UK: pre-qualifying
Exciting,
and stupid, news: idiots in suits (I would guess the same idiots who
decided double points in Abu Dhabi makes sense) have decided that
next year we're going to have standing starts after a safety car.
What
that means is that, instead of what happens now (cars trundle around
behind the safety car then return to racing when it comes in) they'll
line up on the grid. This will offer some exciting new disadvantages,
such as:
The
leading cars may well overheat
It'll
greatly reduce the advantage leading cars rightly enjoy
It'll
increase the chances of a crash
There
are no upsides. Yes, crashes are exciting, but a sport involving
moving at 200mph doesn't need less safety.
Maybe
the FIA has a bet on that it can dream up a different totally mental
rule each year...
In
less idiotic news, Caterham has been sold by Tony Fernandes to a
Swiss/Middle East consortium, which will retain the Caterham name.
Team
principal Cyril
Abiteboul
has left the team and has been replaced, it seems, with Christijan
Albers, a former F1 driver.
The
new consortium has the stated aim of finishing 10th
in the championship. That means either scoring 2 or more points, or
beating Sauber. Realistically, points are probably needed. I think
they're likely to finish last.
It
also emerged that Raikkonen may well retire, according to the man
himself, at the end of his Ferrari contract (end of 2015). It'd be a
shame, and there's still a chance he'll be axed by Ferrari before
that happens.
There
was also a Sky article on the standing re-starts after a safety car,
worth linking to as it's interesting (in a depressing sort of way)
enough to read entirely:
In
essence, Charlie Whiting, race director, has come out strongly in
favour of the proposal for standing re-starts after a safety car from
2015 onwards (most drivers and fans are against). He has some
exciting contradictory opinions including:
he
doesn't know if overtaking is more likely at a standing than a
rolling start (one would hope the race director would pay more
attention than this statement suggests)
it'll
give an opportunity for the person in the second to get into first
(you can debate the merit of this, but it is diametrically opposed to
the notion expressed above that there's no real difference in
overtaking possibilities between standing and rolling starts)
I
especially enjoyed his nonsense about accidents, which I quote:
“Of
course you are more likely, statistically, to have incidents at a
standing start than any other time in the race, but no driver wants
that to happen and no driver will cause it to happen.
“I don’t know if there is any added risk, personally.”
“I don’t know if there is any added risk, personally.”
There's
a statistically higher chance of an accident, but he doesn't know if
there's any added risk? Charlie Whiting, I wish you did my house
insurance. “So, you want to build a hut on the caldera of an active
volcano? Well, there is
a
statistically higher chance of your home being engulfed by a tsunami
of lava, but I'm not sure if there's any added risk. A standard
premium seems appropriate.”
As
well as the points I raised above (which have been noted by just
about everyone not employed by the FIA) one of the comments (by bob,
a chap as sensible as his name suggests) rightly points out that half
the grid might well be covered by marbles, giving a significant
disadvantage to one side.
Oddly,
Whiting's stated the change was an idea (I use the term loosely) by
one of the teams, and that all the teams are 100% behind it. Now, the
100% line might just be because teams don't want to publicly oppose a
rule change, but I doubt he made up the initiative aspect. Who wanted
this? And why? It's bloody stupid.
Moving to the race weekend, the
tyre compounds are medium and hard.
Watched
some of P1. Williams suffered double woe, as Wolff's engine suffered
terminal failure and Massa put his car into the wall at speed,
bringing out the red flag. During practice Rosberg suffered an ERS
issue. When Vettel's had that sort of thing in practice it seems to
recur during the race and lead to a DNF. Not necessarily the case for
Rosberg, but something to consider when betting.
In
P1 Rosberg was fastest by a surprisingly large 0.7s over Hamilton,
who was barely a tenth ahead of Alonso. Ricciardo, Raikkonen and
Vettel followed, with Button, Kvyat, Vergne and Magnussen rounding
out the top 10.
In
P2 Hamilton stopped on-track due to an oil pressure problem with the
engine, which is exactly the same as the issue that Wolff had in the
first session. Vergne also halted on track, as his left front wheel
decided to come off, and Bottas' session ended early when his engine
cover blew apart.
Hamilton
was fastest, two-tenths ahead of Rosberg, who was half a second up
the road from Alonso. Ricciardo and Vettel were next, performing well
on the hard tyre but a bit slow (relatively) on the medium, with
Bottas, Button, Magnussen, Raikkonen and Vergne finishing the top 10.
On
Friday afternoon it looks like Mercedes will once again enjoy a
private duel, but the engine failures of Wolff and Hamilton may make
things unpredictable. Alonso was looking pretty good, including on
the long runs, in practice so he may have a shot at a podium (I'll be
checking that market). Red Bull are also looking much improved from
their Austrian nadir.
Williams
have slid backwards, and Force India were behind a Sauber in P2.
Either Force India are sandbagging greatly or they're going to
struggle here. Lotus continued to have all the handling capacity of
an oil tanker, but Toro Rosso may have a shot at points (if they can
finish).
P3
started wet (although not raining), with most going out on
intermediates. It rained almost immediately, and many had limited or
no running, making the running order not very useful. Alonso and the
Mercedes did no fast laps. For the sake of completeness, here's the
top 10: Vettel, Ricciardo, Maldonado, Grosjean, Sutil, Kvyat,
Magnussen, Button, Bottas and Raikkonen.
The
lack of running also meant Hamilton couldn't make up the time (in the
dry) he lost yesterday.
Weather
for qualifying will be critical. If it's wet, that'll help Red Bull,
and make things harder for the likes of Williams, who don't have a
great chassis. Forecast suggests a likelihood of rain, but how much
and when it falls is impossible to try and guess.
Two
bets I considered were laying either Force India driver to be in the
top 10 (I really don't think they'll do well in qualifying, whatever
the conditions) and backing Vettel to be top 3. I think in the wet
Vettel stands a decent chance of being best of the rest.
However,
the odds were too long for the Force Indias (around 3 for Hulkenberg
and 4 for Perez) and not quite enough for Vettel (2.8, with limited
cash on offer. I was after something more like 4).
So,
no bet, as has been the case for most qualifying sessions this year.
The weather could make things more unpredictable, so perhaps we'll
end up with an unexpected grid.
Morris
Dancer
Button to achieve a points finish tomorrow is the only, somewhat unusual bet, for me.
ReplyDeleteI should have added that my bet on a Button points finish was at odds of 8/11 with SkyBet.
ReplyDeleteThat's looking rather splendid at the moment, Mr. Putney. Must admit I never would've backed that, but, as I said, it looks good.
ReplyDelete