Australian GP 2009 ( finally! )

[slimjim8201]

Kubica set up the crash, no doubt. He put his car in a position that gave Vettel no choice or room.

It is true that Vettel collided with Kubica, in that Kubica had control of his car and his line and Vettel did not (wheels sliding, steering wheel sawing back and forth looking for grip). The overhead shot confirms that Vettel's car slid into Kubica's, but this was all due to the manner in which Vettel entered the corner. Kubica only left enough room for Vettel to take a very early, very oblique apex, resulting in Vettel's post-apex line moving all the way across the track. Unfortunately, this line intersected with Kubica's cleaner line.

Plain and simple, Kubica did not have the position to make the pass where he attempted. Certainly not against a driver unwilling to be passed. Perhaps if he had pulled a Glock, gone wide after forcing Vettel in shallow, then cut backwards across and behind Vettel as he slid across the track, he would have been able to pass Vettel cleanly in the next turn. Glock did it perfectly. Twice. Once on Alonso...

I believe that the blame should be placed on the person who caused the accident. Kubica put his car in a position to get hit, and hit it was.

[donskar]

An all too confusing result I dare say..
Brawn GP proved they have the best car, but might or might not be found illegal in 2 weeks.
Button did nothing more than cruise to the finish, I'd be surprised if he had to push anywhere near 100% during the whole race.
Rubens --- up big time twice, and went off unpunished.
A veeeeeery late deployment of the SC also helped. Combining this with the lack of any punishment for Rubens is funny. Had it been Ferrari and Massa instead, everybody would be talking about conspiracies by now..
I'd really like to see what he'll say if he has to play second fiddle to Button later on in the season due to team orders!!!
Maybe FIA are indeed planning to deem the diffusers illegal.I just wish if they do, that they will not disqualify anyone retrospectively..
The super soft tires were a joke: 10-12 laps was all they lasted, and surely not in the hottest conditions. What's the point of even having said tire for a race? It looked as it was almost dangerous..
Hamilton drove very maturely and wise, and also got lucky. Surely nothing spectacular, given all the retirements and Trulli's penalty. But I doubt anyone could achieve anything better than that with the car he was driving.
Ferrari --- up big time again. But I was expecting that, as they always seem to struggle in Melbourne. Reliability issues aside, I think in different track conditions they will be much stronger.
Driver of the race? Surely Button, he 's the one who won. Best of the rest? Definitely Vettel and Kubica, they both had a great race, and if only they were both a bit more careful everyone would be cheering at them as well..

FINALLY - an intelligent post. Thank you, andartop!

Vettel had the inside, and replay shows he could not move over any farther. Kubica screwed up.

Lots of action, yes. Competition for the WIN? Nil. You're going to love F1 2009. IF you loved the later Schuey Ferrari years. PLEASE ANSWER HONESTLY: barring DNF, do you see anyone but Button and Barichello contending for the win in the next race???

Hamilton: without crashes and stupidity would have finished barely in the points. A GOOD performance, but not the second coming of Fangio/Clark/Senna (depending on your age group).

Jingoism sucks. It has NO place in F1. (Look it up in wikipedia.)

[donskar]

Do some of you guys actually watch the race or do you just come on here screaming for your favorite driver?

Webber did nothing wrong!. Rubans was hit from behind by Kovi(I think Kovi was on the KERS and misjudged the braking for turn 1)... this sent Rubans into the side of Webber, and Heidfeld finished Webber off by hitting him from other side simultaneously.


Vettel did nothing wrong! Even if he wanted to lift off and Let Kubica by he couldnt because Kubica forced him onto the grass/off the track. SLICK ON GRASS DONT WORK! I dont care if they are green or purple, new or old its impossible to brake or turn with slicks on grass. Vettle deserves a penalty for running around on 3 wheels, but 10 spots is too much... dont think we've ever heard of that penalty before... unless he ignored a black flag. Why didnt they fine KIMI for throwing engine parts nearly into the stands last year in France?

They didnt show the whole Trulli/Hamilton incident... but 25 seconds was too harsh(unless he overtook at speed under the yellow in the accident zone)... there was confusion everywhere, all they had to do was put Truilli back behind Hamilton and everything would have been square.

Good post, ismalatron (and I often do NOT agree with you.)

Vettel could have prevented the accident ONLY by slammingon hisbrakes. He had the inside line and was right on the edge of the grass.

F1 is truly international and the jingoism shown here is embarrassing and childish. Pathetic. I pity the Anglophiles this year: how will they be able to decide who to root for: Brawn and Button AND Hamilton are all brits, right?

[donskar]

Bullshit again... what kind of idiot just gives up 2nd place? How many times have we seen drivers overcook it trying to pass on the outside and end up in the kitty litter?(Kimi at that same corner last year I think?) Vettel had every right to defend his position.

And the stewards do not agree with you, they penalized him for driving on track with 2.5 wheels and causing a hazard, not for causing an accident.

Oh? See below:

Red Bull Racing F1 Team driver Sebastian Vettel has been given a 10-place grid penalty for the Malaysian Grand Prix. Vettel got the penalty because of his crash with Robert Kubica at Melbourne. Red Bull was also given a fine of $50,000 as they instructed Vettel to stay on track despite running on three wheels.

I bet you prefer tag rugby to real rugby don't you? It was a racing incident between two racers.

The stewards should interfere far less, only when someone does something really stupid or deliberate.

Well, it was really stupid. Hence the penalty Vettel even agrees himself! If both cars had similar grip levels and Vettel had a chance to defend the position then yes, absolutely, he should have tried to hold RK off the remainder of the race. But, given he was lapping nearly a second slower per lap, that's just dumb.

This is pro racing, and the start of a long season. You have to be smart. It is BAD news when a really slow car tries to defend against a much faster one. This is common sense. Vettel had two choices.

1. Let Kubica by and definitely secure a podium finish and substantial points. Not as many as for 2nd, but a good banking nonetheless
2. Fight a pretty much un-winnable battle on tires with crap grip, with a very good chance of causing an incident and throwing away ALL his points

1 is the wise move. Gotta be smart to win championship.

Don't get me wrong, pileups in T1 are stupid as well. Races aren't won at T1, only lost.. so I have no sympathy for anyone being overzealous there. IMO in the long run it's probably much better to give room into T1 and only fight for obvious holes. But with regard to stewards decisions, at that point in the race everyone has fresh tires and options.

Jersey Tom, Kubica had choices, too. He had plenty of time -- and the faster car -- to pass at a safer point. All he had to do was show a little patience (and intelligence).

It is BAD news when a really slow car tries to defend against a much faster one.

That is NOT "bad news." That is racing.

[donskar]

Woah woah ladies calm down.

My view on the incident:

Premise:

Vettel was nursing tyres
Kubica was on a mission on the mediums
Kubica felt he had the pace to win

Incident:

Vettel out-braked himself into Turn 1 giving Kubica the run up the outside into Turn 3. Vettel rightly blocked the inside line and held it. Kubica at no point was significantly ahead enough mean that Vettel had to yield. Kubica then turned into the apex expecting Vettel to have yielded or be out-braked. They collided.

In hindsight, Kubica should have yielded and taken him on the run from Turn 6 to Turn 8.

Kubica mainly to blame.

Exactly. +1

[donskar]

VERY sad that most posts here are about two DNFs rather than the winner.

Brawn took a well-deserved, even epic win. But a question for those of you who rooted for Brawn because they were "underdogs': who will you root for next race? Surely Brawn will NOT be the underdogs. Will you root for Ferrari?

This is a denagerous situation: the man who led the technical effort to reduce downforce and increase passing has been able to find a loophole in the regs and . . . Wait a minute. Doesn't that mean he found a loophole in the rules he helped write???

Need I say more?

Longer term, if it is bad for F1 to be dominated by a famous team (Ferrari or McLaren) will it be better for F1 if it is dominated by a relatively unknown team? Hint: NO.

[jddh1]

VERY sad that most posts here are about two DNFs rather than the winner.

Brawn took a well-deserved, even epic win. But a question for those of you who rooted for Brawn because they were "underdogs': who will you root for next race? Surely Brawn will NOT be the underdogs. Will you root for Ferrari?

This is a denagerous situation: the man who led the technical effort to reduce downforce and increase passing has been able to find a loophole in the regs and . . . Wait a minute. Doesn't that mean he found a loophole in the rules he helped write???

Need I say more?

Longer term, if it is bad for F1 to be dominated by a famous team (Ferrari or McLaren) will it be better for F1 if it is dominated by a relatively unknown team? Hint: NO.

Yes, I'll be rooting for Ferrari. I always do.

And F1 is better with established teams fighting for championships I think, but when you have a season like this one promises to be, I think it's even better. I think the Ferraris and others will definitely catch up to the Brawns by the Euro races.
But the reason I say that this season promises to be great is because of the tire rules. The difference in tire performance is so great that every race will be exciting till the end. Seems like we did not need a "passing working group" but rather have Bridgestone implement this rule a few years back. Let's all thank Bridgestone for the exciting racing.

[outer_bongolia]

I predict a double decker diffuser on at least one team before qualifying (assuming it can be done within the rules). I also predict that every team will have double deckers for Malaysia.

Those who think the teams aren't capable of building such parts in this time frame (of course out of carbon fiber) are misinformed.

It's not like the teams are incapable of building double deckers. The issue is that the whole aero setup will get affected. Just slapping a new diffuser might increase downforce with pretty much all of the load on the rear wheels of an F1 car, but increasing downforce without attention to overall car balance will kill the team. I had read that McLaren was not able to change their diffuser design because of this exact issue.

Let's just assume a simple case: Because of the increased down force the rear suspension would need to be adjusted. Also the front wing would need additional down force to avoid understeer. Of course, that could alter the optimal airflow, so while at it, you'd need a new nose cover and new barge boards. May be the side airpods might need some work too.

[freedom_honda]

VERY sad that most posts here are about two DNFs rather than the winner.

Brawn took a well-deserved, even epic win. But a question for those of you who rooted for Brawn because they were "underdogs': who will you root for next race? Surely Brawn will NOT be the underdogs. Will you root for Ferrari?

This is a denagerous situation: the man who led the technical effort to reduce downforce and increase passing has been able to find a loophole in the regs and . . . Wait a minute. Doesn't that mean he found a loophole in the rules he helped write???

Need I say more?

Longer term, if it is bad for F1 to be dominated by a famous team (Ferrari or McLaren) will it be better for F1 if it is dominated by a relatively unknown team? Hint: NO.

But the reason I say that this season promises to be great is because of the tire rules. The difference in tire performance is so great that every race will be exciting till the end. Seems like we did not need a "passing working group" but rather have Bridgestone implement this rule a few years back. Let's all thank Bridgestone for the exciting racing.

I have to disagree. That wasn't overtake. When the other cars were overtaking Rosberg, it wasn't exciting at all. It was like the easiest thing the overtaking drivers have ever done. Rosberg simply have absolutely no grip and cannot accelerate out of the corners. He was simply a sitting duck on the straight.

[freedom_honda]

This is a denagerous situation: the man who led the technical effort to reduce downforce and increase passing has been able to find a loophole in the regs and . . . Wait a minute. Doesn't that mean he found a loophole in the rules he helped write???

I don't think Ross Brawn (or Williams/Toyota) was in the overtaking working group.

[ringo]

KERS is bitter sweet; if the heavier RK had kers he might not have been as fast, but he sure as hell would have dispatched vettel coming down the straight before that turn.
I was almost telling him to press the button only to realize he wasn't in Heidfeld's car

But i wont blame any of the drivers, they need to work on their skills, both are among the best but kubica is too aggressive and vettel doesn't know what to do with his talent
Kubica should have just waited 1 lap, let vettel's tires get even worse and just skip pass him with ease.

[shir0]

This is a denagerous situation: the man who led the technical effort to reduce downforce and increase passing has been able to find a loophole in the regs and . . . Wait a minute. Doesn't that mean he found a loophole in the rules he helped write???

I don't think Ross Brawn (or Williams/Toyota) was in the overtaking working group.

I think it was Rory Byrne, Paddy Lowe and Pat Symonds... back in 2007 (when Ross Brawn was taking his sabbatical from Ferrari).

[shir0]

VERY sad that most posts here are about two DNFs rather than the winner.

Brawn took a well-deserved, even epic win. But a question for those of you who rooted for Brawn because they were "underdogs': who will you root for next race? Surely Brawn will NOT be the underdogs. Will you root for Ferrari?

This is a denagerous situation: the man who led the technical effort to reduce downforce and increase passing has been able to find a loophole in the regs and . . . Wait a minute. Doesn't that mean he found a loophole in the rules he helped write???

Need I say more?

Longer term, if it is bad for F1 to be dominated by a famous team (Ferrari or McLaren) will it be better for F1 if it is dominated by a relatively unknown team? Hint: NO.

But the reason I say that this season promises to be great is because of the tire rules. The difference in tire performance is so great that every race will be exciting till the end. Seems like we did not need a "passing working group" but rather have Bridgestone implement this rule a few years back. Let's all thank Bridgestone for the exciting racing.

I have to disagree. That wasn't overtake. When the other cars were overtaking Rosberg, it wasn't exciting at all. It was like the easiest thing the overtaking drivers have ever done. Rosberg simply have absolutely no grip and cannot accelerate out of the corners. He was simply a sitting duck on the straight..

I agree with freedom_honda on this. Making overtaking easy because of dangerous tyre compounds is not fun to watch at all. Now I haven't seen anything from the OWG's official final recommendation but I don't think this "huge difference in tyre performance between available compunds in a single race" is NOT A PART OF IT. This smells more like Mosely wearing his "honorary engineering degree" and Mr.Burns (BE) seeing another way of filling his pockets some more.

[andartop]

Maybe the FIA could rephrase the rules to something like: all drivers have to use both available tires during the course of the race weekend! Thus they could use the super softs just for qualifying (where they belong) and have proper tires for the race. Providing two obligatory options shouldn't be a matter of "quick! let's get these silly ones out of the way asap! and then race with the good ones!", but rather a matter of "hmmm.. should we use these ones or those ones?"!

[shir0]

<snip!>Brawn took a well-deserved, even epic win. But a question for those of you who rooted for Brawn because they were "underdogs': who will you root for next race? Surely Brawn will NOT be the underdogs. Will you root for Ferrari?

Who says that I'm rooting for Brawn because they were "underdogs"? I always root for the possible winner/s! (note the "/s")

This is a denagerous situation: the man who led the technical effort to reduce downforce and increase passing has been able to find a loophole in the regs and . . . Wait a minute. Doesn't that mean he found a loophole in the rules he helped write???

Did he now? I thought that he wasn't part of the OWG? And that during the time that the '09 tech regs were finalized, he was on sabbatical?

Longer term, if it is bad for F1 to be dominated by a famous team (Ferrari or McLaren) <snip!>

Who says it's "bad for F1 to be dominated by a famous team (Ferrari or McLaren)"? And why should it be?

Profits declining? Can anyone really be sure that Bernie was losing tons of money from the last, oh, nine years?

<snip!> will it be better for F1 if it is dominated by a relatively unknown team? Hint: NO.

Why not? For the last nine or so years, there are a considerable number of F1 fans bitching about why do only a certain two or three teams dominating the sport...

Now we have a new team (plus two or three relatively considered to be mid-fielders) shaking the order really well and still people complain.