FORMULA 1

[MIKA27]

Johansson’s radical proposal to make F1 awesome again – Part 1

Stefan Johansson, former Ferrari and McLaren Formula 1 driver, has done a lot of thinking – and writing – to come up a with a template for a radically revised version of the sport he loves. Here is the first of a four-part series on what needs to change and why.
This is an effort to offer my views on the current state of motorsport, and Formula 1 in particular. For some time now, and for whatever reason, there seem to be a lot of negative comments and chatter from the people inside the business as well as from fans all over the world.

Why is that? How did we arrive at this situation from a time not that long ago when things were seemingly mostly positive, viewership was huge, the cars were fast and spectacular to watch, we had some great personalities in the paddock, superstar drivers racing the cars and plenty of action and drama on the race track, both between the teams and the drivers? Money was flowing into the business and global corporate sponsors as well as manufacturers were all lining up to be part of the show. Teams were selling at a huge premium and everyone involved in the business was prospering.

Of course, there is not a simple answer to any of this. For sure, the majority of negative comments today is in part due to easy media accessibility for all, but it seems to me there are real elements of concern in the sport and they have arisen from a gradual process of poor decisions.

In some cases on the technical side, knee-jerk decisions were based on either a bad accident or complaints from the fans and media about the racing not being good enough; in other cases, decisions were based on pressure from certain teams or manufacturers in order to keep them in the championship; and finally, but very importantly, a level of political correctness has crept in that, at least in my opinion, has done nothing to make the racing any better on any level, but has instead only contributed to pushing the costs through the roof and created a greater division between the teams, and, as such, made the racing too predictable and less interesting to watch.

As a result of all this, the technology has evolved to where we are today, and most importantly, was allowed to evolve to a point where the budgets suddenly went into the stratosphere.

At the same time, the business model for the commercial rights holders have changed dramatically since the introduction of pay-per-view instead of terrestrial TV, which means that there is theoretically more revenue, even if derived from significantly fewer viewers. The byproduct of this is that there is less interest for sponsors to spend big money as their metrics are primarily based on the number of eyeballs watching, and in particular, eyeballs in places where the demographics support purchase of the sponsors’ products – not all eyeballs are created equally in the minds of the sponsor – Unilever and Heineken differentiate between reaching eyeballs in Azerbaijan versus Germany and the US.

In addition, there are now a number of different viewing platforms besides TV, which is causing even more confusion and a hard-to-quantify environment for companies to select the best strategy to market their products. The challenge the series and the teams are now facing is how to grow or even just maintain their eco system.

So, as a result of there currently being a less attractive return-on-investment proposition for the global sponsor, we now have a situation where every team is more or less wholly dependent on the money they receive from the series, i.e. from the FOM, as this represents the bulk of their income. This was never the case before, when major sponsors were the main contributors and the money the teams received from the series was almost the icing on the cake, especially if they did well. Hence, there are now several teams racing without a main sponsor, or if they do have one, it’s for a fraction of what a title sponsor used to pay.

Through all these various rule changes that have occurred in recent years I have a feeling that Formula 1 has somehow lost its identity and I am not sure anyone, whether it’s the FIA or Liberty (FOM), really know what Formula 1 stands for anymore. I believe we are now at a point where another two or maybe three decisions in the wrong direction could spell the end of F1 as we know it. People are already tuning out because they have either lost interest or it’s too predictable or not exciting enough. The younger generation doesn’t seem to care, F1 and motorsport in general is struggling to catch their attention. I challenge anyone to define in three words what F1 stands for today.

In order to arrive at a situation that has the right balance between Economics, Competition, Entertainment and Relevance, it’s important to first identify the individual areas that matter the most and focus on getting these right and at the same time eliminate the areas that matter least.

I will first attempt to identify the areas that I feel are important and will then go into more detail on each individual item and come up with what I believe could be a solution, or at least open the door for a debate or dialog in order to find the best way forward. Today.

ECONOMICS - Background

There’s been talk for some time now about various ways to bring down costs but no decisions have been made on how to achieve this. In the meantime, the costs are gradually creeping up every year and it’s now gotten to the point that even the world’s largest automotive manufacturers and the largest corporate sponsors are reluctant to compete in Formula 1. This being the case, the cost to compete is so high, so prohibitively expensive, that it serves as a barrier to those who would naturally be and traditionally have been involved in the sport.

The major cost is in the constant development war, with the aerodynamics and the power units being the largest contributors of excessive expense for the teams and the engine manufacturers. Despite efforts to curb the costs through various sets of rules, such as limitations on the number of engines and gearboxes used in a season, all it seems to have done is the exact opposite and in fact driven the costs of producing these units much higher. The cost of manufacturing an already developed engine or gearbox is not that expensive in the overall scheme of things, but the cost of developing and manufacturing an engine that must last one-third of a season is extremely expensive and seemingly far outweighs the cost of using several engines during the course of the season

Adding the hybrid component to the powertrain has done more damage than all the other rule changes combined in my opinion. It seems that in order to meet the politically correct agenda that is now creeping in to every facet of life, it’s somehow been decided that this is the future of automotive engineering and needs to be part of Formula 1 as well. Pushed by the manufacturers (under the premise of wanting the formula to have relevance to the manufacturer’s production lineup) who put pressure on the FIA, Formula 1 had to follow, along with the WEC. Interestingly, both series are now completely controlled and dominated by the OEMs and would not survive in their current formats without the money being poured in by the manufacturers competing. The privateer or independent teams are now just the clowns that make up the show in both series and have no realistic chance of ever winning a race.

So, this means we are stuck with three teams in F1 and currently only one team in the WEC that have any chance of winning. This seems an incredibly high trade-off just to be doing the politically correct thing. By introducing this rule and subsequently allowing the manufacturers to effectively take control of both series, it will take some major undoing to get things back on the right track again. What we have now is an engine formula that is turning manufacturers away rather than inviting them to join, which is a very dangerous path.

As we all know from past experiences, it’s only a matter of a board decision for any manufacturer (except Ferrari) to stop any racing program if it doesn’t suit their purpose for whatever reason. None of them have any real emotional attachment to racing, which has been shown by Toyota, Honda and BMW who all pulled out of F1 within a few years of each other.

I strongly believe that the current concept of racecar design needs a complete reset in almost every major category, but particularly in Formula 1. There has been no real innovation since the discovery of aerodynamics. Every aspect of a current racecar design always has aero as the first priority, as this is what gives the most gain in lap-time by far. But as we all know, aside from making the car go faster, there are very few benefits from aerodynamics, if any. It’s the #1 factor in driving the costs higher, it’s the #1 factor in making the racing less interesting, it has no relevance aside from making the car go faster, yet it’s been the primary focus in every single form of racing the past 30 years or more. It’s time for a major reset. The cost of the development war is escalating every year and will continue to do so as long as aero is the prime factor in making the cars go faster.

Another contributing factor to the high cost is the fact that each team must build most components themselves rather than buying “off the shelf” components already manufactured and tested. A loose interpretation of the old “B” team concept (using the parts and resources from another team that is legally allowed) has slowly crept in for teams like Haas, Sauber (Alfa Romeo), Toro Rosso and Force India to some degree. Under the current set of rules, this is a far better approach than trying to design, manufacture, test and run every single component yourself. We can clearly see the result of this: Haas and Sauber (Alfa Romeo) are now consistently the “best of the rest” teams.

The result of this is that the “A” teams are starting to gather more and more control of the teams they are supporting, including the choice of drivers in some cases. The concern the midfield teams have is that if we are not careful, the entire grid will be controlled by the major manufacturers and it will turn into another version of the DTM, where three or maybe four manufacturers control the entire field with satellite teams that are under their complete control.

There has been much discussion about a cost cap, and how to implement it. I don’t believe you can ever entirely control a fixed cost cap because teams will always find a way to circumvent a rule like that. The most effective way in my opinion is to limit the development in all the key areas on the cars that are irrelevant in the bigger picture. There are many areas or components on a car that I believe could be standardized and no one would even know or notice the difference. This would have the same or similar effect to the “B” team concept, but it would be the same for everybody, and it would automatically level the playing field in the process. Some of these areas are:

AERODYNAMICS: 

Set a fixed limit on maximum downforce (more details to follow in the chapter on Competition). This will eliminate the massive spend on aero development that is currently by far the biggest line item in the budget.

No aero add-ons allowed on any surface parts of the car. This will still allow for each team to design a car that is unique looking and will have its own interpretation of the rules, but the emphasis will shift away from purely being made to optimize aerodynamic downforce, and instead shift to other areas that will be of equal importance.

By having a fixed limit on downforce, it will stop teams spending time and money on constantly finding different avenues on aero development in order to gain back the original loss. If the amount of downforce is always fixed, they will be forced to look in different areas to get more performance out of the car. This will drastically reduce the budgets as a large majority of the R&D budget is spent on the neverending aero development war.

FRONT WING: Provide a standard front wing issued by the FIA (no one can tell the difference anyway so it really wouldn’t matter). Even Adrian Newey agrees that if you painted all the wings white and put them next to each other no one would know what wing belong to what car. A large portion of the aero budget would go away if the front wings were fixed and the same for all the teams, supplied by one manufacturer chosen by the FIA. As there is no innovation involved in any aspect of this because of the way the rules are written, it is purely a matter of optimizing to the umpteenth degree. Whoever has the most resources will eventually gain an edge, and the money being spent on this entirely worthless endeavor is just mindboggling.

BRAKES: To put things in perspective, a top F1 team’s brake budget is nearly equivalent to a winning IndyCar team’s full-season budget. No one can see or relate to the insanely complicated brake ducting systems each team now must develop. If they were all given the same brake system and brake ducts it would be the same for everyone and no one would even know. With the greatly reduced importance of downforce, it would make sense to go back to a simple brake system whose primary function is to stop the car, not to add more downforce or create more efficient aero.

MONOCOQUE: The FIA should produce a standard tub for all the teams to use that fits their safety criteria and that’s been crash tested by them. It’s a very expensive and unnecessary cost to have every team design, build and then crash test their monocoques before the start of each season. It would make much more sense for the teams to build their engine, cooling and aero package around a tub that is being provided by the FIA at a fixed and reasonable cost. It would save a huge amount of money and again no one would know the difference. Whatever creativity goes into the design of the tub would simply shift to a different area. It may not be the ideal solution for every team and engine manufacturer, but so what? The tub has little relevance apart from bolting the engine, suspension and all the aero bits onto it.

ELECTRONICS AND DRIVER CONTROLS: Implement standard electronics for all the teams. Eliminate most of the current adjustments on the steering wheel. Every button, dial and switch on the steering wheel ultimately leads to somewhere on the car, whether it’s the diff, engine, brakes, steering or whatever. Assume then that each one of these functions requires a significant number of people to design, develop, build, test and maintain for each system. Rinse and repeat every race. The sheer manpower required to develop and maintain all these functions is staggering, and in the end, every team must do the same in varying degrees, and all it does is eliminate more and more skill elements in the driver’s arsenal. This may be the most obvious area that needs to be addressed in order to make the racing a little less predictable and put the emphasis back on driver skills, and by doing so, reduce the costs dramatically.

GEARBOX The gearbox on a current F1 car is a work of art, the engineering is simply mindboggling and the size of some the components are so small they almost look like a Swiss watch in certain areas. Then bear in mind that each team must design, build and maintain these gearboxes. It would be very easy to have one independent manufacturer build the same gearbox for all the cars, no one would know or indeed care. We are already at the point now where the “B” teams are using the complete backend of the “A” team they are associated with. This includes the gearbox, differential, rear suspension and electronics. It would bring the costs down massively if everyone would just use the same gearbox, supplied by the FIA. It would also help level the playing field as this is one very costly component that has very little relevance to the overall importance of the package.

BAN ALL FORMS OF COMMUNICATION WITH THE FACTORY DURING RACE WEEKENDS

This is another area which is completely and utterly unnecessary. I have seen the set-up from one of the top teams first-hand and although it’s incredibly impressive, it does absolutely nothing to add to overall package. Do we really need a team of 20-30 people at the base to assist the race team with setup and race strategy, including test drivers running intra-session setup scenarios or overnight full-race simulations of various setup alternatives? It’s just another added cost that one team started and then everyone else had to follow. It’s only helping teams to optimize the setup and race strategy, and by doing so, taking another element of unpredictability away, again at a huge cost.

Will these changes hurt Formula 1’s DNA? F1 lost its original DNA a long time ago as far as I’m concerned. The original rule which was kind of the foundation of F1 and what made it different from almost every other category in racing was that “every team had to manufacture their own cars.” The argument from the purists is that if we allow standard parts, then F1 will just become another form of IndyCar, where all the teams use the same chassis. If we are brutally honest, F1 is already almost at that point due to the incredibly strict rules every team has to operate under. There is little room for innovation in any area under the current rules, so every team basically ends up doing the same thing, instead of just using a number of items that are supplied directly from the FIA at a fraction of the cost of having to manufacture every component themselves.

COST SAVINGS: A very rough ballpark estimate of the potential savings from the suggested changes above would be somewhere in the region of $80-100m/year, maybe a lot more than that for the top teams, as their development would effectively stop in many areas. The breakdown of savings would look something like this:

BRAKES: $5-7m
AERO DEVELOPMENT: $30-40m
MONOCOQUE: $3-5m
FIXED FRONT WING: $10-15m
GEARBOX: $10-15m
ELECTRONICS: $5-7m
POWER UNIT: $20-30m

I’m not sure how many jobs these changes would eliminate, but it would be more than a few. Payroll is always one of the highest line items in the budgets. I understand and I am sympathetic that there will be many jobs lost due to these changes but, like in any business, sometimes you need to change to make things work. Car manufacturers are not afraid to shut down entire factories, with tens of thousands of jobs lost, if it doesn’t fit whatever decisions they make at the time. Just because the teams have themselves gradually created a monster, in large part thanks to the manufacturers pouring crazy money into the series, and the governing body not recognizing this until it was too late to stop it, they are now faced with how to fix all this in order to ensure their long-term survival.

REVENUE FLOW: The total payout from Liberty (FOM) to the teams over the past 3 years is averaging around $950m/year. This is then distributed through a complex formula among all the competing teams with a very complicated set of rules based on different tiers and how long each team has been competing, the importance of each team, and not insignificantly, what deal each team was able to cut with the old F1 owners when they needed some sort of concession. As things stand today, the FOM payout is heavily biased towards the top teams.

Hardly any followers of the sport are aware of how this works except the die-hard fans. It would be much fairer and also more interesting to the fans if a payout system was used that started with a fixed amount for each team. The total amount could be $500m ($50m/team). The remaining funds would be the official prize money paid out based on performance in each race, so a rough total of $450m/year paid out over 21races. These numbers should be official, transparent and the same for each race. If the winner of each race gets $5m, then there would be something to talk about. Money talks and people are intrigued about it, it’s human nature. Why keep one of the key talking points for people a secret when it’s already one of the highest payouts in sport and would create some excitement and intrigue among the fans? If we use a very simple formula that everyone can understand based on $200,000/point scored, the total payout for 2018 would look like this:

Mercedes-Benz: 655 points x $200,000 = $131m+$50m = $181.0m
Ferrari: 571 points x $200,000 = $114m+$50m = $164.0m
Red Bull: 419 points x $200,000 = $83.6m+$50m = $133.6m
Renault: 122 points x $200,000 = $24.4m+$50m = $74.4m
Haas: 93 points x $200,000 = $18.6m+$50m = $68.6m
McLaren: 62 points x $200,000 = $12.4m+$50m = $62.4m
Force India: 52 points x $200,000 = $10.4m+$50m = $60.4m
Sauber: 48 points x $200,000 = $9.6m+$50m = $59.6m
Toro Rosso: 33 points x $200,000 = $6.6m+$50m = $56.6m
Williams: 7 points x $200,000 = $1.4m+$50m = $51.4m

TOTAL: $925.0m

In addition, there could be a $25m bonus for winning the championship, bringing the total payout to $950m.

With the proposed technical rule changes, there will be sufficient income for every team to operate and be fiscally sound. If they then wish to improve their competitiveness it is up to each team how hard they are willing to work to find more sponsors, hire better drivers and personnel – and there will still be a level of skill placed on spending money efficiently on the right things to bring the success each team aims for – whether it be winning the championship or having the nicest hospitality unit.

[MIKA27]

Johansson’s radical proposal to make F1 awesome again – Part 2

Stefan Johansson, former Ferrari and McLaren F1 driver, has come up a with a template for a radically revised version of the sport he loves. Here is the second in a four-part series on what needs to change and why, this time in the nature of the competition.

Yesterday we dealt with the economic changes necessary to help change F1’s structure. Today, it is about the nature of the competition itself.

What I am proposing below are very radical changes that will require a complete reset philosophically on every level of how we go racing. Over time, focusing on downforce and aerodynamics has completely taken over every other aspect of racing to the point where it affects not only the car design, but also how every new race track is designed.

Sadly, the end result is that the racing is getting more boring, with less passing as each year goes by, to the point where we instead have to come up with band-aid solutions to try and spice up the show. One such is the DRS device, another is forcing the tire manufacturer to essentially produce an inferior product to make the racing a little less predictable. As we know, none of this has worked out very well.

In addition, over time there have been attempts at slowing the cars either by reducing the horsepower and at one point they even went down the road of introducing grooved tires. Yet at no time has there even been a decision to stop the focus on aero development, except for tiny isolated solutions that have been minimally effective and only added to the overall cost.

Learning from other racing series can be extremely instructive as the same physics apply universally. IndyCar and NASCAR have in the past gone in the wrong direction by increasing aero grip, only to find out it was a huge, expensive mistake, and in each case backtracked to a less aero dependent package. If we count how many times there’s been small changes to the aero rules to slow the cars down, or speed them up, or help the overtaking, or whatever the reason was each time, and then count the amount of money that was spent by each team, it’s staggering. A perfect example is the 2019 rules, expected to have cost each team an additional €15m ($16.8m) and they likely won’t make any difference whatsoever. Yet, not once has the problem been fixed, but instead it has maybe masked it slightly for half a season, before the teams catch up to where they were before. At some point the penny has to drop!

70 percent reduction in downforce

The cars should always be balanced on the edge of adhesion in both low- and high-speed corners. By doing this, there will be more emphasis on the drivers requiring the use of delicate car control and, in some corners, bravery will again make the difference. The engineering focus will shift more towards mechanical grip – the vehicle dynamics and tire performance to get back the lost grip from the limited aero downforce. This will make the cars much more difficult to drive which will force teams to hire the best drivers available, and many of the great traditional tracks that have been outgrown by the current cars and become boring due to the massive downforce will again become interesting both from the drivers’ and the spectators’ point of view.

Someone recently suggested a drop of 40-50% downforce but I don’t think it’s enough to make the cars lose their aero sensitivity enough to be able to follow another car closely. The current F1 cars have such a huge amount of downforce that I believe a minimum 70% drop is required to reach the right target where the cars won’t be fully dependent on aero for performance. The Turbo cars of the 1980s had roughly 70% less downforce than the current cars, and they were already on the limit for being aero sensitive when you followed another car. No one at the time considered those cars to be undrivable because they had too little downforce and too much power: we just wanted more, as you always do as a driver. And those cars were awesome to drive.

Implement a fixed maximum level of downforce

In order to heavily reduce the overwhelming importance of aerodynamics on any current car design, there should be a fixed maximum level of downforce. This can be monitored real time from the strain gauges off the suspension pushrods. It will be no different than checking the engines to make sure they are always within the legal parameters or the tire pressures or any of the other multitude of parameters that are currently monitored in real time. It will feed straight into the ECU along with all the other data being collected from the car while running.

So, for example, if there are spikes on the boost level or the fuel flow for a certain amount of time, there is a penalty, or the car can be disqualified, so the same thing should apply to downforce levels. Several different methods can be implemented to control this so there will be no room for interpretation or ways to cheat the system by the teams. It could either be controlled by a form of active ride system, that would alter the ride height by small increments in microseconds once the maximum downforce level is reached. The active ride system was already quite well developed in the early ’90s, so with the current technology available, it would be a relatively easy system to implement.

It could also be controlled from the front and rear wings or the rear diffuser, all with microsecond adjustments so the car would be safe to drive at all times. Once the research on how to best achieve a consistent and safe way to control this is under way, the right answer will be found very quickly. The FIA will then issue and manage the same system for each team.

Make the cars look attractive, aggressive, fast

By implementing the rule on maximum downforce the current hideous front wings will be eliminated automatically and if the rule of standardized parts is implemented there will be one front wing design for all the teams to use. No add-on aero bits will be allowed on any of the car’s surfaces. Any aero development will be more focused on drag and aero efficiency, which will then also translate to road relevance eventually. As a result of this we will hopefully find a number of interesting and visually appealing solutions.

Increase power by 30-40 percent, formula based on thermal efficiency and energy consumption

Create a formula based on thermal efficiency and energy consumption that will have a maximum limit on how much energy a car can use for the duration of a Grand Prix. This will allow and hopefully encourage manufacturers to develop new technologies that are not restricted to the hybrid/internal combustion engine concept only, which is the only option currently allowed. Everyone with even a basic interest in engineering knows that there are a number of far more interesting alternatives.

This would truly open the door for F1 to genuinely be at the cutting edge of technology instead of constantly fine-tuning a politically correct concept at a cost that is astronomical to everyone involved. Set a target of around 300-400hp increase in power as long as it can meet the energy consumption criteria, which will offset about 30 percent of the loss in lap-time from the reduction of downforce. By using this formula, it will eventually become apparent what energy source is actually the most environmentally friendly and efficient from a performance point of view.

The immediate response I get when I mention this idea to anyone is that the manufacturers will never accept it and will leave instantly. If this is the case, F1 is doomed anyway. If there is one thing that is historically consistent in any form of motorsport, it’s when the manufacturers end up controlling a championship, they will eventually screw it up or simply pull out when it doesn’t suit their purpose any longer. Sometimes they then come back again when they’ve had a rethink (Honda most recent example), but there is zero loyalty to – or emotional engagement in – the sport. For them it’s purely business.

If the current manufacturers don’t like the idea for whatever reason, I am certain that there will be other manufacturers that would look at F1 very seriously if it had a more sensible set of rules that would allow for more innovation and had a lower barrier of entry than the current rules provide. Interestingly, there is not one senior executive from any car manufacturer that I have spoken to that is in favor of the electric concept, they all feel this is a political agenda that’s been forced upon them.

Noise

If the rules are open for different alternatives on engine technology, we will again get back the engine noise as a factor in the overall experience. Fans can hear the difference between the different engine concepts and there will be very noisy engines and some that are not, but there will be something for everyone to relate to and talk about.

More power, higher top speeds, less downforce, longer braking distances, slower cornering speeds, more passing
With the massive reduction in downforce and a significant increase in horsepower we will see a huge increase in top speed, and as a result, much longer braking distances. This should radically improve the opportunities of overtaking as the entry and mid-corner speeds will be significantly lower, which will again require the drivers to slow the cars down much earlier and a lot more before they turn in to the corners. The target should be somewhere close to 400kph (248mph) in top speed, it will be super-exciting to watch and will definitely give people something to talk about.

It’s hard for people to relate today when there are road cars with higher top speed and more horsepower than a Formula 1 car, no one cares or can appreciate that F1 cars are insanely fast in the slow- and medium-speed corners. We were close to 400kph in some cases in the ’80s with the turbo cars, at tracks that were infinitely more dangerous than any of the tracks are today, yet there were hardly ever any incidents except when a freak accident of some sort occurred, when something broke on the car for example.

We need to get the ‘awesome’ factor back somehow. With the added horsepower and less downforce the cars will become beasts to drive and you will see the drivers really wrestling with the cars on exit and entry to the corners. I can guarantee that Lewis, Seb, Daniel, Max and all the rest of the top guys will love every moment of it, and it will automatically weed out the average guys as the teams will be forced to hire the best drivers they can.

Weight reduction

Put more emphasis on weight reduction. With all the focus on the current electric vehicles being the future of not only motor racing but also road cars, the weight of all these cars has increased dramatically, due to the batteries and the systems to run them. A current F1 car is now 50 percent heavier than it used to be. At one point the weight limit was 500kg.

As an example, 30kg equates to roughly one second in lap-time on an average lap of 1m30s. If there were an emphasis on weight reduction as well as an option on engine technology, based on my idea of a fixed amount of energy over the duration of a race distance, there would be some very interesting alternatives surfacing very quickly. And if a good portion of the money currently being spent on the endless and worthless aero development would instead be spent on material technologies and more efficient engine technologies, we would very soon find some very exciting alternatives that would eventually filter down to road relevance. Imagine if every car on the road weighed 30-40% less than the weight of a current car, how much would that save in fuel consumption and subsequently in emissions each year on a global scale? The results would be massive!

It seems strange to me that all focus is on electrification when the gains from lightweight cars would most likely outweigh the benefits of all-electric vehicles, yet there seems to be almost no effort in this area. Road cars today are essentially made of the same materials they were in the early 1900s: surely there has to be a lighter, safer and cheaper alternative. There are already materials in existence, both alloys and composite materials, that could be implemented, and if there was more focus in this area it would not be long before we would see some incredibly light and strong materials surface that would also eventually be cost effective enough to use for production vehicles. I refuse to believe there are no better alternatives than what is currently being used.

Improve tire technology, make them wider and bigger in diameter

Another by-product of the high downforce cars is the current generation of tires. For years, Pirelli has been forced to make a tire that is purposefully poor in performance just to slow the cars down or “make the racing more interesting” since it’s nearly impossible to pass when you follow another car due to the turbulence and the highly sensitive aero on today’s cars.

None of this has worked out very well as we can witness every weekend watching any form of racing with aero-dependent cars. In order to offset the reduction in downforce, the tires could very easily be made to have significantly more grip and durability. It’s almost comical that every weekend teams at the highest level get caught out by tires not working at their optimal level. Teams spend hundreds of millions of dollars on aero development and engine development, yet on the day, they lose races because the tire pressures were off or the temps didn’t reach their optimal working range, or the fronts didn’t heat up as quick as the rears, or whatever. Literally, most races are won or lost depending on how teams make their tires work.

So why isn’t there more focus on the tires in the overall performance of the car from the outset? There are chassis and engine manufacturers competing fiercely against each other; why not allow the tire manufacturers to do the same? Aside from the driver, there are three things that make a car go fast or slow – engine, chassis and tires. If we opened up the rules and allowed more than one tire manufacturer, we would very quickly see a dramatic increase in speed and lap times.

This would also be by far the easiest and also cheapest way for the teams to get better performance as the tire companies would pour money into development and marketing. Tires have always been, and will always be, the cheapest and easiest way to get more performance out of a racecar. Like I already mentioned, teams spend millions in almost every category of racing on aero, chassis and engine development to gain an extra second in lap times, yet you can bolt on a set of tires that cost $3,000 and gain far more just by being a different compound or different in construction.

Allow more than one tire manufacturer

There are at least four tire companies I can think of today that would look at F1 very seriously if the rules were changed to reflect a more modern style tire. Each of these companies is already spending considerable amounts of money in other forms of motorsport, both on development and team support. If they were to engage in F1, we would see benefits not only on the competition side, but also in marketing and development as they would all spend significant money to promote their products through F1. This would help the series, the teams and the entire eco-system would grow accordingly.

18-inch rims to correlate to road car technology

All other forms of racing except F1 have adapted to the more modern, low-profile size of tire versus the mandated 13-inch rims that has been part of F1 for nearly 50 years. F1 has been slow to adapt as it would interfere too much with the current aero packages, and as it’s the engineers that now write the rules, this idea has been shut down every time it arises. If there’s a wholesale rule change on aero reduction, this would be the perfect time to switch to the bigger diameter wheel and tire to make the tires more relevant to tire manufacturers’ high-performance road tire production, make the cars look more relevant to current road car design.

And it will make the cars look far better from a pure aesthetic point of view rather than the image created by these silly-looking little balloon tires they are currently running on. If F1 claims it is on the cutting edge of technology and that it’s important to have some level of road relevance, you’d think one of the first things they would move away from are tires that have not been seen on any road car since the late ’70s!

Summary of proposed changes

To summarize these changes and how they will relate in overall performance, I’ve provided a “ball-park” guess at the loss or gain from the different changes based on an average lap of 1min30sec:

Reduce downforce by 70%: +10-15sec
Wider, taller, improved tires: - 3-5sec.
Increase power by 300-400hp: - 3-5 sec.
Reduce weight by 150-200kg (331-441lbs): - 3-5 sec.

Again, this is a ball park guess without having done any significant research but based on my own experience and discussions with other drivers, engineers and designers. But it’s clear that we will be very close to the current lap times quite quickly, but it will be achieved in a completely different way. Hopefully in a way that will bring the awesome factor back to F1, with a fast-looking car that a driver will have to really fight to get the most out of it. The spectators will be able to see the drivers working hard with the cars moving around a lot more.

4-way matrix of chassis, power unit, tires, driver

Based on the ideas I’ve presented above, when the new rules are being created, there should always be a focus on what I refer to as a 4-way matrix. The rules should always strive for each of the four elements to have an equal importance in the performance of the car. This will also help spread the load of development costs between the teams, engine manufacturers and tire companies, and it will help promote the best drivers to graduate to F1.

Reduce the importance of electronics

By eliminating all the electronic aids the drivers currently use, except the ones absolutely necessary to operate the car, the emphasis will shift back more towards car control instead of the engineers optimizing a car’s performance by studying the data to see where the drivers need less or more support in certain areas, with the help of a multitude of settings all controlled via the electronics on the cars.

One of the technical directors was quoted recently saying, “We need to throw some things in there to make the racing more unpredictable”. If we instead threw a bunch of things away, we would get to that point a lot faster, and save a lot of money in the process. The electronic driver aids would be a good starting point for that. This is a perfect example of poor governance. The electronic takeover could and should have been nipped in the bud, so it didn’t get completely out of hand.

Eliminate designers and engineers in the rule-making process, simplify the rules

Since the rule-making process became a democracy of sorts, which allowed all the teams to have a say through the introduction of the “Technical Working Group” we have seen a progressive decline in the overall quality of the racing. The rules have become more and more complicated each year to the point where the team principals no longer bother to even try to understand them. They simply leave it to their technical team to make the decisions, and the 2019 aero rules are a perfect example of this. We have yet another new rule on the aero, apparently to make overtaking easier. This rule will make absolutely zero difference and will only add tens of millions of expense to the already stretched budgets for most of the teams.

The engineers are all great and highly intelligent people, and it’s great working with them and talking to them, but they only have one thing in mind which is to make the cars go as fast as they can. It’s very difficult for them to see the bigger picture of what is required to make all the elements of the package work. I think it’s actually irresponsible of the team principals and the FIA to allow this to have happened in the first place, bearing in mind that the car rules are by far the most important element to make the business model work.

So now we have this bizarre situation where the inmates are running the asylum – what could possibly go wrong?! Allow the engineers to do what they are good at and leave the governance to people who know what they’re doing. It’s evident that the democratic approach is not working. The teams can’t agree on anything most of the time, and, as such, we always will end up with some form of compromise that will in the end make no difference or, at best, very little.

Instead, it should be governed by putting together an unbiased and well-rounded group of independent people that understand the business from a competition, technical as well as a practical and economic point of view – people who can see in advance when things are heading in the wrong direction before they do, and then act forcefully before it’s too late to correct. Make a set of rules that are challenging and exciting for manufacturers and private teams alike, and make them fair and equal and, most of all, easy to understand for both teams and the fans.

Modify race tracks to make them more difficult to drive and more interesting to watch

Virtually every race track today is either designed or modified to suit the current type of high downforce cars. As such, we end up with tracks that are full of low- and medium-speed corners, first-gear hairpins, and boring chicanes. These types of corners are not very interesting either for the drivers or the spectators, and are merely there to slow the cars down. Chicanes should be banned as far as I’m concerned, and for a track designer to put one in when they have a clean sheet of paper is beyond me.

Abu Dhabi is a perfect example: they could have done pretty much anything they wanted with a budget that was through the roof, and we end up with arguably the most boring race track ever made. If the downforce is reduced significantly, many of these tracks can be modified, or in the case of some of the older tracks, put back to their original design as the cornering speeds will again be much lower. Braking distances will be longer and with run-off areas now much bigger than they were when they changed them in the first place, they will be much safer. The fans will love watching the drivers balancing the cars on the limit rather than perfecting the art of jumping a curb in a low-speed chicane which is currently the case and where you gain the most time in a modern car.

Although the runoff areas are there for a reason, it’s important to find a method to “punish” a driver if he goes over the limit, something that will significantly slow him down to the point where there will be an automatic loss of time that far outweighs the potential gain of trying too hard and going over the limit. As it is today, every driver can find the limit on most tracks within the first five laps as there is no real penalty for going too fast and all you have to do is peg it back slightly the following lap. Interestingly, there are no more incidents on the street circuits where there are often no run off areas at all, which goes to show that drivers will be more disciplined when they have to be.

Replace DRS with push-to-pass (P2P)

The introduction of the DRS system was a typical knee-jerk reaction based on the fact that there were too many complaints that the racing was getting too boring and there was not enough overtaking. Although it has certainly helped the overtaking, it is of no interest as the driver in front is nothing more than a sitting duck, and there is no skill or strategy involved as you can use it as many times as you like during the course of the race.

The Push to Pass system that is being used in IndyCar is far more interesting becaus each driver is given a certain number of seconds per race where they can use it, it is then up to the driver to distribute this to his best ability for the duration of the race. For example, if he’s too aggressive in the beginning of the race and he’s run out of seconds, he’ll be in trouble at the end of the race if there is a restart or a dice for position with another driver who still has enough P2P time left in the bank to attack. The time consumed could be displayed on the TV monitors so the fans can see what each driver has consumed. It adds another element of intrigue both on the track and for the commentators to discuss during the broadcast. Depending on what engine concept is used, a percentage performance gain could be used to achieve the same result.

Race format

The current race format is working quite well, it has a good balance of speed and endurance for both drivers and cars. By reducing the downforce significantly, the importance of gaining positions in the first couple of laps will reduce and we will see a more balanced approach from the drivers regarding where and when they decide to attack in the races, rather than risking everything at the start as they know that’s pretty much their only chance to overtake the way the current cars work.

Allow teams to run the full distance if they wish to gamble on tire strategy, no mandatory pitstops. Race tactics will become more important, with more options on fuel strategy, tire wear and overall speed of the cars as the race progress. With the new rules drivers, should be able to attack at full speed for the duration of the race, with enough energy and tires to race hard from start to finish.

Longer pit stops, one crew member per wheel

Although it’s fascinating to watch the coordinated ballet of 16 people during an F1 pitstop, once you’ve seen it a couple of times it’s all the same as far as I’m concerned. It doesn’t bring any further elements that add to the show. In fact, because the pitstop is so fast, it makes the overall race strategy more predictable than if you had a longer stop. If you only have one person on each corner of the car, it will make the time of the stop about 5-7 seconds longer than the current 2-4 second stops. This will alter the strategy calls and we will most likely see some drivers choosing to stay out on one set of tires and others going all out risking the extra time the pitstop will take. Tire strategy will become more important and as such add an extra element of unpredictability.

Fewer investigations and penalties

By using a random group of former drivers as Race Stewards, we are only causing confusion as each one of them has his own views of what is acceptable or not. If these things have to be policed based on a subjective viewpoint, it’s critical that the decision is made by the same person or team every time, otherwise it’s inevitable that there will be inconsistency.

We need one person with great experience and is somewhat current, who is respected by everyone, to be appointed Chief Steward and attend all the races. This way, there will be consistency and all the drivers will eventually know what they can and can’t get away with. This person needs to be extremely tough and firm at all times. Because as we know, each generation has at least one driver who is pushing the envelope to the absolute limit of what they can get away with. They’re always in trouble with the stewards and historically these guys have such a strong conviction that they’ve never done anything wrong, that they are able to gradually wear the stewards down and often get away with stuff they shouldn’t.

As it is, we currently get some very odd penalties and decisions depending on who is stewarding each particular race. Again, a lot of this is an unfortunate side effect of trying to sanitize the tracks to a point where there is no longer any punishment for going over the limit.

No penalties for engine and gearbox changes

Can anyone even remember the original purpose why this penalty rule was implemented? I think it was in the interest of cost reduction that it was decided that teams would only be allowed a maximum of three engines per season and the gearbox had to run at least five consecutive races before it could be replaced. It is evident that this rule has had the exact opposite effect, making the costs spiral even higher. By implementing a Draconian set of rules that are being enforced in an equally Draconian manner, the manufacturers are being forced to develop and build engines that are infinitely more expensive to produce than if they were allowed a sensible number of engines and gearboxes over the course of the season.

By enforcing the rule as strictly as they do, the competition and subsequently the entertainment side have become a complete farce in many instances. The constant grid penalties are ruining the races and the competition is becoming a joke when a driver starts a race from last on the grid with 50 or more grid penalties. The team’s (rational) behavior of strategically taking penalties in order to position themselves for a better future race leads to even more confusion amongst fans and adds nothing to the racing. As always, the best way to reduce the costs in the long run is by having rules stability: the constant tinkering with the rules is just driving the costs higher every time, and the top teams with big budgets will always gain more from these rules changes as it’s the R&D that drive the costs through the roof, not the manufacturing of parts.

[MIKA27]

LECLERC: THERE WILL ALWAYS BE TEAM ORDERS IN F1

Charles Leclerc said on Thursday he would be willing to move over again for Ferrari team-mate Sebastian Vettel, but only in certain situations.

The 21-year-old Monegasque Formula 1driver was running third in China two weeks ago when he was asked to allow Vettel through as Ferrari tried to take the fight to champions Mercedes.

Leclerc obliged but Vettel was unable to stop Lewis Hamilton and Valtteri Bottas romping to the team’s third straight one-two finish.

Vettel finished third, the German’s first podium of the season, but Leclerc — who was denied a first win by engine trouble in Bahrain last month — fell to fifth behind Max Verstappen’s Red Bull.

“Obviously there will always be team orders in F1,” Leclerc told reporters ahead of this weekend’s Azerbaijan Grand Prix. “But, yeah, it depends on the situation. In some situations I will (obey),” he added without elaborating.

Vettel and Leclerc can race each other but team boss Mattia Binotto has said that in 50-50 situations the German — a four-times champion in his fifth season with the team — would have preference.

Leclerc, in only his second season in Formula One and going into his fourth race for Ferrari, said he understood that and that it was up to him to prove his worth to the team.

“I’ve got a lot of things to prove and now it’s just up to me to do the best job possible in the car to prove to the team what I’m capable of,” he said. “I just need to continue doing what I’m doing, trying to improve myself and hopefully it will change soon.”

Asked if he thought he could beat Vettel over the course of a season and would be allowed to by Ferrari, Leclerc hesitated, “It’s very early in the season still. I don’t know, it’s a tricky question,” he said.

After Ferrari’s press officer prompted him to “say yes,” he continued: “I believe there is the potential to do so but then from the potential to actually doing it, I need to do a lot of work and put all the things together.”

Hamilton, who found himself in a similar position alongside double world champion Fernando Alonso in his rookie year at McLaren in 2007, empathised with Leclerc.

“It goes against your core values because you’re a racing driver at heart,” said the Briton, now a five times world champion, who finished level on points with Alonso in 2007 but ahead on placings.

“I understand how Charles feels because in his heart he believes he’s the best or got the potential to be the best. It’s almost like having your light dimmed (to have team orders).”

[MIKA27]

BAKU WANT RETURN TO JUNE DATE FOR FORMULA 1 RACE

The Azerbaijan Grand Prix would like to move back to June from its current April slot on the Formula 1 calendar, race promoter Arif Rahimov said on Thursday.

“The weather (in June) is a bit more predictable, the build-up is easier, you have less winds, less rains, it’s warmer overall,” he told reporters ahead of Sunday’s race in Baku.

Azerbaijan made its debut on the calendar in 2016, running as the European Grand Prix that year. That race and the following one were held in June.

The grand prix was moved to April last season, with France taking the June slot, and is set to stay on the calendar until at least 2023 after a contract extension agreed earlier this year.

Race organisers’ desire to hold the race in June next year could be complicated by Azerbaijan hosting four European championship soccer matches, however.

“It’s good to create this festive feeling for three weeks, it’s perfect,” said Rahimov of the prospect of potentially having the race fit in either just before or between the Euro 2020 matches.

“On the other hand, given the logistics and the logistical restrictions of F1, we have to stick to some guidelines to see where we can actually make it happen.”

[MIKA27]

HAMILTON: I’VE HONESTLY STRUGGLED A LITTLE BIT IN BAKU

Lewis Hamilton is no stranger to winning at just about every venue on the Formula 1 calendar, but the Mercedes driver admits he has yet to find the sweet-spot around the Baku Street Circuit despite winning last year’s race.

But the truth is that the five-time Formula 1 World Champion inherited victory last year at the Azerbaijan Grand Prix when teammate Valtteri Bottas was forced to retire while leading late in the race with a puncture.

Ahead of this weekend, Hamilton said, “It’s a really great track and it’s one that I’ve honestly struggled at a little bit, particularly last year. It will be interesting, and I’m going there with a mindset that I’ve got to try and improve my previous years’ performance.”

Last year’s race fell into his hands when error-prone Ferrari driver Sebastian Vettel made a hash of it last year, and then the #44 got a free pass when Bottas suffered the misfortune.

Hamilton acknowledged, “I was fortunate to get the win there last year but I wasn’t quick enough really through the weekend. So that’s a place I expect Valtteri to be quick and I expect the Ferraris to be particularly quick.”

[MIKA27]

AZERBAIJAN GRAND PRIX: WHO CAN STOP HAMILTON?

Championship leader Lewis Hamilton is expecting his main rivals to give him a tough time on the demanding streets of Baku at this weekend’s Azerbaijan Grand Prix, but the question remains: who can stop him from winning his 76th Formula 1 race.

The five-time world champion, who heads the embryonic 2019 title race by six points after three races, has struggled to master the Baku circuit in the past and won last year only after Mercedes’ team-mate Valtteri Bottas had a puncture when leading with three laps remaining.

That disappointment was a body blow for Bottas who did not fully recover and failed to claim a win as Hamilton romped to his fifth drivers’ crown. This time, Hamilton expects him, and Ferrari, to respond.

Although the betting odds are tilted towards Hamilton winning in Baku, bookies also have Ferrari duo Sebastian Vettel and Charles Leclerc as well as Valtteri Bottas as drivers with a chance of celebrating on the top step of the podium on Sunday afternoon.

“I was fortunate to get the win here last year,” admitted Hamilton, who has developed a habit of turning unpromising races into valuable podium finishes or wins. I wasn’t quick enough really, right through the weekend so it will be interesting this time.”

“I’m expecting Valtteri to be quick and I expect the Ferraris to be particularly quick. It will be interesting. I’m going with a mindset that I’ve got to improve on my previous performances.”

Victory last year was Hamilton’s first at the tricky track made up of the season’s longest – and very fast – straight and tight corners, some with little run-off and walls.

A reinvigorated Bottas, winner of the season-opener in Melbourne, but beaten twice since then by Hamilton, has often relished such conditions.

“I’m disappointed that I didn’t win from pole in China and I know that was all about the start,” he said. “It’s all about details and learning from them. That’s life. It’s how it goes sometimes. I know I can turn this around so that’s my goal now. I would prefer to be leading.”

After three outings, Mercedes have proved they are in form with three straight one-two finishes, the first team to do so since 1992 when Williams, now struggling, were the dominant force.

Hamilton, however, has warned his team needs to be wary of Ferrari, wounded by their disappointing start after shining in pre-season testing.

Already adrift by 57 points in the constructors’ contest, they will be extra-keen to bounce back and end Mercedes’ run.

New boy Charles Leclerc, in particular, could be a major threat to Hamilton and Bottas as he is a slick street track specialist, won the Baku F2 race from pole in 2017, following his father’s death, and is keen to prove Ferrari wrong to use team orders in favour of four-time champion Sebastian Vettel.

“I love racing at Baku and scored my first F1 points there last year,” said the 21-year-old Monegasque. “I always go well there.”

Hamilton, who spoke in support of an under-fire Vettel earlier this season, was this week hailed by former Ferrari driver Gerhard Berger as the only man “on the same level” as his ex-McLaren team-mate Ayrton Senna.

Berger’s praise made clear that he saw nobody on the grid to equal Hamilton, an assessment sure to add vigour to Vettel’s need for success.

Ferrari fans may hope to see the raw power of their car’s engines give them a speed advantage on the long Baku straights, but team chief Mattia Binotto was reluctant to encourage the tifosi’s dream.

“Let’s wait – Mercedes were very strong in China and Baku is a very difficult circuit,” he said, hinting at the track’s reputation for creating chaos and the unexpected.

[MIKA27]

HAMILTON: IF FORMULA 1 GOES ELECTRIC IT WILL LOSE ITS ESSENCE 

Lewis Hamilton admits he watches Formula E and is impressed by the look of the cars that compete in the all-electric series, but warns that if Formula 1 goes that route it will lose the essence that makes it the pinnacle of motorsport.

Speaking to Sport Bild, Hamilton said, “I watch the races and find it fascinating to see what is going to be the future of motor racing. Every year the cars get cooler and it looks like fun.”

But at the same time the Mercedes driver questions whether the new technology can thrill fans as in the past, “For example, this new generation have never experienced the smells or the crazy sounds of those 10-cylinder engines.”

“I was at Spa in 1996 and I remember hearing Michael Schumacher’s Benetton and it was so cool. It’s why I became an F1 driver.”

“People need those emotions, the emotions, the smells, the sounds, which of course are not the same anymore. I’m sure that if we keep heading in this direction, the basic essence of motorsport as we know it will be lost.”

Meanwhile, the five-time F1 World Champion has for the first time hinted he might be tempted to sample alternative series’ when he finally decides to quit the top tier, “So far F1 has always been everything to me.”

“When I quit, I’ll have massive withdrawal symptoms like any F1 driver, so there are other series that I could go to. Fernando Alonso is at Indy, Gary Paffett is a bit older than me and is now in Formula E. That will be the future.”

“So who knows. At the moment I will try to stay in F1. As long as I’m focused and fit, I want to be here,” added Hamilton ahead of the Azerbaijan Grand Prix weekend.

[MIKA27]

FORMULA 1 GIVES UP ON MIAMI GRAND PRIX STREET RACE

Formula 1 and local organisers have given up on plans to hold a race in downtown Miami because of the disruption for businesses and residents, the Miami Herald reported on Wednesday.

It said they were now looking into an alternative race location on land next to the Hard Rock Stadium, home of the Miami Dolphins NFL team, to the north of the Florida city.

“We want to do something great for Miami,” the paper quoted Tom Garfinkel, vice chairman and CEO of the Miami Dolphins and Hard Rock Stadium, as saying.

“Unfortunately when we finally received the detailed report of what it would take to build out a street circuit each year, the multiple weeks of traffic and construction disruption to the port, Bayfront Park and the residents and businesses on Biscayne Boulevard would have been significant.”

Formula One had hoped to add the street race to the calendar for this year but that was pushed back last July until at least 2020 as a result of emerging local opposition to the proposed harbourside layout.

The sport’s owners Liberty Media say they want to make sure Miami, which has been offered a 10-year contract, has long-term viability with maximum local support.

The race would be a second grand prix in the United States after the one in Austin, Texas.

Miami Dolphins franchise owner Stephen Ross is supporting the project, with a company owned by the U.S. entrepreneur lined up as the potential promoter.

“A lot would have to happen for us to be able to do it,” said Garfinkel of the new proposal.

“But we have over 250 acres of land so adding an F1 race to where Hard Rock Stadium and the Miami Open sit means we can create a world-class racing circuit that is unencumbered by existing infrastructure.”

[MIKA27]

WILLIAMS AND FINANCIAL TIMES ANNOUNCE PARTNERSHIP

Williams have announced a partnership with Financial Times ahead of this weekend’s Azerbaijan Grand Prix, the iconic media outlet will have branding on the team’s current challenger.

Press Release:

Rokit Williams Racing and The Financial Times are pleased to announce a multi-year partnership.

This will increase both organisations’ visibility among global, influential audiences and combine marketing assets, enabling the team’s commercial partners to access integrated sponsorship and advertising solutions.

The deal sees the FT become an Official Partner of ROKiT Williams Racing ahead of this weekend’s Azerbaijan Grand Prix. It is the first time the FT has partnered with a team in Formula One, complementing the FT’s successful annual event and content series entitled ‘The Business of Formula One’.

The FT logo will appear on the inside of the rear wing endplate of the FW42 during the remainder of 2019 FIA Formula One World Championship.

Claire Williams, Deputy Team Principal of ROKiT Williams Racing said, “I am delighted to announce the Financial Times as an Official Partner to ROKiT Williams Racing. In only a few short years, the landscape for marketing and brand exposure has changed significantly for all sports, including Formula One. The opportunity to collaborate with the FT to embrace these new forms of media and digital opportunities is hugely exciting for both our team and our existing partners, and I am looking forward to seeing how the partnership develops.”

“This is a hugely exciting partnership between two iconic British brands, both operating globally and at the forefront of their respective fields,” said David Buttle, FT Global Commercial Marketing Director. “The innovative structure of this deal will both extend the FT’s brand and bring together complementary commercial assets and capabilities.

We’re pleased to announce this at a landmark moment for both the FT – which recently secured its 1 millionth paying reader – and Formula One – which just held its thousandth race, in Shanghai.”

[MIKA27]

MARKO: WOMEN NOT STRONG ENOUGH TO RACE IN FORMULA 1

Red Bull consultant Helmut Marko has kicked the proverbial hornet’s nest with statements in which he claims women are not suited physically and mentally for Formula 1.

Marko is not shy to be politically incorrect, and his statements come at a time when there is a push to produce a female race driver capable of competing at the highest level. The W-Series was launched recently to provide a springboard for young ladies to compete in the top flight.

Marko argues that women are simply not physically strong enough to compete against men at the highest level, citing popular mainstream sports – tennis, football, skiing etc – where women and men compete in separate tournaments of the same discipline.

He told Kleine Zeitung, “You have to be in peak fitness to race in Formula 1 and you need crazy power in your shoulders. In the old Gösser Kurve on the Red Bull Ring you have to endure about 4G. That is a huge physical burden and possibly that is too heavy for women.”

He also questions the temperament of female drivers to go toe-to-toe against male counterparts in F1,  “If you drive 300km/h and then fight wheel-to-wheel, you must also have to be aggressive. I don’t know if that is in female nature.”

“Why don’t men and women always play tennis against one another? Why doesn’t Serena Williams play Novak Djokovic for example?”

[MIKA27]

HONDA: IN BAKU WE WILL INTRODUCE SPEC 2 VERSION OF OUR ICE

Although the first major upgrade to the current Honda power unit package was initially earmarked for the Spanish Grand Prix, ahead of the Azerbaijan Grand Prix the Japanese manufacturer confirmed they have their new spec engine available for Red Bull and Toro Rosso.

In his preview of the Baku race weekend, Technical Director Toyoharu Tanabe said, “We will introduce the Spec 2 version of our internal combustion engine (ICE) across all four cars right from the start of the weekend.”

“One of the reasons for bringing it to this race is that we found that Daniil Kvyat’s PU problem in China was down to a quality control issue. The main benefits of Spec 2 are improved durability and life and better reliability. It also offers a slight improvement in performance.”

‟The fourth round of the championship takes place on the fastest street circuit on the calendar. The key features of the Baku track are the main straight, which is over 2 kilometers in length and the many right angle corners, typical of a city circuit,” added Tanabe.

This will come as good news for the energy drinks organisation whose driver Max Verstappen is verging on frustration as he is being sent to do battle in car that right now is not quite a match for Mercedes and Red Bull.

[MIKA27]

ALFA ROMEO: BAKU MEANS CRASHES AND SAFETY CARS

Alfa Romeo preview the Azerbaijan Grand Prix weekend, Round 4 of the 2019 Formula 1 World Championship, at Baku City Circuit.

But with the greatest respect, even if Baku is apparently one of the most beautiful cities of the world, even if the capital is located a record 28 metres below sea level, which makes it the lowest lying national capital in the world and also the largest city in the world located below sea level (one quick sidebar thought though: if high altitude in Mexico means less power due to less oxygen being available, does this mean our car will have more power in Baku?) and even if Baku is set to host the final of the 2018-19 UEFA Europa League Football final, there is only one thing which comes to mind and makes us smile when we travel to this particular part of the world:

Frédéric Vasseur, Team Principal Alfa Romeo Racing and CEO Sauber Motorsport AG: “I normally don’t spend much time in overanalyzing previous races – I look forward and work hard on how we can come back even stronger – but after three races it makes sense to reflect on our performance so far. We’ve scored points, which is great, the car showed great potential, but at the same time we faced some technical issues and tricky situations.”

“Kimi is doing a great job, his feedback to engineers is as precise as it can be and as soon as he sits in the car he gets the job done. Antonio so far couldn’t show his real potential, but that’s completely down to the team.”

“Some technical issues and therefore missed track time meant that he could never get comfortable and get the best out of the car, but especially in Australia in Q1 he showed how fast he is. Everyone just needs to be a bit patient and I’m sure he’ll come around.”

“Baku means crashes and safety cars and overtaking so you’ll never know what to expect from the race, but our target is clear: we’ve put a lot of work into the development of our performance since the race in China so we want to finish in the points with both cars.”

Kimi Räikkönen: “I generally don’t like to make predictions, especially in Baku as anything can happen there. In principal our performance is strong, the car is fast, but we constantly need to improve in order to establish ourselves as best of the rest and score as many points as possible.”

Antonio Giovinazzi: “Next to training I also watched fellow countryman Fabio Fognini win the ATP Tennis Masters in Monte Carlo on Easter Sunday, so I’m going to Baku pumped up and with some good vibes. I have very good memories as I won two races when I drove in GP2, I like the track and I hope that I can improve my performance and get the maximum potential out of the car.”

[MIKA27]

2019 Azerbaijan Grand Prix: Pre-Race Press Conference

 

[MIKA27]

Toro Rosso better than points tally suggests – Alexander Albon

Alexander Albon reckons Toro Rosso are in a much stronger position than their points tally suggests and believes they should have been in Q3 at all three opening races of the 2019 Formula 1 season.

Toro Rosso are currently ninth in the Constructors' Standings with four points to their name, but Albon, who has scored three of those points, reckons the team are capable of much more with the current car.

"We've scored three points in three races. Looking at the championship position we look quite low down, but I think we aren't as bad as the table suggests. We've been consistent through the first three races. We just need to qualify a little bit higher.

"I think it's just trying to fine-tune and get rid of the little mistakes, either driver-related or set-up. [We] just need to get everything hooked up a little bit better I think.

"That's three races we've done now where we should've been in Q3 three times. I think everyone can say that probably in the midfield, but I do think we really should've been in Q3 three times and of course when you're in the front half of the field, it makes the races a lot easier."

Albon has been the team's highest qualifier this season with 13th in Australia and 12th in Bahrain, but he crashed heavily during practice in China and was forced to start from the pitlane. Despite that, he went on to finish tenth in the race and labelled it as his best performance in F1 so far and reckons it's proof of their pace.

"I was really happy with it, to be honest. Coming from FP3 it felt like I needed to do something to try to just show the speed, because we did have a lot of pace in FP2. Even in FP3 before the crash we were looking very strong, so when I crashed I wasn't, let's say, disappointed with the crash; it was more like I felt we missed an opportunity more than anything.

"So coming into Sunday I felt like we deserved points. That was the aim. Obviously we knew it was going to be a difficult race to get points, but the team did a great job with strategy and the car as well to get that point."

[MIKA27]

Grid penalties will be worth it if Honda makes gains - Max Verstappen

Max Verstappen believes it is worth Honda taking on grid penalties at some events this year if it ensures the manufacturer can close on its Formula 1 rivals.

Honda has introduced its Spec 2 engine for this weekend’s Azerbaijan Grand Prix in the wake of detecting a quality control issue on Daniil Kvyat’s power unit in China.

It means Red Bull’s drivers are on their second Internal Combustion Engines of the season while Toro Rosso’s duo are onto their third – and final – permitted component.

If a driver takes on a fourth ICE in one season they will be hit with either a five- or 10-place grid penalty, depending on other circumstances.

“I am really happy because they keep pushing really hard to bring updates so that is always good,” said Verstappen.

“I think last year I showed that even if you start at the back you can still finish on the podium like for example in Austin. I don’t think it is a major problem.

“I am happy if we can say by the end of the season that we have really closed the gap to Ferrari and if we use a few more engines then that is fine.”

“I am happy that they did it [introducing Spec 2] and hopefully we can run that engine longer than compared to the first one, which we can still use, there is no problem with it.”

Verstappen added that the performance displayed by Formula 1’s current engine pacesetters acts as further motivation for Honda.

“I think in the race we are more competitive,” he said. “In qualifying it is mainly just Ferrari that stands out, it is massive, but like I said before they have found something in their engine that really works so it is good.

“It gives Honda good motivation to work even harder which they do.”

[MIKA27]

Nearly impossible for Williams to gain from any chaos - Robert Kubica

Robert Kubica fears it will be “nearly impossible” for Williams to profit from any potential chaos at this weekend’s Azerbaijan Grand Prix, due to the team’s lowly position.

Formula 1 races at the Baku City Circuit in both 2017 and 2018 resulted in only 13 finishers due to an array of incidents and accidents, with the event one of only two at which Williams scored points last year.

Williams has endured a miserable start to 2019, with its FW42 around a second off the pace of the tail-end of the midfield group in most sessions.

Williams is the only team yet to pick up a point this season.

“Well Baku showed in the past that everything happened,” Kubica said.

“But still last year I think we were much closer to the others than we are this year, at least looking our first three races.

“So from one point yes everything can happen here, from the other probably from what we have seen in the first three races I would say it would be very difficult, or nearly impossible [to take a point].

“I think we are too far off from the pack to think about it.”

Kubica is the only driver on the grid without experience of Baku City Circuit and has not driven at a de facto street track since the 2010 Singapore Grand Prix.

“I will expect a higher level of alert in the beginning of the session which is normal, especially when you join for the first time a street circuit,” he said.

“And I’m looking forward because it will be nearly nine years [since] my [last] time on a street circuit after 2010 Singapore.

“It has always in the past been a special feeling to drive close to the walls.

“From the outside the Baku street circuit looks pretty simple in many places but on the other hand is quite complicated in three or four places so yeah, we will have to go through them and I think there is no need to think too much about it, just go there and discover what will happen.”

[MIKA27]

Kubica: Lowe not solely responsible for Williams crisis

Robert Kubica believes Williams's slump to the back of the grid is not a "one-man issue", even though chief technical officer Paddy Lowe is leaving the Formula 1 team.

Lowe joined Williams from champion team Mercedes early in 2017 but the two cars designed and built under his technical leadership have been the slowest on the grid.

The 2019 Williams is even less competitive than its predecessor, it was late to testing and required design changes to be legal for the season opener, and Lowe has been on a leave of absence since pre-season.

Speaking to Motorsport.com, Kubica said Williams’s problems went beyond one person.

Asked if he had an answer for himself over how Lowe’s leadership at Williams went so badly, Kubica said: “You can have an answer for yourself, but in the end I don't think it’s a one-man issue. Unfortunately, normally the highest person pays the price.

“But it’s the question of bigger groups and bigger people. I think the problems which you can see is not only a problem of last month, it’s something that was kind of growing [over time].

“We have been in a situation that wasn't great last year, but honestly it’s even more difficult than it was last year. Where we were last year here we were thinking [that] it cannot be worse.”

Williams finished last in the constructors’ championship in 2018, scoring seven points.

F1 returnee Kubica and his rookie teammate George Russell have qualified slowest in the first three races of the season and finished well adrift of their rivals in the races.

“It is a complex sport, and [it] requires a lot of group work,” said Kubica. “It’s never a single guy who can make it wrong or make it good.

“If last year for example we would be fighting for top positions, probably your question would be 'how does Paddy make it work perfectly?'.

“But it’s never one person. Of course a person can influence, that’s why I think Patrick [Head] can help us in current situation, and definitely people can make the difference.

“In the end it’s a lot of people involved in making of running the team and making team being successful of not.”

Williams co-founder Head has returned to the team on a short-term consultancy basis to try to help it during its current struggles.

“The job he can do, and good things he can bring to the team, are more than working with me,” said Kubica.

“We don't know each other, but I have big respect from what he did in the past, and what he had achieved in his career. He has been a big player at Williams, a big factor in Williams history.

“These factors can only bring positive things to the team. But still it’s not a single-player sport.

“He can definitely help the team with his experience and his character, and definitely he is a racer, so it’s something what I think the team can benefit [from].”

[MIKA27]

Illness rules Russell out of Baku media duties

Williams Formula 1 driver George Russell was excused from his media duties in Baku on Thursday after feeling unwell in recent days.
Although Russell was seen in the paddock his team wanted to minimise his workload and allow him to rest ahead of the start of practice on Friday.

Russell was due to appear in the FIA press conference alongside Kevin Magnussen, Lance Stroll, Nico Hulkenberg and Antonio Giovinazzi, but the Englishman was given permission to miss it.

He also missed the track walk and some team meetings, although Friday's late start will allow him to catch up with the latter.

“He has been feeling unwell for a few days,” a Williams spokesperson told Motorsport.com. “But he is improving and was advised to rest to ensure he is fit for tomorrow.”

There’s no suggestion that Russell won’t be able to drive this weekend, but it’s worth noting that Williams reserve driver Nicholas Latifi, who is present in Baku for F2, does not yet have a superlicence that would allow him to race.

[MIKA27]

Straightline speed "one of the best things" of 2019 - Sainz

Carlos Sainz says McLaren's straightline speed has been "one of the best things" about the start of the 2019 Formula 1 season.
Sainz has switched to McLaren from the Renault works team but is continuing for a third straight season using the French manufacturer's engines, because McLaren is a customer.

Renault's reliability remains dubious but it has made a performance step in 2019, while McLaren also appears to be able to run with less drag this year.

Asked by Motorsport.com about McLaren's Azerbaijan Grand Prix prospects at the high-speed Baku circuit, Sainz said: "We've definitely been more competitive on the straights in the first three races, but we were also running a bit less rear wing than our main competitors.

"So, if all of a sudden, everyone equalises their wings towards a more low-downforce set-up like we were running in China or Bahrain, suddenly we could see that straightline advantage going away for us.

"We need to be on top of that, need to make sure we create a bit more of a lower-downforce set-up, a lower downforce car, and still be competitive in the straights.

"Because to be honest it's been one of the best things this year, to finally be decent on the straights in my fifth year in Formula 1."

Rookie teammate Lando Norris has scored McLaren's only top-10 finish of the season, earning his first F1 points with sixth place in Bahrain.

Sainz is still waiting to break his McLaren duck because of an MGU-K failure in Australia, a puncture and a gearbox problem in Bahrain, and first-lap contact in China.

Asked by Motorsport.com if he was starting to put pressure on himself to secure a breakthrough result, Sainz said: "I'm very hungry for a result, I want a result as soon as possible - hopefully Baku – but I am not desperate for a result.

"I'm not desperate, because when you are comfortable with the car, when you are comfortable with the team, when you feel the support from the team, when you know you're fast with the car and that you're comfortable and that every time you hit the track you're fast, you know it's more a matter of time.

"It's just one race, where there's a freak thing is not going to happen to me, and the result is going to come.

"So no, I'm not concerned. I want it, I'm very hungry for that first points finish with McLaren and a top 10, top eight, top six, but no, I'm not desperate for it."

[MIKA27]

Ferrari reveals upgrades to 2019 F1 car

Ferrari has revealed the upgrades that mark the first development step for its SF90 Formula 1 car.
After failing to win any of the opening three races, Ferrari has made some changes to its bargeboard package for the Azerbaijan Grand Prix.

The small strakes at the front have been reconfigured, as the exclusive photograph from Giorgio Piola above shows.

The second collection of mini-bargeboard elements has been enlarged - while the piece to the right of that has lost its slots. Those work in tandem to coerce the airflow outwards more drastically than it previously did.

There's also an added flick underneath the sidepod turning vanes to both clean up the airflow channelled around by the bargeboard.

The team is also running a lower drag wing for the Baku straights, although it appears to be aimed at delivering more downforce than other teams have gone for.

Sebastian Vettel said he expects Ferrari's upgraded 2019 Formula 1 car to start giving Mercedes a "very hard time", with the developments expected to deliver straight away.

"If you improve the car in general it helps you here, and obviously everywhere else," said Vettel.

"That is the idea. The target is to make the car faster so it is pretty straightforward, no matter where we go.

"Hopefully we can find the same results on track that we found in the tunnel, hopefully the numbers stack up, and we see how much of a jump we can do."

Vettel's teammate Leclerc said that Ferrari's package "should be going in the right direction".

Leclerc, who sits one point behind Vettel in the championship and 32 behind Mercedes' table-topper Lewis Hamilton, said bouncing back from three races that have not gone as Ferrari expected was vital.

"We were quite close, so hopefully we can now be in front," he said. "Overall as a package – I don't think there's one big weakness on the car. Trying to put the set-up right will be a key thing and then just the overall development."

Vettel added that it was wrong to view this weekend's Azerbaijan Grand Prix as a crucial turning point in the season, even though he believes Ferrari will initiate a fightback.

"Hopefully at one point we can look back and say this was the decider, and the decisive moment, but right now I don't know and I don't really care," he said.

"We have a very strong package and I am confident that if we can get it in the right place, we should be able to show that and give the others a very, very hard time.

"So, I am not thinking that it all depends on one single moment. If we do another 17 races like this, then we know also it is too late to turn it around."

[MIKA27]

Mercedes brings serrated rear wing design back

Mercedes has resurrected its serrated rear wing design for this weekend's Azerbaijan Grand Prix, bringing back an idea that it last raced with in 2016.
As Giorgio Piola's exclusive photograph shows, the rear-wing mainplane of the W10 appeared in the pitlane in Baku with tiny serrations on the trailing edge.

It is a concept that Mercedes first experimented with back in 2015 before developing it further for the following season - running it in pre-season testing that year (below) before regularly racing with a tweaked version.

The benefits of the serrated edge are plenty. By making the wing work harder, they allow a steeper angle of attack before airflow separation occurs. At the same time, the span of the surface appears improved, reducing the tip vortex strength and reducing drag.

Furthermore, the small vortices that the sawtooth design creates help re-energise the airflow, making the main plane of the wing perform more consistently when the DRS is opened.

They can also help to re-attach the airflow to the flap section faster when the DRS is closed, something that is very important at a track like Baku.

At the Azerbaijan GP last year, Mercedes attached some serrated tape to the rear wing during practice to understand what effect it would have at the track. The team did not race with it though.

However, it looks like the results of its tests have proved positive enough for it to commit to a bespoke design this time out.

The idea for serrated rear wings returned in 2016, when both Mercedes and Ferrari trialled them in pre-season testing after some initial experiments at the end of the previous season.

As well as the serrated rear wing in Baku, Mercedes has dialled back its T-wing to consist of just a single element, trimming drag further.

[MIKA27]

Johansson’s radical proposal to make F1 awesome again – Part 3

Stefan Johansson, former Ferrari and McLaren F1 driver, has come up a with a template for a radically revised version of the sport he loves. Here is the third in a four-part series on what needs to change and why, this time in the nature of F1’s entertainment value.

Make the drivers more accessible
The drivers are the stars and they will always be more important to the fans than the cars or the teams. Every series other than F1 has some form of planned fan engagement either the day before the race weekend starts or for an hour at some point during the race weekends. Make it compulsory for each driver to do a certain number of days as part of the super license. It’s a pain for the drivers but in the long run it will benefit everybody.

Make it mandatory for the promoters, broadcasters and drivers to provide X hours of promotional appearances prior to each race in each country. By forcing / helping each promoter to better publicize the races, each driver will be helping themselves by building a better audience and a more valuable ecosystem. Cross-promote the drivers in other forms of entertainment in order to gain a larger following and new demographics.

Make the racing less predictable
By implementing some of the rule changes I have already mentioned in the chapter on Competition, the racing will become less predictable without the use of any artificial devices such as the DRS. The combination of less aero, more power, less forgiving tracks, fewer driver aids and longer pitstops will all contribute to more human errors and will not only make the racing a lot more interesting to watch but it will also sort out the good from the average.

By definition, the more well engineered a car is, the less chance of something unpredictable to happen as it makes the life of the driver much easier. By eliminating some of the electronic aids and making the cars have significantly less downforce, this will automatically help make the races less predictable.

By enforcing the track limits there will be more occasions for drivers to make a small mistake which is often all a following driver needs in order to make a move that would otherwise be impossible. The reduction in downforce will help the car following to stay much closer to the car in front, and as such he will be able to get a run on his target from the exit of a corner without having to rely on DRS to pass on the following straight.

It's no coincidence that some of the best races we’ve had in recent years have come when there have been changing conditions, usually unexpected weather, thus making it difficult for the engineers to model the race strategy to the nth degree in their race simulations. We won’t be stuck with “he’s now in the DRS zone” or “will he do an undercut or an overcut” which it is pretty much what it’s reduced to at the moment.

Bring back the “awesome” factor
F1 should be defined by one word – AWESOME! With these proposed rule changes, we will arrive at a point where we will again have some beautiful and spectacular looking cars that will also sound great.

Make bravery one of the tools that count in a driver’s arsenal, and allow the drivers who are willing to stick their neck out to gain a couple of extra tenths in a high-speed corner do so, and let the fans enjoy that show! The massive reduction in downforce will visibly show the car control of the drivers as opposed to the current cars which are on “rails” all the time. We will have talking points like “top speed around 400kph” and “1300-1400hp” Power Units, which to anyone is awesome and it will get people’s attention.

It’s difficult to explain that F1 is the ultimate in motorsport when we have a number or regular road cars today with similar power and top speeds. How do you explain why F1 is the ultimate when you can buy a Jeep truck with 800HP for less than $100,000?

“Well, the F1 cars have a huge amount of downforce which means they are really fast in the slow and medium speed corners…and because they are so fast in these corners they have had to reduce the power in order to slow them down. And because the cars have so much downforce it’s made it very difficult to follow another car which makes overtaking really difficult, so to fix that we came up with this idea called DRS. This is a really clever device that that the engineers who design these cars came up with, that the driver following another car can use when he wants to overtake the car in front. There is nothing the driver in front can do at that point to defend himself, but it’s supposed to spice up the show.”

Not a great or easy explanation for someone who is trying to understand the sport. Any time you have to explain why something is great, you’re already in trouble: this is why we need to simplify everything so that anyone can immediately see and understand that this is really awesome!

How simple would it instead be to use the formula of Less Aero/Lower Cornering speeds/More Horsepower/More Acceleration/Higher Top-speeds/Longer Braking distance/ More Passing/More Visible Car Control? No one understands or can appreciate downforce, you can tell them the cars produce 5,000kg of downforce or 50kg, most people wouldn’t know the difference between that and a bar of soap. But everyone understands 1,400hp and 400kph top speeds – and is immediately impressed.

Improve the broadcast and the graphics
I find it very difficult to follow any race and fully understand the dynamics of what is happening especially once the pitstops have started. The graphics and the information you get is very limited and quite poorly presented. It has gotten better this last year (at least in the U.S. now that we see the Sky broadcast) but there is still a massive amount more that could be done to keep the viewers better informed of what is going on.

I don’t think you can have too much info or data displayed, anything that will keep the viewer better informed is a plus. The teams already look at a lot of interesting data so a lot of the information is there and just needs to be presented to the audience so they can better understand what’s happening.

With the emerging Drone technology it would be possible to show a completely different view of the cars and how a battle between different cars transpires that will add a whole new element. I’ve seen some prototype footage of this already done at some minor events, and it’s a completely different experience than with fixed cameras. This is one area that I believe could really be a game changer for the viewing experience.

Create a huge prize-money fund that is transparent and official
As I have already outlined, allocate a large portion (30-40%) of the total pool of funds from FOM as prize money rather than a guaranteed amount before each season starts. This is a common management tool to align incentives with performance.

Money talks and people are always curious when there’s big money involved in anything. If Mayweather was fighting for a few thousand dollars each match, no one but the absolute die-hard boxing fans would bother tuning in, but because it’s tens of millions at stake, everyone is curious of the outcome, even people who don’t like boxing. This is human nature.

As it is, not many even know what the prize money is in F1, only the diehard fans have some idea what each team get before the season even starts, based on an incredibly complicated payout schedule. If we use the already mentioned formula of $200,000 per point, the prize money for each race would be:

1st 25 points $5,000,000
2nd 18 points $3,600,000
3rd 15 points $3,000,000
4th 12 points $2,400,000
5th 10 points $2,000,000
6th 8 points $1,600,000
7th 6 points $1,200,000
8th 4 points $800,000
9th 2 points $400,000
10th 1 point $200,000

TOTAL PRIZE MONEY AT EACH RACE: $20,200,000

[MIKA27]

Feature: Five key talking points as F1 heads to Azerbaijan

Formula 1 heads to Azerbaijan for the fourth round of the season and the last of the early ‘flyaway’ events before the European phase. Motorsport Week ponders some of the key talking points.

Can Mercedes maintain its unbeaten start...?

Not since 1992 has a Formula 1 team started a season with three straight 1-2 finishes. Not even in its dominant 2014-16 period did Mercedes manage the feat, emphasising the manner in which the team has managed to improve operationally as the seasons have progressed. It was fortunate to triumph in Bahrain but that it was in a position to profit from Charles Leclerc’s problem owed much to Lewis Hamilton’s resilience in battle with Sebastian Vettel – which in turn opened the door for Valtteri Bottas to rise to a net second. Either side of Bahrain, Mercedes has got its W10 into the perfect set-up window and reaped the rewards. The results, given its and everyone else’s data post-testing showed Ferrari were ahead, are surely beyond its expectations. Mercedes has had an eventful history in Baku with two wins courtesy of Nico Rosberg’s controlled 2016 drive and Hamilton’s fortunate victory 12 months ago in the wake of Bottas’ puncture. If it can make it four-in-a-row (or, more truthfully, six up given its end-of-2018 success) then it can start packing its tuxedos for December’s FIA Gala. Hamilton, too, is on an extraordinary run of 10 wins in the last 14 races.

…or will Ferrari finally get the win?

Hamilton has 68 points to Vettel's 37

Results-wise this has been a desperately disappointing start to the year for Ferrari. It opened both 2017 and 2018 with two wins from three but is yet to triumph in 2019 – indeed, Kimi Raikkonen’s US GP triumph is its only victory in the last 11 races. That is a lacklustre run. Vettel has stressed that its SF90 has inherently strong pace but unless that can be evidenced soon, and consistently, then this year’s title race will already be done and dusted. Formula 1’s 2019 cars are only operating in a very narrow operating window – even at the front of the grid – and Vettel has not found the sweet spot with his car since testing. Reliability has also been a concern. Ferrari has yet to win in Baku – one of only three circuits on the current calendar – but it has had its opportunities, with Vettel’s 2017 meltdown and his over-exuberance in 2018 costing him and the team dearly. Ferrari’s SF90 should, in theory, be rapid down Baku’s lengthy straights, with most of the circuit layout more Bahrain than Baku. Ferrari’s peaks, so far, appear higher than Mercedes’, but the baseline is not, and that is costing it pace and points.

Is this Leclerc’s time to shine?

At each of the opening three grands prix Charles Leclerc has been instructed to play second fiddle to Sebastian Vettel, with varying levels of justification as to whether it was the correct call. In Bahrain Leclerc was the dominant figure, belying his inexperience, and the engine glitch that denied him a maiden win was cruel. Leclerc still sits on zero Formula 1 wins – but could that change in Baku? Leclerc has a strong record at the street venue. In 2017 he crushed his opposition in Formula 2 to claim pole position and two on-the-road wins – the latter taken by a time penalty – just days after the death of his father, demonstrating supreme mental strength to ally to his natural flair. Last season he took a stunning sixth place – his best result of the year – in a drive that announced his arrival in Formula 1 after a tricky start. If he gets the better of Vettel in Baku this weekend then it will leave Ferrari with a difficult decision as the sport returns to Europe.

Can someone upset the order?

Checo has two Baku podiums from three attempts

Formula 1 has visited Baku three times but the only driver to have taken two podiums is not from any of the big teams. Step forward Sergio Perez, whose 2016 and 2018 top-three finishes are even more impressive when Force India’s underdog status in an era of big team dominance is taken into account. Perez and Force India flew throughout the 2016 weekend, was in win contention briefly in 2017 – until a clash with team-mate Esteban Ocon derailed the weekend – and last year picked up the pieces as others crumbled. Lance Stroll, too, has as many Baku podiums as Lewis Hamilton and Sebastian Vettel courtesy of his 2017 heroics, and last year dragged his recalcitrant Williams to eighth. Could one of Racing Point’s drivers upset the order again this season? Given how competitive Racing Point – well, Force India – has been so far in Azerbaijan, they could be a team to keep an eye on this weekend.

Can Williams pick up a point?

Williams has a 100 per cent record of scoring points in Azerbaijan. Granted, none of the previous three years have been this diabolical but even in 2018 its two drivers qualified on the sixth row of the grid, with Stroll racing to eighth. Only at low-downforce Monza did it scale such heights again. Williams remains comfortably adrift of the midfield – a situation unlikely to massively improve this year – but Azerbaijan surely represents an opportunity. It has an abundance of similar 90-degree turns while the third sector is fundamentally a full-throttle section that even a soapbox such as the FW42 should find fair game. In both 2017 and 2018 just 13 of the starters reached the chequered flag thanks to the litany of incidents and accidents. If the race unfolds in a similar outcome this year then it’s surely the best chance – and is likely to be thereafter – for Williams to at least sneak into the top 10. It is destined to be last come Abu Dhabi – but a point or two would be a welcome respite amid its ongoing malaise.  

[MIKA27]

Securing first win ‘not an obsession’, says Leclerc

Were it not for a short circuit on the electronics controlling one of his Ferrari engine’s six cylinders, Charles Leclerc would have become a race winner in only his second Grand Prix for the iconic Italian team. But despite the disappointment of missing out on his maiden win in Bahrain, ahead of this weekend's Azerbaijan Grand Prix Leclerc was keen to stress that getting his first victory under his belt is not something he is losing sleep over.

Leclerc’s Ferrari failure in Sakhir paved the way for Lewis Hamilton to secure Mercedes’ second straight one-two of the season, with that becoming three in Shanghai when the five-time champ once again led home Valtteri Bottas.

But speaking before the action in Baku, Leclerc maintained that it was advancing Ferrari’s cause in the constructors’ fight, and not chasing wins, that was his main focus currently.

“[Winning my first race is] not an obsession,” said Leclerc. “My obsession at the moment is to do the best job I can in the car and extract the full potential of it and then I am sure the results will come.

“Obviously I am impassioned for this moment to happen, if it will ever happen, and I will work for that. But I am not obsessed with it and I don’t think it would be a good way to approach the weekend, only thinking about the win. I am just obsessed with extracting the best from the car.”

Leclerc has a strong record at Baku, having taken an emotional F2 win here just days after his father Herve’s death in 2017, while in 2018 he secured his first F1 points at the track with a fantastic drive to sixth for Sauber. Asked if, given his previous success here, it would be particularly meaningful to claim his first F1 win in Azerbaijan, Leclerc replied: “It would be a good sign to have it here.

“I will give it everything and if it comes now or later, I don’t know. I will try to do everything in my hands to do the best result possible.

“I feel somehow particularly confident in street tracks, [and it’s] no exception here because I really love this track and driving as close as possible to the walls without touching them. This is a challenge I like as a driver.”

Leclerc’s team mate Sebastian Vettel, meanwhile, was also focusing on getting Ferrari back on terms with Mercedes – and revealed in Baku that he is still convinced that the team’s SF90 challenger has the potential to give its rivals ‘a very, very hard time’, despite the Scuderia’s current 57-point deficit to Mercedes.

“I know that some people like to put it that this is the ‘turning around’,” said Vettel of Ferrari’s hopes for coming back at Mercedes in Azerbaijan. “I think we have a lot of races left and hopefully at one point we can look back and say this was the decider and the decisive moment. Right now, I don’t know and I don’t really care.

“We want to win, that’s for any race we go to. I think we have a very strong package and I’m confident that if we can get it in the right place then we should be able to show that and give the others a very, very hard time.”

 

[MIKA27]

BOTTAS SEEKING REDEMPTION IN BAKU BUT HE HAS TO BEAT HAMILTON

Valtteri Bottas has a score to settle as he heads to the Azerbaijan Grand Prix determined to make up for a lost win and regain the championship lead from Mercedes teammate Lewis Hamilton who he first has to beat before the Finn can claim payback from Lady Luck.

The Finn was leading around the streets of Baku last year when a puncture three laps from the end handed victory to Hamilton instead.

The Briton went on to win 10 more races on his way to a fifth title while Bottas ended the season demoralised and with zero wins.

The 29-year-old has come back from the winter stronger and looking more of a match for his teammate, even if Hamilton has returned to the top of the standings after chalking up his second win of the season in China on April 14.

“For sure I would prefer to still be leading but that’s the situation now and if I keep performing well I can turn it around,” said Bottas, who trails Hamilton by six points with 18 races remaining.

“So that’s going to be the goal for Baku,” added the Finn, who was on pole in China but dropped behind Hamilton at the start.

Mercedes head into Sunday’s race, the fourth since Azerbaijan joined the calendar in 2016, as favourites after three one-two finishes — the strongest start to a campaign since Williams in 1992.

They have also won two of the three races in Azerbaijan, even if it has not been a particularly happy hunting ground for Hamilton. Last year’s victory was his first podium appearance there.

Nothing can be taken for granted at a circuit that has served up some thrillers in the past, mixing ultra-long straights and tight corners with no margin for error.

Like Bottas, Ferrari will also be hoping to make a statement. Already 57 points behind Mercedes in the overall standings, the pre-season favourites have a meagre haul of two third-place finishes from the first three races and cannot afford to lose any more ground.

New recruit Charles Leclerc, smarting from being ordered to move over for four times champion Sebastian Vettel in China and denied a maiden Formula One win by engine trouble in Bahrain, will be especially fired up.

The circuit holds a special emotional significance for the Monegasque, who won a 2017 Formula Two race from pole position in Baku only days after the death of his father.

“Baku is a demanding track, but I can’t wait,” said the 21-year-old, who also scored his first Formula One points there last year with sixth place for Sauber. “I simply love it and I’ve always performed very well there.”

The unpredictability of the race means there’s always a chance for an unexpected podium finisher.

Since the 2016 race, Baku is the only grand prix on the calendar that has seen a driver outside of the top-three teams finish on the podium.

Mexican Sergio Perez, with two third places for Force India — now Racing Point — is the only driver to have stood on the podium more than once in Baku.

“It’s a big show,” said Max Verstappen who will pounce on any opportunity to snatch a win for Honda-powered Red Bull. “And hopefully this year’s race will make for a good story.”