Thread

That's what I said "team prefers Norris". By the way, some so-called F1 experts attribute Oscar's drop in pure speed to the fact that the final tracks on the calendar simply don't suit him. It's all about cornering technique, and Oscar himself has mentioned this more than once. One source (Mark Hughes) quotes: "They have completely different techniques, and they load the car differently on corner entry in almost every race. But on these two tracks, Piastri was about 0.5 seconds behind. Looking more closely at the Mexico City round, the main challenge with the smooth surface of the track, located at high altitude, is warming up the front tires before the first turn and preventing the rears from overheating by the final stint. This is much more difficult to achieve than on other tracks that require a similar compromise in car setup (Barcelona, Hungary, Abu Dhabi), as the ultra-smooth asphalt prevents the tires from gripping the surface well, meaning the mechanical grip generated by tire hysteresis (the deformation of the tire during movement, causing heat) is not very effective. All this puts additional stress on the tire tread, which is prone to overheating. As it overheats, it transfers less load to the tire carcass, which remains cold and inflexible. Norris' pole position was 0.588 seconds faster than Piastri's lap, which earned him eighth place. This difference is explained by Piastri losing 0.25 seconds in Turn 1 (his front tires were underheated) and 0.343 seconds in the long, slow final corner (his rear tires were overheated). In total, Piastri lost 0.593 seconds compared to his teammate in these two corners. They lapped the rest of the lap at the same pace, as the layout smoothed out the differences in their driving techniques. While Piastri did lose time in the fast Turn 9, which is unusual, he was generally faster in the slower sequence of Turns 4, 5, and 6. Piastri's 0.343-second loss in Turns 16-17 is explained by greater understeer on entry, more wheel lockup as power builds, and, consequently, greater oversteer on exit, which further overheats the rear tires. Piastri isn't as efficient at cornering simply because his driving technique puts a different strain on the front tires. This is also evident in the time lost in Turn 1. Approaching this corner, Norris partially lifts off the throttle and simultaneously applies braking, while Piastri brakes later and immediately releases the throttle completely, without simultaneously applying both the throttle and brake pedals. During this phase, Norris has the opportunity to turn the car more deeply into the corner, allowing him to take it at higher speed. This is where the significant time gain occurs. Norris took the apex of Turn 2, the slowest part of the sequence, at 112.6 km/h (70.5 mph), while Piastri did at 101.4 km/h (63.5 mph). Piastri lost a quarter of a second in this section. Mexico City was simply a more extreme example of what we typically see at the start of every race weekend, when on a dusty track with no rubber, Norris is invariably faster than his teammate. As grip improves throughout the weekend, and the car copes better with the more abrupt load changes associated with Piastri's corner entry technique, Oscar catches up or passes Norris." It's slippery in Brasil too. So the team has an explanation. Anyways, we will see if Oscar is much better when they both will change the team. I think Lando is good too. I disagree with your marketing conspiracy theory. The hyper-marketing Lewis once left McLaren and won multiple titles with Mercedes. Your example of his move to Ferrari after seven titles is rather an exception. The undeniable talent of Schumacher, Alonso, Raikkonen, and others at the end of their careers wasn't enough to compete for the title. Of the current drivers mentioned, Alonso shines compared to Stroll, but his protégé Bortoleto would probably have outscored Fernando this season. I keep seeing the same arguments between the glory boys and the haters, and they say that absolutely every driver they don't support is bad. They drive like rocket ships compared to others, and the team devotes all their resources to them, forcing their teammates to give up positions and help defend against attacks, and much, much more. Meanwhile, the teams these haters are rooting for isn't much different. Oscar and his Australian manager, by the way, aren't saints either and are battling it out behind the scenes. I think if McLaren's fortunes worsen in 2026 with the new regulations, we'll see Oscar in a different team in 2027, and he'll have a chance to prove he's stronger than Lando.

No hate here, no beef in that barbecue, just say it like I see it, you believe what you want to believe and if you consider the stabilisment F1 journalist analysis are valid, good for you. For me just an enormous effort to justify what the majority thinks, it is rigged. And their justification a pile of shit they were paid to pedal. Go listen to Piastri's comments were he explicitly says he does not understand where the pace of his car went. On a side note, today during Laa Vegas quali was checking the on board sound of Norris car and compare it with the one of Piastri. The one from Norris sounds like a Formula E, an annoying sound... The one from Piastri like all the other cars, a F1... Favoritism is just human nature, unavoidable, sports corruption and arranged games, fights and races is obviously happening and will continue to happen, we have examples in F1 as the Flabio Briattori Gate, removed for making a driver to crash to favor his team mate Alonso... And yet, the guy is back, that alone speaks volumes of the sport and how is managed.

The difference in the sound of cars from the same team has been discussed many times, and in most cases, the difference is explained by different car settings and driver preferences. I also noticed a pronounced whistle from Norris's onboard, but I don't consider this evidence of a decisive difference in the cars' technical characteristics. But I heard an opinion that the last updates of the season, which McLaren brought in at rounds 7-9 before the end of the championship, introduced decisive changes that were much more suitable for Norris, Piastri's weeks. I agree that favoritism for brit is evident, it's obvious, but I don't believe that the team is sabotaging Piastri, preventing him from revealing his talent, especially that they have different cars. Piastri would never agree with old details. And if one driver have a new front wing/brakes/suspension or anything, but his partner is not, the team explain it immediately after the mandatory registration of any changes in it's cars between races. FIA and F1 owners are political, profit-oriented and likely corrupted institutions. I agree Briatore needed to be banned from racing business for life after what he did. Behind the scenes, a lot of what could be called match-fixing happens, whether for the sake of high ratings, spectacle, or drama. But in this particular case, even though I like the calm Oscar more than the whiny Lando, I see no reason to consider Formula 1 a failing sport. You say you stopped watching it in favor of F2, but you still watch. It seems to me that in recent years, with Max becoming king, the championship has become much more interesting and the intrigue has increased exponentially. Even if it's partly artificial, I don't care. I think it's long been clear that in Formula 1, you can't be a nobody; you can't win races only on pure talent. It's long been a sport for billionaires, allowed into which the children of millionaires are allowed, who are expected to be able to elbow each other and weave intrigues from the very childhood. In any case, time will put everything in its place. Thanks for the interesting opinion!

Good take, and yes, I stop watching as often as before and going to races, but, there is always that friend that want to watch and I endulge. Still enjoying F2 way more. And what is your take on Verstapen's team mates poor performance, the difference is abysmal, I confess Verstapen is one of my favorite drivers of all times but that difference is suspect