If you want close racing then you need to remove all the aero, but then you end up going rather slowly! (Or have "identical" cars, but that won't happen.

I'd argue that aero makes a big difference at Monza because it has a huge effect on braking performance. See Ricciardo's overtake of Bottas (and he said he hoped for such an advantage after qualifying).

 

And I'll be at Sepang - fingers crossed that something happens there to mix the order up.

 

Yup, me too!

Prices at Sepang are something of a revaluation!

 

People always say they want harder to drive, faster and more mechanical grip. I've never been convinced that will equal better racing. You only get better racing through the cars being more even and that means leaving the regulations alone.

Boring race after the start, mainly because Hamilton vs. the Ferraris was decided on pit stop strategy. That sort of thing isn't going to be any different. We had the most boring race of the year (probably) at Monza where the aero makes least difference (at least to cornering) so is aero the problem? Don't think so.
[/quote]

Any overtaking at Monza is done under braking with the benefit of a slipstream and DRS, so it will always produce a "dull" race. I don't know why people seem to be surprised by this. It also tends to produce 2x2 grids, with identical cars next to each other at the start - and the last thing that teams want is both of their cars crashing into each other, so for the first lap or two drivers are rather circumspect, although the stupid first chicane usually results in some sort of coming-totether. Also this is the time of year when the teams tend to focus on preserving their remaining engine components. Spa and Monza are both hard on engines (as is Suzuka) and nobody wants any grid penalties if they can avoid them, especially with a street race up next. Chassis and aero upgrades tend to take lower priority at this end of the season, especially as next year's cars will be quite different, so resources are diverted to the new cars.

Hamilton making a hash of the start enlivened the first part of the race, but as soon as Mercedes realised that the Ferraris were two-stopping they could let Rosberg run at a comfortable pace without extending the car, and keep Hamilton in touch so that he could take the Ferraris at their second stops.

Ferrari used up their engine tokens for their second major engine upgrade of the season, but on ultimate pace they were still half a second slower than the Mercedes at Monza, and spent most of Friday trying to limit the waywardness of the rear end, which was blistering tyres. They're in a real scrap with Red Bull for second in the Constructors' Championship, which is what really matters, because it dictates the share of the FOM money for next season. Similarly, Williams and Force India are both short of money and are fighting over 4th and 5th, and further down the food chain McLaren are close to Toro Rosso, so there's a lot at stake in the remaining races.

As far as the argument that parity of equipment equals better racing is concerned, I'm not convinced. Unless there is inequality you won't see much overtaking, because performance differentials will be all but non-existent, and overtaking will be largely reliant upon driver error. In today's Formula 1, any one of around fifteen drivers could become World Champion in a Mercedes. I'm a fan of Fernando Alonso, simply because I think that he's a more complete driver than most, and he's a wily old fox. I enjoyed watching him at Spa where he started at the back of the grid, and finished the first lap inside the top 10. In his Ferrari days he would inevitably qualify fifth or sixth and usually emerge from the first corner in third. He's outdriven the true performance of just about every car he's raced in Formula 1, but he's in a small cohort of drivers who can do that. Alonso in a McLaren and Vettel in a Ferrari have shown that they're proper racers this season. Watching two former World Champions (and their only slightly less illustrious team-mates) in cars that are off the pace has been one of the highlights of the season so far. The prospect of a completely redesigned Honda package for next year should mean that there will be four teams fighting it out at the front at least. Mercedes have had it their own way for too long, and Formula 1 hasn't benefitted.

 

Maybe with a reverse grid, but inequality puts the fastest car at the front and makes it easy for them to stay there. Without such a performance advantage you might see a small mistake costing one of the Mercedes drivers 7 or 8 places on the grid and then the race would be different. As it is if Hamilton makes a small mistake he only has to worry about slipping behind Rosberg.

Of course in Spa one of the top drivers in the best car started at the back and it still wasn't a thrilling race, so you never know.

I watched the end of GP2 Saturday afternoon and it was a much more interesting and closer race than F1. Same cars of course, but even then there's still a variation in performance thanks to different setups.

 

Perhaps F1's new owners might be open to a few options to mix things up a little.

I agree that starting with the fastest cars at the front of the grid won't exactly promote exciting racing. I also feel that DRS has worked well for Formula 1, because without it we would be in a situation where pit stops provide the only opportunity to overtake.

 

We need to make the braking distances longer. That would in theory allow for more overtaking opportunities under braking going into the corners. I have no idea how you do that, but I think that's the next thing they need to change.

 

Slightly off topic, but F1 related..


Silverstone boss Patrick Allen leaves role

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/37289623

 

I'll be in the Stamford Grandstand.

Nice!

Where's everyone staying while in SG?

 

Staying with some friends.