Making Elimination Qualifying Work

So having watched this so-called "disaster" for Bahrain (and not thinking that it was terrible), I think I understand both what the intent of the plan was and why it doesn't work.

The intent of the plan is to draw out the tension of the session, where the number of eligible running cars is reduced as time goes on. The idea is that things get more and more frantic as the bar for continuing rises and rises.

There are two reasons why it doesn't work: the cars, and the sessions.

Firstly the cars. Modern F1 cars have evolved into these complicated science projects that are good for one thing -- running Grand Prix races. They are not suited to an elimination style qualification. The cars basically have one good timed lap in them, so we get the situation that we have had for the last two races: everyone boils out of the pits, sets one time, and that's it. There is practically no chance that a team could turn a car for a second timed run, and since for the first two sessions the number of cars being dropped is relatively small, for the vast majority of the runners there is absolutely zero point in even trying. Thus, empty track time. If you send a car with enough fuel for more than one timed run then you will be compromising both runs since you A) have to carry around the extra fuel for the extra timed run(s), and B) you have to go easier on your tires so that you don't root them out too early. Neither situation is conducive to setting a time which is ultimately competitive.

Secondly, the sessions. Since qualifying is still broken up into Q1, Q2, Q3, then for the majority of the field there simply is no incentive to even try to run a second time in the session -- the times are set, and moving from 10th to 8th means nothing in Q1.

So here's my idea for solving both problems:

A) Make the cars start on race-fuel (or some common, minimum fuel level; and B) run qualifying as a single session, with the elimination starting after 10 or 15 minutes.

Presto, everyone has to look after their tires; the cars get faster as the session winds down; everyone would have incentive to keep running to keep burning off the fuel load; changing to the softer tires would become a strategy as to when you'd do it; and setting times would always be relevant because the times are always live.

You'd also get an hour of on-track chaotic running which the media thinks the man-in-the-stands likes to watch.

Overwhelming

So from today we can conclude that the Mercedes engine is a huge advantage.  I rate the Ferrari engine next, and the Renault bringing up the rear.  I think the Red Bull chassis is in the same ballpark as the Mercedes chassis, with the Ferrari probably next -- but Mercedes power covers a lot of sins. 

The way the two Mercedes romped away from everyone else over the last ten laps -- three(!) seconds a lap faster than anyone else -- was awesome.  Dispiriting to everyone who isn't driving a Mercedes, and even more so to anyone who doesn't have a Mercedes engine, yes, but still an awesome display of power.

2014 is going to be a long year for Ferrari.  Points today is entertain no points, but really the title looks like a "next year" prospect.  The list of teams beating Ferrari today is depressingly long and includes a bunch of teams which really shouldn't be there.  Force India?  Williams?  Really?  Yes, really, and we just have to ride this season out and hope that next year is better. And it feels terrible to be writing off 2014 just three events into the season but frankly without engine development being permitted I don't see any chance for significant improvement.

I think that the engine homologation rules are really going to work against Formula 1 for a while.  Freezing engines after the formula had been in place for a few years and everyone had done some real-world development was one thing.  The resulting engines were reasonably equal, with some trade-offs -- yes the Mercedes was more powerful, but the Renault was lighter and easier on fuel.  But now that there is clearly an engine disparity and no chance to make it up in-season, Formula 1 risks becoming a one-make series.

Your Q3 Qualifiers:

Seven Mercedes, two Ferraris, and one Renault.  Clearly engine choice makes no difference.

Now while in the long run having homologated engines is good for the sport, I fear that the fact that there is no longer any in-season development being done means everyone who doesn't have a Mercedes engine behind their shoulders is looking at a long season with scant chance of even points.  And that I think means that this year could be a right snoozer.

Rain Action

So we've now had two races with rain, and both of them yielded more action than the dry desert race we had before.

Australia featured a lot of action, with cars having more ability to pass each other. Malaysia seemed to be drying faster, and after the initial burst of activity we were left with a high-speed procession -- until mechanical failures happened.

While the track at Bahrain was not conducive to having a lot of passing, one would have hoped that a car which was a second faster than the one it was catching up to would be able to at least have a couple of good goes.

Australia had the tire change gamble that paid off for Button and not so much for the Red Bull cars or Hamilton. Behind the leaders there was quite a bit of action due to the still wet sectinos of the track. Malaysia seemed to dry more quickly and once everyone settled down there wasn't much action.

At this point people are predicting rain for China tomorrow, and while that might be good as far as action goes, it would be nice to see a dry race to see if the 2010 cars are actually any good at providing more than a high speed train.

Desert Racing Extra Dry

Back in August of last year I said I was worried about the racing in 2010. The fact of the matter is that the cars just are not built to follow each other closely enough to effect passes -- witness Hamilton's efforts to pass Rosberg, despite having a car capable of going a half- to a full second faster per lap than the Mercedes, he couldn't get on terms to make the pass and had to do the business in the pits. The combination of the double-diffuser development with the intricate changes made to the front wings on the cars mean the following car just isn't as efficient as the car in front is.

I also noticed that there seemed to be a lot more flip-ups and aerodynamic "things" hanging on the cars than there were last year.

Even the "extra" action brought on by the new teams retiring at an increased rate did little to improve the show, although Senna's HRT car made it almost half way through the event, which is a decent enough amount for what was effectively its third day of running.

And while Ferrari had an almost perfect weekend -- missing out only on the pole position as an accomplishment -- one is left to wonder if their slow reeling in of Vettel was due to Ferrari pace or Red Bull exhaust issues slowly manifesting themselves.

I also have to comment on the graphics shown through the event -- a lot of the time it was difficult for me to understand what they were trying to tell me. I guess putting everything in stylishly slanted boxes is the coming thing.

One race is not enough to condemn an entire season, even if there are rumors about hastily amending the rules to make a second pit stop mandatory. Artificially trying to manufacturer more "show" is always going to result in silliness.

One just hopes that the FIA resists the urge to continue the silliness that was a hallmark of the Mosley years.

Toyota: Brave Strategy

Some of the post-Bahrain analysis has been critical of Toyota's decision to run the unpopular harder tire during the second stint, running the better performing soft tire during the first and third stints.

I personally thought that the decision was a brave one, one which might have conceivably paid off with at least a second, and quite possibly was the factor which kept Toyota on the podium at all instead of sliding further down the order.

The gamble here was three-fold. First, Toyota gambled that they could get far enough ahead during the first stint such that those pursuing would end up behind the Toyotas after their first stops, seeing as how they will run longer than the Toyotas will. This is where Timo Glock was unlucky; his stop dropped him right down the order and he never really recovered. Jarno Trulli was luckier, and only Jenson Button's heavily fueled Brawn managed to get past in the first round of stops.

The second gamble is that even though Toyota was on the harder tire during the second stint, and therefore slower than the opposition on the softer tire, they were still fast enough to keep the faster cars behind them. This paid off, as Sebastien Vettel was unable to find a way past Trulli's Toyota.

The third gamble is that assuming that Toyota will again lose out slightly in the second round of stops -- again presuming that Vettel will run longer, lighter, on the faster tire -- Toyota will have the advantage of a fast car on the better tire in the final stint and be able to pass then for at least that position. Here is where the gamble failed to pay off, in that Vettel's Red Bull was the same as Trulli's Toyota had been in the second stint -- not the fastest, but fast enough to prevent being passed.

Trulli ended up in the final stint having one of the fastest cars, fastest of all except perhaps Button's Brawn, which wasn't seriously tested in the third stint. Had he been able to find a way past Vettel, there is little doubt in my mind that he could have cruised up to the back of the Brawn. As to whether or not the Toyota could find a way past the Brawn is entirely another question, one we'll hopefully get to see for ourselves another time.

This is a fantastic demonstration of where Toyota is as a team right now. The car was legitimately fast, straight up, against the other front runners, with nobody being absent due to track or car dramas. Straight up, the Toyota was fast; straight up, the team's strategy showed different, yet still effective, thinking from the herd mentality.

In any other year, one could confidently say that attrition or track dramas would conspire at some point in the year to present Toyota with a victory. However, with reliability being what it is, and with the drivers showing an unusual amount of discretion when it comes to attempting potentially car-bending maneuvers, Toyota might just have to continue the improvement and get their win straight-up without any help from the other random factors.

Not Quite The Worst

The good news: Raikkonen brings his Ferrari home 6th, bagging three points. This averts the "worst start to a Ferrari F1 season in history" headlines everyone was warming up.

The bad news: well the good news isn't really that good, is it.

In a way, Ferrari is the victim of the FIA's success. Through the leveling of the playing field, the grid from front to back is much, much closer than in previous years. This means that even tiny mistakes at critical moments will have a magnified effect, as the rest of the field goes roaring past. This is seen in Ferrari's stumbling in qualifying and in some of the strategic thinking that has been happening.

The other way that Ferrari is falling behind is reliability. With the comiditization of key components -- gearboxes with restricted or no development, engines with restricted or no development over the past few years, and other areas to come -- reliability across the board is up. In Bahrain, we had one non-finisher, and the rules regarding retirement are such that even no-hopers like the BMWs were compelled to continue pounding around the circuit. So with nobody falling out ahead of you, you are forced to make up positions either through strategy or through passing on the track. And it doesn't help that Ferrari's reliability is starting to fall apart, as this was the third out of four races where Massa had a technical problem ("mechanical issues" in Australia, engine issues in China, and now KERS issue in Bahrain).

These issues put sharp focus on the problem of the car's obvious lack of pace. One could argue that McLaren has improved their car to rough parity with the Ferrari, or perhaps even slightly better. Other teams have similarly improved. At the beginning of the season, one expected the Toyotas to be dicing with the front runners -- and with the exception of the all-conquering Brawns, they are.

This season is shaping up to be one of the worst since the early 90s or even earlier. This is what I expected to happen after Schumacher's retirement -- the braintrust that Schumacher gathered around him has moved on, and the replacements are not capable of having the team perform at the same level. The same thing happened after the palace intrigues of 1991, where a wholesale change in team members resulted in several years of poor performance.

Team management needs to look very closely at what has happened this year and decide if it is an aberration, if the team is really capable of competing with these team members in this rules environment, or if changes need to be made.

2009 doesn't need to be a write-off, but we must still keep our eyes on the future.