An engine upgrade means the team brings a newer or improved version of its F1 engine. The goal is usually more speed or better efficiency, but teams have to fit it into strict rules and schedules.
Barcelona is where Hamilton recently won, and the hosts use that as a clue for what might happen next. They’re basically asking whether Ferrari’s strong form will carry over to Austria.
Person
Camille Antonelli
Camille Antonelli is the teammate Russell is being compared against. The idea is that Russell needs to beat him to help Mercedes catch up.
The Red Bull Ring is the race track in Austria where the next Formula 1 race is held. Track layout and elevation can strongly affect how cars and tires perform.
Topic
Monaco result
“Monaco result” means what happened in the last Monaco race. People then debate what it really says about who’s strongest and why.
Altitude means the track is at a higher elevation. At higher altitude, the air is thinner, so engines can make less power unless the team compensates with settings and strategy.
Tyre management is about making your tires last and work well during the whole race segment. If you manage them well, you can stay quick instead of slowing down as the tires wear out.
Term
trick wheel rims
“Trick wheel rims” means the team is using special wheel designs, not just normal wheels. The idea is to help the tires work better by controlling things like temperature and grip.
Sometimes the tires—especially the back ones—are what limit how fast you can go. If that’s the case, teams plan their race strategy around keeping the rear tires from wearing out too quickly.
A “stop” is when the car comes into the pits to change tires. “Two stops” means the teams expect to change tires twice during the race to manage tire wear and keep speed up.
A turbo is a device that uses the engine’s exhaust to force more air into the engine. That helps the engine make more power, but conditions like altitude can make it harder for the turbo to work as effectively.
Downforce is the aerodynamic “push” that presses the tires onto the road. “Rear downforce” helps the back of the car stick better, improving grip when turning and accelerating out of corners.
Vmax means the highest speed the car reaches. The point here is that being fast at the very end of a straight isn’t enough—you need to be fast the whole way.
A regulation cycle is when the rules for F1 cars change for a new era. Teams have to redesign their cars to fit the new rules, and the host is saying Ferrari handled the latest change better than before.
F1 cars have batteries that store energy and help the engine deliver extra power. If the battery system has a problem, the car may lose power or stop working.
Cooling demands are how much the car needs to keep its important parts from overheating. If it’s hot or the track makes it work harder, the team has to move more heat out of the car.
Term
ambient
Ambient temperature is the air temperature around the car. In F1, higher ambient temperatures reduce how effectively radiators and brakes can dump heat, which can force teams to adjust cooling and engine/brake operating targets.
Thin air means there’s less dense air at higher altitude. That can make it harder for the car to cool itself and can also change how the car behaves aerodynamically.
“Near the knuckle” means running something right up to its limit. In this case, Ferrari is keeping engine temperatures very high to gain an advantage, but it can be risky if anything goes wrong.
Aerodynamic performance is how well the car cuts through the air and how much grip it gets from downforce. How hot the engine runs can affect what openings the car needs, which changes the aerodynamics.
P.U. means the car’s power unit—the main hybrid engine system in F1. If there are reliability problems with the P.U., the car can lose power or break down.
When they say “performance parameters,” they mean the measurable things teams look at to estimate how quick the car will be. It’s basically the car’s settings and behavior that affect speed.
Term
Friday
In an F1 race weekend, “Friday” is when teams run practice sessions to gather data and understand car balance, tire performance, and reliability trends. It’s often the first real chance to judge where teams stand for qualifying and the race.
Qualifying is when drivers race to set their starting position for the main race. A qualifying crash means someone wrecked during that session, which can hurt their chances for the race.
Austria is where the next Formula 1 race is held. The track layout matters because it has mostly smooth, flowing turns, with one key tight corner (a hairpin) that changes how drivers can push.
A hairpin is a very tight corner that you have to slow down for a lot. It often becomes a big deal for braking and car setup because it’s much slower than the surrounding turns.
Term
first phase of breaking into the corners
This refers to the initial braking and turn-in phase—how a driver slows the car and begins rotating it into the corner. The hosts argue Austria’s corner types don’t give Hamilton the same chances to use his strengths during that early braking/entry moment.
Leclerc is a top Formula 1 driver for Ferrari. The discussion here is about whether he can avoid making the same kind of mistake he made in a previous race.
Russell is a driver for Mercedes. The hosts are saying he looked strong on pace in practice and qualifying, but something went wrong in the race and it affected his results.
This is the Spain race weekend they’re talking about. They’re comparing how well Russell did in practice and qualifying versus how the race turned out.
The front wing is a key aero part that helps the car stick to the track. Adjusting it can change how the car handles, and the host says a wrong adjustment hurt performance late in the race.
Montreal is the Canadian track where an F1 race was held. The hosts are using it as an example of a weekend where one Mercedes driver had trouble while the other looked faster.
Canada is where another F1 race happens. The track and conditions there can affect how tyres work, which can change how fast drivers are across the weekend.
In F1, the tyres are a huge part of how fast the car can go. How they heat up and grip the track can change a driver’s pace, especially depending on track conditions.
The front tyres need to be at the right temperature to grip well. If they’re too cold, the car won’t turn as sharply; if they warm up correctly, the driver can get more traction and confidence.
Graining is a tyre surface degradation where the rubber develops a rough, uneven texture. It usually happens when tyres overheat or aren’t at the right temperature/pressure window, and it can reduce grip until the tyre stabilizes.
Race tires come in different “types” made from different rubber. Some give more grip but wear out faster, so teams have to balance speed and how long the tire lasts.
A stint is how long a car stays on the same set of tyres before the next pit stop. Tire grip changes over time, so stints matter for how fast the car can be.
“Medium” is one of the tyre types teams choose for a race. It’s usually a balance between grip and how long the tyre lasts, so it affects both speed and how the car behaves over time.
VSC timing is when the race switches into “virtual safety” mode and when it turns off. That changes how fast drivers can go, so it can make it easier—or harder—to gain position depending on when it happens.
A safety car is used when the track isn’t safe, so the field has to slow down and follow a pace vehicle. When it comes out (or goes away), it can completely change who has the advantage.
“Toe-to-toe” means two sides are so close that it’s basically a head-to-head fight. Here, they’re asking whether Mercedes and Ferrari (and their drivers) will be battling at nearly the same level.
Sochi is a race track in Russia where Formula 1 has held events. The hosts bring it up because something memorable happened there involving team instructions.
A time penalty means the race officials add time to a driver’s result for breaking a rule. If the driver doesn’t serve it properly during the race, they can get even more punishment.
Stewards are the officials in F1 who judge whether rules were broken. They decide on penalties, and teams may protest if they disagree.
Term
Court of Appeal
They’re talking about a higher-level appeals process. The point is that it would be controversial and could set a precedent if they tried to erase the race result.
Annul means cancel—like saying the race result shouldn’t count. The concern is that it would cause a big controversy and could change how future disputes are handled.
“Cut fuel” means the team tells the engine to use less fuel than it could. They do it to save fuel for the end of the race while still trying to stay quick.
A “fuel sample” is a small amount of fuel taken after the race to check it meets the rules. Teams plan their fuel so they can finish the race and still have enough fuel left for that check.
A “pit lane measurement” is how officials check what happened in the pit lane—like whether the car followed the pit lane speed rules. If the measurement is incorrect, it can affect whether a penalty is given.
“Timekeepers” are the race officials who handle timing and measurements during the event. Their job is to make sure the race timing data is used correctly when deciding penalties.
FOM (Formula One Management) is the group that manages Formula 1 operations. Here, they’re mentioned as the authority involved in deciding which measurement counts.
“Pit stops” are when the car comes into the pit lane during the race to change tires and/or refuel. When you do it (and how long it takes) can make or break race strategy.
“Wrongly penalized” means a driver got a penalty that officials later decide shouldn’t have happened. Even if they fix it afterward, the race timing impact may not be fully undoable.
“Penalty points” are points added to a driver’s license when they break rules. If a penalty is later found to be wrong, the race outcome may not be reversible, but the license points can be corrected.
Track limits are the rules about staying within the marked boundaries of the race track. If a driver goes outside those boundaries, officials can remove the lap time or penalize the result.
A review mechanism is the official way teams can challenge a decision made by race officials. There are rules about what kinds of mistakes can be corrected and what can’t.
Burden of proof means how strong the evidence has to be to change an official decision. Here, it’s about how convincingly a team must show the original ruling was wrong.
“Fairness and sporting integrity” are the ideas that the rules should be applied in a way that keeps racing honest. If a process could be manipulated or produce inconsistent results, officials may treat it as a problem.
They’re talking about how the rules divide things up—like how much weight different parts of the system get. The point is that the current balance (a 50/50 split) didn’t lead to good racing, so F1 is changing it.
Term
60-40
This is another “split” in the rules—just with different percentages. They’re saying F1 is adjusting the balance to try to fix what wasn’t working before.
“Yo-yo racing” is when the order changes back and forth a lot—cars keep jumping forward and then dropping back. They’re saying it wasn’t the main problem; the bigger issue was that the system didn’t reliably match what drivers were doing.
Term
deployment pictures
They’re talking about the data/visuals that show how a driver is using the car’s performance during a lap. The claim here is that those patterns don’t line up with what you’d expect from the lap outcome.
Qualifying laps are the fast timed runs that decide where you start the race. The point they’re making is that something in the system can mess up a driver’s qualifying even when the driver did everything right.
F1 is changing the rules for the engines. The hosts are saying everyone wants the new rules soon because the current setup isn’t working as well as it should.
Term
power offsets
Power offsets are rule-based tweaks that change how the car’s power is delivered. They’re saying these tweaks might help make it easier to follow and pass other cars.
A pit box is your team’s designated parking spot in the pit area. If you have to serve a penalty, you can’t just slow down—you have to stop in the correct pit box.
Term
FB1 sessions
“FB1 sessions” here means the limited rookie opportunities in the F1 ladder system. The key point is that even if sessions exist, you still need the right license to take part.
A super license is the top permission drivers need from the FIA to race in F1. You earn it by getting enough points from racing results in lower categories, so it can be a major barrier to entry.
Term
F2
F2 (Formula 2) is the main feeder series to Formula 1, where drivers race to build experience and earn FIA super license points. The transcript uses F2 results as one of the routes toward meeting super license requirements.
Formula 3 is a junior racing series that helps drivers develop before they reach higher levels like F2 and eventually F1. The idea is that strong results there could lead to more opportunities in F1.
F1 Academy is a racing series designed to help women progress in motorsport. It’s meant to create more opportunities and a clearer route toward Formula 1.
Intra-team dynamic means how the two drivers in the same team are doing against each other. It includes how close their performances are and how much pressure or focus each driver gets.
Micro sliding is when the tires are barely slipping—just a tiny amount—rather than gripping perfectly. Good drivers keep it under control so the car stays fast and stable.
Term
PU
In F1, the PU is the car’s main hybrid power system. It includes the engine and energy components, and problems with installing it can cause reliability issues.
The battery is part of the hybrid system in an F1 car. It stores energy so the car can use it for extra power, and if installation goes wrong it can cause reliability problems.
The Dodge Challenger is a performance car made by Dodge. It’s known for strong engine power and a sporty, rear-wheel-drive layout. People mention it when talking about fast cars and racing-style performance.
Exit clauses are contract rules that let a driver get out of the deal if certain goals aren’t met. In F1, those goals are usually about results or whether the car/team is performing well enough.
Performance clauses are contract conditions that depend on how well someone performs. In F1, they can be based on where the driver finishes in the standings or whether the car is good enough.
Williams is a Formula 1 team. The hosts are comparing how competitive it is versus other teams, and how that affects what drivers can learn and prove.
Term
ref edges
“Ref edges” sounds like a shorthand for small driving mistakes. The point is that Ferrari expects a driver to be very consistent and not make those repeated errors.
Ollie Berman is a Formula 1 driver. The hosts are talking about how his current season and experience with his team could decide whether he can become a top-level, championship-caliber driver.
Haas is a Formula 1 team. The hosts are saying that staying there longer (within reason) can help a young driver improve so they’re ready for a bigger opportunity later.
In F1, the “main car” is the regular race car you’re driving in actual Grands Prix. The hosts are saying young drivers want that top job, not a backup role.
LIVE
The Athletic
The race is on!
And as F1 heads to Austria, Ferrari could have the help of an engine upgrade to boost
its chances of turning Lewis Hamilton's Barcelona win into a title push.
But will Mercedes hit back?
And if so, can George Russell find a way to turn the tide against teammate Camille Antonelli
after being fortunate enough to gain 18 points last time out?
I'm Ed Straw, and joining me to look ahead to events at the Red Bull Ring and tackle
the implications of the ongoing ramblings about the Monaco result are Joshua Till and Ben
Anderson.
Ben, we're off to Austria, always a favourite, expecting Ferrari to pick up where he left
off in Barcelona.
Well, I actually am quite optimistic.
I think Barcelona was a bit of a surprise, but there's lots of logical reasons why Ferrari
was so strong there.
Massively upgraded car that seemed to work, Lewis Hamilton on form, not too many long
straights to highlight their engine powered efficiency.
And Austria is kind of similar, but obviously the altitude, the high altitude, plays a massive
role there and can skew things a bit.
I think irrespective of whether Ferrari makes this engine upgrade in time for Austria because
there's a bit of conjecture about whether it will be ready for Austria or might have
to wait for Silverstone the week after.
I think there's lots of ingredients that actually favour them.
Curve riding is really good.
We know that the tyre management was exceptional with these trick wheel rims they have.
You need good warm up in Austria, which is difficult to do on that track.
And you need good rear tyre management.
Teams are expecting it to be a rear tyre limited race.
So that could be similar to Barcelona.
Two stops are expected.
Could it pitch into three stops again if it's particularly hot?
We're going through a heat wave.
So that plays into Ferrari's hands.
Good at riding the kerbs.
And also that small turbo, the core piece of the design, which we don't expect to be changed
in this first engine upgrade.
I think that could be really quite powerful here because in the Williams team preview,
normally the previews are a bit bland, but they raise the prospect of turbo lag being
a particular thing that they're worried about going into this weekend and they have to monitor.
Obviously they use the Mercedes engine, which has one of the bigger turbos.
Running in that altitude is hard work for the turbos.
It's harder to get them to spin and work.
So I just feel like that could play massively into Ferrari's hands and help them not only
with the starts, which is an advantage they've kind of lost recently, but also just with
the punch off of those slower corners in particular.
Ideally you'll want to work the turbo a little bit harder.
It's an interesting circuit from a PowerPoint of you because it is a track where the power
level is important, but not in terms of the ultra long, eternal, everlasting straight.
So when you've got Ferrari that carries the speed well through the corners, it's got good
rear downforce.
That's something Lewis Hamilton really enjoyed in Barcelona, just how strong the rear end
is.
So if you're able to carry speed through the corners, get the power down.
If you've got the traction, if you can carry speed onto the straights, because it's really
important to remember that speed on the straights is a function of the speed across the full
duration of it.
It's not just Vmax or how quick you are in the last 10% of the straight.
It's the whole thing.
So really, really interesting to see where Ferrari pans out, but of course Josh Mercedes
will have upgrades coming.
There's a little bit of an outer phaseness about the Ferrari versus the Mercedes upgrades.
We don't know what Mercedes may or may not appear within Austria as well.
So there are some imponderables there as well.
Mercedes needs something else because Ferrari has raised the bar.
Mercedes started the season, obviously, with a fairly comfortable margin.
You probably put it around four tenths a lap maybe.
I mean, that has gone now, hasn't it really?
It might still have the fastest overall package, but we're talking a tenth maybe.
Ferrari has really closed that gap.
And like I said on the post-race podcast, it's delivered an upgrade that has worked,
which has not always been the case for Ferrari in the last few years.
So it's really positive to see a genuine step forward.
And that gives, I think, hope that it can be the same on the engine side too.
They've so far avoided the missteps that were made after 22.
The last time there was a new regulation cycle and they made a really strong start.
It's very early days.
I mean, I think they even won that Austrian race at this time in 22.
But so far, the early evidence is good, but actually they are making that car faster
and everything they've kind of wanted to do with the car has actually worked.
And like I said, that is quite a rare thing to say for Ferrari recently.
I think the thing that will be hanging over all the teams, Ferrari and Mercedes,
everyone actually, is just reliability.
Mercedes, we know, have been having some problems with the batteries.
There's one stuck on a boat still, isn't there?
Coming back from Canada, the one that blew on George Russell in that race.
And you need to really consider cooling demands in Austria,
irrespective of the heat wave going on and the fact that temperatures might be
as much as 30 degrees ambient when we get to Sunday.
The thin air at that altitude just makes the cooling demands that much harder.
So cooling the engines, cooling the brakes.
This will be something that applies to everyone.
And obviously, Ferrari, they run a bit near the knuckle on engine temperatures
to help the aerodynamic performance of the car.
They might have to open up a little bit.
But I'd be more concerned if I was a team like Mercedes,
which has some kind of underlying, it seems, reliability concerns with elements
of the P.U. and have a history also of getting the cooling demands of Austria
a bit wrong. It's not one of their strongest circuits, technically.
So irrespective of whether they've got a decent upgrade package coming,
I'm not sure they'd be able to fully utilize it anyway,
because I think the cooling demands of the circuit will override
a lot of those performance parameters.
And of course, we won't be able to actually judge exactly where they stand
until we start to get a picture on the Friday.
So it's still a slightly uncertain picture.
I think we have to be a little bit careful about being too high on Ferrari
based on one race week, and even though there's some very encouraging signs
that could translate. So.
Oh, come on, Ed, get excited.
We want a title race, a multi-team title race. Come on.
Well, that's what we hope for.
And it is exciting that you can go to a race.
And actually, there is a realistic possibility
that not only will Mercedes be challengeable, but they could be beatable.
And ideally, we want them at about the same level.
Yeah. And it's not even just about Mercedes and Ferrari, is it?
Because I think McLaren could be quite strong around here.
And we know Red Bull and Verstappen have quite a good record here.
So you just have this quite interesting multi-team aspect, you know,
where it's really hard to pick a favor.
And I think we've said that I think it was the three of us before Monica wasn't in.
It was kind of a similar deal where we're not sure who's going to come out on top.
And maybe actually that was a bit of a surprise that Mercedes were able to win that one.
So maybe we can't count them out.
But I just wanted to come on the reliability thing, you know,
which has been a massive differentiator between Ferrari and Mercedes so far,
because Ferrari have lost, you know, very few points to reliability.
See, the Clare had his problem at Barcelona, which cost him.
And then the brake thing, you can kind of maybe argue either way,
whether that's a kind of a full reliability problem that led to his crash in Monaco.
So kind of a bit of both, obviously a bit of the Clare in that as well.
But that's been a huge strength for Ferrari.
And by my kind of calculations, they've lost, you know,
way, way fewer points than Mercedes have.
And Mercedes have lost 43 points.
Ferrari have lost, I'd say, around 10 to 15.
So that has made quite a big difference and has made this title fight a lot closer.
I think Mercedes will be concerned.
Obviously now, Ferrari is a much bigger threat and potentially getting even stronger with that engine.
Is Mercedes really able to stretch its legs with its own engine?
Because when it seems to do that, especially when its cars are together,
like in Montreal, like in Barcelona, they were both running close there.
And obviously we know what happened then.
It was a big, big retirement.
So if Ferrari is pushing it, are we going to see that continue?
Because we've seen a lot of problems for both Mercedes and
its customer McLaren as well.
Let's say Ferrari is at least in the fight with Mercedes,
and this is a winnable race for them.
Ben, which driver would you expect to lead the line?
Are you thinking that Hamilton's got it all sewn up there now,
and the clerk's the man of the past, and Lewis Hamilton's the future?
Or are you perhaps taking the slightly more measured view?
I think I'm going to have to take the measured view.
That's not like you.
No, I know.
But it's tempting to see all the momentum is with Lewis obviously coming off the back
of a brilliant win in Barcelona.
But the clerk didn't feature in that Grand Prix because of the qualifying crash he had.
And I know we talked on another episode of the Race F1 podcast about
that mistake being so silly from the clerk, and he was chasing Hamilton.
And that's why he made the error.
So it's kind of not totally unforced.
It's maybe semi-forced.
But it also means you don't know what the clerk would have done in the car
had a clean weekend.
And also Austria is just not really a great Hamilton track.
It's not one where there's a couple of slow corners.
But apart from that one hairpin, actually the corners are quite open and a bit flowing.
There's not really the opportunities for Hamilton to really exercise his kind of
sensitivity in the first phase of breaking into the corners in the same way.
He used to struggle against Nico Rosberg on that track at Mercedes.
He struggled a bit against Valterri Bottas on that track at Mercedes.
The clerk in the past has had excellent form on that circuit.
I mean, Josh, you mentioned the win at the start of the previous rule cycle there for
the clerk kind of against the runner form versus Red Bull.
But the clerk is coming off a really bad patch of form.
Like he's not comfortable in the car.
He's had problems with the brakes.
Okay, they've changed the material and he was looking better in Barcelona.
But when it came to the crunch, he threw it into the barrier.
So you would normally back the clerk.
But I think at this moment you wouldn't necessarily because he kind of needs to tidy things up.
And you wouldn't normally back Lewis on this circuit,
but he's looking so at one with the car at the moment that might override kind of historical
form. So I think it really depends on kind of like you said before, Ed, how we find things
where they start to hit the track on Friday and who feels comfortable and who can get going
with the car because the clerk might just come out all guns blazing and it's kind of
back to more what you'd expect.
But equally Lewis might be riding the crest of a wave and the clerk might run into more
troubles that he has to unpick.
The encouraging thing for Ferrari is actually you can make a case for the fact they should
both be able to get to a good level and be a factor and a threat because I think while
the clerks had some difficult weekends that have been poor overall, there's still been
flashes of underlying pace. He's not been dog slow or anything.
So three in a row though, isn't it?
And we do see some that we have had a few phases like this with with
Leclerc where he has a little dip for a few races and he comes back.
I'm expecting him to come back now.
Leclerc coming back doesn't mean you'll suddenly be beating Lewis Hamilton week in week out.
That's that's the thing that I'm interested to see how that balances up.
But it's going to be a little bit of a test of where Leclerc is in terms of
avoiding making that mistake that he did in Barcelona when he was chasing something
Hamilton could do in turn four, which Hamilton was delighted to point out to to everybody.
You've got drivers are always at their best when they focus on doing what they can do and
not getting sucked into just an area where they can see their teammates doing something better.
Because if you've got a strong teammate, there will be corners where they are stronger
and sometimes that will be down to driving techniques set up all of these sorts of things.
Yeah, look at it. Think can I do that? Work out if you can, but don't do it if you can't,
which is what what tripped over Leclerc, because if Leclerc does what he can do,
he can be excellent. How about the Mercedes drivers, Josh? The Spanish Grand Prix weekend
looked like it was Russell's triumphant return with a new approach, dominated qualifying,
mighty in practice. And then the race just didn't quite work for him, did it?
It's becoming a recurring theme after weekends where there's a bit of an explanation comes out
as to why Russell wasn't as quick as Antonelli or something. So in the case of Barcelona,
it was that front wing adjustment had gone wrong for the final stint. So that was kind of explained
it. But these things are kind of adding up quite a lot over the season where you are seeing
many different cases. For example, Montreal, where obviously Russell retired from the lead,
but Antonelli was looking quicker. That was kind of semi explained away in the fact that
they were following each other, so you couldn't quite see who was quicker. And we keep getting
this and the more and more it repeats leads me to come to the conclusion that at the moment,
Antonelli does have a pace advantage over Russell. And at some point in that weekend,
it always seems to get to that point. So even though Russell started stronger in Barcelona
and did really well to get the pole, by even the middle scent of that race, Antonelli looked
like he was becoming the quicker Mercedes driver. So that will be a huge concern. And
again, it brings back to the reliability question because I think Austria is quite a
circuit where we are going to see the cars running really close. I think we'll see
Antonelli and Russell running very close. We've seen a lot of battles over the years,
a lot of drivers trying to stamp the authority over each other, you know,
stopping the Claire in 2019. And I could see a similar scenario here with Russell and Antonelli,
you know, both trying to get the edge on each other. Because at the moment, it seems like
Antonelli has been the quicker driver. So Russell's in dyneed, I think, of a really strong weekend
from start to finish, because at the moment he's not had that. Barcelona promised to be that,
but then in the end, as it has in many of the weekends, it fell away by the end of the weekend.
That's why I see Barcelona as actually not that good a weekend for him. Obviously,
it was good in terms of qualifying. It was good in terms of the points game. So the outcome,
actually, because that's better than if he'd won with Antonelli second in terms of the points game.
But in terms of the performance, there's big concerns there.
Yeah, there are. There are. But I'm just not quite so sure it's as clear cut as Antonelli is
fundamentally faster or looking that way. It could be the case. Obviously, he's much younger
and so should be in a different part of his development curve. But if we wind it back to
Canada, I mean, as you said at the time, Ed, Russell was doing everything he needed to do.
And I feel like there's a certain element of putting the reliability to one side,
something about the way the tyres are behaving and with that car on certain tracks that really
can swing it because Antonelli was doing a lot of chasing in Canada. But running behind Russell
was also helping him with his front tyre temperatures. And we saw in the sprint how
Russell was really struggling with the graining because of the cold, relatively cold track
temperatures. Once he got through that, he was quite quick. So you could look at it broadly
and say, well, yeah, it looked like a defensive weekend from Russell and Antonelli was just
underlying pace a bit quicker, but didn't quite get the execution. But or you could look at it
and say, well, actually, it was favorable to be the chaser rather than the chased in that weekend.
And Russell was actually doing everything he needed to do until the car let him down.
Monaco was a disaster from Russell's point of view. But then Barcelona, as you say, was
really strong until the race became this real furnace for the tyres. And he just couldn't
hang on with the tyre temperatures. Now that could be an element where you go, okay, so fundamentally
the driving style maybe is not quite there. And maybe Antonelli's just got that little bit of an
extra knack with managing the tyres. But it was one particular compound, two stints. And then
Mercedes muddied the waters with the explanation post race that they'd messed up the front wing
adjustment. So in every case where you think, oh, yeah, okay, we're starting to see a pattern.
There are just too many caveats at the moment. But I do agree broadly that, you know, Russell was
meant to come out in this phase of the season and start swinging against Antonelli and properly
clawing back points lost obviously was helped by the DNF for Antonelli and Barcelona. But
performance wise, it doesn't look quite there yet. But I wouldn't be feeling the Russell in the Russell
camp like he's in proper crisis mode yet because up until whatever went wrong on that medium tyre
stint to in Barcelona, he was looking imperious, wasn't he? Yeah, it's just that every weekend
there seems to be a different reason, you know, what's going to be the reason this weekend if
Antonelli has had a Russell? Is it the, you know, the altitude? Is it the, the mountains? You know,
it's kind of like... Yeah, blame the mountain air, definitely. All those tyres are just seem,
that all seems to me quite fundamental to how these cars are. And that's kind of like the
parameters of how you judge a driver and what they have to do this year. So I mean, the front
wing in credit adjustment, of course, is not something they should have to deal with. But
the tyres feels like that's something you've got to get on top of. And at the moment,
maybe a somewhere Russell is lagging behind a little bit. Yeah, it isn't decided yet. There's
still a long season to go. So Russell is not an idiot. And Antonelli is not the finished
article. So there will be swings in this. But I feel like Russell was just being that point
where he's just desperate for a weekend to go clean. Because even in Spain, he can look at the
VSC timing. And he can tell himself, oh, I don't want this race without that. He could have said
the same thing in China. Monaco, obviously, he should have got a better result. So it just
becomes important to get out, get out of that, that kind of feeling that things are going against you,
because that can, can multiply. But the only one who can get himself out of that ultimately is Russell.
He can't influence the external luck with timing of safety cars, etc. But he can make sure he's
his absolute best. And we know how good Russell at his best is. And the biggest lesson from last
year is don't assume that's what's going on across a quarter of a season is the full picture.
There's far, far more to come. And that doesn't just mean that Russell can come back.
It could mean that Antonelli could take a big step forward. And then suddenly he really is
destroying Russell and Russell can't get near him. There's still a long way to go in this. So
that's going to be a great story for the season. Do you think there's a danger that they get
toe-toed in this as well? We've been talking about how close Ferrari are getting to Mercedes and
how this engine update might lift them ahead and how competitive Lewis Hamilton now is and how the
clerk could quite easily get back to the level we expect. If you've got two Ferraris up there and
they're really taking it to Mercedes, can you see toe-toe intervening in the kind of intra-team
battle between Antonelli and Russell? Because there was kind of a hint of that Barcelona,
I felt. Well, yeah, post-race. That could happen. And there might be a position where it does have
to happen. But the simple answer there is be ahead. And you will be in good shape. I mean,
I know it sounds trite, but that is the thing. And think that to the famous Sochi when Bottas
was made to drop down on Hamilton. Because he was under threat. And the key thing there was
that would not have happened to Bottas if he was the guy who was consistently weak in, weak out,
strong and was the title threat. So it's harsh and in the moment unfair. But this is all about
making it happen for you. It's about taking your chance. Russell has all of that. So do you know
what? If there's going to be some intervention calling off battles, you make sure it benefits
you. You make sure you are the one who is ahead when it gets locked down. That's the only thing
I think you need to look at. What Russell really has to not do is get worried about that or
favoritism of Antonelli or anything. It's like, do your job, you will deliver. And Russell can do that.
Hi, I'm Juliette from New York Times Games and I'm here talking to fans about our games.
So you play New York Times games? Yes. Do you have a favorite? Connections. It just
scratches an itch in my brain. It's really out of the box thinking of that game. I play with
my husband every night. I refuse to let him play it without me. I love that it's like a real life
connection. Yes. While you guys play connections. Yes. Very sweet. I promise I didn't play that.
New York Times Games subscribers get full access to all our games and features.
Subscribe now at nytimes.com slash games for a special offer.
Well, we've looked ahead, but we still need to look back to a previous race because that hangover
from Monaco, Josh is still there with the pit lane speeding penalties, the controversy rumbles on.
Mercedes has withdrawn its petition for review, but Red Bull and McLaren are proceeding with taking
their cases to the FIs International Court of Appeals. So how do you untangle this mess?
It's not a great look for F1. I mean, it would be good if we could just all move on from this.
It's a shame that the mess has continued and I guess we'll continue for quite some time.
Clearly mistakes were made, but I think unfortunately the reversal of those two penalties has
created a bit of a kind of worms. I understand why those teams have decided to take action
and kind of support them in a way because before those penalties were overturned,
I remember hearing from Iokomatsu, the house team boss, and he said, look,
house as a team had taken precautions after practice and qualifying, having seen the practice
because after practice, there were some fines given out for pit lane speeding. So all of the
teams were aware that something slightly weird was going on with the pit lane. House then took
extra precaution and other teams did as well because they knew something was going awry.
So they potentially had cost themselves a little bit of performance and not come away with any
penalties. And then maybe other teams in the view of the likes of house had not taken those
necessary precautions and then been given the penalties and then got annoyed afterwards about
those penalties. So I'm kind of sympathetic to be honest to that view and it's a mess really to
untangle it by giving Albion's result back, but then not any of the others because they'd already
served that penalty in the race. It's just a really murky mess where I can sort of see the
point of the teams who have carried on, but in a way also it would be nice if we could just all
move on from this mess and just kind of remember it as a mistake. I do wonder if this scenario
would have been different if it hadn't been a midfield team like Albion and Gasly getting their
podium back because I think that was automatically like felt like Justice had been done because
this midfield team who had done a great job had got their podium back. The injustice had been
reversed because we had that celebration of Gasly over the line and it felt like a feel good moment,
but he kind of got his podium back. But imagine if that was George Russell or Ferrari or one of
the front runners you'd expect to be on the podium until we have that same reaction. So I think it
having a few weeks removed, it kind of made me feel like, yeah, I'm not sure like the
correct course of action had kind of fully been taken since that initial mistake with the time
keeping. The fundamental problem is there's no actual way to fix it all because by giving Gasly
the podium back, Alpine and Gasly have actually got a better result than they should have done,
had the whole penalty thing not happened. If you don't give it back, they've got a worse result
than they should have had. So you've got this whole series of complexities in terms of that
there's no way to reset it. The only thing you can do is not make the mistake again. The measuring
that's the really important priority that there's a few bits of rhetoric going around. I don't
entirely agree with there's been the argument of well, it just shows you just don't take your
penalty and then you can argue it after the race. But that's not the case. Because Alpine served the
penalty, but you served at your pit stop, they were not they didn't make another pit stop. So it
gets added on at the end. And for example, the argument with Mercedes it's good their review
was dismissed because Russell's result was ruined by failing to take the penalty. You can't argue
that the penalty was not just forget to take it admit you forgot it and it was your own error
and then say I wasn't right just in the first place. So that's why that review was always
a nonsense. I mean, it's it's frustrating for them. I imagine if you're George Russell and
Mercedes you rightfully feel it's incredibly unfair because it is. But this argument that you can
just ignore penalties and not take them because if you're given a time penalty and you make a pit
stop, you have to serve it. And then if you don't, you get a separate penalty, which is which is
separate. So there's a lot of rhetoric flying around here that I think is somewhat somewhat
flawed. But I do think is in addition to the you have to make sure you get your measuring correct,
which is pretty fundamental for a timekeeper. So let's assume they get that right. I think
there's also a chance here to if you were to have another scenario where the stewards did question
the number of times people were being pinged for speeding. If you get into a scenario where you
think things may have gone wrong, is there a way to freeze the situation and deal with it later
when you can check it? Maybe there's an emergency condition where if you've got good reason to
think that, but then of course, you'll get all the teams protesting it and complaining and saying,
oh, we don't think it's right, etc. So it's a mess, isn't it? And the only way to do it, Ben,
isn't it is get ahead of it and make sure it doesn't happen because there's no way to fix Monaco.
And you can't annul the result of some as some have argued, because for the points that were made,
people adapted to the length of the pit lane 17 people weren't done for speeding, etc.
Yeah, I mean, you could you could annul the race result, I suppose if it went,
I don't know if the the Court of Appeal has that power to go, you know what, this is such a mess,
we're just going to pretend the race didn't happen. I feel like if they did that,
it would cause a whole new storm of controversy and ridiculous precedent.
The point Josh made about Hass and teams taking precautions, that's fine in itself,
but it's also not very F1. You know, one of the things Fred Forsers talked about in terms of
getting Ferrari more on point as a front running force is pushing the limits more the limits as
they're set out. So, you know, if you feel your cut fuel your car with five kilos extra fuel,
just to be safe, that you've got enough to make the end of the race and provide the sample,
you're giving away four kilos, I think it is, because you need that kilo left to
provide the sample of performance. So it's how close to the knuckle can you get before you
tip the wrong side. Now, obviously in this case, the former ones admitted the pit lane
measurement was wonky, the data they were working with was fundamentally wrong,
but the only reason I think that Alpine won their appeal and got the result back is because it wasn't
written in the regulations that that measurement of the day is the one that should be used as
decided by the timekeepers, which in this case was FOM. If they'd just written that line into the
rules, that would have declared the pit lane measurement, whether it's correct or not,
the one that you're using, and therefore you have to abide by. And if you speed,
then it's it's fair cop. But because that wasn't in there, it created a gap, which Alpine was the
only team astute enough to go through. And they even strategize the last part of their race to
make sure they could do that. Whereas other teams, as you say, they they tried to make pit stops.
Alpine took the risk of not changing tyres, which could have gone wrong, it didn't go wrong.
So it meant that the time was added to the end, added at the end of the race and could be taken
off again. Whereas obviously, if they'd served the penalty, a bit like Carlos Sainz did when he got
wrongly penalized for driving into the Mlawson at Zandvoort, they couldn't undo that bit, they could
only take back the the penalty points they gave him on his license. George Russell, they could
have served the penalty, but messed up even that they did, they committed another offense in the
pits. How do you unpick that you can't, that's just a team blunder. So you can't kind of reverse
every single thing. All you can do is tidy up the regulations and the way you enforce whatever
limits. So two things I have to do is one, change the way they measure the pit lane to make it right.
But even if they don't want to do that, just make sure that effectively, that's your scale of the
day, have it written sacrosanct in the rules that however the timekeepers decide the pit lane is
measured and the calculation is done, that is what you abide by, whether it's right or wrong.
There is one interesting detail in terms of going to the International Court of Appeal in terms of
the conclusion of the review, because that's what McLaren and Red Bull are trying to do to get
the Alpine podium restoration rolled back, is that there was a degree of assumption in terms of
accepting that there was no speeding, because obviously Alpine had all their evidence that
claimed they weren't speeding. And it was kind of accepted that with their measurement system,
they couldn't verify that and validate that. So there is an interesting little argument to be
had there about the burden of proof. I think in principle, in a situation like this, you do look
for the highest, for the most achievable level of justice. And I don't have a big problem with
because Gasly's post race time penalty could be rescinded. I don't have a big problem with that
being done, because ultimately two wrongs don't make a right. And just because there's a multitude
of wrongs there, doesn't necessarily mean that if you can fix one, you don't fix it.
It's an unusual scenario. And you could argue that, oh, well, teams will gamble on that and do
what Alpine did and not take the penalty. But that was a strategic decision either way, because
of the unusual circumstances. None of them were going to take that. None of them who didn't have
to make another pit stop were going to do it. But it just made sense, given the race circumstances,
and you could you could take that opportunity. So I don't think if this stands, it creates any
particular problems in terms of that precedent and how you respect penalties, because if you just
want to argue your time penalty, then you will get penalized for it. You can't you can't do that.
That's not a thing that is open to you. So yeah, I think probably this is one of those things where
there's a few things that can be tidied up and discussed and challenged and argued and you hope
it all gets fixed so that this doesn't happen again. And that is the probably the most important
thing because there's no there's no fair way to restore it all. Without the right of review,
which actually is a fairly recent thing, isn't it? I don't think we've had rights to review forever.
Obviously much derided. This wouldn't have happened at all, because normally these kind of things,
weight, speeding, etc. They're just factual judgments, track limits. Even if you disagree with
them or you think they're marginal, usually it's a judge of fact thing. And you can't appeal it.
You just have to take it on the chin. And effectively Alpine did, but knowing they were
going to try to review it with this right of review mechanism, I was really surprised that
that went all the way to overturn the result. I thought they would find some way to just argue
this point that, you know, this is how we've measured the pit lane. This is just how it is
this weekend. And it's a judge of fact thing. And yeah, we can look at how we can change that process
and review are the wording of our rules and whatnot for growth and for everyone to progress.
But I'm so surprised that they use that kind of doubt beyond reasonable doubt of the facts of
actually speeding according to the calculation to then overturn the result. That's obviously what's
caused a massive furore. And it's interesting you make the point there about the Court of Appeal
and whether it will, whether that burden of proof thing will come back under the spotlight and
whether they judge that fairly because there was a lot in the judgment about it passing that test
for the stewards. But obviously, that's one particular body with a particular thing to look
at will will the court actually now go, Oh, no, you shouldn't have done that. And we have to reverse
that. That could be a massive mess if they go down that route. Yeah. And there is a kind of catch
all regulation about considering things through fairness and sporting integrity. I forget the
exact wording. But again, you come back to that problem of there's no way to fix it. There's
the order of had jar pastry, there's no actual way to make that order fair. It's not it's not
possible because if you follow it through logically, you've got cars that have to be ahead of the other.
But because the other car relative to the other one has to be the other order that there's no
there's no kind of way you can you can do it. So, you know, it is a bit of a mess,
but it'll make an interesting test case. But certainly, I imagine teams are going to be
measuring pit lanes now as a standard and Monaco's a unique case. But again, it comes back to the
key thing. I think it's good that the FOM and they were responsible for the timekeepers cooperated
very clearly. They I think the reason this this got changed is they didn't try to hide it or cover
it up. They they really did collaborate on it. And my understanding is that Stefano Domenicali
says, look, no messing about, you cooperate with this, if there's a mistake, be honest about it.
And I think that's a positive. But I hope they apply that same thing to making sure it's not
repeated. It shouldn't be repeated at most, because most pit lanes are much less complex than the
than the Monaco one. But it shouldn't have happened. But just because it should, but it just
because it shouldn't have happened doesn't mean it didn't happen, or you can make it so it didn't
happen. And it's always going to be a thing. I mean, if you are George Russell and you lose the
world championship by say six points, you are going to be forever furious at whatever it was.
At your team, your own because you didn't serve the penalty. That
is the mistake. That would be what I would be annoyed about. Like how could we do that? The
most simple of things to serve a penalty to just wait and not touch the car is a fundamental basic
and a world championship winning team got it wrong. Oh, that's certainly true. And that is
the primary thing. But the thing that with human psychology and the way it works, you'll be thinking,
well, if you could fit in measure 77 centimeters properly and lose it, then it would have changed
things. But that's a lot of things happen. This is a weird set of things happen. It doesn't always
even out over a season. The season is not long enough for everything to even out. But stuff happens.
And it's the nature of sport. It's a weird, it's a weird environment, isn't it? It's a
controlled environment where things are meant to be correct and controlled and manage properly and
decisions are correct. And the foundations of those decisions are correct. And it was just a
fundamental error and doesn't make it any easier for anyone to take. But there is a point where you
do have to draw that line under it and say, well, it was messed up. But unless anybody's got some
magical idea, I can't think of that can somehow make it all better. I mean, it didn't happen with
time machine and rerun the race. That'd be the sarcastic verdict. Put
it out and say, well, we agree in principle. So as soon as the time machine is available,
the race will be rerun with the original competitors. That's the that's the fair outcome.
Anyway, just a quick reminder, in Austria this weekend, we'll be doing loads of bonus content
for the race members club. If you're interested in that, hit the link in the episode description
or head to Patreon and search for the race, we do bonus podcast thriving community, we do loads
and loads and loads of extra stuff. But it's well worth it if you're interested in just participating
in what we do getting more of what we do and in some ways steering a little bit of what we do.
So check that out if that sounds like it might be for you. Okay, we're going to finish off with
some listener questions. This is one of those members club perks that we like to talk about.
You get to ask questions of the race. We usually ask for questions after the Grand Prix. I say
usually we always do. And these are some of the less time sensitive, I'm going to call them
off cuts, but they're not off cuts in terms of quality of question. Choice cuts. Well, these
were ones that didn't pertain so directly to the race, but we're among the ones that were a good
question that it's interesting to answer. So Ben, we're going to go in your favorite direction here,
the power unit regulations. TMB says, is it possible we overreacted to how bad the PU
regulations appeared to be after the first few races? Notwithstanding the Ferrari over at Aduot
that will probably run and run the disconsent over the formula as a whole seems to have died
down at least a little. And there seems to be a little less yo-yoing during battles than there was
initially. And the last point, yeah, there has been a bit less yo-yoing. But I think that's
been a function, partly of the tracks we've been to most recently, Barcelona and particularly
Monaco, you know, not such long straights, not such extreme energy recovery tactics. It's also
partly a function of rule changes made in season for Miami because of the complaining.
Because of the complaining. Yeah. So we're not seeing the same kind of yo-yoing and extreme
harvesting and deployment techniques because the rules don't permit them anymore in the same way.
And in terms of the complaining, yeah, it's died down, but it's not gone away. People have just
stopped talking about, I think Carlos Sainz even said this, I'm just not going to talk about it
anymore, because you're just repeating yourself until something's done. And the fact that they
are changing the rules quite substantially for next season and the season after to abandon the
50-50 split and move it towards 60-40 just tells you regardless of what anyone says,
the rules were wrong and have to be changed. So whatever we see is just going to be a function
of particular dynamics of the tracks and the conditions. I don't think we were wrong. I think
we were absolutely right to complain about the rules and the very fact that they're changing
them proves that. Yeah, I'd also say that the yo-yo racing was always secondary to me in effect
than what it had on what the drivers were doing. And you still see it, I see it when I go through
driver rankings, you still see deployment pictures on qualifying laps that it's very hard to correlate
with anything. Lin Blad in Barcelona, his whole Q3 bid was ruined, wasn't it, by just random
deployment mistake that wasn't his fault? Exactly, and there's still moments where you get these
little quirks, etc. They've mitigated it well, they've responded well, I would say, but the
problem's not solved. And that's why now basically F1 as a whole can't wait to get to the new engine
regulations. Yes, and that's a pretty bad place to be in, I would say. It's terrible as six months
in to brand new engine regulations and you want them in the bin. Yeah, there are upsides to it.
There are things I think they've been learned. I think power offsets are an interesting thing in
terms of overpowering the problem of following. So there's a lesson in the yo-yo racing there.
So there are things to take from it. It's not all universally bad or universally good. They never
are that clear cut. But I think the stratospherically bad, I would say. But I think the reaction
is actually really important because it will mean that some of these factors, hopefully,
there will be the mindset of getting ahead of them rather than baking them into rules and
then saying, well, this isn't very good as it's like, well, you should have not saddled yourself.
With the right question from Christopher Partridge, he says, if during a safety car
period, a driver is carrying a time penalty, when the safety car has to go through the pit lane,
is the driver obliged to box and serve their time penalty when they're taken through the pit
lane by the safety car? Or they're allowed to carry on without boxing as if they stayed out,
serving the penalty at their next stop, or having the time added at the end of the race if normal?
Yeah, if you're redirected through the pit lane, because the field is because of
the cause of the safety car, then, yeah, you're not obliged to. The rule of state,
you serve it in your box. So you have to stop in your pit box in order to do it.
And there's no obligation to make a pit stop or stop. If you roll through the pit lane, it's purely
a bit of pragmatism in order to avoid going through a bit of track where there's some
cleanup going on. So yeah, you can avoid it. Right, Josh, a question from Gavin Cameron.
Given that there are now 88 available FB1 sessions per season for rookies,
why are we still not seeing any female drivers taking part?
Fairly, there's two answers. I guess one is sort of like the facts of the fact that you need an
FB1 super license. And for that, you need to think, have competed in either six F2 races or
need to think about 25 super license points, which is quite a hefty total given you need 40
to obviously get the race license. So simple fact is there isn't really any female drivers who would
realistically have an FB1 who have that super license total. And then obviously the other
answer is that there isn't, again, anyone kind of on that pathway who is close enough to Formula
1 for that to be a realistic prospect. So I suspect that day will certainly come soon. And
when that day obviously happens, we'll be closer to having a female racing driver in F1 again.
But yeah, at the moment, realistically, there isn't that. Those female drivers at the top of
the ladder seems like there aren't more and getting more success at the bottom of the ladder,
but that's yet to sort of translate into Formula 3 level. That'll be the game changer once a female
driver is really strong in proper Formula 3 on the F1 undercard. Then at that point, the conversation
more I think will be far more on someone racing an F1, not just an FB1 outing.
Yeah, there's a long lag in terms of when you're trying to get a cultural shift like this.
And actually, this sort of movement to get more women racing in Formula 1 to give more
opportunities to it. Basically, you're really hoping to influence those who might be starting
karting, the kind of 6789 year olds who are aspiring to karting and then
starting karting. So that that instantly bakes in a kind of 10, 15 year lag, doesn't it? And
this movement really in terms of properly pushing it doesn't properly go back that far. It doesn't
in some forms. But yeah, and you need to see that keep being pushed. And there are there are
questions about whether the existence of F1 Academy and the way that's being pushed is enough.
I think probably need to see a bit more than that. But it's a it's a complicated question,
isn't it? But hopefully it will happen. No question. And not only will we see an FB1 driver,
we will see race drivers, we will see successful race drivers in the future. I've got no doubt
about that. Right, Ben. A question from Ben Hawkes. Has Lando Norris taken a step since becoming
champion? Hmm. Has he taken a step? I'm not sure. I mean, I think McLaren has taken a step back,
certainly. And so maybe what Lando is doing is is not quite as visible as it was. Certainly,
it's not the same amount of scrutiny and pressure as there was last year. But I don't see anything
massively different in the intra team dynamic between him and Piastri qualifying record.
Actually, Piastri's ahead, isn't he? So far, narrowly, I think he's got 11 more
qualifying than Norris that he's been ahead overall. And the gaps have been very small.
You know, it's a 10th year, a few hundreds there either way. So either either Norris hasn't taken
a step and neither is Piastri or they both have taken the kind of same degree of step. I think
what we saw in Barcelona most recently is kind of Norris at his best, you know,
dealing with all that micro sliding, managing the tyres really well, a weak track for Piastri.
So we saw a big gap in race performance between them on that occasion. But I think broadly,
there hasn't been a massive performance difference between the two of them. It's just that the
McLaren car is not there aerodynamically. And obviously, they're having reliability problems
with the installation of the PU and the battery in particular. So both drivers, depending on how
that cookie crumbles are being held back by the the frailties of the car, I think. I'd say Norris
and Russell have almost swapped places in a way, because last year Russell did not have a championship
winning car and was looking really good, making very few mistakes, making a good account of himself.
And I feel like Norris is almost doing the same thing. Like I think he has having
a genuinely really solid year that doesn't necessarily mean he's taken a step on from
last year. The main difference is that just he's obviously a bit more comfortable in the
car than he was at the start of last year. But he's making few mistakes because I think the
title pressure isn't there. And then now for Russell, I think with the intensity of that
title fight, he is making a few more mistakes. And obviously, his driving style doesn't suit
the car as much as well, which is it didn't for for Norris last year. So in a way, I feel like
those two have swapped places. And again, would that McLaren maybe a championship challenger,
we'd probably see a few more mistakes creeping in. I think Norris is just kind of thriving,
knowing that it's not a driving problem. His part, it just doesn't have the car yet to defend
that title properly. Question now from notchad.altake. You mentioned exit clauses in drivers contracts
related to either their performance or the team slash cars performance. How are these decided?
It seems very subjective. Well, ultimately, they're agreed. So the kind of performance clause you
will have will depend on where the power is in negotiation. So if you are a driver desperately
looking to get onto the F1 grid or stay on the F1 grid and your market value is not that high,
then chances are the performance clauses will be about what you do.
In terms of the team will say, well, you've got to do this and you don't really have much power
to do it. If you're Max Verstappen, then you can put pretty powerful performance clauses in. So you
can say, well, if I'm not in the top two of the championship, I'm free to go. And it's hard to
push back because if Max Verstappen is not in the top two of the championship, the car probably
isn't good enough. So it's anywhere in between that. And it can be anything really. It can be
drivers, championship position, constructors position. If I was a team, I'd favor constructors
position because I'm always a little bit wary about a driver's ability to influence their
results if they really want to leave. So constructors is a little bit easier, but it can be anything.
And always these contracts and A, as we've said before, that there's multiple contracts in place.
Because you'll often have a separate one for commercial stuff. And it's once in all these
things. So you can have, you can easily have three contracts in existence. They can be very,
very complicated. But in terms of the performance, it's basically there's some kind of covenant that
says, you continue with us if you are performing at this level, or I will continue with you if
you're performing this level. And then it's a question of whether that auto triggers options,
whether that triggers the option opportunity, whether that triggers a break clause opportunity,
there'll always be timeframes about when you can do it. So sometimes it might be if we're not,
if we're not on the top four, the constructors championship by datex, you are free,
but there might only be a window in which you're free to conduct the break because the team will
say, well, we don't want you deciding in January that because we were poor last year. So you've
got to do it by October, October the 30th, just to pull a random date. So it can be just about
anything. And they will come in through what you can negotiate. And if you're a driver,
you'll say to your manager, get me every clause you possibly can that benefits me,
because why wouldn't you? Sometimes you'll get really, really nominal ones in there that you'll
join a front running team and say, well, if we drop out of the top six, you're free to go. And
that's if you're not in a super powerful position, but it's just sort of a token. Well, if we completely
disastrously tank, you might be free. So and sometimes your team bosses also your manager,
as in the case of George Russell, and then you're really screwed in the negotiations because
you're negotiating with yourself. There are some interesting moments. Ultimately, contracts can
be absolutely anything. There's no, there's no kind of set in stone thing you can go into a
negotiation and say, I'm free to leave if you do not provide me with a fridge full of Magnum
Ice Creams every race weekend, which is personally one of my excellent clauses. You could argue for
that. You're not going to get it, but there's nothing stopping you saying that's a condition.
And if you don't get your ludicrous condition, you can walk away. So
well, also, you can get those clauses where something's written into one driver's contract,
and then the teammate doesn't have the opposite of that written into there. So both drivers think
they've got what they want. But actually, only one driver has what they want. The kind of,
I'm thinking of the kind of Vettel Weber situation at Red Bull, where Vettel had
number one driver effectively in his contract. And whether it had definitely not a number two
driver in his contract, but that was assumed to me that there was no number one, but actually
there was. So you can have these kind of parallel contractual universes going on as well.
Yeah, exactly. And always those things about number one, number two status,
unless they are specifically tied to something tangible, unless they back in the day when this
is allowed say, it is in my contract that I always have the spare car. And if you then discover
your teammates got the same clause, then you've both got a legal case because the entity that's
agreed it with you has not delivered. But that's why always these number one, number two was that
they don't, if I was there and I want to guarantee number one status, I would be creating clauses
that say what that actually means. And that's where it really matters, which is why generalities
about what's in contracts are difficult. And it's hard because I have seen bits of driver
contracts. I have seen driver contracts in the past. I've definitely not seen all of them.
And there's a lot of things we know are in contracts that we will hear from, you'll hear
them from drivers or managers or team bosses. I've heard conflicting things about what's in
what contracts from both sides of it. Normally the people who are best, best placed in terms of
knowing what's in there will be rival teams, because you can bet that if you're running a big
team, you will know what Max Verstappen's release clause is, because there's conversations always
going on in the background, you're always positioning yourself as a team, you're always
positioning yourself as a driver manager, as a driver, you are always positioning yourself
for the next step, what happens there. This idea that you might get told you're dropped and suddenly
then the work begins. Well, if that happens, your manager is letting you down, because they
should be working in the background. So it's a fascinating area. And maybe one day we should
do an in-depth podcast about it, and perhaps we can even get a driver manager on or something,
so to really talk through how all of this works, because there's some very, very sharp operators
in the paddock, and you probably don't get into F1 without a good manager, and you certainly don't
stay there and have the best career decisions if you don't have good managements. Right,
enough of me banging on about contracts, but a great question there. Josh, your question from
Nate B to finish off. Rafa Kamara is looking every bit the next big thing, with Lewis Hamilton's
recent upward ticking form. He's looking far less likely to retire after this year, which
realistic looks up the Ferrari seats for around two more seasons. Oli Berman has long been viewed
as the heir apparent, but is he going to get blocked for too long to ever secure the Ferrari
seat? There's a real chance he would actually end up being Kamara's teammate at Haas as soon as next
year. Then it becomes a one versus one fight for the Ferrari seat. I think this is F1's next big
driver market story. I was talking to actually Ben about this yesterday, and we think that,
you know, Verstappen is going to be deciding what he wants to do, and that affects most of the teams
on the grid, but it probably doesn't affect Haas. Now, as the question says, you know, Hamilton,
more than likely is not going to retire after this year, given the form he's in, and that is a
change maybe from the expectation that we'd have had at the end of last year. So yeah,
that means Berman is staying there, but who is going to be his teammate is the big question. I
mean, Estaban Ocon, I think, has not had the kind of performances he'd have hoped since he joined
Haas. Very kind of patchy form. A lot of weekends where he just goes missing or has obviously problems,
which the team doesn't always sort of agree on what the root cause is. So I think his position
is vulnerable for next year in particular, and there are a multitude of different options
who could replace him. We had the interesting news since the last round that Haas had offered a test
to McLaren Junior, Leonardo Fornaroli, their reserve driver, Formula 2 champion last year,
someone without a seat for this year. I mean, McLaren, I think, do rate highly. I mean,
Andrea Stella, unprompted, gave this really lengthy answer on Fornaroli. He was just asked a quick
question about how his free practice had gone, and Stella kind of gave this really eloquent
long answer on Fornaroli. And McLaren do seem genuinely impressed by him. And I think Haas
have obviously noticed that and noticed what he did in that FP1 and TPCs. And yeah, they're given
in this private test at Haraf before Austria. So it's going to be one of the most interesting
things to find out across this Austrian Grand Prix weekend is, you know, how highly did Haas
rate Fornaroli. And is that an audition for Ocon seat for next year? The question mentioned
Rafa camera as well. And he's another big prospect. See, I think he's looking pretty good
in Formula 2 this year. Fairly safe, but I'd say to win the title driving for the same team that
in Victor that Fornaroli did and bought a letter that champion before did. So yeah, it's shaping
up to be really interesting. And it seems like it's nothing to do with what's going on with
Verstappen. So it seems just kind of really interesting fight for that seat and Haas trying
out a few different drivers. So yeah, we're going to try and find out exactly what is going on there
certainly seems to be some some interesting prospects bubbling up. It's important to remember
as well, though, that if Ferrari have a vacant, well, they will at some point down the line,
they're not obliged to take one of their juniors. I think Ollie Berman's on a good trajectory. I
don't think it's yet a slam dunk. But it's getting close to it. Let's put it that way. So
if you're Ferrari, you are able to bid for pretty much anyone and at least have a conversation
with them. So there's no guarantee that they will go down that route.
They'll have loads of money if Lewis stops, won't they? Rolling in it.
And I don't think like Berman doesn't need to be worried either. Again,
we're having this conversation the other day. But yes, it's a bit annoying, but he has to wait
potentially longer for that Ferrari seat. And, you know, George Russell was annoyed
to spend three years at Williams. He felt like he'd spent too long there.
And it's kind of more than ready to go into the Mercedes seat. But, you know, Berman's
having a good season, but it's not a perfect season. He's still making mistakes. There are
still ref edges. There are still things that he can hone because when you get into Ferrari,
you've got to be ready. You've got to be really on it. You can't have those ref edges. So I think
it's not the worst thing in the world and has at the moment is still despite their little bit
of downturn since the start of season. It's a very competitive team. It's not Williams at the back
of the grid like it was for Russell. You know, this is a competitive midfield team where Berman
can learn a lot. And whoever his teammate is, he's going to have to beat them. You know,
if it is camera next year, if it is Ocon, it doesn't really matter as far as he's concerned,
because the focus is ever is just on beating whoever is alongside you.
Exactly. And Berman's 21. I don't think he'll be unduly worried if he's not in a Ferrari next year,
which looks unlikely. That third year was always in the Haas contract as well.
Ferrari could have taken him, certainly. But obviously any young driver in that position
wants to be in the main car now. That's just the nature of the beast. And obviously Berman
has raced a Ferrari in Formula One. We need that remarkable standing job in Saudi Arabia.
But as to the Russell thing at Williams, drivers will always think that they should
have been promoted yesterday or given whatever opportunity yesterday. That's what drives them
on. So I don't think Berman needs to be too worried about it. And Haas is a great place for
him to learn his trade as well. So actually, the longer he spends at Haas, within reason,
the better prepared he will be if he was thrown into a Ferrari. I think he would certainly do a
good job in a Ferrari. But the question we need to answer is Ollie Berman on a directory that
can make him a world champion level driver. And there's some very promising signs there.
But you need to hone your skill. That's just the way it works. Anyway, thank you very much to
everybody who sent in questions. Join the Race Members Club if you'd like some question asking
privileges in future, among other benefits. Thanks very much, Josh and Ben. I'm now going to be
heading to the airport to fly to Austria. So stay with us for everything you need to know
from the world of Formula One.
About this episode
Austrian GP preview turns into a wider Mercedes vs Ferrari title-fight discussion: Ferrari’s Barcelona momentum could be boosted by an engine upgrade, while Austria’s altitude and cooling demands may reshape performance. The hosts expect a rear-tyre-limited race with strategy landing around two stops, possibly three in heat. Reliability and battery/cooling concerns could swing points, and even Hamilton’s strengths may not translate as well to the flowing Red Bull Ring layout.
As F1 heads to Austria, Ferrari could have the help of an engine upgrade to boost its chances of turning Lewis Hamilton’s Barcelona win into a title push. But will Mercedes hit back, and if so can George Russell find a way to turn the tide against team-mate Kimi Antonelli after being fortunate to gain 18 points last time out?
Those are the key questions tackled by Edd Straw, Ben Anderson and Josh Suttill in the latest episode of The Race F1 Podcast.
There's also the latest on the Monaco GP pitlane speeding penalty controversy, plus Edd, Ben and Josh tackle another batch of questions sent in by The Race Members' Club.
Get bonus F1 podcasts, extra content and ad-free listening, sign-up to The Race Members' Club on Patreon today.
