2025 Oracle Red Bull Racing F1 Team

[AR3-GP]

In no universe Max gifts a position, the team should have told him to do so if they wanted, but Marko and Horner said they expected it to be a no penalty based on similar incidents in F2.

Of course I know that is not Max's instincts or nature but he can be reasoned with.

Max probably depressed about losing the race by being jumped off the line rather than losing through a penalty.. smart move by Oscar too and that hurts.. should’ve been a win, very encouraging

I think he would actually have seen the silver lining which was that he was matching Mclaren pace. That is a lot more important than 7 points at this stage of the championship. You would rather lose knowing you have a fast car, than lose knowing you had no chance. If Red Bull can achieve that for the rest of the season, Max will do the rest. The Mclarens look vulnerable. They are saying they aren't dominant.

[Xyz22]

Max is furious because he knows this was a huge chance to gain a lot of points.

[Dee]

I also think that strategically you have to give Red Bull a break. They could have told Max to give the place back (like other teams do, who know their car is faster (Ham/Norris Bahrain), but they were very worried about their race pace and from that perspective you would advise him to stay in front to keep the buffer to Russell. Knowing what we know now, he could have won the race if he immediately gave the place back, but that is hindsight. No one foresaw Red Bull's race pace today and that's still the most positive thing. A car doesn't get that quick out of nowhere. Red Bull have to understand this and see where the development goes.

I think this is 100% spot on.

What I don't agree with though is the wording in the stewards document. They said that Piastri was alongside and he needed to be left room, but if that was the case didn't Max also deserve to be left room?

This is what I understand the rules to be;

Alongside = 50/50 - racing incident - no penalty
Ahead = win the corner - no penalty
Behind = lose the corner - penalty given

On their wording alone, it should have been a racing incident and no penalty given, no?

[Emag]

Unless Max completely let go off the brakes just to be alongside Oscar with no intention of making the corner at all, then that obviously should warrant a penalty. This is exactly why the "ahead at the apex" rule is so incredibly stupid and should have never been followed 1:1.

I think it was pretty clear after Mexico last year that the good old Max tactic of ignoring corners just to make it ahead at the apex was not going to be tolerated anymore.

[Dee]

Unless Max completely let go off the brakes just to be alongside Oscar with no intention of making the corner at all, then that obviously should warrant a penalty. This is exactly why the "ahead at the apex" rule is so incredibly stupid and should have never been followed 1:1.

I think it was pretty clear after Mexico last year that the good old Max tactic of ignoring corners just to make it ahead at the apex was not going to be tolerated anymore.

If you see the stills from Russell's onboard, Max would have made the corner but Piastri made sure to give Max no room. Max would have done the same thing. I am not questioning that. What I am questioning is the rules and have they been changed since we have last seen them because alongside means racing incident.

[euv2]

I also think that strategically you have to give Red Bull a break. They could have told Max to give the place back (like other teams do, who know their car is faster (Ham/Norris Bahrain), but they were very worried about their race pace and from that perspective you would advise him to stay in front to keep the buffer to Russell. Knowing what we know now, he could have won the race if he immediately gave the place back, but that is hindsight. No one foresaw Red Bull's race pace today and that's still the most positive thing. A car doesn't get that quick out of nowhere. Red Bull have to understand this and see where the development goes.

I think this is 100% spot on.

What I don't agree with though is the wording in the stewards document. They said that Piastri was alongside and he needed to be left room, but if that was the case didn't Max also deserve to be left room?

This is what I understand the rules to be;

Alongside = 50/50 - racing incident - no penalty
Ahead = win the corner - no penalty
Behind = lose the corner - penalty given

On their wording alone, it should have been a racing incident and no penalty given, no?

Because the rules are apparently 50/50 = driver on the inside can push the other driver off as long he keeps a wheel on the white line.

In this case VER was actually ahead at the apex, as seen from multiple angles including RUS onboard but they assumed MAX was not going to make the corner because he brakes later and thus has no right to make the corner.

The standards for stewarding are so low, it's coin toss what decision they come up with. The narrative that Sky and F1tv have built doesn't help at all in these instances, Jolyon Palmer literally starts crying on air when Max is involved in anything

[AR3-GP]

Jolyon Palmer literally starts crying on air when Max is involved in anything

very accurate.

[Paa]

I think it was a mistake not to give the place back. If Max has one weakness, this red mist stubbornness must be it.
He had a bad start, lost a position, need to accept it and move on. If he gave the place back immediately he might have gotten the chance to overtake at SC restart (he is good at that), but worst case scenario he would have ended up 2nd, like he did now. But not giving the place back had some additional risks. (luckily all avoided, but the risk was there)

1. He could have given a penalty point? (I'm not sure about this, but he needs to be extra careful as he is sitting at 8 for the next 6 or so race)
2. He could have given 10s penalty.
3. With the 5s penalty he was very vulnerable for an early safety car. Say at around lap 10-13. He would have lost positions because of it.
4. He couldn't have known at that time that Russell will fall back that much. If Merc had better tyre wear, he would have lost a position to him as well.

It was clear that he was going to be penalized.

[Emag]

Unless Max completely let go off the brakes just to be alongside Oscar with no intention of making the corner at all, then that obviously should warrant a penalty. This is exactly why the "ahead at the apex" rule is so incredibly stupid and should have never been followed 1:1.

I think it was pretty clear after Mexico last year that the good old Max tactic of ignoring corners just to make it ahead at the apex was not going to be tolerated anymore.

If you see the stills from Russell's onboard, Max would have made the corner but Piastri made sure to give Max no room. Max would have done the same thing. I am not questioning that. What I am questioning is the rules and have they been changed since we have last seen them because alongside means racing incident.

Being ahead at the apex, warrants the driver on the inside the corner, right?

Oscar was ahead at the apex :


Then Max just let go of the brakes to go alongside him on the outside. Now, if both of them went off (like Max in Mexico & Texas last year), I would agree with you and Max shouldn't get a penalty there, but Oscar made the corner just fine. I hate this type of "technical racing". The moment your antics require you to break track bounds, then "technically correct" should no longer apply, because it is not real racing.

[Dee]

I think it was a mistake not to give the place back. If Max has one weakness, this red mist stubbornness must be it.
He had a bad start, lost a position, need to accept it and move on. If he gave the place back immediately he might have gotten the chance to overtake at SC restart (he is good at that), but worst case scenario he would have ended up 2nd, like he did now. But not giving the place back had some additional risks. (luckily all avoided, but the risk was there)

1. He could have given a penalty point? (I'm not sure about this, but he needs to be extra careful as he is sitting at 8 for the next 6 or so race)
2. He could have given 10s penalty.
3. With the 5s penalty he was very vulnerable for an early safety car. Say at around lap 10-13. He would have lost positions because of it.
4. He couldn't have known at that time that Russell will fall back that much. If Merc had better tyre wear, he would have lost a position to him as well.

It was clear that he was going to be penalized.

His team told him to stay in place because similar starts in F2 were not penalised.

[Dee]

Unless Max completely let go off the brakes just to be alongside Oscar with no intention of making the corner at all, then that obviously should warrant a penalty. This is exactly why the "ahead at the apex" rule is so incredibly stupid and should have never been followed 1:1.

I think it was pretty clear after Mexico last year that the good old Max tactic of ignoring corners just to make it ahead at the apex was not going to be tolerated anymore.

If you see the stills from Russell's onboard, Max would have made the corner but Piastri made sure to give Max no room. Max would have done the same thing. I am not questioning that. What I am questioning is the rules and have they been changed since we have last seen them because alongside means racing incident.

Being ahead at the apex, warrants the driver on the inside the corner, right?

Oscar was ahead at the apex :
https://i.imgur.com/Mk0db3a.png

Then Max just let go of the brakes to go alongside him on the outside. Now, if both of them went off (like Max in Mexico & Texas last year), I would agree with you and Max shouldn't get a penalty there, but Oscar made the corner just fine. I hate this type of "technical racing". The moment your antics require you to break track bounds, then "technically correct" should no longer apply, because it is not real racing.

Show another angle because Max is alongside at that point from that pic.

[AR3-GP]

I think it was a mistake not to give the place back. If Max has one weakness, this red mist stubbornness must be it.
He had a bad start, lost a position, need to accept it and move on. If he gave the place back immediately he might have gotten the chance to overtake at SC restart (he is good at that), but worst case scenario he would have ended up 2nd, like he did now. But not giving the place back had some additional risks. (luckily all avoided, but the risk was there)

1. He could have given a penalty point? (I'm not sure about this, but he needs to be extra careful as he is sitting at 8 for the next 6 or so race)
2. He could have given 10s penalty.
3. With the 5s penalty he was very vulnerable for an early safety car. Say at around lap 10-13. He would have lost positions because of it.
4. He couldn't have known at that time that Russell will fall back that much. If Merc had better tyre wear, he would have lost a position to him as well.

It was clear that he was going to be penalized.

Everyone thought Red Bull had worse race pace than Mclaren and Mercedes.

[napoleon1981]

We just need gravel traps. Piastri knew Max would yield, and drove in very hot himself. With a gravel trap there and no place to go for Max that corner would have been totally different.

[Emag]

If you see the stills from Russell's onboard, Max would have made the corner but Piastri made sure to give Max no room. Max would have done the same thing. I am not questioning that. What I am questioning is the rules and have they been changed since we have last seen them because alongside means racing incident.

Being ahead at the apex, warrants the driver on the inside the corner, right?

Oscar was ahead at the apex :
https://i.imgur.com/Mk0db3a.png

Then Max just let go of the brakes to go alongside him on the outside. Now, if both of them went off (like Max in Mexico & Texas last year), I would agree with you and Max shouldn't get a penalty there, but Oscar made the corner just fine. I hate this type of "technical racing". The moment your antics require you to break track bounds, then "technically correct" should no longer apply, because it is not real racing.

Show another angle because Max is alongside at that point from that pic.

I don't really have any. The best angle would be Max onboard. Either way, if Max had to release the brakes to be alongside then the stewards would have telemetry data available to judge Max's entry speed if it was reasonable or not. Oscar was already at the limit and he barely made the corner. I find it hard to believe Max would have made it while going that much faster in it.

[Tvetovnato]

We just need gravel traps. Piastri knew Max would yield, and drove in very hot himself. With a gravel trap there and no place to go for Max that corner would have been totally different.

No, we just need drivers accepting when they are beaten and play by the rules. It works just fine for other drivers. It was the most straight forward racing scenario ever, and yet Max manages to create a controversy from it and get penalized once again.