Ricciardo puzzled by Red Bull gains

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Daniel Ricciardo admits he is unsure how Red Bull have closed the gap to Mercedes and Ferrari in recent races.

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Comment of the day

This weekend’s Caption Competition was won by @Tango:

“…And that’s how I overtake my Finn. How about yours?”
“Nah, he’s never in front…”

@Tango

Thanks to everyone who entered, especially Travis Daye, Carlos Patrao, Neil, F1Junky, Dom and Me4me who all came up with really good captions too.

On this day in F1

The Renault drivers claimed the front row of the San Marino Grand Prix 35 years ago today as just seven teams turned up due to a row between Bernie Ecclestone’s Formula One Constructors’ Association and Jean-Marie Balestre’s FISA.

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

47 comments on “Ricciardo puzzled by Red Bull gains”

  1. When was the last time F1 wasn’t an engineers’ championship?

    To the point that prize money is given to the highest scoring constructors?

    1. 1957!!!!

    2. @ninjabadger, it’s always been an engineers’ championship – 1958 might have been when the constructors championship was introduced, but even before then the team was a significant factor.

      1. Don’t worry. I understand that the Grand Prix racing has always been a competition of groups attempting to build the best cars to win races; and the eras of dominance experienced throughout history.

        My question was more on the definition of the term ‘championship’.

        1. @ninjabadger, OK then, I see the angle that you are coming from. Mind you, although there was not a formalised structure before then, individual races would award prize money to the highest placed teams within a particular event – so although there was not a formal WCC, teams were in a sense still being rewarded on a race by race basis for being the highest scoring constructors.

  2. Great caption winner : )

    1. Except it should have read “..and that’s how my fin had to move over..”

      Overtaking didn’t happen there now did it?

      1. that’s the point, it’s a sarcasm

      2. Fukobayashi (@)
        24th April 2017, 14:13

        There’s always one.

    2. Thanks :) yeah it’s not meant to be taken litteraly. Thanks @keithcollantine too

    3. I have to agree…props @Tango

  3. @ninjabadger everything these days is an engineers’ championship to a certain degree as there’s always some sort of engieering analysis going on. From bobsleigh to tennis… in motorsports, because the racing is primarily about cars, it puts a lot more emphasys on engineering, obviously.

    Even in spec car series, you have engineers setting up the cars. F1 will never detach itself from them. Specially since it’s the pinnacle of the sport, and technology has come a long way. But even in the 50’s, you have the Mercedes team beating the heck out of everyone, and it wasn’t just because of Fangio and Moss…

    Direct injection, desmodromic valves and magnessium alloys don’t grow on trees…

    1. I’m basically saying: Bernie’s comments are not valid arguments to anything…

      1. They haven’t been for a long time. Think it’s a bit on sour grapes from Bernie

      2. Given that he chose, because he had the power, to have an engineers’ championship he can’t be complaining, or can he?

      3. @fer-no65 I think there is some merit to his words (this time anyway).
        Its been long considered that the drivers’ championship has the bigger effect with PR (as people tend to be drawn more by personalities). And, for better or worse, PR is Bernie’s thing.

        It could be said that, PR-wise, F1 is seen as more corporate driven than personality driven.
        With drivers tending to be corporate friendly in front of the media.
        Like it or not, it’s why it grabs our attention when drivers speak out. Be it Alonso at Honda, Hamilton at the media, or Vettel at Charlie.
        It shows more about the people behind the wheel; whether that be aggression, desire, talent, manipulation, stress, resentment, passion, arrogance, competitiveness, nonchalance. And that helps people become invested in a driver.
        Without it the racing may as well be autonomous to some.

    2. @fer-no65 I think this isn’t quite accurate. Perhaps true of bobsled, but tennis? I think it’s a bit of a stretch to think that tennis tournaments are won purely by the person who has access to the best racquet. For sure, getting the racquet right for the athelete is a major part of creating that success, but in the end it’s the quality of the player that determines the winner. The same can’t really be said for F1. In F1, as it is and as it has been for as long as I can remember, it’s not the best driver who wins the championhip, it’s the best driver out of those who have access to the best cars. Any tennis player can pay for a pro racquet setup – it’s available to anyone who wants it and the costs aren’t prohibitive. Same for swimming suits, track spikes, golf clubs, and most other forms of sports equipment. Anyone who wants it can get the best. The same certainly isn’t true of F1 – access to the best equipment is restricted to a very small number of competitors, and the difference between the best and worst F1 machinery is far greater than the performance difference between the best and worst F1 driver. The slowest driver on the grid could win races in the right car. Partly because the level of driving across the board is very high, but mostly because the margins are that fine.

      I’m not saying there is aything inherently wrong with this – this is how motorsport works outside of spec series. And even in spec series the ability to set the car up for the track is often the biggest deciding factor.

      Basically what I’m saying is that this notion of F1 being a pure competition between drivers is a fantasy – it never has been and it never will be. The reality has always been that the designers make a far bigger difference than the drivers.

      1. Drivers are coloured by their cars. Then it is up to drivers to either try to take a car beyond where it belongs, or take advantage and not squander the equipment when it is indeed worthy of wins. History has shown overwhelmingly that you pretty much need the WCC car with which to win the WDC. But there still remains lots of room to discern the better drivers from the lesser ones. If they can engineer less aero dependence and get rid of DRS, which is the tone coming from Brawn, then perhaps we’ll see more of the driver effect and less of the car effect. The degree of negative effect in dirty air is too handcuffing for drivers to show everything they can in this decades long addiction to aero downforce that works great in clean air and damages close racing in reality.

      2. Tennis is indeed almost certainly not won by the greatest racquet @mazdachris!

        On the other hand, I think a team of engineers carfully studying movement, analysing training procedures, metodically formulating an optimal approach might be what does the trick, combined with keenly developed shoes, and the optimal racquet. Especially for a guy like Federer getting back to the top.

        So if we take the engineering only as (too big a) focus on the equipment it would probably count for sports where we use vehicles (motorsport, sailing, rowing, bobsled, cycling, but also skying, …), although even then, remember what high-tech training paired with specially engineered suits did for swimmers a couple of years back. Or just look at the engineering that goes into building the track athletes run on (or skate on for example).

        If we take it as a wider view, looking at using science and engineering to find the best package of everything to support the athlete, then the statement from @fer-no65 would probably be spot on. I guess it is a question of your point of view.

      3. @mazdachris i wasn’t only talking about the racquet, there’s also big investments in engineering in shoes, clothes, balls, surfaces, the hawkeye technology and so on. Modern technologies changed the game since the day of wooden racquets. Sure technology has less influence over the result than say motorsport, but it’s still very tied with the sport nowadays.

        The conclusion is the same anyway. To a certain degree there’s always engineering. Motorsport, because the car dictates how far a driver can go, will always be the extreme example of the influence of technology in the end result.

  4. The younger the kids the move vulnerable they are in racing.

  5. The reason why RB and everyone was closer together at the Sakhir circuit is because there’s fewer long corners, the lap is shorter and the tyres were within temperature for everyone, at least the super softs were.

    1. Also to me it looked like hamilton could have gone quicker but made a mistake on his last attempt. I doubt it would have been any more than couple of tenths faster than bottas though.

    2. Maybe Red Bull drivers are making mistakes in Australia and China but didn’t in Bahrain. (And Mercedes drivers did make mistakes in Bahrain)

      1. Not an mistake of the drivers but their setup was not the same as RB thought it was behind the computer. And the rain disrupted the normal race day. But as you see RB is good on the supersoft while the rest race good on the softs. That means the downforce isn’t switching the soft on (not good enough)

    3. I don’t think ther were actually closer in real terms. It was one of those tracks where the “new” spec cars weren’t all that much faster than they were last year.

      Neither Mercedes or Ferrari were that magic 3 – 5 seconds a lap faster for the reasons @peartree stated so the rest of the field (including RBR) just seemed closer.

      I’d love to be wrong but Inthink RBR still have an awfully long way to go.

    4. I think it could be that Merc and Ferrari have realised the importance of race pace over quali time. The cars might be slower in Quali but faster in the race.
      This would also explain why Hamilton was uncharacteristically slower in quali and had good pace throughout the race.

      Just a theory..

  6. What’s wrong in F1 being an engineer’s championship. I believe it should primarily be an engineer’s championship. It’s these advances in technology that’s taking the world forward

    1. @malleshmagdum, I think that the problem comes because there is an inherent tension in the fan base about what they want – on the one hand, people want to see greater diversity in the appearance and performance of the cars, but on the other they want the cars to be closely matched because they want to believe that their favoured driver is the one who is making the difference in performance and to see the drivers battling on track.

    2. @malleshmagdum

      I agree. There are so many one make series out there so why not switch channel instead of complaining about one of the few engineering focused series.

      1. For me the magic bullet is obvious and is something I have a lot of faith in Brawn to start to fix, since he’s already talked this way. They need to ween themselves off of so much aero dependence and the resultant ‘need’ for DRS. The engineering, designing aspects will always be there, but we have now seen over too many variables over too many years with good tires and bad that the real harm to the product comes from aero dependence.

  7. Someone should tell Ham that Toto doesn’t have any interests (at) in WIlliams anymore and Macca are not being supplied by Merc. The privateer teams in F1 are no more, and Renault+Honda, never going to amount to anything as long as Merc is allowed to dominate through the rules. Merc are happy to let Ferrari look like they are close, HAM is happy to do what ever Toto wants him to do.

    1. Sure, Toto is the One that decides everything, the puppet master! It’s so difficult to understand that Ferrari and Vettel at the moment are stronger during the race?

    2. Yes Merc are so happy to make Ferrari look so so close, i guess they’re happy to give em to win also.
      1 thing You and Marko have in common is that your paranoia is off the charts.

      1. @foreverred, ignore him – he’s admitted in the past that he makes things up because he is an attention seeker.

    3. Toto Schillaci?

  8. First mcLaren puzzled at reliable day… Now Red Bull puzzled to be only 8 tenths off pace? What is next? Mercedes puzzled by another victory?

  9. I’m devastated – next you’ll tell me football is a team championship :p

  10. Wasn’t there some kind of strategic meeting last Friday where the future existence of the T-Wing was on the agenda ?
    I may have missed it, but anyone who knows what the outcome was ?

  11. Alonso’s tweet reads:

    “Woken up in the morning in one of the saddest days. Devastated. From here, an enormous hug (In Spanish is common to send hugs as a sign of comfort, a bit like in English people say “my thoughts are with…”) for Gonzalo’s family and all the Karting “community”.”

    The twee is in reference to the last article on the round-up

    It has been very bad news for Motorsport these couple of weeks.

  12. I don’t remember the last time I saw Button excited to race in that McLaren to be honest

    1. You can’t blame him though. He’s going to be stepping in to the most rubbish car at the most challenging track on the calendar without having driven the 2017 machines yet. He would hate to leave the sport getting lapped multiple times by the front runners and finishing dead last (if he doesn’t DNF).

      1. He could always prwtend the cars broken and park it. Nice pay day.

  13. And Renault were 0.3 behind the Red Bullies after being 0.5s behind in china. If we’re going by Ricciardo’s Logic Mercedes and Ferrari will not find any gains.

  14. Naaa he should have made the telephone sign with he’s right hand because that’s really how.

  15. It just dawned on me after seeing Ecclestone, does the Liberty take over also mean that Tilke is out as well?

    1. MrF1GuyV12POWAHHH (@)
      25th April 2017, 2:25

      Likely not.

      That being said while Tilke is a great architect, I wish the newer track’s layouts themselves would be designed by different people for the sake of variety.

Comments are closed.