Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

2019 Renault F1: Ricciardo, Hulk and other Enstone goings-on


  • Please log in to reply
1736 replies to this topic

#1701 goldenboy

goldenboy
  • Member

  • 5,317 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 16 May 2019 - 12:17

I'm sorry guys while qualli is important no way is qualifying pace more important than race pace thats nonsense. Even at Bahrain where they had their worst quailifying in 11th and 17th they were still able to get back to best of the rest behind the top 3 before they DNF'd late in the race.

Only two or three out of 21 tracks have no or virtually no overtaking chances where qualli is key. That is nowhere near ALOT, the rest of the tracks if your slow in the race there is a good chance you will get overtaken. Prime is example is Haas. Almost every race so far this year they were the best midfield qualifier yet went backwards most of those races due to poor race pace. Leaving qualli start positions where they are and taking into account where both teams should have finished on race pace (from the data available) minus driver mistakes, DNFs etc Renault end up on around 34 WCC points vs Haas 21 at this point even ahead of McLaren as well with similar adjustments.

Also the new aero regs allow a car to follow much closer to the car in front than before and with less aero wake as well which obviously helps with overtaking this season.

their race pace may be better than rest of the midfield but seemingly a bit short of being able to make up for their woeful qually defecit.

Edited by goldenboy, 16 May 2019 - 12:17.


Advertisement

#1702 gowebber

gowebber
  • Member

  • 3,224 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 16 May 2019 - 12:27

Hang on - what are we calling good race pace? A car that can get into the points or stay there if it qualifies in the top 10? That's not good. That's average at best and damning with faint praise - Presenting the RS19 - Average at Best. Have at it Dan and Nico.

 

Mercedes, Ferrari and RB have good race pace. Let's not make a silk purse of a pig here.

 

I thought we were comparing the midfield now suddenly we are comparing to the top 3?

 

Well it seems I'm telling you something completely new, as you seem to focus on race pace only. The Q and R pace interact, as you often can't use your racepace if your Q was bad. 

 

In my view you downplay the Q results too much and put too much emphasis on the race pace. The results of Renault are an excellent indication of why qualifying is an important part. But like usual, you have your own very specific view on things :).  

 

Not really I've told you a number of times its important. It just annoys me that many are claiming the sky is falling (especially in regards to qualifying position) when in reality its not that bad, my point on the WCC points adjusted when removing driver error, team strategy and reliability problems during the races so far proves this. 

 

Every serious, statistically founded analysis going has Renault firmly in the midfield in race pace (for example moreland's race pace 2019 thread on here) and qualifying pace (for example this one albeit after 4 rounds), on average 1.3-1.5s off the pace of the Mercedes. Clearly Renault currently doesn't have the pace to qualify ahead or at the front of the midfield consistently, nor do they have a clear race pace advantage that would allow them to make up the deficit on the Sunday. If there is concrete statistical evidence that points to Renault being clearly ahead I would like to see it.

 

Yet you're complete ignoring my statistical evidence that when adjusting for the above (from the qualifying position and likely finish position) where teams and drivers have cost themselves points during the first 5 races (for all midfield runners) it would have Renault sitting clearly 4th in the WCC. Bahrain is a clear example of poor qualifying position well for Hulk anyway and finishing strongly in the points due to race pace (before the double DNF). Australia as well for Hulk starting 11th finishing 7th

 

Anyway we seem to just be going around in circles so I'm happy to wait until later in the season to continue this after we have a bit more additional data to go on.


Edited by gowebber, 16 May 2019 - 13:05.


#1703 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,142 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 16 May 2019 - 12:42

@Gowebber: you want to adjust WCC points by removing driver error, team strategy and reliability problems, for Renault.

 

What about adjusting WCC points for all other midfield teams by removing driver error, team strategy and reliability problems? Or are we just analysing Renault as an isolated case, assuming that all other teams reached their full potential and no driver errors, team f'ups and reliability problems have been faced by them?



#1704 Dratini

Dratini
  • Member

  • 1,271 posts
  • Joined: July 17

Posted 16 May 2019 - 12:45

@Gowebber: you want to adjust WCC points by removing driver error, team strategy and reliability problems, for Renault.

 

What about adjusting WCC points for all other midfield teams by removing driver error, team strategy and reliability problems? Or are we just analysing Renault as an isolated case, assuming that all other teams reached their full potential and no driver errors, team f'ups and reliability problems have been faced by them?

As we know, pace means nothing if you can't execute with it. Let's look at Vettel/Ferrari 2017-18.



#1705 gowebber

gowebber
  • Member

  • 3,224 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 16 May 2019 - 12:45

@Gowebber: you want to adjust WCC points by removing driver error, team strategy and reliability problems, for Renault.

 

What about adjusting WCC points for all other midfield teams by removing driver error, team strategy and reliability problems? Or are we just analysing Renault as an isolated case, assuming that all other teams reached their full potential and no driver errors, team f'ups and reliability problems have been faced by them?

 

I mentioned that previously that I did it for all midfield runners as well and Renault were still in 4th position. We are debating qualifying as being the main problem but its actually not when you just remove the driver errors, poor tyre/strategy calls and reliability issues from the races, Renault are clear 4th in the WCC and once again thats also doing the same for the other midfield runners. Fix those race issues and the qualifying positions Renault started from are not really a factor stopping them from being 4th currently in the WCC. That double DNF in Bahrain alone cost them dearly in the WCC and without that the points gained would have been probably enough to lift them to 4th in the WCC.

 

Basically like I said those race issues are the main problem in regards to where they find themselves currently in the WCC (not qualifying position) however obviously qualifying higher would net them most likely even more points and is important in the long run.


Edited by gowebber, 16 May 2019 - 13:12.


#1706 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 4,814 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 16 May 2019 - 12:53

Yet you're complete ignoring my statistical evidence that when adjusting for the above where teams and drivers have cost themselves points during the first 5 races (for all midfield runners) it would have Renault sitting clearly 4th in the WCC.

 

Anyway we seem to just be going around in circles so I'm happy to wait until later in the season to continue this after we have a bit more additional data to go on.

 

Is this in reference to this:

 

"Leaving qualli start positions where they are and taking into account where both teams should have finished on race pace (from the data available) minus driver mistakes, DNFs etc Renault end up on around 34 WCC points vs Haas 21 at this point even ahead of McLaren as well with similar adjustments."

 

 

I don;t know how you got to your numbers. If I do what I think it is you are doing (i.e. handing p7 sorted by race pace 6 points, p8 4 points etc. using moreland's race pace data classification for each race) I get Renault on 17 points, McLaren on 16, Toro Rosso on 13, etc. Hardly conclusive evidence that Renault on race pace has a clear edge over the other midfield teams. How do you get to your numbers?

 

Edit: considering your post above I am quite intrigued by your methodology, because whichever way I look at the data I can't come to any conclusion resembling what you claim to be true.


Edited by FullOppositeLock, 16 May 2019 - 12:57.


#1707 FPV GTHO

FPV GTHO
  • Member

  • 2,165 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted 16 May 2019 - 13:07

Renault's race pace isn't so strong that it can consistently make up for its lack of qualifying pace. This is the problem, and the conversation is one that seemingly has no end in sight. :lol:


Historically there's always been cars with good qualifying pace but poor race pace, or vice versa. It typically involves how hard or soft they're working their tyres.

#1708 Dratini

Dratini
  • Member

  • 1,271 posts
  • Joined: July 17

Posted 16 May 2019 - 13:12

Historically there's always been cars with good qualifying pace but poor race pace, or vice versa. It typically involves how hard or soft they're working their tyres.

Sadly. I think I speak for many people when I say I just wish all teams could put the tyres on, push, and not have to worry about whether they're in the right operating window, whether it's a couple degrees warmer or cooler than it was five minutes ago etc.



#1709 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 4,814 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 16 May 2019 - 13:17

Basically like I said those race issues are the main problem in regards to where they find themselves currently in the WCC (not qualifying position) however obviously qualifying higher would net them most likely even more points and is important in the long run.

 

If that's all you said I doubt anybody would have disagreed. Obviously not having MGU-K issues, not lawn mowing the Melbourne gutter, not suffering from software bugs and not driving into other drivers backwards would have resulted in more championship points, as would having qualified higher up the field, but that was never in question. What you said and continue to say is that Renault are "much quicker than everyone else in the midfield" in terms of race pace, and you are yet to provide any convincing evidence or data to this effect.



#1710 Paco

Paco
  • Member

  • 2,664 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 16 May 2019 - 13:23

Sadly. I think I speak for many people when I say I just wish all teams could put the tyres on, push, and not have to worry about whether they're in the right operating window, whether it's a couple degrees warmer or cooler than it was five minutes ago etc.

 

I agree and have been saying that for 10+ years.  That said, you do realize the reason we have gone done this path is because people wanted drivers to have more impact with tire management.  Plus, there is a good chance MGP would demonimate even more if the tire construction was stronger. 

 

They are they way they are for a reason.. to have drivers have more influence in lap times.  Well.. in theory anyway..



#1711 Dratini

Dratini
  • Member

  • 1,271 posts
  • Joined: July 17

Posted 16 May 2019 - 13:30

I agree and have been saying that for 10+ years.  That said, you do realize the reason we have gone done this path is because people wanted drivers to have more impact with tire management.  Plus, there is a good chance MGP would demonimate even more if the tire construction was stronger. 

 

They are they way they are for a reason.. to have drivers have more influence in lap times.  Well.. in theory anyway..

I've always heard people moaning about tyre management, both drivers and fans. I thought the reason we went down this road was due to the resurfacing of the Canadian GP circuit in 2010, which resulted in a high deg race. Fans went nuts for it, and it received the highest race rating on RaceFans that year (https://www.racefans...t-race-of-2010/). Contrast that of course to the Italian GP of that year where Vettel made his only stop on the penultimate lap, a grand prix which received a rating of 6.8 compared to Canada's 8.7.



#1712 BCM

BCM
  • Member

  • 1,589 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 16 May 2019 - 13:55

I thought we were comparing the midfield now suddenly we are comparing to the top 3?

.

 

Err no that's your paradigm. I've never been interested in what happens with the midfield and Renault aren't supposed to be either this year. They're supposed to be focused on the front.

 

Look even Cyril says so - I think he's had a spanking from the board.

 

https://au.motorspor...-goals/4389494/



#1713 gowebber

gowebber
  • Member

  • 3,224 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 16 May 2019 - 13:58

Is this in reference to this:

 

 

I don;t know how you got to your numbers. If I do what I think it is you are doing (i.e. handing p7 sorted by race pace 6 points, p8 4 points etc. using moreland's race pace data classification for each race) I get Renault on 17 points, McLaren on 16, Toro Rosso on 13, etc. Hardly conclusive evidence that Renault on race pace has a clear edge over the other midfield teams. How do you get to your numbers?

 

Edit: considering your post above I am quite intrigued by your methodology, because whichever way I look at the data I can't come to any conclusion resembling what you claim to be true.

 

Heres how I came to my conclusion looking at starting position, footage from races and where teammate finished up etc to calculate finish positions after removing driver mistakes, DNF's, strategy errors etc

 

 
------------------------------
Australia
 
Grosjean likely finishes ahead of Hulk in 7th. Hulk demoted to 8th, Ricciardo finishes 9th, Sainz likely finish outside the points
 
Haas + 6, Renault (points remain same as current as Hulk loses 2 and Dan gains 2), McLaren No extra points
 
 
Bahrain
Hulk 6th and Ricciardo 7th finish ahead of Sainz 9th, Haas finish outide points
 
Haas no extra points, Hulk +8, Ricciardo +6, McLaren demoted to 8th and 9th (-4 points, +2 = -2, Therefor subtract 2 points off WCC total)
 
 
China
Haas finish outside points, Hulk finish 8th, McLaren finish outside points
 
Hulk +4
 
 
 
Azerbaijan.
 
Haas finish outide the points, Ricciardo finishes 9th, McLaren no change in points
 
Ricciardo +2
 
Spain
 
Haas no change in points, Ricciardo finish 8th (possibly higher if not for safety car), Sainz demoted to 9th, Albon up to 10th
 
Ricciardo +4, Sainz -2, Albon +1
 
---------------------------
 
Total adjusted lost WCC points to add to current WCC
 
Haas +6
Renault +14 +4 +2 +4 = 24
McLaren -2 + -2 + 1 = -3
 
Adjusted current WCC standings after 5 races ( Racing Point, Alfa and Toro Rosso don't really factor in or change positions so haven't bothered adding thier totals again)
 
4th Renault 36 (Current 12 + 24 adjusted pts)
5th Haas 21 (Current 15 + 6 adjusted pts)
6th McLaren 19 (Current 22 - 3 adjusted pts)
7th Racing Point 17 
8th Alfa Romeo 13
9th Toro Rosso 6
10th Williams 0

Edited by gowebber, 16 May 2019 - 14:03.


#1714 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 732 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 16 May 2019 - 14:14

I mentioned that previously that I did it for all midfield runners as well and Renault were still in 4th position. We are debating qualifying as being the main problem but its actually not when you just remove the driver errors, poor tyre/strategy calls and reliability issues from the races, Renault are clear 4th in the WCC and once again thats also doing the same for the other midfield runners. Fix those race issues and the qualifying positions Renault started from are not really a factor stopping them from being 4th currently in the WCC. That double DNF in Bahrain alone cost them dearly in the WCC and without that the points gained would have been probably enough to lift them to 4th in the WCC.

 

Basically like I said those race issues are the main problem in regards to where they find themselves currently in the WCC (not qualifying position) however obviously qualifying higher would net them most likely even more points and is important in the long run.

 

I don't buy that at all. You really can't correct for all the midfield teams "issues". In fact, the "correction" that you did should show you that Haas are the clear 4th, and that the tire temperature issue and their drivers (KMags and RoGro  :rolleyes: ) is holding them back from being 4th as they would have finished 6th and 7th in every race thus far without the tire issues and driver squabbling.

 

Also what are you arguing here? That we should remove every single metric that defines how well a team does in the Constructor championship, so that you can slap Renault's name at the top? I don't get that. It seems wrong to me, but maybe I don't understand. WCC success is not just about "race pace" for which it is marginal if the "race pace" is coming from the car, or just the extra bit that Ricciardo and Hulk add. I think put two lesser drivers in the RS19 and Renault would be 8th...Look how well Jolyon Palmer went...The car sucks. It's also about consistent reliable car with brakes and aero stability worth a damn :rolleyes: , good strategy and execution all of which Renault have shown they are NOT the clear 4th best team in 2019.  You cannot just delete everything that makes Renault poor, in order to then say they are good.


Edited by ARTGP, 16 May 2019 - 14:24.


#1715 gowebber

gowebber
  • Member

  • 3,224 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 16 May 2019 - 14:26

I never adjusted for tyre warmup / problems on any of those teams that's virtually impossible to estimate. I just simply eliminated the standout issues that are much easier to make adjustments for to give an idea of where I believe the WCC points would stand given the current qualifying and race pace for each team. It just highlights how many issues Renault have created for themselves and how many points it's cost them.

Edited by gowebber, 16 May 2019 - 14:31.


#1716 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 732 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 16 May 2019 - 14:30

I never adjusted for tyre warmup / problems on any of those teams that's virtually impossible to estimate. I just simply eliminated the standout issues that are much easier to make adjustments for.

 

 

Do you see the problem in the logic here? You just cherry picked some "easy" standout issues to make a claim that Renault are 4th in your "Corrected" championship.  But since your "corrected" championship does not correct for everything, it's not that valuable to look at.


Edited by ARTGP, 16 May 2019 - 14:30.


#1717 gowebber

gowebber
  • Member

  • 3,224 posts
  • Joined: May 08

Posted 16 May 2019 - 14:41

Do you see the problem in the logic here? You just cherry picked some "easy" standout issues to make a claim that Renault are 4th in your "Corrected" championship. But since your "corrected" championship does not correct for everything, it's not that valuable to look at.

Trying to correct the tyre issues for each team and then figure out where everyone is is impossible and just an easy unprovable way to refute the conclusion I've provided. Past similar WCC/wdc adjustments done by others in driver vs for example have also never done tyre warmup adjustments etc because its virtually impossible. By your own admission then you can also say that Renault fix thier qualifying tyre warmup issues and are well inside the top 10 in Q3 alongside or in front of Haas at each race. See your just "cherry picking" the Haas issue and only mentioned them fixing thier tyre issues to provide your 4th in the WCC conclusion. It works both ways.

Anyway I'm out until Monaco as I don't really have the time to go round in circles. I've made my position clear with what I believe is reasonable data and evidence so let's see if Renault can prove a few of the doubters wrong.

Edited by gowebber, 16 May 2019 - 15:40.


#1718 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 732 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 16 May 2019 - 14:50

Trying to correct the tyre issues for each team and then figure out where everyone is is impossible and just an easy unprovable way to refute the reasoning I've provided.

I think you're missing the point. You have not corrected for ALL of the factors (how easy or difficult it is to do so has got nothing to do with me). So it makes your "corrected" championship incomplete. I don't know what you are trying to show if your analysis is incomplete.

This isn't about me wanting to "refute" your reasoning. Your reasoning is by your own admission incomplete.

Edited by ARTGP, 16 May 2019 - 14:52.


#1719 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 4,814 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 16 May 2019 - 15:58

Your analysis is seriously flawed in that it assumes other teams’ mistakes, misfortune etc. would still have happened or that Renault would have been able to pass faster or equally fast cars on track whist at the same time keeping faster cars behind:

Australia: Grosjean likely finishes ahead of Hulk in 7th. Hulk demoted to 8th, Ricciardo finishes 9th, Sainz likely finish outside the points

Ricciardo started behind Kimi who had better race pace than him, so it’s unreasonable to assume he would have got past. So let’s say 8th and 10th, or less points than they actually got due to Grosjean’s misfortune.

Bahrain
Hulk 6th and Ricciardo 7th finish ahead of Sainz 9th, Haas finish outide points

Correcting for mistakes and misfortune (as you say you do) Sainz wouldn’t have got tangled up with Max fighting for p5 and would have finished in front of both Renaults. Ricciardo was on a one stopper and in p10 when he retired. Kimi, Norris and Gasly all had already passed him and had better race pace (tyre corrected) so I would say Hulk p7 and Ric just out of the points (Sainz p6 pushes him out) at a push.

China
Haas finish outside points, Hulk finish 8th, McLaren finish outside points


Perez (who finished p8) was ahead of Hulk after lap 2 and by the time Hulk’s problems started he had also been passed by Kimi. So let’s say Hulk would have finished p10, a single point swing with Toro Rosso who you deem irrelevant anyway.

Azerbaijan.

Haas finish outide the points, Ricciardo finishes 9th, McLaren no change in points

Without misfortune Gasly finishes p6. Perez, Sainz and Norris had better race pace than Dan so finish ahead. Assuming Ric would have been able to pass Kvyat with ruining both their races, the maximum possible was 10th (correcting for Gasly’s drive shaft misfortune the same way you do for Renault’s MGU-K failures). So again a single point swing at most, with Racing Point (another team you don’t deem worthy for inclusion in your analysis).

Spain

Haas no change in points, Ricciardo finish 8th (possibly higher if not for safety car), Sainz demoted to 9th, Albon up to 10th


Haas no change in points? If their drivers don’t decide to **** the team over (massive mistake in my book, so should be corrected in your race pace correction analysis), Haas finish p7 and p8. If the Toro Rosso’s don’t double stack without bringing tyres they both finish ahead of the first Renault. Ric’s race pace was only better than the Racing Points and Alfa’s here (and Williams obviously) corrected for tyres. No way in hell he finishes p8 corrected for mistakes, misfortune and whatever else you wish to correct for. A well deserved no points.

So all in all you could argue that all this misfortune, mistakes, etc. cost Renault 7-ish points, which still puts them squarely in midfield. And that’s before even discussing if leaving out mistakes is a valid way to approach such an analysis.

Edited by FullOppositeLock, 16 May 2019 - 16:00.


Advertisement

#1720 Dratini

Dratini
  • Member

  • 1,271 posts
  • Joined: July 17

Posted 16 May 2019 - 16:44

Can someone please win this argument so I can read about other things :lol:



#1721 FullOppositeLock

FullOppositeLock
  • Member

  • 4,814 posts
  • Joined: September 15

Posted 16 May 2019 - 17:19

No worries, I will leave it there. Agree to disagree and hope for better times in any case.

#1722 CharlesWinstone

CharlesWinstone
  • Member

  • 582 posts
  • Joined: July 16

Posted 16 May 2019 - 20:31

Wen even Dan's fans start bullying Gowebber something is really wrong.

Hope Cyril proves everybody wrong by giving the guys a car to Q both drivers on the 4th row in Monaco👊

#1723 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 732 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 16 May 2019 - 21:13

Can someone please win this argument so I can read about other things :lol:

 

:lol:  touche.



#1724 BCM

BCM
  • Member

  • 1,589 posts
  • Joined: July 10

Posted 17 May 2019 - 07:52

Can someone please win this argument so I can read about other things :lol:

 

I declare myself the winner. Let's move on :)

 

Renault won't do any better at Monaco either. Qualifying will crucify them there.



#1725 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 9,449 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 17 May 2019 - 11:21

I declare myself the winner. Let's move on :)

 

 

Spoken like a true Cyril.  :rotfl:



#1726 noikeee

noikeee
  • Member

  • 15,335 posts
  • Joined: February 06

Posted 17 May 2019 - 12:07

Renault looked fleetingly good on race pace in Bahrain, but on the bigger picture even there they should've had a McLaren finish ahead of them and that's already assuming had they put Dan on a decent strategy he'd have done well; and every other race they have been a bit crap. Massive disappointment tbh and I think we can already conclude their race pace overall isn't that good.



#1727 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 732 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 17 May 2019 - 18:24

Is anyone able to reconcile Cyril's crying that "Renault is poor" interview, with the fact that Renault are supplying a Mule Car for Pirelli? With reports that teams like Racing Point saying they couldn't afford it. And Mclaren saying it's significant task.

 

I don't think Renault is poor by any stretch of the imagination. Just needs to be better run...



#1728 Neno

Neno
  • Member

  • 1,694 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted 17 May 2019 - 20:26

Is anyone able to reconcile Cyril's crying that "Renault is poor" interview, with the fact that Renault are supplying a Mule Car for Pirelli? With reports that teams like Racing Point saying they couldn't afford it. And Mclaren saying it's significant task.

 

I don't think Renault is poor by any stretch of the imagination. Just needs to be better run...

Renault F1 team is poor in sense that Renault main brass is not interested in spending money on budget as top team even though they as manufacturer are making more money than Ferrari or Mercedes. So when Cyril crys about Renault being poor he is right. Even though they have technically money to spend it, it's not available to them. Meaning they need operate like they are no different than Haas. 

 

But then again even I wouldnt give 500M budget to Nick Chester to build a car.  And then that's on Cyril. Good principal would hire someone who actually knows how to build a good car without needing biggest budget and then when time come ask for increase in budget. 

 

And that's my friend is called 101 how to run a team efficiently and succesfully.


Edited by Neno, 17 May 2019 - 20:32.


#1729 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 732 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 17 May 2019 - 20:38

Renault F1 team is poor in sense that Renault main brass is not interested in spending money on budget as top team even though they as manufacturer are making more money than Ferrari or Mercedes. So when Cyril crys about Renault being poor he is right. Even though they have technically money to spend it, it's not available to them. Meaning they need operate like they are no different than Haas. 

 

But then again even I wouldnt give 500M budget to Nick Chester to build a car.  And then that's on Cyril. Good principal would hire someone who actually knows how to build a good car without needing biggest budget and then when time come ask for increase in budget. 

 

And that's my friend is called 101 how to run a team efficiently and succesfully.

 

Agree, I didn't know Nick Chester has been with them so long. Seems like Cyril needs to hire someone else for the sake of trying something different.  If they don't succeed, that's on Cyril too. By that route I can see the logic in that Cyril is directly holding them back, even though he doesn't design anything. He refuses to hire better technical leaders. 

 

I know that Jorg Zander guy did some good stuff with the Audi LMP program.  But got "let go" from Sauber for some reason.

 

 

If McLaren could get rid of a stature like Ron Dennis, then Renault surely can get rid of Chester?


Edited by ARTGP, 17 May 2019 - 20:44.


#1730 StanBarrett2

StanBarrett2
  • Member

  • 937 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 17 May 2019 - 20:53

 

If McLaren could get rid of a stature like Ron Dennis, then Renault surely can get rid of Chester Cyril....................

Edited 4 U

 

not that he has stature, but.....


Edited by StanBarrett2, 17 May 2019 - 20:53.


#1731 Stonk

Stonk
  • New Member

  • 3 posts
  • Joined: May 19

Posted Today, 04:30

Good to see that among all the drama with cyril & the car, Dan is showing himself to be absolutely top drawer. 4-1 in Qualifying against Hulkenburg is quite an effort at this stage of the year considering how uncomfortable he was looking in Australia. Hulkenburg usually wrecks his team mate in Q as well.

 

He is over driving a bit because the car needs to be manhandled right now to get a good lap, so he's making some errors, but it's good to see his elite qualifying pace is still with him.

 

If/When Renault provide him a better car, he will be worth every penny.

 

This might be the end of the road for Nico though, Ricciardo starting to consistenly beat him so early on is not a good sign, It took Verstappen a good year to get on to terms with Ricciardo after moving to the team. (and that was going from a poor car to a great one, not the other way around) 

 

His contract is up at the end of the year and I can see Renault looking for a promising young guy to put alongside Ricciardo.. They may look to start circling over the traffic jam Merc have at the moment with Bottas/Ocon/Russell - any one of those guys along side Daniel would be a great fit. My pick would be Ocon but I am french so am biased.  :blush:



#1732 born1983

born1983
  • Member

  • 104 posts
  • Joined: July 18

Posted Today, 06:21


Good to see that among all the drama with cyril & the car, Dan is showing himself to be absolutely top drawer. 4-1 in Qualifying against Hulkenburg is quite an effort at this stage of the year considering how uncomfortable he was looking in Australia. Hulkenburg usually wrecks his team mate in Q as well.


He is over driving a bit because the car needs to be manhandled right now to get a good lap, so he's making some errors, but it's good to see his elite qualifying pace is still with him.


If/When Renault provide him a better car, he will be worth every penny.


This might be the end of the road for Nico though, Ricciardo starting to consistenly beat him so early on is not a good sign, It took Verstappen a good year to get on to terms with Ricciardo after moving to the team. (and that was going from a poor car to a great one, not the other way around)


His contract is up at the end of the year and I can see Renault looking for a promising young guy to put alongside Ricciardo.. They may look to start circling over the traffic jam Merc have at the moment with Bottas/Ocon/Russell - any one of those guys along side Daniel would be a great fit. My pick would be Ocon but I am french so am biased. :blush:


They both have 6 points, while Dan is paid a lot more than the Hulk....

I think it is way too early to tell. Neither of them is doing well in my honest opinion, but that can (at least partially) be attributed to the unpredictable car.

#1733 speedx

speedx
  • Member

  • 122 posts
  • Joined: February 11

Posted Today, 09:08

I think it will be hard for Hulk, hope he will beat Dan more than he is doing now. He should make less mistakes, even this is hard with this unpredictable car. Otherwise they could really take Ocon or perhaps Alonso. He is free 😉

Edited by speedx, Today, 09:09.


#1734 FPV GTHO

FPV GTHO
  • Member

  • 2,165 posts
  • Joined: March 08

Posted Today, 09:50

If anything I think if Hulkenberg was after a contract tomorrow, his performance against Ricciardo would demand a similar pay packet. The qualifying gaps are 0.008s ahead in Q2 Melbourne, 0.175 behind Q1 Bahrain, 0.004 behind Q3 Shanghai, 0.941 behind Q1 Baku and 0.019 behind Spain Q1.

#1735 Gambelli

Gambelli
  • Member

  • 140 posts
  • Joined: February 19

Posted Today, 10:23

Yeah not sure I'm seeing a trend of Ricciardo definitely ahead yet, once you're under 0.1 sec I tend to disregard qualifying as a win either way.  I stuck to that on the times Max pipped Dan by such a margin and I stick to it now Dan is doing it to Hulk.

 

So far pretty even, but maybe Dan is actually starting to get his head around it a little more.... but again, not definitely ahead in my book....



#1736 Dratini

Dratini
  • Member

  • 1,271 posts
  • Joined: July 17

Posted Today, 10:27

They both have 6 points, while Dan is paid a lot more than the Hulk....

I think it is way too early to tell. Neither of them is doing well in my honest opinion, but that can (at least partially) be attributed to the unpredictable car.

It is more difficult to build a sizeable points gap when the difference between a sterling race and a horrible one is just six points.



#1737 earthling45

earthling45
  • New Member

  • 5 posts
  • Joined: May 16

Posted Today, 12:18

Nico Hulkenberg is a very decent driver but Daniel Ricciardo is one of the best on today's F1 grid in my view.

So, i won't be a even a bit surprised if at the end of this season, Daniel has a definite edge over Nico.