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.”

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

Comments

  1. Button to achieve a points finish tomorrow is the only, somewhat unusual bet, for me.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I should have added that my bet on a Button points finish was at odds of 8/11 with SkyBet.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That'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

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Monaco: pre-race 2023

F1 2014 - Second and Third Tests

Japan: early discussion