The legacy of refuelling

Some people had decided in advance that scrapping it was a bad idea, and have used the relatively pedestrian Bahrain Grand Prix as definitive evidence that they’re right. But one race is far too soon to judge. And as I pointed out in the previous article, there was actually more overtaking than normal.

It is no secret that F1 has a bit of an overtaking problem. The amount of overtaking has declined steadily throughout its history, and nose-dived in 1994 when refuelling was introduced in the modern era. In the intervening decade-and-a-half, the amount of overtaking has been relatively stable at this low level.

For me, the biggest legacy of refuelling has been to gift seven World Championships to a driver who isn’t particularly good at wheel-to-wheel racing, but transformed “overtaking into the pit lane” (i.e. gaining positions just by being in the pit lane at the right time) into the most important aspect of modern-day grand prix racing.

It is often argued that this “strategy” element adds an important dimension to the racing. The argument goes that what is lost in terms of on-track action is gained in terms of strategic intrigue.

This may have been true in the early days of refuelling, when strategists were still finding their feet with the new rules. But over time, it became clear what worked and what didn’t.

Armed with 15 years’ worth of data, teams had their strategies worked out by computers to the extent that there was one clear optimal strategy, and the race was won or lost on whether your first stop was made on lap 17 or made on lap 18. More often than not, after the first stop, it was clear how the rest of the race would play out, and the whole spectacle usually settled down.

The powers that be concocted increasingly contrived ways to re-inject a strategic element into the racing, but it stopped working. We reached the ridiculous situation where cars were qualifying on race fuel loads, which still did little to avoid the harsh reality that there is one optimal strategy.

How to re-introduce strategy while keeping purists happy

For me, there is far too much talk about “the show”. F1 is not a show. It is a sport. As far as I’m concerned, if you want to see a show, you should go to the pantomime. Todd on the latest Formula 1 Blog podcast said it best: “Jim Clark didn’t take part in a show. He took part in a race.”

Yet, with the obsession with making F1 more entertaining, the rules have constantly been tinkered with. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t, and the powers that be have to tread a fine line. They must make the sport more appealing to people who, truth be told, aren’t really interested in F1, while keeping the purists happy.

F1 is special because it is, at its core, about finding the fastest driver in the fastest car. Everything else is tinsel. Some of the new rules actively go against this attempt to find the fastest.

Look at the obsession with strategy. Look at attempts at mixing up the grid. The current tyre rules are among the most unpure in F1 today.

Forcing drivers to use two different types of compounds achieves nothing for anyone except Bridgestone. And I am yet to work out what is achieved by the new rule forcing drivers to start the race on the same tyres they qualified on. What does it prove? Do we tie one hand behind the back of footballers to “spice up the show” there? It is ridiculous.

Yet, all the talk is to introduce a mandatory two stops. That is certainly what Martin Whitmarsh implied on the BBC’s coverage last weekend. The idea sends a shiver down my spine. And quite how it is supposed to spice up the action is beyond me. Just now the optimal strategy appears to be a one-stop. Now they want to enforce a two-stop strategy? It’s difficult to see the scope for spiced-up strategy action here.

But I can think of a way of re-introducing the strategy element while keeping the purists happy: get rid of the mandatory tyre change. This would blow wide open the possibility of a no-stop strategy, thereby potentially reducing the predictability of the current situation. Sure, Bridgestone will be unhappy — but they are leaving the sport anyway so there is no point in making them happy.

Aerodynamics

The decline in overtaking pre-dates 1994. It has been clear for years that it is not as easy for F1 drivers in F1 cars to overtake as it perhaps should be. There are plenty of pet theories as to why this might be. The ones that get the most attention are the ones that are put forward by Bernie Ecclestone and the FIA, as they are the most powerful people in F1. But of course, they have their own agendas.

The FIA and Bernie Ecclestone have long blamed modern aerodynamics for the lack of overtaking. The received wisdom has become that aerodynamic grip is bad news if you want overtaking, and that the emphasis should be more on mechanical grip.

I was very interested to see James Allen write about what Frank Dernie thinks about this — that’s it’s a load of old cobblers. I have felt for a while that the argument that aerodynamics damage the racing does not hold water. On a Renault podcast a couple of years ago, Pat Symonds pointed out that the races that have the most overtaking, as everyone knows, are wet races. In the wet, aerodynamic grip is ramped up, and mechanical grip plummets.

When you think about it, it’s so right. It does amaze me that, in the face of so much hard evidence to the contrary, people still blame aerodynamics for the poor racing. I have come to the conclusion that many people’s views on the overtaking problem are shaped largely by fashion and spin rather than the evidence.

Speaking personally, I love seeing what sorts of devices teams come up with. We have all been fascinated by McLaren’s “F-duct” (even though it seems to have done them “F-all” good). Neutering these sorts of areas is the first step on the slippery slope towards spec chassis. And then it just wouldn’t be F1 any more.

I am not totally averse to restricting the cars though. Formula 1 is, after all, a formula — it always has been.

I am no engineer, but it strikes me that F1 cars are simply too fast to allow for much overtaking. In particular, the brakes on F1 cars are so good today that there is little opportunity for a driver to perform an outbraking manoeuvre. With such small braking zones, the scope just isn’t there in the same way it might have been in the past. Is somehow reducing the power of the brakes a viable option?

The points system

Bernie Ecclestone has also sought to blame the points system for the lack of overtaking, and the system has accordingly been tweaked. I personally think there is something in this. The points system rewards conservatism.

Think about instances where a driver attempting to overtake faces a 50-50 situation (or, more accurately, a ⅓-⅓-⅓ situation). By this I mean that there is a ⅓ chance that a clean pass will be made and a position will be gained, a ⅓ chance that an attempt will be made but will fail, and a ⅓ that the move will go wrong and end in a crash. (Obviously this is a major simplification of the real-life scenario, but I think this “50-50″ thought experiment still underlines an interesting point.)

Under last year’s scoring system, for a driver in second place trying to overtake the leader, this “⅓-⅓-⅓” situation would lead to an expected gain of… -2 points. Under the new points system, the expectation is -3⅔ (although as a percentage of the winner’s points haul, this is better). No wonder drivers can’t overtake. It’s not in their interests to even try unless they are practically left an open door.

This was the core reason why I was in fact, contrary to the fashion, in favour of Bernie’s proposed “medals” system. Then, attempting to gain a position would be unambiguously advantageous.

The circuits

However, I think there would be much more to be gained in ensuring that circuits are more challenging and provide more in the way of opportunities to overtake. Nothing is certain. After all, Suzuka is normally entertaining, but produced a bit of a stinker last year. Sometimes it just doesn’t happen.

But we all know that certain circuits, in general, produce better racing than others. I really do struggle to think of any grand prix held at Interlagos that was boring. But I know not to expect much action at, say, Valencia or Shanghai. Or Bahrain for that matter.

We know this because teams and drivers will often turn up a circuit and say, “there is only a certain place you can overtake, and it’s here”. Adrian Newey, Sam Michael and Martin Whitmarsh are all in agreement. As the Williams technical director said:

You’ve got to ask yourself, why do you go to a race such as Barcelona where no one overtakes, and then take exactly the same cars to Monza, Montreal or Hockenheim and you get lots of overtaking.

And the McLaren team principal said:

You only need to do simple statistical analysis and look at where the overtaking moves are If, say, we race on 18 circuits with 350 corners, then 90 per cent of overtaking moves in a year would happen at just 10 corners… The fact that overtaking is focused on such a small number of corners clearly demonstrates that it’s circuit-dependent.

Ferrari and Renault went to Valencia in 2008 proclaiming that they know from their simulators that there would be little in the way of overtaking. Ferrari even based a fundamental decision about their engine on this prediction. And they were right.

But Bernie will not entertain the suggestion that the circuits are to blame. This is because, unlike the effort made by drivers or the aerodynamics or the strategy, this is the area that he is responsible for. And he doesn’t want to take responsibility for it.

The effect of adding a new slow, narrow, bumpy, twisty section that looks as though it was almost designed to prevent overtaking was predicted before the race began. Quite why the organisers of the grand prix thought it would be a good idea is beyond me.

GP2 world feed commentator Will Buxton saw the writing on the wall, and was left exasperated by the negative effect this different circuit configuration had on the GP2 racing. He predicted a similar negative effect on F1, and it transpired that he was right.

What else is Bernie to blame for?

While I confess that it is a bit too easy to lay the blame on Bernie Ecclestone for the boring race in Bahrain, there is another core part of F1 that he is responsible for, which led to a dull spectacle being played out in our living rooms last Sunday. But that is what I will deal with in another article in the near future.

It is also special because it has now comprehensively replaced Suzuka as the proper place to settle a World Championship, particularly due to its useful time slot. It is on prime time on European television. That is another unique aspect of Brazil, due to the lack of North American races this year.

So it was most fitting that Jenson Button managed to seal the deal in Interlagos, even when it seemed further out of his grasp than ever. A disastrous qualifying session sent us off the scent. The only saving grace was that Vettel’s was almost as bad. But his main rival Barrichello was on pole at his home race.

Unfortunately for Barrichello, he never gets any good luck at Interlagos, even when he is doing well. I will never forget the tragedy of his car breaking down in 1999 while he looked like he could win the race driving for Stewart. His bad luck struck again.

After a strong first stint which he led with relatively little challenge, he somehow managed to lose the plot by failing to push hard enough at the start of his second stint, handing the lead to Mark Webber. Later in the race came his tangle with Lewis Hamilton, which resulted in a puncture for Barrichello.

(Apparently Lewis Hamilton can’t go to Interlagos without having an eventful time. Hats off to him for ploughing his way up to a 3rd place finish from 17th on the grid.)

In normal circumstances, therefore, we would normally be talking about Mark Webber’s fabulous win. And Pink Peril was right to point it out in the comments to my previous article. Mark Webber did a great job — the one person who managed to do well in both qualifying and the race.

He certainly had a better weekend than the Red Bull driver who needed it, Vettel. It was suspected that Red Bull would do well thanks to the “testing” Webber was able to do at Suzuka. Sadly we didn’t see much of Webber’s race because the television cameras were more focussed on the Championship protagonists.

As for the Championship winner, Jenson Button, I would say he had the race of his season — possibly even the race of his life. It really is as though his bad qualifying performance gave him the kick up the backside he needed. I read one story today which said that after his poor qualifying, he texted his mum to say, “Don’t worry mum, we’re going to kick some butt.” She replied, “Good, go and kick some butt.”

It was as though a barrier had been passed. Button was no longer defending his lead, as he had been since the start of the season. The tide had turned so far that he now had to attack to win. And attack he did!

His aggressive and ballsy driving was captivating to watch. He was already 9th by the end of lap one. Once the Safety Car period was over, he was ready to line up Romain Grosjean, and in the process took a risk by going round the outside. I thought Grosjean did a solid job when racing side-by-side for two or three corners against Button. Button put a lot of faith in the inexperienced Grosjean not to do something silly. But both came out of the fight looking good.

Within a lap, Button got past Kazuki Nakajima in a rather risky move at the Senna S. Several laps later, also into the Senna S, he finally got past Kamui Kobayashi who was in his first race. After that, as the pitstop strategies shook out, Button found himself looking good.

There has been some criticism of Kobayashi’s driving, particularly weaving in the braking zones. Certainly he pushed it too far later on in the race when he was involved in a high-speed accident with Nakajima. But his defensive driving against Button impressed me and suggests that Kobayashi has promise, even though he wasn’t particularly good in GP2 (like Nakajima).

While there was some decent racing going on for most of the race, the majority of the action came on the first lap which was rather crazy. My theory is that they just decided to do a Wacky Races thing because it was on prime time.

First there was the accident which brought an end to the races of Adrian Sutil, Jarno Trulli and Fernando Alonso. Alonso was so placid about it that the BBC’s commentators did not even notice him at first. He just trudged nonchalantly into his lift. I sense that he really has just been going through the motions, awaiting his big chance in a red car before exerting himself once again.

Little wonder Alonso went by unnoticed, because Jarno Trulli was running up to Sutil and gesticulated in quite a threatening manner. I am struggling to remember the last time I saw a driver so angry. It looked like it was going to turn into this sort of moment!

I am struggling to see what Trulli was so worked up about. Maybe Sutil could have left Trulli some more room, but I think Trulli was optimistic trying to overtake him there anyway. And it is not as if Sutil drove into Trulli. In fact, before Trulli loses control of his car you can see Sutil clearly make an attempt to steer away from Trulli to give him more space.

It was a racing incident in my book. But the accident that resulted was quite a high-speed one, which I guess is why Trulli was so rattled.

Then there was the pitlane fire, when Heikki Kovalainen drove off with the fuel hose still attached. It wasn’t Kovalainen’s fault — he was instructed to leave, but the fuel hose was still attached.

I really am confused as to why we get so many more of these incidents these days. I can’t remember ever seeing a driver leaving with his fuel hose still attached until Jenson Button did it at Imola in 2006. Since then there have been several, from Christijan Albers (who was effectively sacked for it), to Massa in Singapore last year and Alguersuari in Singapore this year, to Kovalainen now. And I’m sure there are one or two more that have slipped my mind.

The increasing frequency of these incidents is quite alarming, particularly when so much attention was given to Ferrari’s pit lane incidents in 2008. Surely teams and drivers must be more aware than ever of the possibility, and it is just bizarre that it keeps on happening over and over again now.

Massive, massive kudos to Kimi Räikkönen for driving through the fire which resulted from Kovalainen’s premature pit box exit. The fuel was more or less being sprayed into his face, and flames briefly exploded all around him. Yet he kept his foot down and kept driving.

After the race, he said his eyes were still burning! Yet he plodded on. As far as I’m concerned he could have been blinded by that sort of thing. He must have huge balls. And people say he doesn’t have motivation.

One last thing to mention — Robert Kubica. He finished 2nd, his best result of the season, after starting 8th. He had a great restart when the Safety Car pulled in — he was right on top of Nico Rosberg and passed as soon as he could. I am sorry that Kubica has not been able to show more of his talent this year. I hope Renault can build him the car he deserves.

Next we head to the brand new circuit in Abu Dhabi. The last time the Championship was decided before the final race of the season was in 2005. Then we were treated to one of the best Grands Prix there has ever been, the breathtaking 2005 Japanese Grand Prix. Maybe the same end-of-term atmosphere can spice up Abu Dhabi, which aside from the gimmicky pitlane exit looks like it will be another bland Tilke operation.

I have to admit that I wasn’t expecting Button to seal it in Interlagos, especially after his poor grid position. So I must confess that I hadn’t really factored in the possibility when I planned my week ahead! So unfortunately, a more in-depth analysis will have to wait for a few days.

However, what I will say just now is that after the way Jenson Button drove in Brazil, he was fully deserving of what he achieved. It was as though he woke up on Sunday deciding that he would be World Champion come what may.

He was aggressive and ballsy — the things everyone was saying he’d forgotten to be in the second half of the season. He pulled off some of the best overtaking moves there have been all season and in my view was seriously impressive.

It is never good when a driver wins a Championship while not winning a race. It is a bit of an anti-climax. But in this case it didn’t feel like a damp squib. Jenson Button may not have won the race, but it was no leisurely drive to 5th place. He fought for it and as such took the Championship in style.

Congratulations must also go to the Brawn team. As was widely predicted, they faded away as the season progressed and they got swallowed up somewhat in the development battle. But the fact is that they had the fastest car, and one with bullet-proof reliability at that.

Considering how much their backs were against the wall last winter, you have to say that the Constructors’ Championship has gone to the best team. And the team spirit shines through. No doubt there is an intense and special bond between team members because of the difficulties they went through last year. This probably made them stronger and gave them the resolve to fight as hard as they did.

Congratulations to Jenson Button and Brawn GP.

The first unexpected event was a short, sharp downpour coming just minutes before the scheduled start. The start–finish straight was now soaking wet, leaving the drivers stranded on the wrong tyres. The start was delayed by ten minutes. The rain stopped as quickly as it started, and the sun shone.

It looked as though the track might have been drying enough. But the river of water was running down the Senna S, making the first complex of corners tricky throughout the race. Intermediates were the right tyre to go on at first, to the disadvantage of Robert Kubica who started on dry tyres, had to pit after the formation lap and was never in contention again.

For the leaders, the start didn’t shuffle things up too much. Hamilton appeared to get a poor start, but luckily Kovalainen was his only main challenger. The McLaren team mate gave Hamilton an easy time through turn 1 and Hamilton stayed in position 4.

As the track dried out on lap 10, Massa pitted for dry tyres. The following lap all the other front-runners followed suit. But by pitting earlier, Sebastian Vettel and Fernando Alonso brought themselves into contention. By this stage, Hamilton had found himself in 6th position, behind the Force India of Fisichella.

The Italian was soon dispensed with, not just by Hamilton but by several other cars. But with Hamilton needing to finish in 5th position, things were pretty tense. It was clear that Massa had the race under control and practically had the win in the bag. The Championship situation could hardly have been closer.

Vettel’s pitstop strategy was out of sequence with the other leaders, which threw another uncertainty into the mix. Overall, though, Vettel’s strategy meant that Hamilton’s “true” position was effectively a stable fourth, which would have secured Hamilton the Championship no bother. To tell the truth, the race was becoming rather bland.

Then the rain came back. It was another spell of rain that was difficult to read. Seemingly it was pretty heavy at one point in the pitlane, but only for a short period of time. The rest of the circuit didn’t seem to be affected as badly. The front-runners came in for dry tyres, but Timo Glock was the most notable person electing to stay on the dry tyres. This propelled the Toyota driver ahead of Hamilton, placing the Brit in 5th place, back on a knife-edge.

At first, it seemed as though Glock’s decision had paid off. The drivers running intermediates were not having as much of an advantage over the grooved tyres as may have been expected and Glock looked safe in 4th.

Meanwhile, Hamilton had his mirrors full of Vettel. McLaren are usually seen to have an advantage in damp conditions, but it has to be said that Toro Rosso have even more of an advantage. Vettel made life very difficult for Hamilton in the final few laps, and when the fancied German passed Hamilton it looked like it was game over for the Brit. Hamilton was now in 6th place, with Massa still easily on for the win.

As Massa came across the finish line, he was World Champion. If memory serves me correctly, at the start of the previous lap Glock still had at least a ten second advantage over Vettel, who in turn was a second or two ahead of Hamilton. Glock’s sector 1 time was slow, but not slow enough. But obviously the dry tyres caved in through the twisty sector two. If you’re struggling in the wet, that is where you will suffer the most — and boy did Glock suffer.

At the end of sector 2, on the last slow corner of the circuit, Vettel passed Glock, and Hamilton followed soon afterwards. In the most incredible of fashions, Hamilton had won the Championship in the final sector — indeed, in the final corner.

It didn’t take long for the conspiracy theorists to suggest that Glock backed off to let Hamilton past. But I see no explanation for why Glock would do this. It seems to me that the dry tyres simply gave up the ghost. His team mate Jarno Trulli, also on dry tyres, posted a near-identical lap time on the final lap, suggesting that intermediates were the right tyres to use on the final lap.

But so unexpected was Glock’s sudden drop in performance that personnel in the Ferrari garage were still celebrating several seconds after Hamilton had crossed the finish line in 5th position. The moment when a calmer head came across to the group and said “no, no” was broadcast on the FOM world feed. It was a painful moment as you saw the smirks drop off their faces.

Seemingly, Felipe Massa had already been told he was World Champion. You absolutely have to feel sorry for Massa today. He did everything he needed to do in Interlagos, and his World Championship was snatched away at the last possible moment.

But hats off to Felipe Massa who proved that he is a good loser. He approached the situation with absolute dignity. The podium ceremony was surreal, with the national anthems of Brazil and Italy blasting out in recognition of a Felipe Massa–Ferrari win. But Massa hadn’t won. He’d lost. His face said it all. But he approached the edge of the podium to greet his home crowd in a most dignified manner. He was philosophical and respectful during the press conference.

It was a partisan crowd in Interlagos, but you wouldn’t expect anything else. Some complained about the fans jeering, but as long as it is not malicious I see no harm. It is only to be expected that Brazilians would want to see a Brazilian be crowned World Champion in Brazil. I got the impression that it was a more playful, pantomime-style atmosphere and I am sure it would be similar if it were a bunch of British fans in the grandstand at a championship decider in Britain.

All-in-all, it was quite an incredible race — perhaps the most hair-raising end to a Championship I have ever seen. The circumstances were so bizarre that it seemed as though the post-race atmosphere was subdued. Spiritual atmosphere was matched by meteorological atmosphere as the heavens had opened in the most spectacular way and the podium ceremony was held more or less in complete darkness under heavy clouds. But I doubt Hamilton will let the atmosphere get in the way of his first World Drivers Championship.

What we can say though is that we are heading towards the final race of the season with Lewis Hamilton having slightly extended his lead. Ominously, that is exactly the same lead he had going into the final race last year — 7 points. On paper, it should be easy enough for him to simply finish 4th or above so that he can wrap up the title. But what if he gets the jitters?

Today we saw the calmer, more conservative Hamilton. It’s true that he didn’t ever have to go on the attack. Unlike in Fuji, he got a fine start. Besides, his advantage over Ferrari at Shanghai has been clear to see all weekend. So there was no reason for Hamilton to risk it and in the end he cruised to an easy victory with a 15 second margin.

That advantage might not exist in Brazil. Ferrari have won the previous two races at Interlagos, and Felipe Massa in particular tends to perform well on his home patch. What Hamilton needs to do is make sure he doesn’t get spooked if Ferrari perform well like they did last year.

There is a slight debate surrounding Ferrari’s team orders. Kimi Räikkönen had the advantage over Massa for the whole race, but mysteriously slowed down for a few laps towards the end of the race to let Massa pass before returning to his normal pace. The Finn knowingly chuckled when asked about it during the press conference.

The hysteria surrounding team orders is nonsensical. All teams use team orders of some sort, it is a normal part of motor racing and has been for decades. The only reason team orders got a bad name was because of the botched switchover at the 2002 Austrian Grand Prix, which was quite rightly criticised. But that incident was so offensive because it took the supporters for mugs. Supporters know what was going on today though, and it was reasonable for Ferrari to ask Räikkönen to move over, allowing Massa to score two extra points which could come in very handy.

Meanwhile, outside bet Robert Kubica has dropped out of the championship hunt. I feel that he has been the best driver this season and he certainly deserves to win the title one day. I do hope he finds himself in a good enough car in the near future. In the meantime, it was always slightly surreal that Kubica was so close to the championship leaders for so long, and it must be admitted that he has done so mainly by hoovering up the points fumbled by McLaren and Ferrari rather than outright pace.

Kubica’s weekend got off to a bad start when he only managed to qualify 12th. As always, Kubica fought a strong race, but could only manage 6th just behind his team mate Nick Heidfeld. One day.

Unfortunately, there are almost no other talking points following today’s race. It wasn’t really worth the 7am start. That’s tilkedromes for ya.

However, the problems of the German Grand Prix were much more major than usual. And it represents what I consider to be the second large failure of FOM’s infrastructure in the past twelve months.

What happened in Germany

Problems with the live timing system became apparent when commentators across the world exclaimed to their viewers that Heikki Kovalainen was dropping down the order, but they couldn’t explain why. Soon enough commentators realised that this was an error, as Kovalainen was still running in third position with no problems whatsoever.

Each Formula 1 car carries a transponder which uniquely identifies each car. At various points on the circuit there is a beam which receives a signal from the transponder as the car passes through. This is the equipment that enables FOM to measure lap times to a thousandth of a second as well as car speeds. This equipment also records when cars enter the pitlane and how much time they spend in the pitlane.

What apparently happened is that the transponder on Kovalainen’s car failed. This is not the first time that has happened. Seemingly (and this is speculation on my part) once the people at FOM realised what was going on, Kovalainen was manually re-inserted into his actual race position — not before the legend ‘STOPPED’ (meaning “stopped on the circuit”) was displayed. This process seemed to continue for the rest of the race. A few times I spotted him slipping down the order a couple of places before magically re-appearing in his original position.

Apart from the initial scare of watching Kovalainen tumble down the order for the first time, this was a bearable issue. However, it was not the only problem to afflict live timing that day.

During the first round of pitstops, only three drivers were recorded as having entered the pitlane when in fact almost every driver had made a stop. This wreaked havoc as it was impossible to tell who had taken a pitstop and who had not. To make matters worse, the pitstops were subsequently manually added over a period of several laps. Cars were shown in the red text with the words ‘IN PIT’ which normally signify that a driver is taking a pitstop. However, they were not in the pitlane.

At this stage of the race Radio 5 Live’s pitlane reporter Holly Samos said that the teams were finding the failure of the live timing system very frustrating. It was very possible that the failure of this extremely important source of information could potentially have affected the race itself.

Captions on the television also went a bit awry for a short while at this stage, with the classification being displayed without the time or pitstop strategy information that normally accompanies it. For a few laps every driver except for Hamilton was shown as a being a lap down until this too was (seemingly) manually rectified.

The lap chart — which can still be accessed by clicking on the live timing link on this page — is a bit of a mess. Here, not only was Kovalainen largely missing from the chart, so too was Kimi Räikkönen.

The positions of the two Finnish drivers were not updated lap-by-lap as they should be. Instead, they jump about with their position updated at seemingly arbitrary points of the race. Gaps are left in the chart where they were supposed to be.

All-in-all, it was a bit of a shambles on the timing front during the German Grand Prix.

The other major failure

This comes off the back of the problems experienced in the 2007 Brazilian Grand Prix. Here, the timing systems were fine (as far as I am aware at least), but the weather equipment was playing up.

I and others had pointed out that the temperature was extraordinarily high at Interlagos. At its peak, the track temperature was recorded at 65 °C. Looking back, it seemed a bit fishy. Ted Kravitz pointed out, “That would’ve melted even my trusty Dr Martens boots.”

The track temperature is often of interest, but it is not usually a vital aspect of FOM’s offering. However, this time the temperature measurements were later to have a pivotal bearing on the race result in this, the final race of the championship. The Drivers Championship was almost decided by FOM’s temperature gauge.

In what became known as the ‘cool fuel’ saga, the BMW and Williams teams were deemed to have breached article 6.5.5 of the technical regulations which states that “no fuel on board the car may be more than 10 degrees centigrade below ambient temperature”.

A cooler temperature in the fuel would allow teams to refuel cars more quickly — and, indeed, fit more fuel into the car. The BMW and Williams teams were both accused (by FIA technical delegate Jo Bauer) of filling their cars with fuel which was more than 10 degrees cooler than the ambient temperature which was recorded at 35 °C.

There then followed the revelation that the rules do not state how the ambient temperature should be recorded. Should the fuel temperature be measured against the ambient temperature recorded by FOM’s equipment? Or should it be measured against the information supplied by the FIA’s meteorologists, Météo-France?

Météo-France recorded the ambient temperature as being “a few degrees lower” than FOM’s measurement. Meanwhile, Bridgestone recorded the track temperature as being 48 °C as opposed to FOM’s 65 °C.

Clearly, FOM’s temperatures were way off. Ted Kravitz speculated that their temperature sensor may have been placed in the sun — a mega no-no in meteorology. Williams technical director Sam Michael furthermore pointed out that the equipment had not been calibrated for a full seven years and that it had been clear to all the teams that FOM’s weather information was not to be trusted as early as 2005!

That just strikes me as complete laziness on FOM’s part. Coupled with the woes we saw in Germany which frustrated the teams, it is clear that, unless things change, FOM’s faulty equipment could one day alter the direction of a race or even a championship in a big way. Here’s hoping FOM look into the technical issues and try to avoid a repeat of what happened at Hockenheim and Interlagos.

The thing is that, even though I am in Britain, I live a long way away from Silverstone. I don’t exactly live in the sticks, but the central belt of Scotland where I reside is hundreds of miles away from Silverstone. The British Grand Prix is not my grand prix. I’ve never been in a position to attend it. And I doubt I would be in the future. It simply involves too much upheaval.

Of course I would one day love to attend a Grand Prix and would pull out all the stops when I decide to do so. But would Silverstone be my first choice? Probably not. Travelling all the way to Silverstone would only be marginally more convenient than travelling to, say, Magny-Cours, Catalunya or Hockenheim.

Once I decide to spend such a significant amount of time travelling somewhere, I really may as well make a holiday of it or something rather than going along just to spend a blustery weekend in a crumbling, roofless Silverstone grandstand. It is notable that the one grand prix I have actually seriously considered attending is the Hungarian Grand Prix. I’ve never looked into travelling to Silverstone.

So my “home” grand prix means very little to me. When home is hundreds of miles away it ceases to have any meaning. My affinity with Silverstone is zilch. Of course I appreciate it as a circuit, just as I appreciate any other circuit. But I wouldn’t shed any more tears for the British Grand Prix’s loss than I would for the removal of, for instance, the Belgian Grand Prix.

As such, I can only shrug my shoulders for the prospect that the British Grand Prix is under serious threat. So I am not particularly bothered about the proposed move to Donington. I suspect most people are apprehensive about it because they suspect that Donington will never be ready in time for 2010 and therefore the announced move is little more than a proxy for the removal of the British GP.

Clearly Donington needs a lot of work to be brought up to the standards expected of a modern F1 circuit. But it is a nice circuit with plenty of history. People talk about Silverstone’s history as though it’s the only place that has history. But Donington has it as well.

People talk about Donington as though it is a pigsty. But in recent years it has been the venue for the British MotoGP. MotoGP is not Formula 1, of course, but it’s not that much smaller. Of course Donington needs work, but as I pointed out in my previous post so does Silverstone (certainly in the eyes of Bernie Ecclestone).

Access is also said to be a problem. But it handles MotoGP okay (though I’ve heard the traffic was pretty bad this year). It also plays host to the rather large Download music festival. And it’s not as though Silverstone has been free of traffic problems over the years.

There are many who also point out that Silverstone is by no means the F1 circuit with the worst facilities, with Interlagos frequently being cited as a terrible venue. However, this ignores the reality that Formula 1 simply needs a venue in South America even if that venue has to be a total dump. If F1 is to have any pretence of being a World Championship, it can’t afford to ignore this part of the world, especially as it has brought us so many great drivers over the decades. Europe, meanwhile, has grands prix falling out of its pockets. F1 can probably afford to lose the British Grand Prix. It certainly can’t afford to lose the Brazilian Grand Prix.

Where the Donington story gets fishy is the idea that the upgrades will be finished within two years. And that £100 million will somehow be raised by a fan-powered debenture scheme. Then again, you could just as easily ask where Silverstone would get the money it needs to make its improvements.

I think the harsh reality is that Britain now has no venue that is capable of holding an F1 grand prix. That certainly seems to be the view of Bernie Ecclestone. If the best hope of retaining the British Grand Prix is to throw our weight behind Donington, it might be the only way to go. Whether fans will feel this way to the extent of £100 million collectively remains to be seen.

The mystery of Kimi Räikkönen

Clive wrote a post last month revealing his “gnawing doubt” about Kimi Räikkönen.

Why does he throw it off the road so needlessly sometimes? Why has he not blown Massa into the weeds yet? Why does he look so determined at one race and then apathetic at the next? It is all very well blaming it on his enigmatic personality but that explains nothing. The fact is that he is completely unpredictable and it is probably this that makes me doubt him.

There’s no doubt that Räikkönen blows hot and cold. Just look at the first half of 2007 compared to the end of the season. At the start, Kimi was rather unspectacular — almost anonymous. But as the season finale drew closer he became hyper-motivated, more flawless and quicker. The fact that he overcame a 17 point deficit in the final two rounds just says it all.

But now he is looking a bit more average again. In Australia he seemingly couldn’t keep his concentration, spectacularly throwing it off the road needlessly a number of times. In Bahrain and Turkey, too, we saw little of his foot-to-the-floor attitude we saw towards the end of last season. Clive asks, “Must we admit that Massa is on a par with our hero?”

I think it’s a bit much to say that Räikkönen and Massa are on a par with each other. But unquestionably Räikkönen has not become the race-winning machine some people expected him to become five or six years ago.

My own theory is that Räikkönen is genuinely great. But we became too used to Michael Schumacher’s utter dominance. When he retired, we expected someone to immediately fill a Schumacher-sized gap. It doesn’t happen that way.

Schumacher was exceptional in that he was in close contention for the Championship in almost every year of his F1 career (1999 being an exception due to his broken leg, 2005, 1996 and 1993 due to abnormally inferior equipment). No-one before him can claim that level of dominance, and I see no reason to expect anyone after him to claim it either. Not for a long time, anyway.

The mystery of Felipe Massa

Ah, for the days before Bahrain. It was all so simple then. Massa can’t handle F1 without traction control and Ferrari are looking to replace him ASAP. Not so fast. In the subsequent three races the Brazilian has mounted an incredible fightback under extreme pressure. Dodgy drivers don’t score 28 points from 3 races.

But I’m not a convert. I still think Massa is a sub-par driver who certainly does not deserve a Ferrari seat — at least not with an “equal number one” status. As has been pointed out by plenty of people, this year’s calendar flatters Massa. Turkey has moved to an earlier slot, meaning that most of Massa’s favourite circuits are bunched together.

In fact, this year he has done worse than last year. Last year he won in Spain whereas he could only come second behind his team mate this year. In 2007, Massa scored 37 points at the five circuits where Massa has managed to score 28 this year.

Of the Massa-friendly tracks, only Interlagos remains. Given that it is at the end of the season, Massa will probably be well out of contention by then, and may have to give way to assist Räikkönen’s championship hopes.

Monaco comes next, and Massa’s record there is not so glittering — a sole third place from last year being his best result in the principality. I might find myself eating humble pie here, but I doubt it. It will be business as usual from this Sunday.

The mystery of Lewis Hamilton

The last time I wrote about Lewis Hamilton, it was on the back of a lacklustre Bahrain weekend. Since then he has mounted something of a fightback, with strong performances in Spain and Turkey. But the Turkish Grand Prix yet again brought to the fore that issue that Hamilton appears to have with tyre management.

After the race it was announced by Bridgestone that Lewis Hamilton’s tyres were found to be at risk of internal delamination. Therefore, for safety reasons, McLaren opted to put him on a three stop strategy, thereby minimising the amount of time spent on his tyres, particularly the softs.

I have to take my hat off to Lewis Hamilton for managing to make the best of a bad situation. There seems to be some confusion over the optimality of his strategy. Clive seems to think it was advantageous to be on a three-stopper, but I don’t understand his explanation. He says, “that the three-stop plan was the only way for [McLaren] to stay with the Ferraris and it had nothing to do with tires”. But the explanation for this, as Clive himself goes on to explain, has everything to do with tyres. And if it was the only way for McLaren to go, why was Kovalainen on a two stop strategy?

Mike Gascoyne on Maurice Hamilton’s Inside Line podcast said that the two and three stop strategies are actually equally optimal at Turkey according to the simulations. But if that is so it doesn’t explain why Hamilton was the only person in the entire field to opt for the three stop strategy. If they were really equal, would not more people try it out if only to try and overtake their rivals ‘in the pitlane’?

I conclude that if Hamilton’s tyres could withstand it, he would have gone for a two-stopper. So he had a compromised strategy in Turkey. In this context, Hamilton had a stormer of a race. Even if the three-stopper was his preferred strategy, it was a great fight between him and Massa. On live timing it looked captivating as the pair swapped green and purple sectors throughout the race. And on top of it there was even a genuine overtaking move for the lead!

So hats off for the performance. But is it time for Hamilton to get his act into gear when it comes to looking after his tyres? I have been saying this for a while now. All too often now, Hamilton has been thwarted by shot tyres. You can pretty much squarely blame his championship loss on his worn-out tyres.

The debate has been whether or not Bridgestone should cater for Hamilton’s more aggressive driving style. There is something to be said for this. However, Hamilton should really learn the limitations of his equipment and be able to drive on that limit without exceeding it. Is that not what motor racing is about? For a period of time Kimi Räikkönen became known as a car-breaker because his engine went pop a few times. I think a better case can be made for Hamilton being a tyre-ruiner.

We keep on hearing from a certain man who works for ITV that Lewis Hamilton is “Senna-esque”. Senna was known for being able to make dry tyres work in wet conditions. Hamilton is struggling to make dry tyres work in dry conditions. So until he masters this, I’d like to see less of the Senna comparisons.

It seems to me as though the FIA is increasingly determined to stick its nose in everything, constantly bossing the teams and bosses around for no good reason, and ruining the sporting spectacle for the fans at home. All too often the race result is changed hours after the chequered flag is waved. And with the multitude of almost-random grid penalties being handed out race-in race-out they really might as well draw lots to determine the grid order.

There is no need for McLaren to be given a special scrutineer to ensure that Lewis Hamilton and Fernando Alonso are given equal treatment throughout the weekend. Even Fernando Alonso — whose complaints set off the chain of events that led to McLaren getting the extra scrutineer — says that it is completely unnecessary.

There is surely no-one who seriously considers that McLaren would do anything but offer their drivers complete equality — as far as they possibly can — this weekend. For a start, if anything goes wrong with Alonso’s car, there will be no shortage of people ready to suspect the worst and waiting to throw stones at Ron Dennis for it.

But even if McLaren were to ditch their long-standing (and contractually-binding) policy of equality between their two drivers, what business is it of the FIA’s? None whatsoever. McLaren are a private team, and they should be allowed to run their team in whatever way they see fit. Of course, Max Mosley sees it differently.

How interesting, though, that the FIA turned a blind eye to Ferrari’s policy of explicitly favouring one driver over another during the years that Michael Schumacher drove for them. Not only was this Ferrari’s well-known policy, but Ferrari were proud of it. Many today see it as the model by which all modern F1 teams should be run. If the FIA are so worried about equality, why are they not intervene when Michael Schumacher was competing for any of the five World Championships that he won for Ferrari, or for Ferrari’s own six Constructors’ Championships?

As if that wasn’t bad enough, on Friday at Interlagos came news that three drivers had broken a rule that nobody had heard of. Why on earth is there a rule concerning the number of sets of wet tyres a team can use during a practice session?

Quick, fire up the FIA Random Penalty Generator. Because we don’t know where Takuma Sato, Jenson Button or Lewis Hamilton will be on the grid. That’s right, Lewis Hamilton. Given all the criticism the FIA have faced this season, you would think they would be sensible enough to keep their grubby mitts off the championship battle and let the drivers decide the outcome on the track, the way sport should be.

Regular readers of this blog will know that I am not the biggest fan of Lewis Hamilton. But I must sympathise with him and the McLaren team here. Of course, it is fair enough if Lewis Hamilton and the McLaren team have broken a rule. To be frank, it baffles me why Lewis Hamilton needed two sets of tyres when he only did a dozen or so laps. And McLaren (and Honda and Super Aguri) should not be in the sort of situation where they find themselves not knowing the rules.

But this is quite a silly rule that I can’t understand the point of. This probably comes under the FIA’s catch-all “cost cutting” heading, the excuse they give for introducing all of their silliest rules. It is on days like this when I wonder if Formula 1 would not be better just re-writing the rules from scratch.

A good government needs to learn when to leave things alone and treat people as mature adults who can sort things out for themselves. Of course, most governments rather prefer to grab as much power as they can, and the FIA is no different.

Anyway, the Chinese Grand Prix was just the sort of classic race that reminds you why you love F1 (that is, unless you actually hate F1). There is Lewis Hamilton, looking like a dead cert for the championship. Then, in an instant, the all-too-impatient Hamilton makes his first major mistake of the year. And what a mistake. And what a time for it to happen! This is what F1 is all about.

I simply could not believe my eyes when it was happening. First of all there was the fact that Hamilton beached it in a gravel trap — a gravel trap that most people probably did not know existed, given its obscure position on the outside of the pit lane entrance. What an irony, with all of these modern tracks shunning the old-fashioned gravel traps in favour of huge concrete run-off areas, and Lewis Hamilton got stuck in a tiny trap that was barely big enough for him to park in anyway.

There was an amusing moment when James Allen said, “He might not be allowed to get a push here.” Not that this minor quibble has stopped Hamilton from using a crane to get back into the race in the past.

After spending a while trying to persuade the nonplussed Chinese marshals to push him out of the gravel, Hamilton finally gave up. He pulled out his steering wheel, stood up and immediately turned round to look at the marshals in disgust. I wonder what he was trying to say to the marshals?

Don’t you know who I am? I am Britain’s Lewis Hamilton™! I am the greatest rookie ever (apart from Jacques Villeneuve)! Just three races into my career I was already the fifth-best Grand Prix driver in history — imagine how good I must be now! You know, in Europe they know which side their bread is buttered on — I usually get the crane treatment there.

All joking aside though, I actually felt a bit sorry for Hamilton. While he must shoulder the blame for going into the pits too impatiently, the McLaren team were obviously completely off their rocker to leave him out for so long on tyres that were effectively dead.

I was sitting here watching the race, along with Formula1.com’s excellent live timing service. The drop-off in Hamilton’s performance was dramatic. What’s more, it was getting worse. When Räikkönen was catching up with Hamilton, there was a point where Hamilton lost four seconds in two laps. The following lap, having been passed by the Finn, he lost seven seconds in one lap to Alonso.

McLaren say they were waiting to see if it was going to start raining again. But — uncertainty about the weather or not — you simply cannot leave a driver out there when he is losing upwards of seven seconds per lap. I guess it would have been a risk either way, but given the results the team ended up looking a bit stupid. McLaren made a huge error there and it could cost them the championship.

But before all those ITV viewers start sending those angry missives to the McLaren team, here is something to chew on — the dreadful state of the tyres could have been completely down to Hamilton’s over-aggressive driving.

At the start of the race, Hamilton absolutely blitzed away. He just sped off, leaving the others looking a bit silly. It turned out that Hamilton was the silly one. By setting his fastest laps when his car was heaviest with fuel, he completely ruined his tyres. Meanwhile, Räikkönen waited until lap 15 before he started putting his foot down — and those laps put Hamilton’s early ones in the shade. By that time Hamilton’s tyres had been ruined, and the game was up. The full analysis is at F1Fanatic, and it’s fascinating (if you like that sort of thing).

Questions have to be asked overall about the approach that Hamilton and McLaren took to this race. Remember, to secure the championship, Hamilton only needed to finish 5^th. Yet they were taking these risks with the tyres, Hamilton was just impatient to get away from Räikkönen at the start of the race. Then when Räikkönen caught up he wasted his tyres yet again by putting up a fight that he was always going to lose.

So why did he seem so desperate to take so many risks in order to win instead of playing it safe? A lot of people will say that it’s just because of the way Hamilton is. He only wants to win. Maybe so, but his approach only gave him failure.

A lot of people point out the fact that Hamilton is a real racer and a risk-taker, in stark contrast to many other F1 drivers. I can’t help wondering if the other drivers just have wiser, more balanced approaches to their races. if Hamilton learns from this race, perhaps in the future it will be seen as a turning point in Hamilton’s career — when he learned to be conservative like the other drivers.

There is another fascinating thing that I read on F1Fanatic, in the Ben Evans column. I’ve mentioned before about Hamilton not being so good in the wet, although Fuji seemed to put that to bed (if you decide to ignore his dreadful driving behind the Safety Car). But Shanghai has opened it all up again. This was without doubt the worst race of his F1 career so far, and it demonstrated his weakness in the wet. Ben Evans says:

Interestingly, following the European Grand Prix in July a racing acquaintance who ran a Formula Renault team at the same time Hamilton was in the series commented ‘He’s bloody quick, but has no feel for the car in changeable conditions’. Thus it was at the Nürburgring and again appeared to be the case on Sunday.

It was the reverse case for Jenson Button. What a superb drive he put in on Sunday. To get that Honda car into fifth position demonstrates just how good he is in the wet. It is amazing to see — after such a terrible season in a dog of a car — that he could put all that behind him and put in a solid performance. Button has gone up in my estimation a lot this season, particularly since he seems to have put Barrichello in the shade.

Big mention also for Toro Rosso. They really are having a strong end to the season now, and Sebastian Vettel is a revelation. When he moved to Toro Rosso, the joke was that Vettel had scored a point in his first race (for BMW), but by moving to Toro Rosso he was guaranteed to wait 18 months for his next one! Not when Vettel is at the wheel though. What a way to bounce back after his Fuji mishap.

Don’t forget also that Vitantonio Liuzzi scored three points for Toro Rosso as well. All-in-all, a brilliant race for Toro Rosso. I couldn’t help thinking to myself, “Forza Minardi!” Despite Button’s good haul of points, Toro Rosso leapfrogged over Honda in the Constructors’ Championship.

As for the Drivers’ Championship, Hamilton still has the best chance, but obviously it looks as though he has lost a lot of the momentum. Dead cert going into China, a bit shaky going into Brazil. It’s incredible how there seems to be some kind of mystical force that makes sure the championship is usually decided at the final round.

There are a number of mouth-watering possibilities. If any one of the three contenders win, they will thoroughly deserve it.

Hamilton has had a barnstorming début season. He has beaten everyone’s expectations. He has made some amazing overtaking manoeuvres that have made amazing drivers look silly. His qualifying performances have been nothing short of unbelievable. He has rattled Alonso. But, I still doubt that he is truly ready to be World Champion. If conditions at Interlagos are changeable (as they often are), he will be in big danger.

If Alonso wins the World Championship, it would be an equally amazing achievement. A back-to-back triple world champion is not something you see every day. Well, okay, apart from in 2004. But, Alonso would achieve it with two different teams, which is a real rarity. It’s not easy to move teams (and boy, has Alonso’s experience been proof of that!), but Alonso has put all the nonsense behind him and delivered solid results on the track. Also, I would love to see the look on Anthony Hamilton’s face if Alonso wins the Championship!!

But I would be happiest if Räikkönen won the Championship. Yes, I hate Ferrari. And yes, I generally like McLaren. But the conduct of both of McLaren’s drivers this year has put me off them both a bit.

Räikkönen is long overdue a World Championship. It is a long shot. Due to the bumpy nature of Interlagos, McLaren will have the upper hand. Räikkönen will be relying on Alonso getting a bit of the Iberian red mist descending, and crashing himself into Hamilton. Most importantly of all, I would laugh so much if Räikkönen won the Championship. It would be the funniest thing ever. Imagine the protagonists of the whole Championship, Alonso and Hamilton, being gazumped by Räikkönen. They they would both be pissed off with everyone and everything. I might never stop laughing.