|
PART ONE: TEAM
REPRESENTATIVES – Christian HORNER (Red Bull Racing), Franz TOST (Toro
Rosso)
PRESS CONFERENCE
Franz, let’s start by talking about drivers. IT’s been a case of revolving
doors at Toro Rosso in recent weeks. You’ve paired Brendon Hartley with
Pierre Gasly this weekend. First question: Why them?
Franz TOST: Because both are Red Bull drivers, both are high-skilled
drivers, fast driver and we want to test them for the rest of the season,
because there is a high possibility that this will be the driver line-up for
2018.
So where does all this leave Daniil Kvyat?
FT: He is not anymore with Red Bull and therefore he is free to decide
whatever he wants to do.
With immediate effect he is no longer part of the Red Bull family?
FT: No, he’s not anymore with Red Bull and Toro Rosso.
Now, from a Constructors’ Championship point of view, you said at the start
of the year that you wanted to finish sixth. You’re currently there but
Renault are closing fast and the recent musical chairs means that one of
your prize assets, Carlos Sainz, is now with Renault. How do you think the
championship situation is going to play out? Are you worried about the
threat from Renault?
FT: Of course we are worried, yeah. You know, the background story for this
is that Toro Rosso has a valid contract with Renault. We decided to change
to Honda for 2018 and to terminate the contract we of course had to give
something to Renault. The compensation was Carlos Sainz and therefore he is
now driving for Renault. We are well aware, because of his speed, it’s a big
threat for us because he scored most of the points for Toro Rosso. On the
one hand side, we lost him scoring points for us, on the other hand side, he
is now with Renault. He is very fast, as we saw in Austin, and it will not
become easy, but if we don’t have any technical problems I am still
convinced we can stay ahead of Renault and Haas.
Thank you and good luck with that. Christian, turning to you, let’s cast our
minds back to the Austin race last weekend. Max has apologized on social
media for the language that he used after that grand prix. It did get pretty
heated. What’s your take on what happened at the end?
Christian HORNER: Well, I think there are two things here: there’s one, what
happened on circuit, and then there’s what happened off circuit. What
happened on circuit was frustrating, was difficult to understand, and
particularly for the viewers following the sport and perhaps watching the
race in the US for the first time. We had this situation with track limits,
which had been abused, not just in Austin, but at other circuits as well,
throughout the weekend. And then, unfortunately, Max got penalised for
effectively abusing track limits. And it was obviously frustrating and where
Max’s frustration obviously came from was that people had been running off
track all weekend. He managed to make a move on Kimi, got up the inside and
then committed to running off track at that point. Obviously to have then,
on the final lap of the grand prix, to have made that pass, believe that you
are on the podium, a fantastic recovery driver from 16th, the crowd loving
it, you’re in the green room and Matteo pulls him out for the second time
and says “sorry, son, you’ve just got a penalty and Kimi’s on the podium”.
And unfortunately without the right of reply, without the ability to
question, or even a hearing, to present his side of the story, of course, in
the heat of the moment, you know these guys, they’re emotional, they’re
passionate, they’re fired up, he had a microphone put in front of him fairly
shortly after taking his helmet off and being removed from that green room,
and of course emotions are running high, and he said a few things that were
inappropriate, that he subsequently apologized for. But one can understand
the frustration there must have been – having believed that you had achieved
something only to find out in that scenario that it wasn’t to be.
So what is the solution with regard to track limits?
CH: I think it’s important to find a solution. I had a very constructive
discussion with Charlie Whiting earlier in the weekend, because I think it
needs to be simple for the fans, the spectators and the commentators to be
able to follow and saying you can go off the track here but you can’t there
because that’s an advantage here or it’s not such a big advantage there, in
any other sport it wouldn't happen - if it’s rugby or tennis or any sport
you can think of, out us out and in is in. Now, motor racing is more
complicated than that, obviously, and I think one of the key things and a
deterrent to stop drivers using and abusing these track limits is in the
circuits themselves. If there was a kerb there, if there was a gravel trap
there, if there was a surface that wasn’t conducive to being on, be it
astroturf or whatever it is, I think if there was a deterrent to the drivers
being there… they don’t go wide in Singapore, they don’t go wide in Monaco,
because there is a penalty, obviously a severe one because there are walls
there. But I think perhaps the circuits where we share with MotoGP, we can’t
facilitate both disciplines with the regulations that we have and I think at
those venues, like in Austin, you will either say “everything is available;
use whatever you like,” or if you don’t want the drivers going outside track
limits, put a kerb there or a rumble strip or a gravel trap that prevents
the drivers or physically slows them, from using those areas of the circuit.
That would then remove this ambiguity of “is that a penalty, is it not a
penalty?” We saw many moves in Austin, and one that sticks in my mind was
when Daniel was racing Valtteri Bottas – he went off at Turn 1, came back on
the circuit and had the line for Turn 2. Is that an advantage, is it not? It
just takes away that ambiguity. If there had been a gravel trap there he
would not have gone there. If we can address that it will remove the emotion
and the confusion that exists regarding track limits and circuit boundaries.
Franz, do you have anything to add on track limits?
FT: No I’m 100% in agreement with Christian on what he says. As long as the
track offers the possibility to overtake, the driver overtakes, that’s in
the nature of the racing driver. The manouevre of Max was fantastic. We must
not forget the spectators, they want to see a show. Once more there was the
room, there was the space to do it. In future they have to take for this
that the drivers are not invited to use this area for overtaking. To say
“yeah, you were with four wheels over the white line”, this is always
something difficult, because maybe with the rear tyre is not so much over
the white line and no, they must do something on the race tracks to prevent
this, otherwise we should change the regulation and say overtake wherever
you like, if you get an advantage, do it.
QUESTIONS FROM THE FLOOR
Q: (Mike Doodson – GP Plus) This is for Franz. Franz, you’ve seen a lot of
young drivers over and you’ve had a few potential world champions through
your hands. Can you tell us anything about the behaviour, from a technical
point of view, of Brendon Hartley, which perhaps wouldn’t have seen from
outside?
FT: You must have seen it from outside, because he won the 24 Hours of Le
Mans and he won the LMP1 world championship – that means the results are
there. No, Brendon is a very high-skilled driver. He is very committed,
passionate for motor sport, and I am really happy that he is back and I can
tell you that if we give him a competitive car he will be there and he will
also fight in Formula One for success. And I hope that especially next year
that we will bring together a competitive package that he can also fight for
victories and good positions.
Q: (Dieter Rencken – Racing Lines) Red Bull has spent, probably, hundreds of
millions on driver development over the years and yet from the outside it
seems to be a chaotic process. You’ve just renewed with Max Verstappen while
Daniel Ricciardo is said to be on the market, yet you’re saying you want to
sign him. Max, though, is going to be build the team around himself. At Toro
Rosso, Daniil Kvyat was in, then he was out, then he’s back in again. Then
Brendon Hartley, who was got rid of a couple of years ago, is suddenly back
in, and from the outside it juts looks chaotic. Is there a science to this
hundred million dollar programme or not?
CH: Yeah, absolutely. Red Bull has been tremendously successful in investing
in young talent. All of the names that you have mentioned have had their
opportunities that wouldn’t have otherwise been there has Red Bull not
invested in youth, backed youth, supported them through Toro Rosso into Red
Bull Racing. Now, what we have, breaking that down, because they are all
drivers on Red Bull Racing contracts – Max Verstappen, there was the ability
to extend that agreement to 2020 and there’s not a team in the pit land that
wouldn’t have taken that up. It removes speculation that’s only been growing
and movements around him that are quite frankly unhelpful and distracting.
That closed the book on that one. We’ve had a long relationship with Daniel
Ricciardo and he’s currently within a five-year agreement that runs until
the end of 2018. The absolute intention is to see him continue with the team
until 2020. That’s without any doubt and a priority we have. Franz has quite
clearly explained the situation regarding Carlos Sainz, who has been loaned
and remains a Red Bull driver on loan to Renault. And then of course
opportunities have presented themselves with Toro Rosso to look at new
talent. Dany Kvyat has obviously had a large investment from Red Bull over
the years. He had the opportunity to step into Red Bull Racing and compete
in the 2015 season and the start of the 2016 season with the team. Formula
One is a tough business and unfortunately Dany didn’t do enough, in our
opinion, to warrant retaining that seat. But we still believed in him and he
was given a second opportunity, which is very unusual in Formula One, to
retake the seat with Toro Rosso. And then from there we obviously have other
juniors that we have invested in that are knocking on the door of Formula
One. The current GP2 champion, Pierre Gasly, merited and deserved an
opportunity to step into Formula One. And I think, as Franz will no doubt
cover, and as he has done in his previous answer, there is very much an eye
on the future and the future for next year and beyond that. And I think the
two drivers that Franz has for next year represent two exciting prospects
for Red Bull Racing potentially further down the line.
Franz, do you have anything to add?
FT: For me, it’s not chaotic. For me, it shows the possibility, thanks to
Red Bull, that Red Bull Racing and Toro Rosso can change drivers and can
change hopefully also the performance topic and this is a privilege, yeah,
because no other team in Formula One can do this. As I mentioned before, the
situation with Carlos came because of the engine change. You can’t have
everything in life. Of course we were not happy about this, but we think
that at the end it will pay off, because I expect that Toro Rosso next year
will be in a fantastic situation with Honda, and you must not forget that we
have now two drivers at Toro Rosso, they are realty fast, they are
high-skilled, they are committed, they are passionate and I am more than
happy to work together with them.
Q: (Alan Baldwin - Reuters) A question for both of you really. Franz you
said that next year’s line-up is not certain yet, but the way you ate both
talking it looks like Brendon is going to be there next year along with
Pierre. You say you hope to give him a competitive car. Christian you said
that you hope that next year’s driver that Franz has got. How could they
lose this, basically, what do they have to do not to be chosen as driver
next year?
FT: As usual in Formula One, to build up a real good relationship with the
right-hand pedal, to be fast. That’s it, just bring the results, you stay in
Formula One. Totally easy.
CH: I absolutely agree with Franz. What is fantastic about the Brendon story
is, that is a guy who started off life on the junior programme. He got
dropped early on in his career from the junior programme. There was no
remorse, there was no “poor me” or “haven’t I been badly treated”. At the
time he thanked Red Bull for the opportunity and endeavoured to stay in
touch. At that point he had nothing else to race. He went back to racing
Minis, historic Formula One cars, anything he could get his hands on he
raced. He showed a passion and a commitment to keep doing what he believed
in himself as a race car driver. He renewed his association with Red Bull
when he became a sports car driver with Porsche, and became a world
champion, and again is competing for that world championship again this
year. And I think it’s testimony to him, his determination and tenacity, and
skill and talent that he has got himself back into a position where he has
been selected to be in the Toro Rosso car for the races that he is doing.
Q: (Graham Harris – Motorsport Monday) Question for Franz: changing to Honda
engines next year, are you not just a little bit worried seeing what McLaren
are going through currently. If anything they seem to be regressing and more
problems towards the end of the season. What’s the magic bullet you’re
hoping that’s going to happen over the holiday period that’s not going to
leave you as McLaren mkII?
FT: They have another year, or another winter time where they will for sure
have the possibility to sort out the problems, which they have currently,
and we, from Toro Rosso, are working as the only team together with them,
and I think this will become a big advantage for us, and all the meetings we
had so far are quite promising. I’m more than convinced this power unit will
help Toro Rosso next year to become a very strong and competitive team. More
problems we can’t have because we anyway changing every weekend the power
unit.
Q: (Dieter Rencken – Racing Lines) To both, 31st of October, 7th of
November, two critical dates coming up. Although you have the same boss – if
I could call Dietrich Mateschitz that – you have totally different
operations, so individually what are your wish lists out of the 31st and the
7th? What would you like to see for your teams please?
CH: I’d like to see a cheap, standard V12 engine at a 1000hp sounding
fantastic – but I doubt we’re going to get that. But I think that… I think
that what’s potentially going to be presented sounds sensible. I don’t have
any hard details. It seems like it’s the first significant move by Liberty
about laying their stall out for the future. And of course that power unit
is a crucial part of what Formula One will be for the next ten years, from
2021 onwards. So having seen the agenda for the meeting it looks like they
have a plan and it’ll be very interesting on the 31st to understand what
those plans are. As far as the meeting on the 7th, is a Formula One strategy
meeting where no-doubt there will be quite a lot of discussion about various
topics – as there usually is.
Franz?
FT: It must be an affordable engine, then I hope that the output of the
engines are on a similar level, the performance of all the engines, because
currently there is a still a too-big difference. Now fortunately Ferrari
could catch up to Mercedes, but nevertheless Mercedes is still instead far
ahead. I just hope the new regulation will help us, that the engines are not
so expensive for the private teams, and be that the performance is on a
similar level – because we need to have interesting races, we need to see
overtaking manoeuvres and the current power unit is far too complicated from
the technical side and it went to a direction where it is more or less a
championship of the engineers and we must come back, that these power units
give non-manufacturer teams the possibility to fight also for victories.
Q: (Alessandra Retico – La Repubblica) A question for Mr Horner. Bernie
Ecclestone said in an interview with my newspaper that there is a close
relationship between Mercedes and Ferrari and maybe, in his opinion, in the
last two years, Mercedes has helped Ferrari from a technology point of view
– to be sure that you didn’t get a competitive engine. You, I mean Red Bull.
Does this make sense for you, or not?
CH: Well, it’s usual Bernie thinking, I would say, in the way that he’s
pieced that together. It’s very clear that there’s a very tight relationship
between Ferrari and Mercedes, the way they operate in meetings, one won’t
lift the hand up without the other one being in agreement these days. So
there is that dynamic. It’s not the first time that’s happened in Formula
One, it won’t be the last time. As far as whether or not one has helped the
other, that’s not our business. I’ve got no idea. I’d be surprised but yeah…
what you see with Mercedes and Ferrari today, they’re very aligned in all of
their thinking.
Q: (Alan Baldwin – Reuters) Since it’s Friday, there’s been suggestions that
Friday practice in future might be dropped. Just wondering your thoughts on
that. Ross has mentioned it just as a suggestion thrown up in the air. Is
that possible? How soon? What do you think about it?
CH: I think obviously they’re trying to free-up space for more races. I
think what you’ve got to be careful of is a good book only has so many
chapters in it. If there’s too many chapters it loses its path. I think we
need to be careful not to add too many races to Formula One. I think it
would be a long way to come to Mexico for two days. Or Australia for two
days. I think the Friday gives the promoter the opportunity to bring more
fans, more people into the sport. I thing perhaps what we do on Fridays
could be a bit different. We could liven it up, we could make it more
interactive. Maybe we only need one session on a Friday afternoon – but I
would be concerned about going to just a two-day weekend because that would
feel fairly short, perhaps too short and will inadvertently put more
pressure back on simulations, that you’re turning up prepared to hit the
road running, and I’m not sure that’s going to be a great balancer between
the teams.
Franz, your thoughts?
FT: I agree with Christian: the Friday running is important for the
organisers to sell additional tickets and it’s also important for the teams,
because we don’t have any more time in between for tests. We can only do
simulations, and therefore the Friday sessions, especially for smaller teams
like Toro Rosso are important, that we can do our runs, that we can do some
different setups, and we can be in the best possible way prepared for
qualifying and for the race.
Q: (Graham Harris – Motorsport Monday) Question for both of you. On the 7th,
with all likelihood, you’ll be discussing what’s come out of the new engine
regulations and looking at the next three years to develop the new engine.
There’s been a lot of speculation about bringing in the new engine perhaps a
year earlier in 2020. Can I have both of your thoughts on that? Is that
something you’d push for, is it something you’d like to see – getting rid of
the current engine a year earlier, bearing in mind, even if you agree now,
it’s still three years before we see it?
FT: I don’t see an agreement because then all the teams must be aligned. The
teams which are in front, which in this case Mercedes, Ferrari, I don’t
think they will agree to this – because to develop this new engine, takes
some time. Therefore, I don’t see the big possibility – but nevertheless we
will have this meeting, this will be discussed there and then it will be
voted and we will see the result.
Christian, would you like to see the new engine come in early?
CH: I’d love to see it come in next year. For me, these engines have done
nothing but damage Formula One: they’ve done nothing to contribute to the
sport; they’ve taken away the sound; the passion; they’ve added too much
complexity; they’ve become far removed from road car technology; they’re
effectively turning into diesel engines in some cases – and I can’t see
anything that they’ve contributed that’s been positive, so the sooner it
goes, the better. Unfortunately there’s a contract between the existing
manufacturers and the FIA that guarantees the engine will be in place until
2020, and I can’t see there being sufficient motive amongst all the
manufacturers to get rid of this technology and this power unit before 2021.
Q: (Dieter Rencken – Racing Lines) Christian and Franz, based on what you’ve
just said, plus the previous question about Ferrari, Mercedes possibly being
aligned. Given the fact that Mercedes and Ferrari are in Formula One
predominantly for technological reasons, as a showcase etc., plus the fact
that Ferrari does have a veto valid until the end of 2020, are you concerned
that, if the regulations don’t suit them, that Ferrari, aided and abetted by
Mercedes, could actually invoke it’s veto as they tried two years ago.
CH: That’s their business at the end of the day – but at the end of the day
Formula One is a marketing business. It is a global platform which these
brands are involved in to advertise their products and their brand. I think
a technology showcase, that’s in some ways quite a spurious description
because, as I say, the product that we’re racing has not a great deal of
relevance to what’s in their road car product. So, Formula One is foremost
and utmost a sport. There is obviously an element of technology to it but
it’s at a crossroads where it decides what it’s going to be. Is it going to
be all about technology, or is it going to be about fundamental racing, man
and machine at the limit, putting on big events, spectacular events? Then,
of course, each team will have the ability to decide whether it wants to be
there post-2020 or not and you can’t predict or pre-empty what another team
or manufacturer or group might be thinking.
Franz?
FT: It’s in the hands of Liberty Media. They should come up with a proper
regulation and then it’s the teams will decide whether to take part or not –
but Liberty Media must take into consideration that Formula One is
entertainment, is show and we must find a good middle way between
entertainment, show and the technical voyage which Formula One went in the
last years. Because currently we have a power unit championship. This can’t
be for the future because if this is the future then Formula One is dead.
One hundred per cent. |
