F1 2019
- Thread starter 1%er
- Start date
1%er
Well-Known Member
Some good news for you Limejuice Sky have just issued a statement saying that Ted will be part of its F1 coverage, I wonder why he wasn't mentioned in their press releases last weekBugger!
Bad news about Ted (if true). I like his stuff very much.
It's also bad news about Nico Who? whom I cannot stand.
More Ted and less Nico, I say.
Bah.
In an article published on Monday afternoon, Sky confirmed their full line-up for the 2019 season. The season, which begins on March 17, will be exclusive on Sky Sports. The line-up includes three F1 World Champions. Jenson Button and Karun Chandhok are the highlighted changes while Nico Rosberg retains his spot.
Full line-up
Rachel Brookes
Martin Brundle
Jenson Button
Karun Chandhok
David Croft
Anthony Davidson
Paul Di Resta
Johnny Herbert
Damon Hill
Ted Kravitz
Simon Lazenby
Natalie Pinkham
Nico Rosberg
Limejuice
Well-Known Member
Huzzah!Some good news for you Limejuice Sky have just issued a statement saying that Ted will be part of its F1 coverage, I wonder why he wasn't mentioned in their press releases last week
Nico Rosberg
Three magnificent bits of news this week!
My central heating has been fixed after 4 weeks. I'm taking a shower every hour on the hour.
My son was elected as student president at his college and gets a free living next year!
And Ted's Notebook may well be around through the 2019 season.Hosanna!
Oh, wait... Nico Who? survived the cull as well?
1%er
Well-Known Member
More on the Ted Kravitz story
It seems that Ted had fallen out of favour with the new boss Scott Young. Apparently ongoing discussions with Ted and Sky Sports F1 had been occuring in the background, hence the silence from his colleagues and indeed Ted himself. Here is some news from the industry blog "motorsport broadcasting" (link to their full story here).
Industry sources have indicated to this site for some time that Kravitz’s Sky future was in doubt. Motorsport Broadcasting can now confirm the reports that circulated over the weekend that Young initially opted not to renew Kravitz’s contract for the 2019 season. However, this site can exclusively confirm that the decision to axe Kravitz was overturned from within, with discussions between Sky and Kravitz ongoing regarding his ‘return’ in recent weeks. The u-turn from Sky is not a result of any social media storm that unfolded over the weekend, the wheels for his return were in motion far before the leak. This writer chose not to write about the subject of Kravitz’s potential exit given that negotiations were ongoing between both parties, and any decision to publish an article could jeopardise those. Possibly one of the most surprising, and bewildering, Formula 1 broadcasting stories, on a human level, in years. Was Scott Young really thinking of getting rid of Ted Kravitz from the Sky Sports F1 set-up? Amazingly, astonishingly, the answer is yes.
The idea of people coming and going is not a new concept by any stretch of the imagination. Ask Jonathan Legard, Gary Anderson, or Georgie Ainslie (nee. Thompson), three examples of where a UK F1 broadcaster has parted company with the talent in question (or vice versa) for one reason or another in the off-season. The idea of a new person coming in to the lead the ship and wanting some fresh blood through the doors is also not a novel concept, it is a concept that exists in businesses worldwide. But, the idea of not renewing the contract of one of the most popular on-air team members from the Sky Sports F1 line-up in a year where Sky needs every viewer and subscription they can get from Formula 1 strikes me as a very narrow-minded decision. If you asked one hundred F1 fans on the street what they would change about Sky’s F1 line-up, I suspect very few would say ‘get rid of Ted Kravitz’. In a poll on this site in 2016 asking fans who they thought was Sky F1’s biggest asset, Kravitz placed second, with Martin Brundle heading the table.
Only Scott Young can answer why he thought axing Kravitz was a good idea. Whether it is his view that only ex-drivers and ex-F1 personnel can be pundits, I do not know. You do not need to have ‘been there, done that’ to be knowledgeable on a subject. Kravitz may not have been a racer, but he has risen through the ranks of ITV, BBC and now Sky. Inevitably, some of the above leads us to the decision to overturn Young’s original move. Those within the Sky set-up will know how popular Kravitz is, and no doubt will have tried to fight his corner in the battle to keep him in the line-up. Some of those working with Kravitz have worked with him since the BBC and ITV F1 days, so have had a longstanding professional and personal relationship with him. Given the outcome that we now know, clearly those that did fight for him behind the scenes went some distance to get the outcome they, and the fans, wanted. The outcry on Twitter that has dominated the weekend were a day late, and a dollar short. Kravitz’s absence from the first F1 test in Barcelona, where he would have normally presented his Notebook output on Sky Sports, made it clear to those watching that something was going on behind the scenes, making a leak inevitable.
Mercedes take lots of new aero parts to 2nd test
Lewis Hamilton was busy this morning completing 83 laps in a car on which virtually every aero part has been changed since last week.Heading out sporting a new nose, front wing, sidepods, floor and various other parts on the W10. The most noticeable change to the latest Silver Arrow was a revised nose and front wing. Although the wing itself still adheres to a philosophy of full depth across its span (in contrast to the Ferrari and Alfa Romeo), the endplate has been redesigned and realigned. Whereas the endplate’s edge previously turned slightly inboard in order to hook up with the flow of the top elements to generate a vortex that aided in out-washing the airflow around the tyre, now the endplate itself is aligned outboard.
The nose section has been tapered in tighter, just up from its tip, where the big ‘cape’ guide vane beneath the nose is joined. This will have increased the feed of air to the vane, helping to further accelerate it on its way to the underfloor, another factor which is crucial for generating more downforce. Mercedes played their cards close to their chest in Test 1, with limited running that suggested they were pushing the W10’s performance envelope. Even so, with data suggesting an early Ferrari advantage and Valtteri Bottas saying the new car’s balance was on a knife-edge, they’ll be hoping these new developments bring them a welcome performance boost.
Red Bull already talking about taking Grid penalties
Red Bull are ready to face short-term pain for long-term gain with Honda power by taking engine penalties. Red Bull boss Christian Horner is also open to the team taking tactical hits if it means increasing the chances of success at certain race tracks in 2019. When asked if whether he would take grid drops as part of a longer-term development plan, he replied “Yes I think if it makes sense, you saw in previous years if you pick the penalties at the right venues. In Russia last year Max was already back in the top five by lap six so if you pick the right venue and assists the development of the power unit then strategically you can lessen the pain”.
It seems that Ted had fallen out of favour with the new boss Scott Young. Apparently ongoing discussions with Ted and Sky Sports F1 had been occuring in the background, hence the silence from his colleagues and indeed Ted himself. Here is some news from the industry blog "motorsport broadcasting" (link to their full story here).
Industry sources have indicated to this site for some time that Kravitz’s Sky future was in doubt. Motorsport Broadcasting can now confirm the reports that circulated over the weekend that Young initially opted not to renew Kravitz’s contract for the 2019 season. However, this site can exclusively confirm that the decision to axe Kravitz was overturned from within, with discussions between Sky and Kravitz ongoing regarding his ‘return’ in recent weeks. The u-turn from Sky is not a result of any social media storm that unfolded over the weekend, the wheels for his return were in motion far before the leak. This writer chose not to write about the subject of Kravitz’s potential exit given that negotiations were ongoing between both parties, and any decision to publish an article could jeopardise those. Possibly one of the most surprising, and bewildering, Formula 1 broadcasting stories, on a human level, in years. Was Scott Young really thinking of getting rid of Ted Kravitz from the Sky Sports F1 set-up? Amazingly, astonishingly, the answer is yes.
The idea of people coming and going is not a new concept by any stretch of the imagination. Ask Jonathan Legard, Gary Anderson, or Georgie Ainslie (nee. Thompson), three examples of where a UK F1 broadcaster has parted company with the talent in question (or vice versa) for one reason or another in the off-season. The idea of a new person coming in to the lead the ship and wanting some fresh blood through the doors is also not a novel concept, it is a concept that exists in businesses worldwide. But, the idea of not renewing the contract of one of the most popular on-air team members from the Sky Sports F1 line-up in a year where Sky needs every viewer and subscription they can get from Formula 1 strikes me as a very narrow-minded decision. If you asked one hundred F1 fans on the street what they would change about Sky’s F1 line-up, I suspect very few would say ‘get rid of Ted Kravitz’. In a poll on this site in 2016 asking fans who they thought was Sky F1’s biggest asset, Kravitz placed second, with Martin Brundle heading the table.
Only Scott Young can answer why he thought axing Kravitz was a good idea. Whether it is his view that only ex-drivers and ex-F1 personnel can be pundits, I do not know. You do not need to have ‘been there, done that’ to be knowledgeable on a subject. Kravitz may not have been a racer, but he has risen through the ranks of ITV, BBC and now Sky. Inevitably, some of the above leads us to the decision to overturn Young’s original move. Those within the Sky set-up will know how popular Kravitz is, and no doubt will have tried to fight his corner in the battle to keep him in the line-up. Some of those working with Kravitz have worked with him since the BBC and ITV F1 days, so have had a longstanding professional and personal relationship with him. Given the outcome that we now know, clearly those that did fight for him behind the scenes went some distance to get the outcome they, and the fans, wanted. The outcry on Twitter that has dominated the weekend were a day late, and a dollar short. Kravitz’s absence from the first F1 test in Barcelona, where he would have normally presented his Notebook output on Sky Sports, made it clear to those watching that something was going on behind the scenes, making a leak inevitable.
Mercedes take lots of new aero parts to 2nd test
Lewis Hamilton was busy this morning completing 83 laps in a car on which virtually every aero part has been changed since last week.Heading out sporting a new nose, front wing, sidepods, floor and various other parts on the W10. The most noticeable change to the latest Silver Arrow was a revised nose and front wing. Although the wing itself still adheres to a philosophy of full depth across its span (in contrast to the Ferrari and Alfa Romeo), the endplate has been redesigned and realigned. Whereas the endplate’s edge previously turned slightly inboard in order to hook up with the flow of the top elements to generate a vortex that aided in out-washing the airflow around the tyre, now the endplate itself is aligned outboard.
The nose section has been tapered in tighter, just up from its tip, where the big ‘cape’ guide vane beneath the nose is joined. This will have increased the feed of air to the vane, helping to further accelerate it on its way to the underfloor, another factor which is crucial for generating more downforce. Mercedes played their cards close to their chest in Test 1, with limited running that suggested they were pushing the W10’s performance envelope. Even so, with data suggesting an early Ferrari advantage and Valtteri Bottas saying the new car’s balance was on a knife-edge, they’ll be hoping these new developments bring them a welcome performance boost.
Red Bull already talking about taking Grid penalties
Red Bull are ready to face short-term pain for long-term gain with Honda power by taking engine penalties. Red Bull boss Christian Horner is also open to the team taking tactical hits if it means increasing the chances of success at certain race tracks in 2019. When asked if whether he would take grid drops as part of a longer-term development plan, he replied “Yes I think if it makes sense, you saw in previous years if you pick the penalties at the right venues. In Russia last year Max was already back in the top five by lap six so if you pick the right venue and assists the development of the power unit then strategically you can lessen the pain”.
1%er
Well-Known Member
2nd test day 1 results
Sergey Sirotkin back in F1
Sergey Sirotkin was dropped after his debut season last year in favour of Robert Kubica, but has been named as Renault's third and reserve driver. The French team also announced that British Formula 2 driver Jack Aitken will be their test driver.
3 red flags on day 2 of the second test morning session
First, Sainz’s McLaren stopped while exiting the pits before Verstappen’s Red Bull filed to move during a practice start. The third was Vettel having a big accident at turn 3 crashing into the barriers at speed. He was able to get out of his car and walk away from the incident but it is unclear what damage he has done to his car. Ferrari later confirmed a “mechanical problem” was the cause of the accident.
Sergey Sirotkin back in F1
Sergey Sirotkin was dropped after his debut season last year in favour of Robert Kubica, but has been named as Renault's third and reserve driver. The French team also announced that British Formula 2 driver Jack Aitken will be their test driver.
3 red flags on day 2 of the second test morning session
First, Sainz’s McLaren stopped while exiting the pits before Verstappen’s Red Bull filed to move during a practice start. The third was Vettel having a big accident at turn 3 crashing into the barriers at speed. He was able to get out of his car and walk away from the incident but it is unclear what damage he has done to his car. Ferrari later confirmed a “mechanical problem” was the cause of the accident.
1%er
Well-Known Member
2nd test day 2 results
Pos No Driver Team Lap Time 1st Gap Laps Tyres
1 55 Carlos Sainz Jr. McLaren 1:17,144 130 C4
2 11 Sergio Pérez Racing Point 1:17,842 +0,698 88 C5
3 5 Sebastian Vettel Ferrari 1:18,195 +1,051 40 C3
4 7 Kimi Räikkönen Alfa Romeo 1:18,209 +1,065 113 C4
5 8 Romain Grosjean Haas 1:18,330 +1,186 120 C5
6 33 Max Verstappen Red Bull 1:18,395 +1,251 128 C3
7 26 Daniil Kvyat Toro Rosso 1:18,682 +1,538 101 C4
8 77 Valtteri Bottas Mercedes 1:18,941 +1,797 74 C3
9 44 Lewis Hamilton Mercedes 1:18,943 +1,799 102 C3
10 27 Nico Hülkenberg Renault 1:19,056 +1,912 58 C3
11 88 Robert Kubica Williams 1:19,367 +2,223 130 C5
12 3 Daniel Ricciardo Renault 1:22,597 +5,453 72 C1
13 16 Charles Leclerc Ferrari no time 1 C3
Foreign object caused Vettels accident
Ferrari has traced the cause of Sebastian Vettel's crash in testing to damage caused to the wheel rim by a foreign object. The German went off track at the beginning of Turn 3 on Wednesday, a corner which has become flat out since the current cars were introduced in 2017. Footage revealed the front-left of Vettel's car dropped down moments before going off, hinting at a mechanical issue and that has now been confirmed. "After thorough checks, we found that Seb’s off yesterday was due to a (wheel) rim issue, The rim had been damaged a few seconds before by an impact with a foreign object. That will be of relief to the Italian team as the discovery of a fundamental issue with the car at this stage of pre-season testing would have been very hard to solve before Australia, said Ferrari in a statement.
Pos No Driver Team Lap Time 1st Gap Laps Tyres
1 55 Carlos Sainz Jr. McLaren 1:17,144 130 C4
2 11 Sergio Pérez Racing Point 1:17,842 +0,698 88 C5
3 5 Sebastian Vettel Ferrari 1:18,195 +1,051 40 C3
4 7 Kimi Räikkönen Alfa Romeo 1:18,209 +1,065 113 C4
5 8 Romain Grosjean Haas 1:18,330 +1,186 120 C5
6 33 Max Verstappen Red Bull 1:18,395 +1,251 128 C3
7 26 Daniil Kvyat Toro Rosso 1:18,682 +1,538 101 C4
8 77 Valtteri Bottas Mercedes 1:18,941 +1,797 74 C3
9 44 Lewis Hamilton Mercedes 1:18,943 +1,799 102 C3
10 27 Nico Hülkenberg Renault 1:19,056 +1,912 58 C3
11 88 Robert Kubica Williams 1:19,367 +2,223 130 C5
12 3 Daniel Ricciardo Renault 1:22,597 +5,453 72 C1
13 16 Charles Leclerc Ferrari no time 1 C3
Foreign object caused Vettels accident
Ferrari has traced the cause of Sebastian Vettel's crash in testing to damage caused to the wheel rim by a foreign object. The German went off track at the beginning of Turn 3 on Wednesday, a corner which has become flat out since the current cars were introduced in 2017. Footage revealed the front-left of Vettel's car dropped down moments before going off, hinting at a mechanical issue and that has now been confirmed. "After thorough checks, we found that Seb’s off yesterday was due to a (wheel) rim issue, The rim had been damaged a few seconds before by an impact with a foreign object. That will be of relief to the Italian team as the discovery of a fundamental issue with the car at this stage of pre-season testing would have been very hard to solve before Australia, said Ferrari in a statement.
Last edited:
1%er
Well-Known Member
Test 2 day 3 results
The Formula One Group grew its revenue in 2018 according to its financial report released yesterday, but increased expenditures led to an overall loss for the second year in a row. Although the Formula One Group reported an increase in annual revenues to $1,827 million, up $44 million from a previous $1,783 million, the operating loss grew from $37 million to $68 million. However, only $6m of the increase was produced by "primary F1 revenue", or revenue derived from race promotion fees, broadcasting fees, advertising and sponsorship fees. The remaining $38m in additional revenue came from various sources such as "logistics revenue, digital media and TV production related revenue, increased revenue from various fan engagement activities. Total payments to the 10 teams fell to $913 million from $919 million in 2017 and $966 million in 2016. Liberty Media, who took over the sport in 2017 and ousted former commercial supremo Bernie Ecclestone, said the bigger operating loss reflected increased expenditure on the business.
Will Paddy Lowe be sacked by Williams
To be honest I don't think he will go quickly, but I think he will go at some point in the season. The problem for Williams is that when they took on Lowe, part of his signing package was shares in the team, so they will have to pay off his contract and I'm sure will also want to buy back his shares, for a team struggling with its finances this will not be easy. The team has made a public statement making it clear that it wasn't parts from outside contractors that delayed its appearance in Barcelona, so it must have been issues from with-in and as the Chief technical Officer (technical director) Lowe is where the buck stops. As I believe I have mentioned before I don't think Lowe is a great leader or one of the top Engineers in F1, his only real claim to fame is the development of active suspension, but he only got the credit for that as he was Joint Head of Electronics at Williams when it was introduced, there is no evidence that it was his idea or that he developed it himself.
But if he isn't that good why did Mercedes take him on as an Executive Director, I hear you ask? Well the answer to that is in Ross Brawn's book "Total competition". Toto Wolff wanted rid of Brawn and bring in Paddy Lowe ensured that would happen.
- Charles Leclerc Ferrari 1:16.231 (C5) 138 Laps
- Alexander Albon Toro Rosso 1:16.882 (C5) 118 Laps
- Lando Norris McLaren 1:17.084 (C5) 84 Laps
- Pierre Gasly Toro Rosso 1:17.091 (C5) 65 Laps
- Daniel Ricciardo Renault 1:17.204 65 Laps
- Nico Hulkenberg Renault 1:17.496 (C5) 73 Laps
- Lance Stroll Racing Point 1:17.556 (C5) 103 Laps
- Antonio Giovinazzi Alfa Romeo 1:17.639 (C5) 71 Laps
- Romain Grosjean Haas 1:17.854 15 Laps
- Lewis Hamilton Mercedes 1:18.097 (C2) 85 Laps
- George Russell Williams 1:18.130 (C5) 140 Laps
- Kevin Magnussen Haas 1:18.199 (C3) 53 Laps
- Valtteri Bottas Mercedes 1:18.862 94 Laps
The Formula One Group grew its revenue in 2018 according to its financial report released yesterday, but increased expenditures led to an overall loss for the second year in a row. Although the Formula One Group reported an increase in annual revenues to $1,827 million, up $44 million from a previous $1,783 million, the operating loss grew from $37 million to $68 million. However, only $6m of the increase was produced by "primary F1 revenue", or revenue derived from race promotion fees, broadcasting fees, advertising and sponsorship fees. The remaining $38m in additional revenue came from various sources such as "logistics revenue, digital media and TV production related revenue, increased revenue from various fan engagement activities. Total payments to the 10 teams fell to $913 million from $919 million in 2017 and $966 million in 2016. Liberty Media, who took over the sport in 2017 and ousted former commercial supremo Bernie Ecclestone, said the bigger operating loss reflected increased expenditure on the business.
Will Paddy Lowe be sacked by Williams
To be honest I don't think he will go quickly, but I think he will go at some point in the season. The problem for Williams is that when they took on Lowe, part of his signing package was shares in the team, so they will have to pay off his contract and I'm sure will also want to buy back his shares, for a team struggling with its finances this will not be easy. The team has made a public statement making it clear that it wasn't parts from outside contractors that delayed its appearance in Barcelona, so it must have been issues from with-in and as the Chief technical Officer (technical director) Lowe is where the buck stops. As I believe I have mentioned before I don't think Lowe is a great leader or one of the top Engineers in F1, his only real claim to fame is the development of active suspension, but he only got the credit for that as he was Joint Head of Electronics at Williams when it was introduced, there is no evidence that it was his idea or that he developed it himself.
But if he isn't that good why did Mercedes take him on as an Executive Director, I hear you ask? Well the answer to that is in Ross Brawn's book "Total competition". Toto Wolff wanted rid of Brawn and bring in Paddy Lowe ensured that would happen.
cybershot
Well-Known Member
A new 30 second trailer (that I can't embed) for Drive to Survive
F1 Netflix | Official Trailer 2 | Drive to Survive
F1 Netflix | Official Trailer 2 | Drive to Survive
Limejuice
Well-Known Member
Wearing my cynic's hat, I'd say Paddy Lowe got the William's job and package because he was seen as "one of us". That is, like FW and Patrick Head, PL is a public school product. And to prove he's decent cove, the chap's a Cambridge graduate.
It's something that struck me about FW and PH in biographies and in the recent film. Both FW and PH sneered quite openly about drivers like Mansell - oiks that didn't stick to the number-two-driver script, while their dashing playboy types were supposed to bring glamour and riches to the team.
I think they hired Damon Hill to be the sparkling son of Graham Hill, with a bottle of fizz in one hand and a pretty girl in the other. When he merely put in a gutsy show, but won a world championship, he was dropped. Not "one of us".
Don't get me wrong. Nowt wrong wiff posh folks and posh skools. And naturally, Cambridge is, beyond question, the apex of academic achievement, attended by people who are sound, good-looking, intelligent, voracious lovers, entertaining, and (if male) communist spies.
And when FW set up Williams, it may well have been the right approach to hire posh types because you could rely on their devotion to this new alma mater. Adrian Newey was a posho and did quite wello, after all. But F1's moved on and, with their budget, Williams need a fucking genius with a willpower at least equal to the determination FW possesses, to wrest the team from the vice-like grip of recent failure. To find that individual, Williams needs to fish in deeper waters than the public schools of Britain.
It's something that struck me about FW and PH in biographies and in the recent film. Both FW and PH sneered quite openly about drivers like Mansell - oiks that didn't stick to the number-two-driver script, while their dashing playboy types were supposed to bring glamour and riches to the team.
I think they hired Damon Hill to be the sparkling son of Graham Hill, with a bottle of fizz in one hand and a pretty girl in the other. When he merely put in a gutsy show, but won a world championship, he was dropped. Not "one of us".
Don't get me wrong. Nowt wrong wiff posh folks and posh skools. And naturally, Cambridge is, beyond question, the apex of academic achievement, attended by people who are sound, good-looking, intelligent, voracious lovers, entertaining, and (if male) communist spies.
And when FW set up Williams, it may well have been the right approach to hire posh types because you could rely on their devotion to this new alma mater. Adrian Newey was a posho and did quite wello, after all. But F1's moved on and, with their budget, Williams need a fucking genius with a willpower at least equal to the determination FW possesses, to wrest the team from the vice-like grip of recent failure. To find that individual, Williams needs to fish in deeper waters than the public schools of Britain.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Limejuice I don't know about the public schools angle, it seems to me more there are a limited number of truly talented non drivers in F1, but not enough of them to spread one in every team. Newey was one, Braun is another, their presence lifts which ever team they are in and Williams at the moment does not posses one of these uber talents.
Limejuice
Well-Known Member
Oh, I entirely agree.
I just think Williams makes a bigger rod for its own back by trying to find that "truly talented" engineer who also exhibits the quality FW and PH would feel comfy with - being "one of us".
Recent results (and past treatment of drivers) suggest Williams has put the"one of us" criterion ahead of the "truly talented", and it really hasn't helped the team.
Being "one of us" is no guarantee of being "truly talented", and being "truly talented" is demonstrably not good enough for FW and PH, either behind the wheel or deploying the oily rag.
But I've been known to be wrong once or twice before... Okay, maybe once, and that was only a majority decision.
1%er
Well-Known Member
Test 2 day 4 final day of testing
Some stats from test 2
Laps by team
Renault 528
Mercedes 520
Haas 487
Williams 479
Toro Rosso 453
McLaren 428
Alfa Romeo 415
Ferrari 399
Racing Point 377
Red Bull 358
Laps by engine
Mercedes 1376
Ferrari 1301
Renault 956
Honda 811
Laps by driver
Driver Team Laps
Magnussen Haas F1 278
Hamilton Mercedes 271
Ricciardo Renault 266
Sainz McLaren 264
Hülkenberg Renault 262
Russell Williams 259
Bottas Mercedes 249
Raikkonen Alfa Romeo 245
Kvyat Toro Rosso 232
Vettel Ferrari 231
Albon Toro Rosso 221
Kubica Williams 220
Grosjean Haas 209
Gasly Red Bull 201
Perez Racing Point 192
Stroll Racing Point 185
Giovinazzi Alfa Romeo 170
Leclerc Ferrari 168
Norris McLaren 164
Verstappen Red Bull 157
Fastest laps by driver
Driver Time Day Tyre
Sebastian Vettel 1:16.221 Day 8 C5
Lewis Hamilton 1:16.224 Day 8 C5
Charles Leclerc 1:16.231 Day 7 C5
Valtteri Bottas 1:16.561 Day 8 C5
Nico Hulkenberg 1:16.843 Day 8 C5
Alexander Albon 1:16.882 Day 7 C5
Daniil Kvyat 1:16.898 Day 8 C5
Carlos Sainz 1:16.913 Day 8 C5
Romain Grosjean 1:17.076 Day 8 C5
Lando Norris 1:17.084 Day 7 C5
Pierre Gasly 1:17.091 Day 7 C5
Daniel Ricciardo 1:17.114 Day 8 C5
Kimi Raikkonen 1:17.239 Day 8 C5
Lance Stroll 1:17.556 Day 7 C5
Kevin Magnussen 1:17.565 Day 8 C5
Antonio Giovinazzi 1:17.639 Day 7 C5
Max Verstappen 1:17.709 Day 8 C3
Sergio Perez 1:17.791 Day 8 C5
George Russell 1:18.130 Day 7 C5
Robert Kubica 1:18.993 Day 8 C5
Mexican GP loses place on 2020 calendar
The Mexican Grand Prix has provisionally lost its date on the 2020 Formula 1 calendar as the race continues to struggle with financial issues. Government funding has been withdrawn from the event, putting its F1 future into serious doubt. It has previously been reported that this year's race could even be under threat, while the United States Grand Prix is also under a cloud of negativity after government funding was also withdrawn at COTA.
Organisers at the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez say that they are trying to work out a way to keep the race in F1, but its future is looking ever more uncertain. A statement read: "After the deadline to keep the date of the one that has been enjoyed by the Formula 1 Gran Premio de Mexico, we announce that the organisation of the event has lost the perennial right to keep that date within the 2020 championship, notwithstanding the negotiations with both F1 and the authorities of our country [which] continue with the best spirit of finding viable alternatives for the remainder of this competition in Mexico."
- Sebastian Vettel Ferrari 1:16.221 (C5) 110 Laps
- Lewis Hamilton Mercedes 1:16.224 (C5) 61 Laps
- Valtteri Bottas Mercedes 1:16.561 (C5) 71 Laps
- Nico Hulkenberg Renault 1:16.843 (C5) 51 Laps
- Daniil Kvyat Toro Rosso 1:16.898 (C5) 131 Laps
- Carlos Sainz McLaren 1:16.913 (C5) 134 Laps
- Romain Grosjean Haas 1:17.076 (C5) 73 Laps
- Daniel Ricciardo Renault 1:17.114 (C5) 52 Laps
- Kimi Raikkonen Alfa Romeo 1:17.239 (C5) 132 Laps
- Kevin Magnussen Haas 1:17.565 (C5) 94 Laps
- Max Verstappen Red Bull Racing 1:17.709 (C3) 29 Laps
- Sergio Perez Racing Point 1:17.791 (C5) 104 Laps
- Robert Kubica Williams 1:18.993 (C5) 90 Laps
Some stats from test 2
Laps by team
Renault 528
Mercedes 520
Haas 487
Williams 479
Toro Rosso 453
McLaren 428
Alfa Romeo 415
Ferrari 399
Racing Point 377
Red Bull 358
Laps by engine
Mercedes 1376
Ferrari 1301
Renault 956
Honda 811
Laps by driver
Driver Team Laps
Magnussen Haas F1 278
Hamilton Mercedes 271
Ricciardo Renault 266
Sainz McLaren 264
Hülkenberg Renault 262
Russell Williams 259
Bottas Mercedes 249
Raikkonen Alfa Romeo 245
Kvyat Toro Rosso 232
Vettel Ferrari 231
Albon Toro Rosso 221
Kubica Williams 220
Grosjean Haas 209
Gasly Red Bull 201
Perez Racing Point 192
Stroll Racing Point 185
Giovinazzi Alfa Romeo 170
Leclerc Ferrari 168
Norris McLaren 164
Verstappen Red Bull 157
Fastest laps by driver
Driver Time Day Tyre
Sebastian Vettel 1:16.221 Day 8 C5
Lewis Hamilton 1:16.224 Day 8 C5
Charles Leclerc 1:16.231 Day 7 C5
Valtteri Bottas 1:16.561 Day 8 C5
Nico Hulkenberg 1:16.843 Day 8 C5
Alexander Albon 1:16.882 Day 7 C5
Daniil Kvyat 1:16.898 Day 8 C5
Carlos Sainz 1:16.913 Day 8 C5
Romain Grosjean 1:17.076 Day 8 C5
Lando Norris 1:17.084 Day 7 C5
Pierre Gasly 1:17.091 Day 7 C5
Daniel Ricciardo 1:17.114 Day 8 C5
Kimi Raikkonen 1:17.239 Day 8 C5
Lance Stroll 1:17.556 Day 7 C5
Kevin Magnussen 1:17.565 Day 8 C5
Antonio Giovinazzi 1:17.639 Day 7 C5
Max Verstappen 1:17.709 Day 8 C3
Sergio Perez 1:17.791 Day 8 C5
George Russell 1:18.130 Day 7 C5
Robert Kubica 1:18.993 Day 8 C5
Mexican GP loses place on 2020 calendar
The Mexican Grand Prix has provisionally lost its date on the 2020 Formula 1 calendar as the race continues to struggle with financial issues. Government funding has been withdrawn from the event, putting its F1 future into serious doubt. It has previously been reported that this year's race could even be under threat, while the United States Grand Prix is also under a cloud of negativity after government funding was also withdrawn at COTA.
Organisers at the Autodromo Hermanos Rodriguez say that they are trying to work out a way to keep the race in F1, but its future is looking ever more uncertain. A statement read: "After the deadline to keep the date of the one that has been enjoyed by the Formula 1 Gran Premio de Mexico, we announce that the organisation of the event has lost the perennial right to keep that date within the 2020 championship, notwithstanding the negotiations with both F1 and the authorities of our country [which] continue with the best spirit of finding viable alternatives for the remainder of this competition in Mexico."
1%er
Well-Known Member
Projected prize money payouts for the teams
As usual Ferrari will take the largest share of the prize pot despite Mercedes winning both championships in 2018. The Italians will scoop $205 million which turns out to be $28 million more than their German rivals. The distribution of the total prize money ($1,004m) is worked out using three different categories. The first split is a fixed $35 million for each of the 10 teams who finished the season, known as column 1 payments (this still includes Racing Point*). The second cut is linked back to their position in the 2018 constructors' championship. Mercedes won $66 million for this, while Ferrari picked up $56 million. This amount falls through the field to Williams who won $15 million in this category, this is column 2 payments.
On top of that five teams receive further payments, a ‘constructors’ championship bonus is paid to four teams, three other teams receive bonus payments ranging from $10 million (Williams) to $35 million (Mercedes and Red Bull) and a special Long-Standing Team payment is made to Ferrari alone. Worth $73 million this year, the Long-Standing Team payment has ensured Ferrari has consistently received the most money of any team since the current prize money structure was introduced in 2013.
*Liberty Media will award a column one payment to Racing Point. This is despite the team being admitted to the championship last year as a new entrant, which prompted claims that it should not qualify for column one revenue as it has not fulfilled the requirement to finish in the top 10 twice in the previous three championships.
Projected Payments
Ferrari - $205 million
Mercedes - $177 million
Red Bull - $152 million
McLaren - $100 million
Renault - $73 million
Haas - $70 million
Williams - $60 million
Racing Point - $59 million
Sauber - $56 million
Toro Rosso - $52 million
Final entry list for 2019 has a couple of small changes
First of all we can see that Racing point will race with Mercedes engines rebadged under major sponsor BWT for the 2019 Formula 1 season. The team officially known as SportPesa Racing Point F1 Team, will race with engines known as "BWT-Mercedes". The rebadging of engines is not new in F1, with Red Bull renaming their Renault power units after watch company TAG Heuer between 2016 and 2018.
The other changes on the updated entry list included confirmation of Williams' new title sponsor, Rokit, with the team being officially known as "Rokit Williams Racing" for 2019. Ferrari has also undergone a minor name change, scrapping plans to race as Scuderia Ferrari Mission Winnow for 2019. The Philip Morris International backed Mission Winnow scheme has been dropped from the name, which reverts to "Scuderia Ferrari".
Five race deals will expire this year
Formula 1 chairman Chase Carey is not fazed by the fact that five race deals will expire this year, and believes it's a challenge the sport will face every year. Mexico is the most recent to be added to the list of races that see their contract run out in 2019, with the race organisers missing the deadline to keep its preferred date on the F1 calendar. European races such as the British, German, Spanish and Italian grands prix are all under threat of missing out on a spot in the Formula 1 race list. However, Carey does not seem too bothered about this and revealed that owners Liberty Media have had to deal with this in every year they have been involved in the sport.
Carey told Investors "We have contracts where 2019 is the last year and we have to either create a new agreement or go our separate ways, there's nothing really unique to this that wasn't true last year. We had a number of renewals last year, just as we had a number of renewals the year before. There are different issues to each one. That's the process we're engaged in now, with renewals for 2020, we'll always have three or four negotiations we'll have to go through each year".
As usual Ferrari will take the largest share of the prize pot despite Mercedes winning both championships in 2018. The Italians will scoop $205 million which turns out to be $28 million more than their German rivals. The distribution of the total prize money ($1,004m) is worked out using three different categories. The first split is a fixed $35 million for each of the 10 teams who finished the season, known as column 1 payments (this still includes Racing Point*). The second cut is linked back to their position in the 2018 constructors' championship. Mercedes won $66 million for this, while Ferrari picked up $56 million. This amount falls through the field to Williams who won $15 million in this category, this is column 2 payments.
On top of that five teams receive further payments, a ‘constructors’ championship bonus is paid to four teams, three other teams receive bonus payments ranging from $10 million (Williams) to $35 million (Mercedes and Red Bull) and a special Long-Standing Team payment is made to Ferrari alone. Worth $73 million this year, the Long-Standing Team payment has ensured Ferrari has consistently received the most money of any team since the current prize money structure was introduced in 2013.
*Liberty Media will award a column one payment to Racing Point. This is despite the team being admitted to the championship last year as a new entrant, which prompted claims that it should not qualify for column one revenue as it has not fulfilled the requirement to finish in the top 10 twice in the previous three championships.
Projected Payments
Ferrari - $205 million
Mercedes - $177 million
Red Bull - $152 million
McLaren - $100 million
Renault - $73 million
Haas - $70 million
Williams - $60 million
Racing Point - $59 million
Sauber - $56 million
Toro Rosso - $52 million
Final entry list for 2019 has a couple of small changes
First of all we can see that Racing point will race with Mercedes engines rebadged under major sponsor BWT for the 2019 Formula 1 season. The team officially known as SportPesa Racing Point F1 Team, will race with engines known as "BWT-Mercedes". The rebadging of engines is not new in F1, with Red Bull renaming their Renault power units after watch company TAG Heuer between 2016 and 2018.
The other changes on the updated entry list included confirmation of Williams' new title sponsor, Rokit, with the team being officially known as "Rokit Williams Racing" for 2019. Ferrari has also undergone a minor name change, scrapping plans to race as Scuderia Ferrari Mission Winnow for 2019. The Philip Morris International backed Mission Winnow scheme has been dropped from the name, which reverts to "Scuderia Ferrari".
Five race deals will expire this year
Formula 1 chairman Chase Carey is not fazed by the fact that five race deals will expire this year, and believes it's a challenge the sport will face every year. Mexico is the most recent to be added to the list of races that see their contract run out in 2019, with the race organisers missing the deadline to keep its preferred date on the F1 calendar. European races such as the British, German, Spanish and Italian grands prix are all under threat of missing out on a spot in the Formula 1 race list. However, Carey does not seem too bothered about this and revealed that owners Liberty Media have had to deal with this in every year they have been involved in the sport.
Carey told Investors "We have contracts where 2019 is the last year and we have to either create a new agreement or go our separate ways, there's nothing really unique to this that wasn't true last year. We had a number of renewals last year, just as we had a number of renewals the year before. There are different issues to each one. That's the process we're engaged in now, with renewals for 2020, we'll always have three or four negotiations we'll have to go through each year".
1%er
Well-Known Member
Ferrari revert to 2018 uniforms for Australian Grand Prix
As mentioned above Ferrari had been warned by the Australian government about their Mission Winnow logo, it is claimed that it could breach the government ban on tobacco advertising. To avoid any controversy or even the Australian government banning the team from participating in the Grand Prix, Ferrari will remove all the graphics for their cars, suits, helmets, panels, and uniforms. The latter, which are used by all the staff of the team, will be temporarily replaced in Melbourne by those 2018. It is known that in Maranello the team are working 24 hours a day to make this late change happen during an already intense period before the departure of the team for the first race of the year.
Did Mercedes take two different car to testing
In week two of the Barcelona test, Mercedes brought a ‘B’ spec car to the track. An engineer is quoted as saying “every aerodynamic surface” of the silver car has been changed. Some claimed it was a reaction to Mercedes’ realisation that it is lagging behind Ferrari by half a second per lap. Ferrari looked very good in Barcelona, that’s for sure, but maybe Mercedes didn’t reveal all their cards. It seemed somewhat strange that they brought two different cars to the 2 tests. It is possible that they are designed for different types of tracks?
Honda to make power-unit changes before Melbourne
Red Bull and Toro Rosso were caused no headaches during the whole of winter testing due to their Honda power units, only Pierre Gasly's crashes preventing Red Bull from gaining further running due to damages caused. Honda technical director Toyuharu Tanabi claimed that the manufacturer had been able to record high mileage without major issues but that some things would need to be changed ahead of the first race of the season. A repackaging of the power unit was highlighted as the main issue facing Honda before lights out in Australia but it was "not a big concern" according to Tanabe. He went on to say "We were able to run throughout all eight days of winter testing without any major problems on the PU side, this meant we were able to do a good mileage. We experienced some minor issues in the second week, but that is what testing is all about, dealing with anything that arises before the season gets underway. We don’t have a serious problem with the current installation, but we found some issues because of the tight packaging, the shape was a little bit too aggressive, so we need to make it a little bit different. It’s not a big concern".
As mentioned above Ferrari had been warned by the Australian government about their Mission Winnow logo, it is claimed that it could breach the government ban on tobacco advertising. To avoid any controversy or even the Australian government banning the team from participating in the Grand Prix, Ferrari will remove all the graphics for their cars, suits, helmets, panels, and uniforms. The latter, which are used by all the staff of the team, will be temporarily replaced in Melbourne by those 2018. It is known that in Maranello the team are working 24 hours a day to make this late change happen during an already intense period before the departure of the team for the first race of the year.
Did Mercedes take two different car to testing
In week two of the Barcelona test, Mercedes brought a ‘B’ spec car to the track. An engineer is quoted as saying “every aerodynamic surface” of the silver car has been changed. Some claimed it was a reaction to Mercedes’ realisation that it is lagging behind Ferrari by half a second per lap. Ferrari looked very good in Barcelona, that’s for sure, but maybe Mercedes didn’t reveal all their cards. It seemed somewhat strange that they brought two different cars to the 2 tests. It is possible that they are designed for different types of tracks?
Honda to make power-unit changes before Melbourne
Red Bull and Toro Rosso were caused no headaches during the whole of winter testing due to their Honda power units, only Pierre Gasly's crashes preventing Red Bull from gaining further running due to damages caused. Honda technical director Toyuharu Tanabi claimed that the manufacturer had been able to record high mileage without major issues but that some things would need to be changed ahead of the first race of the season. A repackaging of the power unit was highlighted as the main issue facing Honda before lights out in Australia but it was "not a big concern" according to Tanabe. He went on to say "We were able to run throughout all eight days of winter testing without any major problems on the PU side, this meant we were able to do a good mileage. We experienced some minor issues in the second week, but that is what testing is all about, dealing with anything that arises before the season gets underway. We don’t have a serious problem with the current installation, but we found some issues because of the tight packaging, the shape was a little bit too aggressive, so we need to make it a little bit different. It’s not a big concern".
1%er
Well-Known Member
Is the Williams car even legal
I'll get on to the disputed areas of the new Williams FW42 below but first some other news about the team. An insider has revealed that the reason the car was late on parade is because of some bad decisions made by upper managers last year when they tried to sack staff, the result of which backfired massively. Also ill-designed parts for the braking system wouldn’t fit during the construction phase of the car last week and that suspension components were misaligned, causing further delays. It has also been reported that suppliers have not moved fast enough for the team with their parts manufacturing, caused by late order placement by Williams. Some speculate that this is a cash flow issue within the team. Paddy Lowe is rumoured to be very much out of favour with the Williams management, and fingers have been pointed at the chief technical officer for Williams F1, citing the ex-Mercedes chief as the reason for the delays.
Kubica made his rather damning report on the team and car performance at the end of the test saying that the team would find it impossible to make up for lost time, rather strangely Claire Williams, team principal, and daughter of founder member Frank Williams, declared that Robert could be a technical director (maybe she is indicating something happening in the near future).
Is the car legal?
After inspections by FIA scrutineers in Barcelona after other teams asked for some rules clarifications, Williams was forced to make some changes that included modifying the unique concave mirror arrangement due to the fact that their drivers would find it nearly impossible to use them. They were purely aerodynamic devices. Ironically Paddy Lowe seems very proud of the car declaring earlier in the week that the FW42 was “a huge step forward in terms of the platform.”, but there were very few reasons to be so proud of an aerodynamic solution that risks being rejected by the FIA even before the first GP of the 2019 season. What’s not so encouraging Paddy is that now the front suspension has also been declared illegal, I just read in Motorsport magazine. It seems the front suspension with two elements instead of one has raised more "clarifications" to Charlie Whiting by other teams, an arm that aims airflow down to the lower bargeboard and the rubber cover of the bracket being areas contested.
In short, for a team that struggles to leave the last row where it had plummeted last year has not the best start to the season. These setbacks add to the already disastrous delay to testing. Surely that there is abject disarray in the management of this once dominant team.
Are Ferrari struggling with reliability
Reports in the Italian press are claiming that Ferrari may have some problems with the reliability of their new car. Last week, as he played down the Maranello team's superiority, the new Ferrari boss Mattia Binotto said of the 2019 car: "I would like to see it more reliable overall. To win we will have to be the strongest and we are not yet". Many observers thought Binotto's comments were a typical ploy to step away from the favourite role. Press reports are questioning the reliability of the car with comments such as "if they have one problem, they can solve it, but if they have a number of problems its not so easy". It seems that the new Ferrari could be having problems with overheating, the new cars appears to have a very slim rear end, with few air intakes and a very small airbox. I guess we will see in Melbourne in a couple of weeks, but if that is a problem it will not just be a quick fix.
I'll get on to the disputed areas of the new Williams FW42 below but first some other news about the team. An insider has revealed that the reason the car was late on parade is because of some bad decisions made by upper managers last year when they tried to sack staff, the result of which backfired massively. Also ill-designed parts for the braking system wouldn’t fit during the construction phase of the car last week and that suspension components were misaligned, causing further delays. It has also been reported that suppliers have not moved fast enough for the team with their parts manufacturing, caused by late order placement by Williams. Some speculate that this is a cash flow issue within the team. Paddy Lowe is rumoured to be very much out of favour with the Williams management, and fingers have been pointed at the chief technical officer for Williams F1, citing the ex-Mercedes chief as the reason for the delays.
Kubica made his rather damning report on the team and car performance at the end of the test saying that the team would find it impossible to make up for lost time, rather strangely Claire Williams, team principal, and daughter of founder member Frank Williams, declared that Robert could be a technical director (maybe she is indicating something happening in the near future).
Is the car legal?
After inspections by FIA scrutineers in Barcelona after other teams asked for some rules clarifications, Williams was forced to make some changes that included modifying the unique concave mirror arrangement due to the fact that their drivers would find it nearly impossible to use them. They were purely aerodynamic devices. Ironically Paddy Lowe seems very proud of the car declaring earlier in the week that the FW42 was “a huge step forward in terms of the platform.”, but there were very few reasons to be so proud of an aerodynamic solution that risks being rejected by the FIA even before the first GP of the 2019 season. What’s not so encouraging Paddy is that now the front suspension has also been declared illegal, I just read in Motorsport magazine. It seems the front suspension with two elements instead of one has raised more "clarifications" to Charlie Whiting by other teams, an arm that aims airflow down to the lower bargeboard and the rubber cover of the bracket being areas contested.
In short, for a team that struggles to leave the last row where it had plummeted last year has not the best start to the season. These setbacks add to the already disastrous delay to testing. Surely that there is abject disarray in the management of this once dominant team.
Are Ferrari struggling with reliability
Reports in the Italian press are claiming that Ferrari may have some problems with the reliability of their new car. Last week, as he played down the Maranello team's superiority, the new Ferrari boss Mattia Binotto said of the 2019 car: "I would like to see it more reliable overall. To win we will have to be the strongest and we are not yet". Many observers thought Binotto's comments were a typical ploy to step away from the favourite role. Press reports are questioning the reliability of the car with comments such as "if they have one problem, they can solve it, but if they have a number of problems its not so easy". It seems that the new Ferrari could be having problems with overheating, the new cars appears to have a very slim rear end, with few air intakes and a very small airbox. I guess we will see in Melbourne in a couple of weeks, but if that is a problem it will not just be a quick fix.
Limejuice
Well-Known Member
Not really.
Williams' woes go back a few years, with driver changes, engine changes, technical changes. Eventually, we're left looking at the one aspect of the team that's been consistent throughout. That's FW and CW. Perhaps it's time for a change. But I think FW will hang onto the team he gave birth to until the day his personal chequered flag waves.
Williams technical chief Paddy Lowe leaves team after disappointing start to 2019
Last edited:
1%er
Well-Known Member
Williams are spinning this as "Paddy Lowe takes leave of absence for personal reasons", but I'd take any bet that he does not return as technical director. The problem for Williams is that Lowe is now a shareholder in the company, so will still be around in some capacity. It is hardly surprising he is out when you look at the situation, They were late building the car, they were late to testing and now the FIA have told them the car is illegal, I can't really think of any problem they have missed, they hit the trifecta and all the shit is on Lowe's lap.
Did I mention that I never reckoned Paddy Lowe
Renault talking to McLaren about them becoming a B team
If reports are to be believed Renault are in talks with McLaren about them becoming the manufactures B team, along the lines of Haas and Alfa Romeo to Ferrari, Toro Rosso to Red Bull and Racing Point to Mercedes. Renault despite being a manufacture has a much smaller team that Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bull who have some 1500 employees at their team while Renault has around 1200.
cybershot
Well-Known Member
This seems to be one of those interviews where it's been took out of context and the headline suggests talks are taking place, but and assuming the article i read is quoting the original source correctly, all he said was:
Asked why Renault can't just join the party by making McLaren its 'B team', he answered: "Because we are equal teams. Who will be the king and who will be the slave?
"Perhaps we will have to talk to McLaren at some point, but this alliance could never be at the level of Ferrari and Haas, Mercedes and Racing Point, Red Bull and Toro Rosso."
spitfire
Walty McWaltface
Decent review of the Netflix show.
Netflix’s F1 series offers a captivating, candid glimpse behind the curtain | Giles Richards
Netflix’s F1 series offers a captivating, candid glimpse behind the curtain | Giles Richards
Limejuice
Well-Known Member
1%er
Well-Known Member
F1 has new theme and intro video
The Chemical Brothers and F1 have apparently put this little number together, I don't think it will replace last years new theme by Brian Tyler, but will be used to promote F1
Point for the fastest lap
Liberty Media has reportedly pushed for the late inclusion, which would see the extra point awarded providing the driver also finished in the top 10 in the race. It has already passed the world motor sport council and now just needs unanimous team support, which must be given with an electronic vote set to take place before the Australian Grand Prix. It's far from a new idea with other series offering bonus points for poles and fastest laps and F1 has also seen the rule in place before during the 1950s.
World motor sport council meeting and F1
There was a world motor sport council meeting yesterday and almost nothing was said about F1. As mentioned above, they took a vote on granting 1 point for the fastest lap but other than that the statement released only contained this statement about F1 "The Council approved the launch of a series of tenders within the context of the ongoing development of the 2021 Technical Regulations". While it is common knowledge that F1 are looking at a "standard gearbox cassette", the statement says "a series of tenders" which would indicate F1 is seeking to standardise more parts.
All this, of course, is part of the drive to reduce costs and level out the playing field, but does standardisation compromises the very DNA of F1? Ross Brawn said at the official screening of the Netflix documentary of the 2018 season "We need to close the differential between the cars in terms of overall performance, we have divisions one and two at the moment, and we need to stop that, we need much closer gaps between the teams and cost control will be part of that. The regulations evolving will be part of that".
Is it the job of the owners of F1 or is it the job of the teams to ensure closer racing, F1 is meant to be the pinnacle of motorsport and I'm not sure dumbing it down, is the way to go. I find this a little hypocritical from someone like Ross Brawn, who when head of Ferrari was the man who pushed the envelope to its very limit and then some, constantly treading that very fine line between the legal and the not so legal in his quest for that little bit extra pace and performance, that edge. People can make the argument that every car has a fire extinguisher system, so why don't we save money by giving every car a standard fire extinguisher system, you could say that about almost everything on an F1 car. But lets look at that argument, engineers look at the fire extinguisher system and make small changes to make it lighter, that can give their team a fraction of a second a lap and that is what F1 racing is about fractions of seconds here and there. I hope they don't go down this road as I find the engineering as interesting as the racing and for sure will not bother watching a standardised car going around the track.
To paraphrase Martin Niemoller "first they came for the gearbox cassette, and I did not speak out..."
The Chemical Brothers and F1 have apparently put this little number together, I don't think it will replace last years new theme by Brian Tyler, but will be used to promote F1
Point for the fastest lap
Liberty Media has reportedly pushed for the late inclusion, which would see the extra point awarded providing the driver also finished in the top 10 in the race. It has already passed the world motor sport council and now just needs unanimous team support, which must be given with an electronic vote set to take place before the Australian Grand Prix. It's far from a new idea with other series offering bonus points for poles and fastest laps and F1 has also seen the rule in place before during the 1950s.
World motor sport council meeting and F1
There was a world motor sport council meeting yesterday and almost nothing was said about F1. As mentioned above, they took a vote on granting 1 point for the fastest lap but other than that the statement released only contained this statement about F1 "The Council approved the launch of a series of tenders within the context of the ongoing development of the 2021 Technical Regulations". While it is common knowledge that F1 are looking at a "standard gearbox cassette", the statement says "a series of tenders" which would indicate F1 is seeking to standardise more parts.
All this, of course, is part of the drive to reduce costs and level out the playing field, but does standardisation compromises the very DNA of F1? Ross Brawn said at the official screening of the Netflix documentary of the 2018 season "We need to close the differential between the cars in terms of overall performance, we have divisions one and two at the moment, and we need to stop that, we need much closer gaps between the teams and cost control will be part of that. The regulations evolving will be part of that".
Is it the job of the owners of F1 or is it the job of the teams to ensure closer racing, F1 is meant to be the pinnacle of motorsport and I'm not sure dumbing it down, is the way to go. I find this a little hypocritical from someone like Ross Brawn, who when head of Ferrari was the man who pushed the envelope to its very limit and then some, constantly treading that very fine line between the legal and the not so legal in his quest for that little bit extra pace and performance, that edge. People can make the argument that every car has a fire extinguisher system, so why don't we save money by giving every car a standard fire extinguisher system, you could say that about almost everything on an F1 car. But lets look at that argument, engineers look at the fire extinguisher system and make small changes to make it lighter, that can give their team a fraction of a second a lap and that is what F1 racing is about fractions of seconds here and there. I hope they don't go down this road as I find the engineering as interesting as the racing and for sure will not bother watching a standardised car going around the track.
To paraphrase Martin Niemoller "first they came for the gearbox cassette, and I did not speak out..."
Limejuice
Well-Known Member
Hear, hear.
It is the aim of the teams to make the racing as far apart as they can. It's racing. It involves winning and losing. Each team wants to annihilate the opposition if it can. For teams, racing comes first - it's their raison d'etre. If a team can get a one-thousandth of a second advantage by customising its tyre-valves, it will.
It's the aim of the rights owner to maximise its revenues, which is an audience and value equation. Liberty believes close racing will mean more excitement and therefore bigger private yachts for Liberty's big smells. As Liberty's idea of an audience is the non-oily rag, short history, celeb bedazzled, travelogue seduced, high churn advert-fodder, they turn to any artifice to keep one more bored bar-fly in Bangkok on his stool for one lap more. I'm astonished we haven't had an audience in-race vote for 'fave racer' because telly folk see voting as engagement and value.
The two aims are not necessarily mutually exclusive. But if one must overrule the other, the pinnacle of motorsport aim must prevail. Otherwise it's just another version of Formula Ford. The product is racing, not television. Telly folk tend to see themselves as ringmasters, and the programmes are their clowns and lion tamers. They see the world like Milo Minderbender: what's good for telly is good for the sport. One glance at American football tells us how that worked out.
Wouldn't it be splendid if another player were to step forward to propose an alternative concorde agreement?
1%er
Well-Known Member
The new Netflix F1 documentary is available all 10 episodes. Drive to survive
When I use this site I use the link vshare.eu if you don't have an ad-blocker you'll get some pop-ups and shit but vshare has never given my virus protection any perblems, I hope you enjoy it
When I use this site I use the link vshare.eu if you don't have an ad-blocker you'll get some pop-ups and shit but vshare has never given my virus protection any perblems, I hope you enjoy it
cybershot
Well-Known Member
Almost feel like I should be posting in the 2018 thread in regards to the Netflix doc. Watched the first 3 episodes and I’m impressed with how well it’s been done. Everyone is coming across honest rather than the usual media trained interview stuff we are used too. Plenty of f bombs. Claire Williams in episode 3 in comparison to the recently aired Williams doc on bbc2 comes across as broken. So I’m a) surprised she’s still there in some ways and b) if she was broken at that point last season then I’m wondering what her state is right now with how testing etc has gone. Ultimately you feel she’ll be made the scapegoat inevitably.
cybershot
Well-Known Member
Limejuice
Well-Known Member
As the Williams graphic masterpiece announces, we gots ourselves some racin'.
It being Australia, all the fun stuff happens at f*ck off o'clock. The things we do, eh?
UK times (also GMT/UTC):
Fri 15 Mar
FP1 - 01.00
FP2 - 05.00
Sat 16 Mar
FP3 - 03.00
Qual - 06.00
Sun 17 Mar
Race - 05.10
I shall be keeping 'em peeled for a glimpse of a Great Sandalled Kravitz who may have escaped extinction.
It being Australia, all the fun stuff happens at f*ck off o'clock. The things we do, eh?
UK times (also GMT/UTC):
Fri 15 Mar
FP1 - 01.00
FP2 - 05.00
Sat 16 Mar
FP3 - 03.00
Qual - 06.00
Sun 17 Mar
Race - 05.10
I shall be keeping 'em peeled for a glimpse of a Great Sandalled Kravitz who may have escaped extinction.
