For years certain people have been telling us not to criticise Pirelli’s high degradation tyres on the basis that “they were only delivering what the FIA asked”. Now, so many years on, and with so many different tyre degradation philosophies supposedly having been pursued, the question is unavoidable. Are Pirelli truly equipped enough to supply tyres to Formula 1, which is supposed to showcase the pinnacle of motorsport technology?
Archive — Formula 1
This story isn’t quite as juicy as the headline suggests. Essentially Ron Dennis asked Nick Fry for Brawn GP’s chassis performance figures to help him benchmark the performance of the McLaren.
But it’s still an extraordinary revelation. And one quote in particular made me think of much more recent events.
According to Fry, Dennis told him McLaren’s MP4-24 chassis “is totally under-performing, as you have no doubt noticed, but my engineers say our aerodynamic package is on the money. The thing is I just don’t believe them.”
McLaren’s engineering director at the time was Paddy Lowe, whose recent spell at Williams appeared to be… under-performing.
Meanwhile, the denial at McLaren about their chassis performance continued up until last year. Then, it became crystal clear that blaming all their problems on Honda engines wasn’t going to wash.
I’ve written many times about how McLaren’s (and Williams’) problems go back many years. This new insight gives us a clue that senior figures were beginning to cotton onto that as early as 2009.
The best bit about this is the fact that they are apologising in advance for the inevitably poor quality of coverage in Singapore…
…we have to really convey what the city is like, this amazing skyline and these fantastic buildings.
How about no?
I’m sure it’s in the contract with the Singapore Grand Prix race promoters, that they must allot a certain amount of the broadcast to showing the city, and not the race. The same goes with Abu Dhabi and that ridiculous vibrator-shaped hotel.
And the Russian Grand Prix. Every year, without fail, they have cut away from the live action to broadcast footage of Vladimir Putin arriving by helicopter about a third of the way through the race. Then some laps later they show him gormlessly sitting next to Bernie Ecclestone in a near-empty grandstand, looking about as interested in the race as some lichen would. Every year. Watch it this year and take a drink when it happens.
The sooner F1 becomes less reliant on these ridiculous publicity-hungry governments, and goes back to real racing on proper circuits, the better. But then, it will be harder to excuse the bad TV coverage.
A very frank, in-depth interview with Daniel Riccardo talking about the aftermath of Anthoine Hubert’s death and how he got back into the cockpit to start the race less than 24 hours later.
I found his description of going through Raidillon for the first time particularly powerful:
I told myself: ‘Go full throttle, and just don’t over-think this corner, don’t over-think any of it.’ Out of the pits… held it full. That was a relief but it felt good to get out there and do that. And that also told me that I was ready to go.
I think if I was, big lift and scared, then that would be a sign that maybe I shouldn’t be on the track right now. I guess I wanted to do that to test myself and then it all felt right.
At this stage, I wonder how Helmut Marko gets away with this. His driver/vanity programme is a monumental failure. Pierre Gasly’s demotion to Toro Rosso after only 12 races is just the latest in a trail of destruction wreaked upon drivers ever since Red Bull Junior Team’s inception.
At Toro Rosso he joins Daniil Kvyat, who has also been rejected by Red Bull’s programme multiple times, only to be invited back due to the scheme’s utter dearth of talent.
Meanwhile, Red Bull lack the patience required to build their drivers’ confidence and skill.
Luke Smith’s tweet sums it up neatly:
This means a driver once dropped by Red Bull's junior programme replaces a driver dropped by Red Bull, who himself becomes teammates with a driver dropped by Red Bull's team and programme before being re-signed by Red Bull's programme #F1
— Luke Smith (@LukeSmithF1) August 12, 2019
I fear the writing is on the wall for Valtteri Bottas. It was bad enough that Toto Wolff has now explicitly said he’s considering replacing Bottas with Esteban Ocon.
But when even Bottas himself is talking about having a plan B and plan C, surely the game is up. It’s not just the fact that he’s considering it. That’s only sensible for anyone to do.
But in talking about it, he is exposing his weakness. A more driven individual (even if he is talking to other teams behind the scenes) would surely still say he is fully committed to Mercedes and, determined to retain his drive, and not thinking about anything else.
Talking like this just makes Bottas seem like he’s already thrown in the towel.
In all seriousness, I’m impressed at the effort Mercedes have put in to celebrating 125 years in motorsport and their 200th F1 race.
While having all the team personnel (including mechanics!) dressed up in 1950s-style outfits looks fun, it surely must be distracting. Watching the mechanics working on the cars in the garage with their baggy overalls dangling all over the place, I had to think some of these mechanics must find it all annoying.
Lewis Hamilton certainly seemed to find his special gloves annoying during free practice 3 yesterday when he tetchily requested his normal gloves as the session was about to start.
As for the livery, Toto Wolff said:
“I can tell you it’s definitely not making the car lighter… In all the briefing sheets prior to this weekend the engineers pointed out ‘too heavy stickers’…”
I’m sure it’s a small thing, but I’ve always wondered if thick stickers have an effect on aerodynamics. If you look at the photos on the RaceFans article, you can actually see how thick some of the decals are.
I’m sure they wouldn’t do it if it was a problem. But surely thick stickers would be more of a factor than matt paint?
Note — 2019-07-15
I just watched the British Grand Prix. 😱 Sebastian Vettel needs to retire as soon as possible, before he does any further damage to his reputation. So sad to see a once great driver reduced to this.
It’s good to see this issue getting some more attention, from none other than Dieter Rencken. I’ve been saying this for years.
If the aim of the Junior programme is to develop F1 drivers such situations point to something seriously amiss with the selection process. In 20 years and over 350 grands prix, just three alumni – Sebastian Vettel, Daniel Ricciardo and Verstappen – won grands prix. Of these only Ricciardo can be considered a fully ‘homegrown’ product of Red Bull’s system, the other two having been schooled elsewhere.
Dan Ticktum’s meltdown was seemingly brought about by the high-pressure environment of Red Bull’s driver programme. But this just the latest in a very long line of failures.
It’s easy to say this from the outside, but if I was a driver with some talent I would steer well clear of the Red Bull programme. The list of unnecessarily ruined careers is far, far longer than the successes.
As usual, Christian Horner seems to be talking bull.
On the one hand, he’s bemoaning the damage being caused to cars by the kerbs. On the other hand, he’s saying they are “too inviting”. It can’t be both.
Horner believes they are “too inviting” for drivers. “They know they’re there, I just think the angle that they’re at, I think that’s what they really need to look at.”…
“It needs something either more substantial that is a real deterrent because the invitation is there for the drivers to try to use it.”
Damaging your front wing isn’t a deterrent enough?
Given this, and other recent events in Canada and France, I’m starting to wonder if F1’s biggest problem is that drivers have formed a sense of entitlement that they should be allowed to leave the circuit without consequence.
I’m a bit concerned. The Hanoi Street Circuit rather looks like a cross between the Valencia Street Circuit and Korea International Circuit — two stinkers of circuits also designed by Tilke. As things stand, my hopes aren’t too high for Liberty Media’s first new circuit for F1.
Note — 2019-03-14
I was sorry to hear about the death of Charlie Whiting, Formula 1’s race director, less than 24 hours before he was due to oversee the first session of the season.
Charlie Whiting has been one person in the FIA I have always respected. It was very difficult to question his judgement, and you rarely heard anyone ever seriously question it.
We saw Charlie Whiting addressing fans when we went to the Belgian Grand Prix last year, and he seemed happy to be speaking to fans and telling them more about the sport and his job.
It has seemed, from my distant vantage point, that the FIA have had trouble finding a successor to Charlie Whiting in the role of race director. He has held the job since 1997. I couldn’t tell you who was the race director before him, and it’s difficult to imagine who it will be after him. They are big shoes to fill.
An excellent analysis setting the decline of Williams into a historical context. Dieter Rencken traces the decline back to 1998, the commencement of the first Concorde Agreement following Bernie Ecclestone’s acquisition of Formula 1’s commercial rights. This is when Bernie Ecclestone began acting in his own interests, and not that of the teams.
That certainly explains why the number of independent teams has decreased since then. The remaining teams, as Dieter Rencken notes, have changed their business models to adapt to the modern commercial realities of the sport.
Williams’s dogged determination to stick to the same business model it had in the 1980s and 1990s may be seen as noble by some. But increasingly it’s being shown to be foolhardy.
Claire Williams may refuse to allow Williams to be a B-team. But let’s not forget that Frank Williams first entered F1 with a customer chassis. Why should they continue to tie their own hands?
See also: Williams have hit a new Lowe
It would have been an embarrassing start to the year by anyone’s standards. But for a team like Williams, it has been utterly mortifying. Formerly known as Williams Grand Prix Engineering, this team has always taken a great pride in its engineering excellence. In the past couple of years, that reputation has been shattered. Read full article6 comments
The 2019 Formula One World Championship will see two of the most historical brands in motorsport – Sauber and Alfa Romeo – return to circuits across the globe with 2007 World Champion Kimi Räikkönen and the young Italian Antonio Giovinazzi driving for Alfa Romeo Racing, formerly referred to as the Alfa Romeo Sauber F1 Team.
It’s a bit of a shame to see the Sauber name disappear. Even when BMW owned the team they kept Sauber in the name.
Michael Schumacher’s son progresses to bring hope in tragic F1 tale — Richard Williams, the Guardian
As always, Richard Williams is well worth reading. This time, a sensitive piece on the mixed feelings some people have about Michael Schumacher, five years on from his skiing accident, as his son Mick prepares to make the step up to Formula 2.
The centrepiece of this article is an interview with Damon Hill, one of Schumacher’s fiercest rivals. As usual, Hill is thoughtful when reflecting back.
Today, everyone with any direct relationship to Michael Schumacher, past or present, chooses their words with extreme care when discussing his life since the accident. “To even contemplate it is frightening,” Hill says. “Whatever my feeling was about Michael and the way he went about his career became irrelevant. From a human point of view, it was so upsetting.”
Slow LMP1s: you asked for it
Hazel Southwell explains why hybrid technology is the future, and why reverting back to old-fashioned V8s wouldn’t solve anything, by looking at how the current LMP1 regulations are panning out.
…the privateer P1s do not go as fast because they are not as good [as the hybrids]…
When a combustion-only car storms up the Le Mans pit straight and then brakes into the curve of turn one, all the energy and fuel burnt through to accelerate turns to heat in the brakes – and is gone. When it gears up the torque to get up the hill to Dunlop, the heat the engine fires up disappears into the night as nothing, fumes out of the exhaust that don’t move the car forwards.
Channel 4’s Formula 1 commentator Ben Edwards began his broadcast yesterday saying, “For many of us, it’s an end of an era.” He talked about it being Fernando Alonso’s final race, and Kimi Räikkönen’s swansong at Ferrari. Not directly mentioned, but telegraphed, was the fact that this was also the last F1 race to be shown on free-to-air TV in the UK, with the exception of next year’s British Grand Prix.
Channel 4 have done an exceptional job of covering the sport over the past three years. I share Richard Williams’s weary assessment of the Sky coverage we must pay through the nose for:
There are aspects that stretch the patience, like the rushed and inane encounters of the grid walk and the plethora of pensioned-off drivers saying nothing very much.
When Sky first shared the rights with the BBC in 2012, the big names went to Sky — but the good names stayed with the BBC. Channel 4 have continued in that vein, if anything improving on the BBC. Their diverse range of pundits are sharper, wittier, more perceptive, more insightful, with more recent race experience.
From now, British viewers are left worse off — and so is F1 itself.
Analysis from Mark Hughes.
I was always a huge fan of Robert Kubica. So on the one hand it is delightful that he will return to race in F1, eight years on from his horrific rally accident.
But I really hope Williams are doing this for the right reasons. Knowing Williams’s history with drivers, they are probably not doing it for the right reasons.
On the eve of Fernando Alonso’s final Formula 1 race, Andrew Benson has written a brilliant five-part article on the key moments in his career. This series is full of fascinating anecdotes and new details about the breakdown of his relationship with McLaren in 2007, what he was really like with Ferrari, and what drove him to move back to McLaren.
More than ever, it’s clear that those who have worked most closely with Fernando Alonso regard him as one of the greatest F1 drivers of all time. It’s all the more shocking that his career has delivered so little in terms of silverware. This series helps explain exactly why that is.
This is probably one of the best articles about Formula 1 I have read for several years.
After a decade (yes, a decade!) of BadgerGP.com we’re closing down after the 2018 season.
One of the first — and best — Formula 1 blogs is closing its doors.
In 2010, I was honoured to be asked if I would like to contribute an article to BadgerGP. The outcome was, The Vettel-Webber backlash: Are Red Bull losing their Fizz?
As noted by the F1 Broadcasting Blog on Twitter, it’s a shame to see another independent motorsport website close.
Thanks to Adam Le Feuvre, and everyone involved with F1 Badger and BadgerGP over the years.
Re-live the 2008 Brazilian Grand Prix
Today it is ten years since the 2008 Brazilian Grand Prix, the most extraordinary championship decider since I started watching Formula 1 in the mid-1990s. Formula 1 have made the full race available on YouTube today.
The race was gripping. The Ferrari team believed they’d won the championship as Felipe Massa crossed the finish line to take race victory in front of his home crowd. Soon after, two corners further back, Lewis Hamilton made a vital pass for 5th, to clinch his first title.
But it’s the post-race events that live strongly in my memory. That year, ITV streamed F1 sessions online. There you could continue watching the raw FOM world feed after ITV’s transmission had finished. This was a novelty, before the days of the BBC’s extended Red Button forum, or the umpteen-hour-long post-race breakdown we now get as routine on Sky.
Felipe Massa’s dignity in defeat was deeply impressive. His conflicted face as the Brazilian national anthem played out on the podium said it all.
Despair at having lost his best chance to become champion. Pride at having done the best job he could.
Up to that year, Massa was a bit of a joke driver. Not since then.
High altitude circuit “doesn’t make much sense” — Grosjean
“Having a car that doesn’t work well at high altitude doesn’t make much sense” — Stephen.
F1 jumps to highest peak audience in nearly three years; beats The X Factor head-to-head
Given that last weekend’s US Grand Prix was the last prime-time race to be broadcast live on free-to-air TV (until at least 2024), Formula 1 is unlikely to see a peak audience like this again in the UK.
“He cheated!” How Pérez mugged Grosjean at the virtual safety car restart
I’d read about concerns that some drivers were somehow exploiting some kind of loophole in the rules surrounding the virtual safety car (VSC), but I never understood what that loophole was. But this from Keith Collantine and Dieter Rencken is a crystal-clear explanation of what was going on when Sergio Pérez gained two seconds on Romain Grosjean during a virtual safety car period.
It seems far from ideal that this is able to happen. Especially if drivers are beginning to focus on pre-empting when the VSC period might end, rather than on driving safely, at a time when the racetrack is meant to be neutralised.
Ferrari marks 11 years of disappointment
McLaren admits its Suzuka tyre selection was “wrong”
Despite the many management changes over recent years, this might be peak McLaren. Rumour has it that McLaren’s odd allocation of tyres for the Japanese Grand Prix is down to the fact that it forgot to submit its choice to Pirelli in time. Gil de Ferran insists that it was a deliberate decision, even though it’s clearly wrong. Wut? 🤔
Formula 1’s first, and chaotic, use of the safety car
I had no idea that this was the first time a safety car was used during a Formula 1 race. It puts some modern controversies around race results into perspective!
When did Formula 1 first use the safety car? If your answer revolves around an introduction during the middle of the 1992 season, and first used in the Brazilian round early in ’93, then you’re wrong.
And we’re not even referring to the F1 statisticians’ favourite anomaly that the Indianapolis 500 was – for a time – part of the world championship. There was one occasion before its modern-day introduction that the safety car, or pace car as it was known, was employed. The 1973 Canadian Grand Prix, 45 years ago. And given the experience, it’s little wonder the concept was then dropped for near enough two decades.
Another burned bridge could drive Alonso to Nascar
This opinion piece from Dieter Rencken on how Fernando Alonso has destroyed his own F1 career contains an insight on the fate of his team bosses that I wasn’t aware of before.
Every F1 team boss Alonso has driven for save Paul Stoddart (who owned Minardi, and thus could not be fired), lost his job during Alonso’s tenure with that team: Renault’s Flavio Briatore (also his manager), Ferrari’s Stefano Domenicali and Marco Mattiacci, McLaren’s Martin Whitmarsh, Ron Dennis and Eric Boullier. One could also add the names of more than a few senior engineers to this roll call.
It’s quite extraordinary that even Alonso’s heavily-hyped potential move to IndyCar could be thwarted by his own past behaviour.