What the data tells us about Max Verstappen, Ferrari and McLaren's chances in the British GP
According to Red Bull advisor Helmut Marko, the new floor has improved the car's performance, though the Austrian mainly credited what he called "the Max factor". While the McLaren drivers left some time on the table at the end of Q3, Lewis Hamilton admitted to a mistake in Vale, and Charles Leclerc cursed himself seven times in a row over the team radio, Verstappen delivered when it mattered most.
Advertisement
Comparing Verstappen and Piastri's qualifying benchmarks
Another key element is undoubtedly the car's set-up, which Red Bull overhauled after a difficult Friday, opting for very low downforce. That brings potential downsides – difficulties in the lower-speed corners and possibly some more instability in high-speed curves – but Verstappen handled it impressively well in qualifying. The upside? Higher top speed, as clearly shown in the GPS data.
In the below comparison, Verstappen's fastest Q3 lap is compared with Piastri's quickest run in Q3 – his first one. The track map on the left shows all the straights highlighted in blue – Red Bull territory. Verstappen hit 313km/h at the end of the main straight, 4km/h faster than Piastri. This helped him carry more speed into the sweeping Turns 1 and 2, though McLaren's higher-downforce set-up showed its strength in medium- and low-speed corners. Piastri had better speed through The Loop, for instance.
After Verstappen extended the gap again on the Wellington Straight, the pattern repeated in Brooklands and Luffield. Piastri maintained higher minimum speeds and stronger traction out of these corners, thanks to the McLaren's set-up choice. Approaching Copse, Verstappen again topped out at 320km/h versus Piastri's 316km/h. That advantage grew in the high-speed section from Copse through Maggotts and Becketts, where Verstappen consistently had an 8km/h edge – significant enough to extend his lead to almost three tenths by that point.
Advertisement
In the final sector, however, Verstappen lost time, particularly in Vale and Club and on the exits of those turns. These are traction zones where McLaren is stronger, but not enough to claim pole. With the low-downforce set-up and above all a very well-executed lap, Verstappen held on by 0.103s to claim another impressive pole position, his fourth of the season.
Max Verstappen, Oscar Piastri, kwalificatiedata Grand Prix van Groot-Brittannië
Max Verstappen, Oscar Piastri, kwalificatiedata Grand Prix van Groot-Brittannië
Max Verstappen, Oscar Piastri, kwalificatiedata Grand Prix van Groot-Brittannië
Max Verstappen, Oscar Piastri, kwalificatiedata Grand Prix van Groot-Brittannië
Long-run approach: McLaren vs Verstappen and Ferrari
Even more important for Sunday's race is a look at the long runs, which shows an interesting picture.
Advertisement
Verstappen was far from happy with the RB21's balance on Friday, complaining about understeer. Yet Helmut Marko concluded the long runs looked 'surprisingly good' for Red Bull, a statement that is backed by data. According to PACETEQ's analysis, Verstappen showed the fastest average over the long runs on Friday.
However, there's a key caveat, visible in the second graphic below, relating to tyre wear. Both McLaren drivers showed significantly less degradation than Verstappen and Ferrari, suggesting two different approaches to the long runs.
Examining lap-by-lap data, it becomes clear that Verstappen and Ferrari started aggressively, while McLaren opted for a different approach: slower early on, seemingly led by a delta time, but more consistent over the entire run.
These are two long-run strategies teams can use. The Verstappen/Ferrari approach helps gather tyre wear data by pushing hard early on, to get a clear picture of the maximum wear and use those findings on Sunday. McLaren's approach was more consistent and more representative for a longer stint. Importantly, all of Friday's long runs were shorter than actual race stints, meaning McLaren's lower degradation is not fully reflected in the numbers below.
Advertisement
Over a full stint, McLaren may therefore well have the edge over Verstappen based on the lower degradation per lap, but Red Bull and Ferrari probably wouldn't start stints as aggressively on Sunday. Plus, Verstappen's set-up and car balance are very different now compared to Friday.
With this in mind, one thing is clear: Red Bull absolutely does not want rain in Silverstone, given its minimal downforce levels. The Ferrari drivers, on the other hand, run much more downforce and could benefit from changing weather conditions.
The same degradation pattern plays out in the midfield. Lance Stroll looks competitive in the graphics below, but deeper analysis shows he had the highest tyre degradation per lap of anyone in the field. The Canadian started strong but fell off a cliff later on, suggesting he might be less competitive on Sunday than the long-run table implies. Fernando Alonso's more stable long-run pace and better starting position (P7) paint a more realistic picture for Aston Martin.
Finally, Oliver Bearman displayed encouraging long-run performance on Friday, but the Haas driver will start from P18 due to his red-flag infringement, when he crashed while entering the pitlane.
Advertisement
The young British driver's 10-place grid penalty (plus four penalty points on his superlicence) is a significant setback, as both his qualifying performance and race pace were very promising. He now has a mountain to climb on Sunday.
Photos from British GP - Race
Lando Norris, McLaren
Lando Norris, McLaren
Simon Galloway / LAT Images via Getty Images
Lando Norris, McLaren
Lando Norris, McLaren
Mark Sutton / Formula 1 via Getty Images
Alex Albon, Williams
Alex Albon, Williams
Sam Bagnall / Sutton Images via Getty Images
Oscar Piastri, McLaren
Oscar Piastri, McLaren
Simon Galloway / LAT Images via Getty Images
Lewis Hamilton, Ferrari with his dog Roscoe
Lewis Hamilton, Ferrari with his dog Roscoe
Jakub Porzycki - NurPhoto - Getty Images
Advertisement
Gabriel Bortoleto, Sauber and Isabella Bernardini
Gabriel Bortoleto, Sauber and Isabella Bernardini
Andy Hone / LAT Images via Getty Images
Alexandra Saint Mleux and Leo
Alexandra Saint Mleux and Leo
Bryn Lennon / Formula 1 via Getty Images
Franco Colapinto, Alpine
Franco Colapinto, Alpine
Sam Bagnall / Sutton Images via Getty Images
George Russell, Mercedes
George Russell, Mercedes
Simon Galloway / LAT Images via Getty Images
Lando Norris, McLaren
Lando Norris, McLaren
Simon Galloway / LAT Images via Getty Images
Lance Stroll, Aston Martin Racing
Lance Stroll, Aston Martin Racing
Zak Mauger / LAT Images via Getty Images
David Richards, Ron Meadows, Sporting Director of Mercedes F1 Team
David Richards, Ron Meadows, Sporting Director of Mercedes F1 Team
Simon Galloway / LAT Images via Getty Images
Lando Norris, McLaren
Lando Norris, McLaren
Sam Bagnall / Sutton Images via Getty Images
Advertisement
Haas F1 fans
Haas F1 fans
Simon Galloway / LAT Images via Getty Images
Nico Hulkenberg, Sauber
Nico Hulkenberg, Sauber
Simon Galloway / LAT Images via Getty Images
Franco Colapinto, Alpine
Franco Colapinto, Alpine
Sam Bagnall / Sutton Images via Getty Images
Oscar Piastri, McLaren
Oscar Piastri, McLaren
Simon Galloway / LAT Images via Getty Images
Lewis Hamilton, Ferrari
Lewis Hamilton, Ferrari
Jakub Porzycki - NurPhoto - Getty Images
Lando Norris, McLaren
Lando Norris, McLaren
Sam Bagnall / Sutton Images via Getty Images
Rain over the paddock
Rain over the paddock
Erwin Jaeggi
To read more Motorsport.com articles visit our website.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
24 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Amanda Anisimova Faces Iga Swiatek in Wimbledon Women's Final
Save LONDON (AP) — Amanda Anisimova and Iga Swiatek both will be aiming to win Wimbledon for the first time when they meet in the women's final. Saturday's title match at Centre Court is the first for Anisimova, a 23-year-old American, at any Grand Slam tournament.
New York Times
33 minutes ago
- New York Times
Wimbledon women's final: Venus Williams, Lindsay Davenport, and Grand Slam mythology
THE ALL ENGLAND CLUB, LONDON — Twenty years ago this week, Venus Williams defeated Lindsay Davenport in one of the most dramatic Wimbledon finals in history. Davenport served for the match in the second set and had a championship point in the third, but Williams won an all-American classic 4-6, 7-6(4), 9-7, in two hours and 45 minutes. It remains the longest ever Wimbledon women's final, and one of the greatest Grand Slam finals of all time. Advertisement After Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner's epic French Open final last month, tennis conversation turned to that very topic. Some Wimbledon finals made the cut: the 1980 men's version between Björn Borg and John McEnroe; the 2008 equivalent between Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer. Even Goran Ivanišević's win over Patrick Rafter in the tournament's 2001 edition. What of Steffi Graf vs. Monica Seles at the 1992 French Open? Or the 2014 French Open final between Maria Sharapova and Simona Halep? Men's Grand Slam finals, which are best of five sets, afford more time and more space in which to unfold into epic dimensions. A sport with legitimate claim to have greater equality than most still has a chasm between its men's and women's events, which are best of three sets, on its biggest stages, at which the format acts as a cap on not just how long a women's match can go, but how deeply it can bury its way into the collective consciousness. Quality does not always equal quantity. As tennis matches generally tend to go on longer, and some five-setters can become dull for long stretches, the best-of-three version has benefits. That Sinner-Alcaraz final in Paris was the exception rather than the rule. But in wider culture, the myth-making of five-set tennis is the more potent, which can limit the exposure given to women's tennis on a purely quantitative basis. And if women's matches spend less time on television screens than men's matches, especially at the climaxes of the biggest events in the sport, then the men's game necessarily receives more exposure. Making both men's and women's singles best-of-three for the first four rounds and then best-of-five for the quarterfinals, semifinals and finals at the four majors is one solution. Venus Williams had spent the day before that 2005 final in meetings with Wimbledon officials, discussing prize money inequality. That year, the tournament's men's singles champion, Federer, won £630,000 ($1.1 million in 2005) while Williams got £600,000 ($1.05 million). Her final against Davenport could not have offered a better illustration of why the disparity was so unfair. Two years later, Wimbledon finally joined the other three Grand Slams in awarding equal prize money. Advertisement Davenport, now 49, remembers that final as one of very few matches in her career in which she played really well but ended up losing. She was the top seed at the tournament, and had already won the U.S. Open in 1998, Wimbledon in 1999 and the Australian Open in 2000, but she fell just short that day against Williams, who won her third of five Wimbledon titles and finished on seven majors overall. The backhand winner that she smacked down the line to save Davenport's championship point underlined why she is such a legend of the sport, and the match underlined how the two players, plus contemporaries such as Venus' sister Serena Williams and Jennifer Capriati, had transformed women's tennis with the power and precision of their hitting. 'It was the toughest loss of my career,' Davenport, who is covering this year's Wimbledon as an analyst for Tennis Channel, said in a phone interview this week. 'Though I spoke about this once with Andy Roddick (a fellow American who lost in the men's final of the London event three times) and he looked at me and said, 'Yeah, at least you have a Wimbledon title'.' That it was an incredible match makes it 'much harder,' Davenport said during an interview in Paris last month. 'You remember those,' she said. 'Sometimes it's almost easier to lose badly. Because you're like, 'Man, that wasn't my day'. That was my day, and I still couldn't win. That's a little harder to reconcile in your mind.' Davenport also has some experience in best-of-five. She played two matches in the longer format, because the final of the WTA Tour Finals used it between 1984 and 1998. Davenport lost 6-3, 6-2, 6-4 to Gabriela Sabatini in 1994, and 7-5, 6-4, 4-6, 6-2 to Martina Hingis four years later, in the last best-of-five WTA Tour match to date. 'It was interesting,' she said this week. 'It was very different, and I was outspoken that I didn't think formats should change in the middle of a tournament. It was a little bit hard to manage, and without the day off before it was a bit complicated. Advertisement 'People talk about changing the format from the quarters on [at Grand Slams]. I'm just not a believer in changing a format in the same tournament. You either go all-in or you don't go in.' The possibility of such mid-event changes being disruptive is balanced by the fact that match times can undulate wildly even within the same format, and players are just expected to adapt. Male players also have to jump from best-of-three to best-of-five in the space of a few days if they had a tournament the week before a Grand Slam. Davenport is sympathetic to best-of-five giving women's tennis a more even platform, but fears that critics of women's tennis would still dig up something to find fault with. She said she'd be interested in experiments, but added that it would have to be tested elsewhere first before it is trialled at a major. There's no suggestion at this point that any of the four Grand Slams is giving it serious consideration. Until 1984, the 1,500 metres was the longest distance available to women at the Olympic Games. Ball girls weren't allowed at Wimbledon until 1977, and it took eight more years for the tournament to let them work matches on Centre Court. From the vantage point of 2025, this appears as absurd as suggesting that women's soccer matches should be 70 minutes instead of 90, the same as in the men's game. In tennis, the most popular route toward format equality is for men to join the women in playing best-of-three. Men's matches at Wimbledon averaged two hours and 45 minutes across last year's tournament, a 22 percent increase from two hours and 15 minutes in 2013, which is leading to more physical and mental strain on average, but switching to best-of-three would also eradicate the five-set myth-making that has made matches such as last month's French Open final transcend tennis entirely. At this year's Wimbledon, leading WTA players have not been enthusiastic about the idea of going to best-of-five. Advertisement Aryna Sabalenka, the world No. 1, said in a news conference last week, 'I think probably physically I'm one of the strongest ones, so maybe it would benefit me. But I think I'm not ready to play five sets. I think we're not ready for this amount of tennis. I think it would increase the amount of injuries, so I think this is not something I would consider. I'll let this (be a) thing for guys to handle.' Sabalenka had played a dramatic final of her own against Coco Gauff at Roland Garros the day before the Sinner and Alcaraz epic, and took a dry approach to any possible envy of the hype created by best-of-five matches. 'I'm not really jealous to stay there for five hours as a player,' she said. 'I don't know how many days they needed to recover after that crazy match.' Former world No. 1 Iga Świątek, who will compete in this year's Wimbledon women's final today (Saturday) against Amanda Anisimova, agreed and said, with a smile, that she 'was glad' not to be competing in a final like that. 'I think I would be good at it because I always feel like physically I can survive more and I would have more time sometimes to problem solve,' she said of best-of-five. Many women's players backed their athleticism if they had to move to the longer format, but the idea of actually having to play more tennis generally did not appeal. Gauff fitted this paradigm: 'I think it would favor me, just from a physicality standpoint. But I do think it would be a big change for the tour. I think it would be fine just keeping it like how it is.' Jessica Pegula, the American world No. 3, said that top players like her would gain an advantage from their opponents needing three sets to beat them, rather than two. 'Not physically, obviously, but I think it always is going to cater to the better player in the long run if you're playing three out of five,' she said, after a first-round loss to a redlining Elisabetta Cocciaretto in straight sets at Wimbledon: the kind of match in which an underdog might not be able to maintain a peak for an extra set. 'I think you'd see a lot more upsets of top players if men played two out of three in the slams. It's a lot harder when you don't have that much time. You get down one break, especially for the men, and you're like, 'Oh, gosh, I'm kind of done. I need some luck. I need someone to choke a little bit.' Advertisement '(With) Three out of five, you have way more time to turn things around.' Pegula, however, added that format equity should come from men playing best-of-three. 'For me, it's too long,' she said of best-of-five. 'I lose interest watching the matches. I think they're incredible matches and incredible physically and mentally. But I'm like, 'Do we really need that?'. I mean, some people love it. I will not watch a full five-hour match. How are they holding their attention for five hours? I don't know. Just not my thing.' Madison Keys, the Australian Open women's champion who played some extraordinary three-setters during her triumphant run in Melbourne at the start of the year, was even more emphatic. 'Why would I want to do that?,' the American asked, with a smile, about playing five sets. She didn't watch that men's French Open final and think how amazing it would be to be part of something like it, she added. 'Did you see how tired they were at the end? Five-set matches can go five hours. That's crazy,' Keys said. 'No, you watch women's matches, there have been so many three-set matches that have been epic, amazing and have so much drama. My match today (in the Wimbledon first round against Elena-Gabriela Ruse) was full of drama. I don't need another two sets of that.' Keys also believes that comparing women's and men's tennis is futile — and even damaging — because they 'are different sports'. 'I think when you constantly try to compare them to each other, you're doing a disservice to both. So I don't think that you compare an epic three-setter women's match to an epic five-setter men's match. I think those are two separate things. That's my view at least. I've never looked at an epic three-set women's match and been like, 'Man, if they only went two more sets to compete against the men',' she said. Japan's four-time Grand Slam champion Naomi Osaka also backed herself in five-set tennis, but said that format inequity 'might be one of the most nitpicky things' about equality and women's tennis at large. Emma Navarro, the American world No. 10, was the only player who expressed much enthusiasm for playing best of five. 'I would be curious to see how the tour would hold up playing five sets. Yeah, I think it would be kind of fun,' she said. 'Sinner and Alcaraz (in the French Open final), it was an insane display of endurance and, yeah, fitness level. I would be curious to see how the ladies would handle it.' Advertisement For active players, their own interests tend to trump the bigger picture, and so it's understandable that for most women, the idea of adding even more physical and mental duress to an already packed schedule is not massively appealing. As long as the different formats are in place, there will be opportunities to undervalue women's tennis compared to men's. Wimbledon debentures provide a 'premium seat' on Centre Court or No. 1 Court for the duration of the tournament, for five editions of the tournament, so 70 days of tennis in total. Centre Court debentures for 2026 to 2030 inclusive were issued at £116,000 ($156,462 at the current rate). The tickets for individual days can be transferred or resold. In a letter sent to Wimbledon debenture holders on the eve of this year's tournament, the recommended sell-on price for a pair of men's final tickets was £16,000. A pair of women's final tickets was £4,000 — a quarter of the price. While this might not be a concern to most players, it contributes to a climate where women's tennis can be continually undervalued on the grounds of guaranteed quantity, even when its quality regularly outstrips men's matches. The women's final at the Australian Open between Keys and Sabalenka was spectacular, immeasurably more interesting than Sinner's 6-3, 7-6, 6-3 dismantling of Alexander Zverev the following day, but the best-of-five-set format gives the men's final the space to be transcendent. And so to today's final between Świątek and Anisimova, which could be anything from one-sided to sensational. If it is spectacular, matching the heights of possibly the best ever between Williams and Davenport 20 years ago, tennis and sporting culture will meet with a built-in limit on how memorable it can be. In the future, that might be looked back on as absurd as not letting women run the longer distances at the Olympics.
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Germany U21 coach: Woltemade rumours not to blame for Euros defeat
Germany's Nick Woltemade (L) reacts during the men's Under-21 European championship final soccer match between England and Germany at National football stadium. Robert Nemeti/dpa Germany under-21 national team coach Antonio Di Salvo said that the defeat to England in the U21 Euros final had nothing to do with the speculation about the future of top player Nick Woltemade. "This story was not the reason for the defeat. Nevertheless, it's sad when ahead of a final a transfer rumour is debated more than the actual game," Di Salvo told Sports Illustrated Germany in an interview published on Friday. Advertisement Two days before the final, media reported that Bayern Munich were interested in signing Woltemade from VfB Stuttgart. The forward scored six goals throughout the tournament, but didn't find the target in the final. Germany lost 3-2 to England in extra time. Di Salvo, however, doesn't believe that this open debate could have affected the performance of his team. "Not really." If anything, then it "preoccupied Nick himself." The coach said that Woltemade had told him before the game that talks had been going on in the background for some time and that his mind was only on the final. Advertisement According to recent media reports, Stuttgart have rejected Bayern's first offer for the player. The Bild newspaper said that Stuttgart dismissed the bid shortly after it arrived. It said that Bayern had offered €40 million ($46.7 million) plus €5 million in add-ons. Stuttgart reportedly want much more for Woltemade, who has a contract until 2028. Woltemade, 23, helped Stuttgart win the German Cup last season and won his first two senior caps last month. Bundesliga champions Bayern are looking for reinforcements up front after the exits of Thomas Müller, Leroy Sané and Mathys Tel. They are also without Jamal Musiala for several months due to a fibula and ankle fracture.
