down after just 9 races? That is definitely not a situation where you just sit back and follow orders...

cosmicmoose2 said:So, I just read today that Red Bull extended Perez's contract through 2024. Combine that with the fact that he's only 15 points behind Max, and you could potentially see a massive internal battle brewing. If that happens, it’ll be wild to see if Perez actually follows team orders blindly or goes rogue...
I honestly get the feeling this is the year for Red Bull, but also for Ferrari to snag both the constructors' and drivers' titles. Mercedes took a hit with that little stumble, but there's zero chance they stay weak next season.
What am I getting at here? Basically, this might be the best shot Perez—and maybe (sadly) Leclerc and Sainz too—has ever had at becoming world champion. In a setup like this, the team shouldn't just push Perez aside to help Max unless the gap becomes huge.
And being only 15 points down after just 9 races? That is definitely not a situation where you just sit back and follow orders...

Look, Max is the reigning world champ and the lead driver for Red Bull, so obviously he’s getting the priority right now. But let's be real—if Checo starts beating him in the upcoming races, Red Bull isn't going to keep playing favorites. They won't mess with him just to protect Max, no matter what those conspiracy theorists want to believe! Experts? The folks on that American forum were totally off with their predictions. Look, at the end of the day, it’s the Constructors' Championship that actually matters. That’s what brings in the massive payouts for the teams. The Drivers' title? Honestly, if we're being nitpicky about it, it doesn't bring them anything at all.

cosmicmoose2 said:So, I just read today that Red Bull extended Perez's contract through 2024. Combine that with the fact that he's only 15 points behind Max, and you could potentially see a massive internal battle brewing. If that happens, it’ll be wild to see if Perez actually follows team orders blindly or goes rogue...
I honestly get the feeling this is the year for Red Bull, but also for Ferrari to snag both the constructors' and drivers' titles. Mercedes took a hit with that little stumble, but there's zero chance they stay weak next season.
What am I getting at here? Basically, this might be the best shot Perez—and maybe (sadly) Leclerc and Sainz too—has ever had at becoming world champion. In a setup like this, the team shouldn't just push Perez aside to help Max unless the gap becomes huge.
And being only 15 points down after just 9 races? That is definitely not a situation where you just sit back and follow orders...

Canada is up next for the ninth race! So far, we've knocked out seven races of the twenty-two. Max has one more DNF under his belt than Checo, which definitely plays into that points gap, but let’s be real—it doesn't take away from how absolutely elite Checo has been driving lately.

ruggedcyclist56 said:Look, Max is the reigning world champ and the lead driver for Red Bull, so obviously he’s getting the priority right now. But let's be real—if Checo starts beating him in the upcoming races, Red Bull isn't going to keep playing favorites. They won't mess with him just to protect Max, no matter what those conspiracy theorists want to believe! Experts? The folks on that American forum were totally off with their predictions. Look, at the end of the day, it’s the Constructors' Championship that actually matters. That’s what brings in the massive payouts for the teams. The Drivers' title? Honestly, if we're being nitpicky about it, it doesn't bring them anything at all.

Canada is up next for the ninth race! So far, we've knocked out seven races of the twenty-two. Max has one more DNF under his belt than Checo, which definitely plays into that points gap, but let’s be real—it doesn't take away from how absolutely elite Checo has been driving lately.

Yeah, yeah, yeah... seven. That means there's a 15-point swing out there for the two Red Bull guys to fight over.

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.