Sergey Sirotkin, Williams, Red Bull Ring, 2018

“It’s a shame you can’t have more than two drivers” – Lowe on Sirotkin

RaceFans Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Paddy Lowe says he’s sorry Williams isn’t keeping Sergey Sirotkin for the 2019 F1 season.

What they say

RaceFans asked

We mustn’t forget, it’s his rookie year, he’s been a great team player for a start. Very supportive of his colleagues both immediately and the team as a whole. He works incredibly hard as well. He’s very committed to his own [development] whether it’s training or whatever but also to the programme he needs to follow. It’s a shame you can’t have more than two drivers.

We’ve picked out driver line-up for next year which I think is a fantastic line-up, the combination of George [Russell] who won his championship – a fantastic result, we have the F2 champion coming into our team – and then the combination with Robert [Kubica] who is a legend as we all know so we’re very excited about that line-up. Which doesn’t take away from the fact it’s a shame we’re not keeping Sergey.

Quotes: Dieter Rencken

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Social media

Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

Comment of the day

Does Vettel believe he needs the ‘fastest’ car or merely a ‘faster’ car to become champions again?

When Vettel said his cars needed more speed, I don’t consider that as him asking for a car that was the fastest out there, but rather one having enough additional speed to be more competitive, and therefore allowing him to take fewer extra risks in an effort to make-up for the slower speed.

In other words, while we all love seeing a driver who can push an obviously slower car to a win, using super-human driving skills, we obviously shouldn’t blame Vettel if he can’t simply dial-up that sort of skill through an entire season.
Chuck Lantz (@Chuckl8)

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Alvink and Bryce Metzger!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

  • Born on this day in 1974: 2013 Indianapolis 500 winner and 2004 IndyCar champion Tony Kanaan

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

57 comments on ““It’s a shame you can’t have more than two drivers” – Lowe on Sirotkin”

  1. “We are comfortable with the reliability of the unit. It was completely different from previous years.”

    I checked honda engine penalties for couple of last years. 2015 data I could quickly find so that’s left out but here is what “completely different” looks like to tost:

    Engine components used. For full team.
    YEAR … ICE … TC … MGU-H … MGU-K … ES … CE
    2016 ….. 14….. 15……. 15………. 13 ……… 13…. 13
    2017 ….. 19….. 23……. 23………. 13 ……… 14…. 13
    2018 ….. 16….. 16……. 16………. 13 ……… 6……. 7 << completely different?
    —————————————————————-
    LIMIT ……6……..6……….6………….4………..4……..4

    Add like 10 more power units for preseason testing… Fact is honda had very few engine failures during races because they switched to new parts constantly to prevent failures during races. Same thing they did with mclaren for 3 seasons. Honda have a long road ahead to even being able to mention reliability without coffee shooting out of the noses of the people listening as they laugh so hard. In fact the direction is towards worse reliability because before 2018 season you could use more engine components. Only improvement is in the ES = Energy Store and CE = Control Electronics parts. Basically battery and ecu for the electric motors and harvesting.

    1. @socksolid

      some engine components were limited to 3 for the year in 2018? yeah doesnot look to great for Honda.

      1. ah ok, for the team. In the years before it was 4 so 8 per team

        1. Exactly. I wonder why I can’t find 2015 engine part usage numbers tho?

          1. Even a bit more strict:

            The rules for the usage of the six Power Unit Elements that constitute the F1 engine for 2018 is: Drivers can use 3 ICE (internal combustion engine), 3 TC (turbo charger), 3 MGU-H (motor generator unit heat), 2 MGU-K (motor generator unit kinetic), 2 ES (energy store) and 2 CE (control electronics) without penalties.

            Kinda still the most stupid rule, it’s not endurance racing, go back to one engine for quali and for race, that’s more “F1 genetics”.

          2. @maxv go back to one engine for quali and for race, that’s more “F1 genetics”.

            Was that ‘F1 genetics’ though?

            Wasn’t until the turbo’s of the 80’s that they started using new engines at every opportunity because of how unreliable they were. Up until that point it was common practice to use the same engine not just all weekend but also over multiple races & in some cases an entire season.

            And even when the top teams started throwing a new engine in every day most of the mid-field & back of the grid teams were not because they couldn’t afford to.

            The rules as they are are not perfect but there better than the expensive & a completely unnecessary waste of using an engine for 12 laps & then never using it in competitive running again.

    2. firstly, kudos for including a readable table in the comment section, @socksolid.
      secondly, probably some of the changes this year were to test new components rather replacing broken ones. Or as per FT: “we were pushing for new specifications at the end of the season. It was not necessary to change the engine in Mexico or in Austin, but we were pushing for this.”
      lastly, enjoy the festivities tonight.

      1. @socksolid I think it is folly to not acknowledge the context of the STR-Honda relationship when you try to claim 2018 for Honda was the same as the three years at Mac. Sure, strictly on numbers of units used as you have pointed out, but that is not the whole story is it? Last year was year one of the STR/Honda relationship so that to me automatically means growing pains. And of course they have been a test bed for the coming RBR/Honda relationship.

        I do agree with you that Honda has everything to prove, but I certainly cannot just look at your chart and assume Honda has made no progress whatsoever, as you seem to be claiming, or indeed that they are worse. We know many of STR’s issues were not with the Pu, and we know they were often just experimenting and learning with RBR in mind. Why try to shade the reality with mere numbers of units used, when there is far more to the story than was the case in any of the three McHonda years?

        1. Hi Robbie – I don’t see that “sock solid” is doing anything of which you suspect him.
          He just queried the erroneous assertion: “We are comfortable with the reliability of the unit. It was completely different from previous years.” – which seems to be clearly incorrect… ;-)

          1. Unless “sock solid” is an engineer for Honda, or has access to their data, it’s all speculation, and just as easy to accept Honda’s explanation– because it makes absolutely no difference to us, until lights-out at Melbourne in March.

          2. @BlackJackFan But that’s just it…those numbers do not represent blown units, but often have represented a voluntary penalty in order to do R&D. Not the same thing at all. I would take the word of a bloke actually involved in the project over an armchair bloke any day. And sure, the actual people involved might be spinning a yarn, but then they surely have to at least back up what they are claiming with something of substance, which is more than a guy in an armchair would know. RBR must have some reason for some optimism, or they would have and could have stayed with Renault. They’re willing to take the pain of the steep initial learning curve with Honda because they surely had seen enough of Renault. And as I have stated before, I will believe it when I see it that the Honda Pu can be cranked to something as competitive as the Renault, when it held together, but I know nothing to think they won’t. It’s awfully hard to imagine the viewpoint of Socksolid, that being that Honda has moved backwards. I just don’t buy that. Let’s see a 2019 Honda Pu in a 2019 Newey RBR, and forget about what just happened at STR, RBR’s test bed.

          3. @robbie
            What those numbers represent is that nothing has changed. Do you have numbers to compare how often mclaren changed their honda units “voluntary …. in order to do R&D” while taking penalty? No you don’t. Yet you attack me for making assumptions when yours is bigger assumption than mine.

            All I see with honda and toro rosso is continuation of trend that started with mclaren. No change for the better.

            You assume the same numbers represent a different scenario just because you want to believe the guys: “then they surely have to at least back up what they are claiming with something of substance“. Did they “back it up” in 2018? Not for me they did not. What did honda do in 2018 that did back it up that they are improving? On every metric toro rosso went backwards. On every metric honda kept doing what it has been doing all along first with mclaren and now with toro rosso.

            RBR went with honda because they had no other choice. I wrote more about that here:
            https://www.racefans.net/2018/12/29/red-bulls-best-hybrid-era-season-fails-to-save-renault-relationship/#comment-3994613

        2. @robbie

          I do agree with you that Honda has everything to prove, but I certainly cannot just look at your chart and assume Honda has made no progress whatsoever, as you seem to be claiming, or indeed that they are worse.

          In all fairness.. Honda has been nothing more than an ongoing experiment over 4 seasons. Never have they even come close to meeting the performance standards or reliability standards for F1 power units. In none of their seasons have they even come remotely close to using just the allocated number of components. You can blame it on Mclaren’s communication or partnership management skills or say they were in their first year of marriage with Toro Rosso, but at the end of the day, they have shown nothing to justify the word “progress”

          It’s actually abysmal that they throw more money at their engine project than Renault from day 1, and still haven’t caught up to them. That’s the quality of Honda right there.

          Let’s see how they perform next year…. but up until then I don’t se how anyone with an objective mind can say Honda has been anything other than a failure so far.

    3. @socksolid
      Regardless of what you think, these stats say nothing about reliability; all it says is components used.
      If none of these components broke, and they were only replaced with slightly better parts for testing, Honda is not lying.
      And unless there is a list of actual failures, you can’t conclude anything regarding reliability out of these figures.
      So no matter what you believe; you know nothing about Honda’s reliability. And posting anything about it is premature, and based on nothing but assumptions.

      1. The huge amounts of components used tell me the story that nothing has changed with honda from the mclaren days. After all honda did not just change engine components because of testing new parts (the toro rosso test bed theory) but they also did all the things they did with mclaren as well. Game the system to change components in the races before important races (japan, hungary, mexico, monaco), switch to newer parts because newer version was available or just switch to newer parts because the old ones would not last. All of this is just exact same thing honda was doing with mclaren and the number of components prove it. Where is the difference??

        And no. You don’t wait for a component to fail before you change it. You can look at the part and see if there is crack growth, if there is excessive wear, if the heat limits have been exceeded. Or you knew before the part even went into the car that it won’t last the full required amount. So you do preventative maintenance. Or you do a race where you push everything to the limit and then switch everything because your parts can’t survive more than one race like that.

        All I am doing I am looking at the facts and I don’t see anything has changed. If you think there is some big change that I am missing then may you want to tell me what it is. If it is just toro rosso’s tost saying things in interview that convinces you then you are a lot easier to convince than me. All I see is honda continuing with toro rosso what they did for 3 years with mclaren.

        1. @socksolid So keep your blinders on then. It is simply the case that STR/Honda is not McHonda. The differences that you choose to ignore are obvious. STR/Honda were in year one of their relationship last year. You allow nothing for a year-one learning curve that might explain some of the issues they had. They are also RBR’s junior team. Now RBR has Honda pu’s too. That you don’t want to acknowledge the ‘test bed’ theory is your choice. I find it ridiculous to expect that given the context of STR being RBR’s junior team, they weren’t setting themselves up for 2019 RBR and trying to sort the Honda Pu out and learn all they can ahead of the marriage with the team that is really going to give them a fighting chance, which isn’t STR. Surely you don’t always, with everything in your life, just look at the numbers and ignore what is behind them? That you choose to now indicates you must just have a dislike for Honda, or RBR, or both. You give them zero chance of progressing when they likely spent 2018 progressing their R&D big time.

          As to convincing, I have stated from the getgo upon the announcement of RBR going with Honda, that Honda still has everything to prove wrt cranking their Pu up to the competitive levels RBR will need, and still have reliability. I will have to see that to believe it. And Honda knows that’s what they have to do, which is why I’m convinced that it is highly possible they have actually made progress and it certainly cannot hurt RBR for them to have had Honda pu(s) in their STR cars.

          Otherwise, @Smurfler Well said.

          1. Comment 1 – “We are comfortable with the reliability of the unit. It was completely different from previous years.”
            Comment 2 – “I’m convinced that it is highly possible they have actually made progress”

            You choose… ;-)

          2. @robbie)

            STR/Honda were in year one of their relationship last year.

            And fourth season for honda and they still need 16 engines to get through a season when the maximum is 6. And it is not like the mclaren honda situation improved in the 2nd or third year either. What makes you think toro rosso and red bull situation is any different? And if the first year of partnership will be tricky then how on earth can expect good things from the first honda-red bull season??? It is not like mclaren-honda started their relationship from nothing in 2015 either…

            You allow nothing for a year-one learning curve that might explain some of the issues they had.

            It was the fourth season for honda. And it is the exact same issues every year 4 years in a row. Where do you get the information that these are different issues?

            That you don’t want to acknowledge the ‘test bed’ theory is your choice.

            No. In fact I embrace it. Honda has been doing test beds for 4 years now. You say toro rosso-honda season was special because of some special test bed program. I say it was normal season for honda. Honda does not compete in f1. They just do test beds and have done so for 4 years now. It was business as usual and the norm we can expect from honda. Not an exception in any way.

            Surely you don’t always, with everything in your life, just look at the numbers and ignore what is behind them?

            I sure wont’t pretend to have made a change or expect improvement when none of the numbers have changed.

            That you choose to now indicates you must just have a dislike for Honda, or RBR, or both.

            I want honda to do well. I want red bull in the championship fight. I don’t believe either will happen because I see no signs of honda improvement. All I see is continuation of trash reliability, lack of power, gaming of the engine part switching system and penalties and big talk. And honda needs to be able deliver engines to two teams this year. I expect more problems, not less.

            And Honda knows that’s what they have to do, which is why I’m convinced that it is highly possible they have actually made progress

            Just because red bull wants a competitive engine does not mean that honda will be able to improve any meaningful amount…

            I ask again. What has honda done this year that is different from mclaren years? Test beds? It is the fourth year of test beds. You did not provide any evidence that this year honda were switching the engine parts for different reasons than they did in previous seasons.

          3. @socksolid Neither you nor I have the evidence that STR and Honda and RBR have, so I am not going to assume like you that they have not made progress. I am going to take their word over yours, and next year we will just see. What I will assume is that RBR knows a lot more than we do and is willing to start a program with Honda vs Renault. RBR will have growing pains next year like I expect all teams in new relationships to do. I’ll trust that RBR would not have switched to Honda if they saw something that scared them during last year. It would seem they are comfortable enough with the potential there, that this is the decision with which they have decided to live. I’ll not presume anything until I see a 2019 Honda Pu in a 2019 Newey car, and that will be the beginning of a new work in progress. Mac had their experience and it was not the same as STR/Honda nor 2019 RBR/Honda. Different entities, early days for Honda, some have said Mac was uncompromising with their chassis whereas RBR have said they’ll work with Honda etc etc. Mac then is not RBR now.

          4. @robbie

            Neither you nor I have the evidence that STR and Honda and RBR have

            Exactly. There is no evidence of change so why do you still believe there is change?

          5. @socksolid

            Completely agree with you on your points. Honda was not a test bed for just this season, they were a testbed for the whole of 2015 (although handicapped by tokens) and most of 2016. 2017 was another epic fail after the tiny progress they made in 2016. For a team that has been conducting nothing but R&D since the new engine regulations were announced, they seem to have absolutely nothing to show for it other than false praise from the Red Bull stable.

            @robbie

            Just to set the record straight. I would love to see Max challenge for the title, and that won’t happen unless Honda get their act together. But you have nothing but a ‘test bed’ theory to say they have made progress. You haven’t actually seen improved reliability … or haven’t really seen any performance gains from Honda. So honestly, you’re just going on faith, and the ever kind words of Red Bull for any engine supplier that isn’t Renault.

            Don’t be blinded by the fact that Honda replaced all their components before they failed on track. It’s a very clear intention of avoiding further embarrassment after they got dumped by Mclaren. Also don’t ignore the fact they couldn’t even run their spec 3 engine in Mexico, a track where engine performance gets negated to a huge extent. They used a fresh power unit on every day of pre season testing, so just think about how clear their priority was to avoid on track failure.

            Other than words from Tost, Horner and the Red Bull squad, who get paid handsomely by Honda, no one else has even noticed Honda’s progress. At no point in time did we see Honda’s performance come close to the Mercs and Ferraris, and at no point in time did they even look close to using only 6 power units & components for the entire season.

            So for now, your words are nothing but a sign of blind faith. I’d have to agree with @socksolid on this one. All the facts point towards just another false hype story for Honda.

          6. Hi Robbie – your quotes:
            “I’m convinced that it is highly possible they have actually made progress”
            “I am going to take their word over yours, and next year we will just see.”

            I’ve mentioned before your rose-tinted spectacles re. anything to do with RedBull…
            I think it’s a shame because many of your other comments are much more interesting.

          7. @todfod @socksolid I was never going to go by year one of Honda with STR to have shown us much progress on the track. It’s STR we’re talking about, and it was season one. You don’t just slap one of these complex pu’s in the back of a car and away you go. You might do a little more if you have the makers suspension and gearbox attached as well, ala Haas or Sauber. The three years with Mac may have turned out to be a test bed, but certainly didn’t start out that way. I believe the STR/Honda relationship started as a stepping stone for RBR, and so I just don’t believe that what we saw wrt STR’s performance and reliability and penalties, was an actual representation akin to, let’s take year one, at Mac, where it was all about them and only them, and a new chapter, not influenced by any other teams’ interest. The penalties Mac took were ‘genuine’ I suspect, at least in the first year or until desperation started to set in and they could see that by regularly starting near the back there was little to lose in taking components penalties. Same with STR but I just don’t believe the sentiment has been the same year one with STR as it was year one with Mac. This time the senior team of RBR is in the mix.

            I have clearly stated from the getgo that we should all hope Honda has progressed and that we will continue to have three teams competitive at the top end and not just two, and I have stated that I will have to see Honda’s progress in a ‘real’ car next year to believe it, so it is not a ‘blind’ faith that I have. It is just a belief I have that indeed we can’t go by what we saw last year with STR/Honda full stop…we likely saw a program being run, not a team trying their hardest to place STR as high up on the grid as possible with all kinds of time spent to reach out and grab every point possible. There’ve been other motivations at play that are different than McHonda experienced, and that is in the past. Honda has had another year, and has no doubt turned over every stone in examining all those components that they ran once and then put under a microscope. And…we haven’t yet seen a 2019 Honda Pu in a 2019 Newey car. Why would I assume it’s just going to be more of the same? I’m certainly not assuming what we saw at STR was a normal season for a team, nor am I going to assume Honda cannot progress, nor that the RBR/Honda/Newey marriage can’t make a difference.

          8. I believe the STR/Honda relationship started as a stepping stone for RBR, and so I just don’t believe that what we saw wrt STR’s performance and reliability and penalties, was an actual representation akin to, let’s take year one, at Mac, where it was all about them and only them, and a new chapter, not influenced by any other teams’ interest.

            But why do you believe that? You don’t think mclaren treated their first year with honda as a test season just like you are saying toro rosso and red bull did? Why is the same thing different for toro rosso and mclaren?

            The word genuine is really weird for you to use in this context. Honda nor toro rosso nor mclaren would never change engine component unless they had a “genuine” reason to do so. Genuine reason being newer part is available and needs to be tested, old part is going to fail or you just take the engine penalties in the american gp so you get a strong engine for the mexican gp for example… There are nothing but genuine reasons to change engine components.

            And when it comes to “representation” doesn’t this sounds exactly like the kind of talk we heard from tost:
            https://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12479/9737487/mclaren

            The penalties Mac took were ‘genuine’ I suspect, at least in the first year or until desperation started to set in and they could see that by regularly starting near the back there was little to lose in taking components penalties.

            Mclaren’s first season is not directly comparable anyways because of the token system. But even then the reliability was total junk. And if you know you are going to have to switch engine components I can’t imagine an f1 team doing so without planning it ahead so they get the best bang out of the component changes. Which is why toro rosso and mclaren did do pretty much identical schedule when they gamed the system to get most out of those component changes. It did not always work out as parts kept failing sometimes instantly…

            we likely saw a program being run, not a team trying their hardest to place STR as high up on the grid as possible with all kinds of time spent to reach out and grab every point possible.

            The honda program that’s been running for 4 seasons now?

            There’ve been other motivations at play that are different than McHonda experienced

            What motivations and how do you even know such a thing?

            nor am I going to assume Honda cannot progress, nor that the RBR/Honda/Newey marriage can’t make a difference

            Why do you expect red bull/newey to make a difference with honda when they could not make a difference with renault?

  2. Re COTD,

    Naw, what Vettel’ saying is, he does want a car that’s definitely faster than everyone else so that he can have a 2+ seconds lead by the end of the first lap and then run off into the distance. We’ve seen the last 2 seasons that if the cars closely matched, he’s going to come up second best.

    1. People love to make excuses for their favorite driver that didn’t win the championship when they had the machinery to do so. Alonso dialed up that sort of super human skill to wrestle a slower car to positions it shouldn’t have been, so why can’t we expect VET to do the same for an entire season? VET still screwed up in races that Ferrari were comfortably faster than Merc.

      1. That SV made mistakes doesn’t erase the fact that Ferrari were just too slow at some races, and that is all SV is pointing out. He may have been less consistent than LH, but so was the Ferrari less consistent than the Mercs when it took a dip in performance until they reverted back to their earlier season car, all the while Merc having found an issue at Spa and didn’t look back after the summer break. It still holds that in order to win the WDC you need the WCC car, and that usually means one that didn’t get worse mid-season to the point where they had to revert backwards. And of course as LH has shown us, as the most recent example of a car and driver dominating, when you can start on the front row more often than not, you inevitably have less work to do…fewer cars to pass. All drivers wish for a car like that, not just SV.

        1. @Robbie

          “It still holds that in order to win the WDC you need the WCC car,”

          Does 2008 ring a bell?

          There were races where the Mercedes was also just slow, China, Canada, Bahrain, Baku & Germany*. The difference between the two teams in this analysis is that Mercedes’ problems happened at the beginning of the season, which gave them more time to make up the ground. If you’re going to drop points or performance, do so very early in the season and not at the point where it’s basically impossible to regain lost ground.

          1. @kgn11 Oh for sure. We can look at SV with his late season unreliability last year as an example. Not enough time left to answer for it.

            The WCC=WDC isn’t of course written in stone, but is the case the vast majority of the time, or otherwise the rare time the WDC still had a very very close second place car in the WCC.

  3. “It’s a shame you can’t have more than two pay drivers”

    Fixed that for you, Paddy.

    1. @phylyp
      I’m sure Monisha Kaltenborn would love an F1 return.
      She could probably help Paddy out on the more than 2 drivers thing :)

      1. “I’m sure Monisha Kaltenborn would love an F1 return.”
        Kaltenborn-again… Oh noooo.! ;-)

        1. Part of the Kaltenborne Legacy

        2. Hopefully still-born…

  4. A huge thank you to @keithcollantine, @dieterrencken, @hazelsouthwell and the rest of the team for giving us such a great independent site and such excellent content for 2018.

    Happy New year to all on the team and to all contributors to articles without whom, some days would be far less interesting.

    I look forward to an excellent 2019 on my favourite site.

    1. I whole-heartedly agree, and couldn’t have expressed it better than @dbradock

    2. Hear, hear!

      1. Puts Autosport website to shame…

    3. And a great community were we discuss f1, some with very different points of view but always respecting everyone’s opinion.
      Happy new year to everybody.

      1. Emphatic +1 to this. For the most part (almost always), the discussions here remain on point & civil, while “alternative facts” tend to be rebuffed swiftly in favor of real ones. The level of knowledge regarding the history, rules, statistics & inside information surprises me sometimes & I’ve come to rely on this site & my fellow fanatics quite a lot. My respect to the Racefans team for a great site, as well as to the community members who never fail to keep the discussions interesting & informative. Happy New Year, all.

    4. Wel said @dbradock, I am very happy to have this site,and also enjoy the increased coverage not just of F1 but of other classes of motorsports.

  5. If Kubica was overlooked and they went for Sirotkin for 2018, then why does Lowe give justification for the drivers selected as “Kubica is a legend” when taking about 2019 lineup? What has Kubica done in past year which reversed the initial selection? According to Lowe, Sirotkin has not done anything wrong.

    1. @muralibhats – Kubica secured additional funding for 2019. That seems to be Williams’ key metric in assessing drivers.

      If anything, it’s impressive they’ve gone with Russell as well, instead of another pay driver.

      1. Russel brings in discounts for Merc engines and also talent.

      2. I do understand why Paddy Lowe is so vocal about the fact that he was happy with Sirotkin. He was a decent driver, polite, quiet, brought ton of cash and was young so could still improve. He is a every team boss dream come true!
        Now he has to work for his paycheck and make sure that Williams under his lead will build Russel and Kubica a midfield car. Kubica isn’t as quiet as Sirotkin so if Williams car will be garbage he will be the first to say it out loud then push everyone around hard to implement improvements. Fans also expect a lot from George and Robert given their potential and expierience respectively- so now the presure is on Paddy to put it all together this year. He can’t hope that fans will blame the drivers next year again.

        1. Interesting and a nice point, never thought of it that way.

        2. Well said. Sad that they cannot accept thrir driver choices were indeed wrong for last year. Maybe someday they give a strong reply with results to Stroll.

      3. I don’t understand where this gossip started, but kubica DID NOT secure additional funding, he had the same pledge as last season, and didn’t even have a manager looking for funding. It’s a baseless lie being spread in western motorsport sites about kubica bringing the most money. What did happen was that sirotkins backers offered less for next season. Williams already would have chosen kubica last year not for sirotkins grand Russian money that came late to the game (plus a phoney shootout to make it seem legit) This year it was an easy choice, since both offered similar money + stroll pays out his contract giving Williams some more freedom.

        1. kpcart, that would seem to directly contradict the reports that have been printed in the Polish media, which have stated that Kubica is being paid additional funds by PKN Orlen to race in F1. Those “western motorsport sites” that you are complaining about are reporting information being relayed by the Polish media – unless you want to assert that the Polish media sector is somehow acting in collaboration with those “western motorsport sites” that you are decrying.

          Indeed, there are quite a few cynics in the Polish media who have suggested that the real motivation behind the PKN Orlen deal was to cover up some embarrassing remarks that the Polish Prime Minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, had made about Kubica.

          Earlier this year, a tape recording of Morawiecki was released where he was caught discussing a wide range of topics, some of which had the potential to be highly damaging (such as discussing giving kickbacks to certain figures in return for political favours).

          Amongst those remarks, he talked about his time at the Polish bank WBK and the sponsorship that WBK gave to Kubica and started complaining about how much money it had cost them to sponsor Kubica – until, he noted, Kubica had “luckily broken his arm once, then again”, allowing WBK to get out of sponsoring him and saving the company several million euros a year.

          Considering that those remarks became public in the run up to regional elections in Poland, those statements had the potential to be rather damaging for Morawiecki and his party. Now, there are those in the Polish media who noted that PKN Orlen – in which the Polish government had a controlling interest – suddenly started showing interest in Kubica the day after the story broke, not to mention that the Prime Minister suddenly invited Kubica to meet him.

          If anything, the “western motorsport sites” are perhaps giving more favourable coverage – they’re merely suggesting that he’s received more sponsorship, leaving out the accusations from some parts of the Polish press that the PKN Orlen deal is politically motivated by a Prime Minister wanting to cover up some rather reckless and offensive remarks that he’d made about Kubica.

          1. I’m gonna start calling you the Racefans Oracle, anon.

          2. If anything, the “western motorsport sites” are perhaps giving more favourable coverage – they’re merely suggesting that he’s received more sponsorship, leaving out the accusations from some parts of the Polish press that the PKN Orlen deal is politically motivated

            I’d agree with this, as I’d not known about this open mike scandal until now.

        2. Hi kpcart – Let’s hope 2019 will be a happier time for you…! ;-)

  6. I still think Sirotkin should’ve been retained, but oh well, this line-up is perfectly decent as well.

    Regarding the COTD: That indeed could/seems to be the case.

    We shall wait and see how Honda’s reliability is going to be next season with a team the size of RBR on board.

  7. Even if Williams had 10 drivers they’d have probably still finished last in the constructors.

Comments are closed.