[Driver] Renault sign the Honey Badger

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by Articus

Yes I agree, Ricciardo deserves his contract fully! I just couldn't help but notice that if one driver is being paid massively more than the other, then that shows who the #1 driver in the team is intended to be....

Not sure there was ever any doubt in this case...

Swapping a ‘rented’ driver on work experience for a pukka race winner should be a pretty good indicator of intent by the team.

No compromise. Go hard or go home.

[S griffin]

This is gonna be a make or break season for the Hulk

[wnut]

Originally Posted by S griffin

This is gonna be a make or break season for the Hulk

The good news for Hulk is that from next year F1 is rumoured to be ballasting all the drivers to 80kg, so one less disadvantage.

Great rule change imo.

[BSchneiderFan]

It is a sensible rule change, and it’s long overdue, but I don’t think it’s all that’s been holding him back, to be honest.

[greentrumpet]

Good rule change.
Hopefully a good move, too. DR is a racer, one of the best at mugging under braking. Why would he want to stay at a team which places him at number two? I really hope Renault pull it all together and Ricciardo gets his chance to show Vettell, Verstappen and the rest that he's worthy of the title.

[BSchneiderFan]

Ricciardo certainly has time on his side - he could be at the Regie for a decade yet.

[S griffin]

Originally Posted by BSchneiderFan

It is a sensible rule change, and it’s long overdue, but I don’t think it’s all that’s been holding him back, to be honest.

Team bosses tend to overlook this if a driver is that good, although there’s no doubt they do prefer shorter drivers

[Alan52]

The only criteria for choosing your drive in F1 should be getting into the fastest car you can.Anything else is just noise.Whether it's the right decision will be determined by whether Renault is faster than Red Bull in the next 2 years.

[chillibowl]

Wow...missed this news over the weekend and more to the point...missed the chance to get in on the Webber to Renault jokes! That's the real shame here lol

Big change and am looking forward to see how the rest of the dominoes fall now.

Major coup for Renault. As for Ric...time will tell but initial thoughts are that it's more of a lateral move rather than a move up the ladder.

[HDTVKSS]

I was caught off guard by this one. interesting move and i wonder if there was more to the politics behind the scene than what was being let on.

I think that DR had a strong desire to drive for a manufacturer and with Ferrari and Merc doors shut, Renault was the only one left. i really dont think he was ever going to sign for Mclaren - you would have to be v brave to do so.

Its a gamble, but in hindsight so was Hamilton to Merc at the time.

The biggest question is what happens to Sainz? hes too good to be shifted out. Id like to see him back at RBR to have some of those good old STR fireworks back again..

[Skam85]

I feel this could be a one step sideways for a two steps forward move for DR.

I hope.

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by Skam85

I feel this could be a one step sideways for a two steps forward move for DR.

I hope.

Two steps forward means Renault competes for the championship.
I don´t see that happen in de near feature.

[BSchneiderFan]

Ricciardo is taking a gamble. Renault are serious about getting to the top, and their track record is good (though Honda have demonstrated how little that proves). But staying with Red Bull as they take on Honda units would have been a gamble too. At least at Renault he doesn’t have Verstappen in the next garage (NO, that is not an invitation to start another Ricciardo vs Verstappen debate).

[Akrapovic]

Red Bull fall out with drivers far too quickly. The next Senna quickly gets dropped should the next next Senna come along. Unless Verstappen wins a title in the next couple of years, the next next next Senna will be here and he'll fall out of favour in the Red Bull garage as well.

[Greem]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Red Bull fall out with drivers far too quickly. The next Senna quickly gets dropped should the next next Senna come along. Unless Verstappen wins a title in the next couple of years, the next next next Senna will be here and he'll fall out of favour in the Red Bull garage as well.

I was talking to someone at work about that yesterday.

The grand tradition of one hotshoe, one Steady Eddie (who does the majority of car setup and drudge work and gets paid handsomely for it but not as much as the hotshoe) seems to be something they're going to miss.

Again.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

Red Bull fall out with drivers far too quickly. The next Senna quickly gets dropped should the next next Senna come along. Unless Verstappen wins a title in the next couple of years, the next next next Senna will be here and he'll fall out of favour in the Red Bull garage as well.

I must admit this leaves me torn.

Red Bull are paying all the expenses for their drivers, and clearly expect them to perform.
Should they not force a current driver out for a new hot shoe who they believe will be better? If not what do you do with the hot shoe, let him sign with the opposition, let him disappear into obscurity because a journeyman driver is occupying the seat that he needs to develop?

Surely professional sport dictates that you should have the best possible candidate in the seat at any time, and if you believe that there is a better prospect you must give him the seat?

Hard but fair?

Red Bull at least doesn't give us the pay drivers who just waste everybody's time while paying handsomely for the privilege.

[S griffin]

Red Bull give chances to drivers who shown promise in the lower formulae. They get the chance and if Red Bull feel they are not quite the next best thing, they will replace them with someone else

[Casper]

Originally Posted by wnut

Red Bull at least doesn't give us the pay drivers who just waste everybody's time while paying handsomely for the privilege.

I don't see what the problem is with paying drivers, it has always been a component of F1 and has supported the race series before sponsorship became a thing. If a driver brings in money then he supports F1 economically by injecting that money into the category ala Stroll in recent times. F1 has always had a range of driver skills and being a paying driver never garauntees the level of that skill. You could say the Robert Kubica is now a paying driver looking for a seat and trying to buy his way in, is that any more wrong than anyone who uses family money to do the same?

[BSchneiderFan]

Originally Posted by S griffin

Red Bull give chances to drivers who shown promise in the lower formulae. They get the chance and if Red Bull feel they are not quite the next best thing, they will replace them with someone else

Very much this. Sure, Red Bull can be ruthless, and I think Helmut Marko, in particular, revels a bit too much in the ability to make or break a driver. But if a driver performs - Vettel, Ricciardo, Verstappen, Ticktum - the rewards can be immense. After all, Red Bull aren’t running a charity.

[ASCII Man]

Originally Posted by Casper

I don't see what the problem is with paying drivers, it has always been a component of F1 and has supported the race series before sponsorship became a thing. If a driver brings in money then he supports F1 economically by injecting that money into the category ala Stroll in recent times. F1 has always had a range of driver skills and being a paying driver never garauntees the level of that skill. You could say the Robert Kubica is now a paying driver looking for a seat and trying to buy his way in, is that any more wrong than anyone who uses family money to do the same?

That's a seriously flawed comparison, I mean, the difference being that we actually know Kubica is a skilled and talented racer, while Stroll Jr. even had competitors moved out of his way in junior formulae thanks to his dads money, so I'm not sure why you're equating him to Kubica.

Even a guy like Lauda was a paydriver, but I certainly would never, ever equate him to the likes of Stroll Junior.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Casper

I don't see what the problem is with paying drivers, it has always been a component of F1 and has supported the race series before sponsorship became a thing. If a driver brings in money then he supports F1 economically by injecting that money into the category ala Stroll in recent times. F1 has always had a range of driver skills and being a paying driver never garauntees the level of that skill. You could say the Robert Kubica is now a paying driver looking for a seat and trying to buy his way in, is that any more wrong than anyone who uses family money to do the same?

I would agree that having pay drivers is not an unnatural thing. Especially when looking at ALL racing series from top to bottom. At the grassroots level, it's all mostly self funded by definition! I pay to participate because that is my only option!

Everyone like to talk about the "total package" when it comes to winning. You can summarize it a few simple ways like "chassis/engine/driver" or other variations that include various roles of the team. But it's hard to not include the driver in most of those lists. EVERYONE in the team has an impact positive or negative. Some more than others. Drivers MUST be high on that list of their ability to singularly determine the outcome.

So, given that a pecking order clearly exists that progresses from grassroots at the bottom to F1 at the top (if you buy into the F1 is the pinnacle argument). And if the top is supposed to be the "best", then it should be a competition for the best resources when you are creating a team. So I would argue that the higher up this series pecking order you travel, the fewer and fewer pay drivers you should see. Additionally, at the very top, I would argue that you can measure the health of the series by the ratio of pay vs. paid drivers. With pay drivers being a bad thing.

If you are looking to win, you can't be making decisions such as... "I will accept a lesser substitute as a way to generate funding". The slide downward is...

1. I can afford to win championships
2. I can afford to be competative
3. I can't afford to be competative
4. I can't afford to participate

In the range of #3 and #4 is when you have teams accepting pay drivers. My point is that pay drivers at the top tier is about team "survival" and not about "competition". While it may help keep any number of workers employed, it is a disservice to the fans. Sorry if that sounds harsh.

If you want to take this a step further... Why not provide "fan fantasy" scenarios. For the right amount of money, you too can be a mechanic and work on the car in the garage, or actually participate in a pit-stop! I expect that for struggling teams, a rich super-fan could inject himself into the pit stop crew. There may be some level of minimal competency required to do this (in no way am I saying that job is easy), but for less critical jobs the level of competency would likely slide. How much to just sit on the pitwall, wear a team uniform and watch monitors? All types of "fan experiences" could be monetized.

Richard

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by ASCII Man

That's a seriously flawed comparison, I mean, the difference being that we actually know Kubica is a skilled and talented racer, while Stroll Jr. even had competitors moved out of his way in junior formulae thanks to his dads money, so I'm not sure why you're equating him to Kubica.

Even a guy like Lauda was a paydriver, but I certainly would never, ever equate him to the likes of Stroll Junior.

I'm not arguing this issue at all, as the Stroll/Kubica comparison is bound to cause noses to wrinkle a bit, but the fact is that Kubica was a skilled and talented racer. There's no guarantee of that now....

[Adam43]

What we could do is rate drivers on how they drive and their results.

Judge no one on how much they pay or are paid. As with wine there is a correlation between how much they cost and quality, but it’s not a perfect correlation.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Adam43

What we could do is rate drivers on how they drive and their results.

Judge no one on how much they pay or are paid. As with wine there is a correlation between how much they cost and quality, but it’s not a perfect correlation.

Agreed,

As with most sports - it's hard to compare the financial value of a competitor with normal employment contracts.

The only people who can really judge the value, in financial terms, of a driver are those who run the teams. So many factors will come into play, including timing, as may be the case with recent Red Bull driver contracts.

What we have seen is that the honey badger has ended up where his self-valuation has matched what is on offer, in the context of his aspirations.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by Adam43

What we could do is rate drivers on how they drive and their results.

If only there was points system in which it could be applied to drivers and the teams?

Originally Posted by Adam43

Judge no one on how much they pay or are paid. As with wine there is a correlation between how much they cost and quality, but it’s not a perfect correlation.

I appreciate and understand what you are saying as well as the point you are making. At the end of the day it is results that matter. The best driver could decide to offer his services for free, etc.

I concede that money does not always equal results, and that some fantastic drivers have been pay drivers at some point in their career (even F1 career). Most rules have an exception somewhere.

But ultimately... there is no way to get around the fact that generally speaking, a strategy of accepting pay drivers is about survival of the team and not winning or competition. I don't enjoy watching teams struggle to survive. Particularly when the game is generally rigged against them (i.e. chance of success without manufacture backing)

Richard