Red Bull struggled significantly in the 2024 F1 championship. An unexpected descent into “technical despair,” at least as far as their approach was concerned. We’ve repeatedly tried to explain what happened with the car. The main culprit behind its lack of competitiveness was the front end of the RB20, an issue that Adrian Newey himself had anticipated during the presentation phase, mentioning an aspect of the car he certainly wouldn’t be proud of. And indeed, this turned out to be the case: the genius from Stratford-Upon-Avon had predicted the issues that eventually unfolded.
However, truly understanding where the real problem originated, which subsequently triggered this decline, is no easy task. There are numerous theories, but the statements from those directly involved have often been contradictory, even when scrutinized carefully. This remains the case even now, just over a month before the start of pre-season testing. These tests, once again, will be held in Bahrain, taking advantage of a track that may not be exceptional in layout but is at least situated in an area with favorable environmental conditions.
Red Bull approaches this date with a sense of cautious optimism. As we have previously reported, there are several changes to the new car aimed at achieving a clear goal: restoring the Austrian single-seater’s competitiveness and avoiding an uneven battle. This is the estimated target, considering the various modifications to the suspension systems. Everything was in the hands of Pierre Waché, the individual tasked with taking on the heavy legacy of Adrian Newey. Doing so was exceedingly challenging, given that the Briton had led the team for many years, always providing highly effective consultancy in terms of results.
Comparing the two figures doesn’t make much sense at this point. Winning without Adrian is possible—after all, McLaren proved it. Nonetheless, some concerns arise regarding the attitude of the Milton Keynes team. Recognizing one’s limitations and mistakes, in F1 as in life, is the first step toward rising again. This is precisely the basis of our analysis, stemming from the communication inconsistency between two key figures for Red Bull: Horner, the team’s CEO and principal, and Marko, the team’s senior advisor.
F1, Red Bull: a highly risky communication strategy
Horner faced a genuine media trial at the beginning of last season. A very complex situation to manage. It affected him, undeniably, but only to a certain extent. Christian demonstrated immense strength in handling this context, and the results on the track in the first two months seemed to vindicate him. Despite the challenges, the Englishman managed to remain composed, even when his project’s cornerstone, Adrian Newey, decided to step down. Approximately eight months later, the Red Bull boss revisits the events, commenting on the outcome of that decision.
In doing so, he argues that Adrian Newey’s departure was absolutely not the reason for the team’s struggles. This naturally raises a question: if Adrian Newey had little to do with the technical debacle, what was the real problem? Did Waché fail to meet expectations? Or was the car, designed under Adrian Newey’s guidance, problematic from the outset? No definitive answer has been provided. For us, the truth lies somewhere in between. Additionally, there’s the issue discussed in recent days about Red Bull’s outdated tools.
Marko, in a way, contradicts Horner. He reveals the difficulties faced by the engineers when Newey, the team’s guiding light, left. Without him, the rest of the team lost motivation and direction. This is supported by the fact that it took the team roughly five months to understand and improve the RB20’s behavior adequately. Reviewing the championship, it’s hard to draw a different conclusion. The octogenarian from Graz knows F1 deeply and is spot-on with his observations.
The same applies when he discusses the future—still uncertain, but one that should be built on stronger foundations. While his reasoning is generally agreeable, especially regarding the need to improve areas of the car that fell short, Helmut Marko refers to an advantage that also highlights a dangerous dependency. He’s referring to Max Verstappen and the notion that the Dutchman doesn’t need the most competitive car to win. A reliable, predictable, and competitive car—not necessarily the fastest—would suffice, as Hasselt’s talent would take care of the rest.
While this reasoning may be correct to some extent, creating such a precedent is unhealthy for the team. It’s akin to telling the engineers: “Do your best, but don’t worry… if we’re not the best, we still have Max.” This is a risky and potentially harmful argument, as it diminishes the engineers’ importance, making their work seem less crucial. Such an attitude is unacceptable in F1, where the car’s mechanical performance is decisive. Even partially relieving engineers of their responsibility is counterproductive.
Lastly, a comment on Max Verstappen. Without a doubt, his added value made the difference. This will further boost his confidence heading into the 2025 season. However, his championship was quite challenging, and he has expressed that he doesn’t want to face such a situation again. While he deservedly won the drivers’ title, McLaren and Ferrari significantly contributed to Red Bull’s success. The Woking team squandered exceptional competitiveness, while Ferrari faltered for at least six races.
Thanks to this, Max managed to win. But things don’t always go the same way. The Maranello team has made additional technical advancements with its new car and will also benefit from Lewis Hamilton’s experience. Then there’s McLaren, which has worked hard on itself and aims for a double triumph in the next championship. For this reason, Marko’s message—“Don’t worry, Max will handle it”—now seems like a foolish statement Red Bull didn’t need at all. A wiser message would have been: “We need to do better because the competition will be even fiercer.”
Leave a Reply