Skip to main content

F1: So Ends The Most Ridiculous Phase In Grand Prix History


Nico Rosberg took the 2016 F1 Driver's World Championship crown in Abu Dhabi last night, adding his name to the list of greats whose names already adorn this trophy. Unfortunately, it's a purely academic crown, given that the last three seasons have shaken out to be a two class championship, with the two Mercedes drivers battling for the title and the rest of the field racing in Class B.

It has been the most tedious, uninteresting and least compelling era of F1 and the titles won by Hamilton and Rosberg are worthless in comparison to the majority of hard won titles achieved over the previous sixty-plus years of the sport. What kind of World Championship only has two protagonists?

Yes, we have had years when one team has dominated in the past - but when free development and testing were allowed, things became more competitive as seasons wore on, or a season of domination has been followed by a competitive season of racing as rivals caught up.

The current set of rules have prevented this from happening. The result being that in three years Mercedes drivers have won all but seven Grand Prix. Only three other drivers have won races in that time.

F1 has become a pale shadow of its magnificent past. Even its recent past.

The only positive is that New regulations might shake things up a bit. Until free development and testing is restored though, the potential remains for one manufacturer to out think the others and begin a new period of domination from next season.

The suggestion that F1 needs to be run on a tight budget is contrary to the historic goals of the sport, where progress was above everything. I imagine that Ferrari, Renault and Honda would have chosen to spend $250m over the last three seasons to get to a place of competitiveness, rather than $150m to be also-rans.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…