2015 Australian Grand Prix - Melbourne

[Moose]

I'm glad you lot all agree that F1 that looks like the late 80s/early 90s is boring as hell.

Hopefully we can get over the rose-tinted spectacles view of that era now.

[.poz]

Lewis has been kind to keep the gap at just 30sec today, if he went for hammer time, the gap to Vettel could easily go to 60 secs.

Not on this track because of fuel. But i expect that on tracks where fuel is a minor issue merc advantage will be bigger.

[Shrieker]

I take it that people that find this race terribly boring haven't watched the opening races of 1998, the entire seasons of 2002 or 2004. Not only you had utter domination, but stagnation right through the field as well. I'll take this over them any time.

[FoxHound]

I'm glad you lot all agree that F1 that looks like the late 80s/early 90s is boring as hell.

Hopefully we can get over the rose-tinted spectacles view of that era now.

One race does not make a season, and last year was as good a run as the previous championships up to Hamilton's triumph in 2008.
What would you do to make it closer, if that is the issue....and why?

[f1316]

I certainly don't like the idea of any equalisation measures - this is supposed to be a competition, not a kids game where the scores are reset if one team gets too far ahead.

Just as I felt when my team, Ferrari, were winning, changing the rules (ala 2003, 2005 and 2009) in an attempt to equal the playing field is the wrong approach, other teams simply need to do better. There's no reason that Ferrari shouldn't have been as good as if not better than Mercedes in an engine dominated formula where being a works team is highly advantageous.

But a good illustration of the problem with the regs is mclaren's situation. Because they knew that performance upgrades would not be possible during the season (new loophole not withstanding) and then restricted afterwards, but also knew reliability changes were allowed, Honda had to build an ultra high performing engine from the get go and disregard reliability concerns. This is why they're currently struggling so much because they followed fairly sound logic: it's actually easier to catch up from where they currently are than if they had built a sound but unspectacular pu.

That strikes me as a badly conceived set of regulations.

[SteveRacer]

Final results look a lot like last year. If you exclude Mclaren because of their engine switch, you still have Mercedes on top, Ferrari about 35 seconds off, followed by a Williams. I guess the real surprise is Red Bulls lack of pace.

[foxmulder_ms]

I find Red Bull's comments childish. What is frustrating is not Renault engines but their attitude.

Raikkonen was really unlucky. Vettel's mistake (intentional or not - I think it was intentional) cost him dearly. Plus pit stops then the tire.... He deserved a much better finish. I think with some luck Raikonnen can beat Vettel.

It is early, but I think Ferrari will beat Williams. And Red bull will be fighting for the 4th with Lotus for the remaining of the season. And I think Lotus can beat them.

[Phil]

I can't believe we all put so much energy and passion into watching such a dismal display. Formula One collectively should be ashamed that they have dragged our beloved sport down to this level.

Kudos to the young drivers who made it all at least somewhat interesting. =D>

Yes. F1 is in trouble thanks to this boring race. Bring on artificial rain to save the sport. And unpredictable tyres like in 2012. Even better, lets hope they put in some random generator that makes some cars slower so that we can have "proper" entertainment again.

[3jawchuck]

I certainly don't like the idea of any equalisation measures - this is supposed to be a competition, not a kids game where the scores are reset if one team gets too far ahead.

I agree with you somewhat. Personally I feel that if someone wants bumper to bumper (wing to wing?) racing, they ought to go watch a one make series or a series where handicaps are placed on the top performers after every race. To me F1 has always been more about the technology and the engineering challenge. Dominance will come naturally for periods, but it always passed in the past and would in the future.

The current rules really do not allow for much hope for any of the chasing manufacturers to catch up. If they don't manage to equalise their engines in the first four seasons then they won't have the chance to at all. By 2019 the only changes permitted are to wiring and fittings.

[bdr529]

Raikkonen was really unlucky. Vettel's mistake (intentional or not - I think it was intentional)

Really ? it was intentional

[Jonnycraig]

Raikkonen was really unlucky. Vettel's mistake (intentional or not - I think it was intentional) cost him.

What mistake? Vettel had the inside line, made the corner and didn't touch Raikonnen.

[efuloni]

Australia is not the best track for williams. And for Massa, neither (he never did well there).

Williams should be a little better the rest of the year.

And its nonsense this talk bout Merc's -team. They took pole last year and several times were on their way or really trying to catch them. They didnt win any races for lack of ambitions and poor strategy, thats it, but was clear that Williams was the second best car on the grid in the second semester.

[Scorpaguy]

Was this 2015 Melbourne or 2005 Indy???

I really cannot put much blame on Merc....what I can blame is a current state of affairs when we cant even have 10 competitive cars afield for an F1 event (the opener at that...didnt they have all winter to prepare?). GVDG must have been livid seeing that empty Williams

Seems we have neither enough drivers nor cars I can remember the days when Can Am, CART, and F1 turned away both. All of these series have a life...but are replaced with a more viable entity at the end of their life cycle.

I really think its time for a rebirth...this is a joke.

[tranquility2k4]

- Mercedes' domination is bad but Ferrari's or Red Bull's was OK? The fact that no Merc/Ferrari/RB-R customer engine team can compete is a problem, yet any talk about cost control is dismissed? It's a fixable design not accident.

- Three years of whining about Pirellis here, Red Bull's propaganda, media's drama, now you have your perfect tyres that last forever like Bridgestones and yet you complain, what did you expect from one-stoppers? Williams gifted one place to Ferrari so something did happen. Choice of compounds mentioned earlier is secondary, choices are limited, they will not touch big difference combination or anything risky, tyres like that were ordered. Ask those who ordered.

- there are two positives: Ferrari/Williams fight and Red Bull. Funny how no amount of test reality could counter brand impact on expectations, slow over one lap, no race sims to speak of, it didn't matter. They were actively advocating destroying other teams through third grade engine support and demands of sole focus and now they dare to complain about the engine? Toro Rosso is fine.

Ferrari and RBR dominant years were due to superior design compared to competitors.... Mercedes domination also is due to that fact for sure, but it's ridicolously defended by the regulations, keeping the others from catching up... that's the problem

Well, in Renault their case also by simply screwing up the limited possibilities they have. Ferrari is rumored to have decreased the engine advantage at least. Renault actually managed to make their engine less reliable, less powerful and less driveable. That's by no means the fault of the regulations.

Also, the regulations allow room for engine development. During the V8 period that scope wasn't there. You are looking at it in the wrong perspective: the rules don't limit the scope of catching up, they actually increase the scope of extending the advantage.
Not that I'm complaining about this. Imagine the current situation in the V8 era; we would all be raging due Renault not being able at all to close the gap.

The current rules advocate efficiency. Not only efficiency of fuel usage, but also efficiency from extracting as much as performance out of limited development scope that is offered. Again, Ferrari did a very good job on this, Renault managed to screw it up.

Also, some comments from Horner that made frown was that he demands the FIA needs to act, claiming that when RBR dominated the FIA abolished certain concepts that made rbr dominate. But what was banned actually?
-Double diffusers: not a thing that RBR pioneered in. They did not start the 2009 season with it, and in 2010 they compromised on the concept by having pull rod instead of push rod.
-F-duct: a mclaren invention. RBR never got to fully integrate it into their chassis, which was homologated in 2010.
-Double DRS: A mercedes invention, which RBR only took over late in the 2012 season.
-Exhaust Blown Diffusers: RBR, Mclaren and Ferrari all developed this on their own. Granted that RBR was the better one with this.
-Engine mapping to support the former point: Admittingly, a thing RBR had the most progress in. However, in Silverstone 2011 they were partially and temporarily banned. Mclaren was the team actually that was the most disadvantaged by it.
-Wing Flexing: banned since an eternity and tried to work around for the same period. I remember mclaren rear wings falling off due too much flexing in the 2000's.

Looking at that list, FIA never specifically targetted RBR in order to diminish their advantage. So why should they do that now with Mercedes? Loose from the fact the FIA does not decide on it own anymore on such things.

Couldn't agree more with the point you make about RBR and Horner. In general RBR were always coming under scrutiny because they were effectively utilising technologies that were illegal by the rule book, but they found clever ways around the tests. Even though the general public could clearly see these things were happening RBR (through Horner) would act arrogant and patronising about it. Even when they banned engine maps, RBR tried to say Renault needed to conduct off-throttle blowing for reliability reasons. He's constantly taking the piss in what he says. Like his latest - I'm the saviour of the sport - let's ban wind tunnels. He only wants to do this because it suits them. Whilst all teams pull these kind of moves it seems to be Horner who does this almost every single race. He's a broken record.

Merc are doing nothing that is even questionable or against the rules - yet Horner just wants the FIA to turn their engine down. It's a complete joke and I'm glad Toto said this:

"If you come into Formula One, try to beat each other and perform at the highest level and then you need equalisation after the first race - you cry out after the first race - that's not how we've done things in the past," he said. "I think just get your f***ing head down, work hard and try to sort it out.

It is always a political season, it was last year and it is this year. There is this wall in Jerusalem that you can stand in front and complain, maybe the guys should go there."

Read more at http://en.espnf1.com/f1/motorsport/stor ... ixqWYxR.99

[Alexgtt]

I'm going against the tide of opinion here but I was quite encouraged by McLaren today. Shock, horror I know but it's not fanboyism. I'm a fan of racing only, with no favoured team at all. I just love engineering and racing. Here are my reasons.

1. The longest that car has run in consecutive laps is 11. No matter which way you cut it, a race distance is progress, all be it at lower power levels and turned down.
2. From what I could see, even with significantly less power than Perez, be that ICE, MGU-H or K related, that car out handled the FI. It tells me most of the issue is PU related and it's a decent car underneath.
3. They haven't even started performance work yet, not even close.
4. No other team to gather any data from on PU is a severe handicap.
5. OK, not maxed the engine power levels yet but there appeared to be no cooling issues with the zero size packaging.
6. Clearly they are working on some amazingly complex electronics and control systems.
7. If they are genuinely 30% down on what the engine could reliably do, I'm not surprised by 3-4 second down.....at all. In fact I'd be quietly happy. We've seen some teams that far off with developed engine packages performing at max potential.

Taking all this into consideration by the time they're in Europe I reckon there'll be a few people reconsidering their opinions.