New rules produced most popular races in four years

2011 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Sebastian Vettel, Lewis Hamilton, Shanghai, 2011

The first half of the 2011 season has produced the two best F1 races of the last four years, according to F1 Fanatic readers.

This year’s Chinese and Canadian Grands Prix – both of which saw dramatic changes of lead late in the race – are the two most popular races of the last four seasons so far.

F1 Fanatic readers are invited to rate every Grand Prix after the race has finished. The races in China and Canada beat the previous record for a race rating set in the 2008 Brazilian Grand Prix.

2011 race ratings so far

Here are the ratings for the first eight races of 2011:

Race Avg. rating out of ten
China 9.241
Canada 9.095
Malaysia 7.775
Monaco 7.684
Spain 7.319
Turkey 7.306
Australia 6.751
Europe 3.871

This chart shows the full breakdown of voting for each race. It shows what percentage of voters (left axis) picked each rating out of ten (bottom axis) for each race. You can toggle races on and off using the controls below:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Australia 0.65 1.15 0.98 2.95 7.2 21.93 38.63 20.29 5.07 1.15
Malaysia 0.72 0.54 1.44 1.44 2.7 6.47 16.73 39.93 23.56 6.47
China 0.68 0 0.11 0.11 0 0.57 2.72 9.98 37.87 47.96
Turkey 0.6 0.99 0.6 2.38 5.36 11.51 28.77 32.14 14.29 3.37
Spain 0.6 0.81 1.01 2.22 5.24 10.89 28.83 33.27 13.1 4.03
Monaco 3.83 0.73 0.55 2.55 2.92 7.48 15.69 24.64 31.2 10.4
Canada 0.99 0.43 0.28 0.14 1.28 1.42 3.41 10.37 32.24 49.43
Europe 12.75 14.97 15.71 16.82 17.93 15.16 5.18 0.74 0.18 0.55

Ten most popular races of the last four seasons

Here are the ten races that have gained the highest scores since the beginning of 2008:

Race Average rating out of ten
1. 2011 China 9.241
2. 2011 Canada 9.095
3. 2008 Brazil 8.756
4. 2010 Canada 8.668
5. 2010 Australia 8.638
6. 2010 Belgium 8.368
7. 2010 China 8.326
8. 2009 Brazil 8.309
9. 2008 Monaco 8.177
10. 2008 Britain 8.164

Ten least popular races of the last four seasons

Here are the ten races that have received the lowest scores since the beginning of 2008:

Race Average rating out of ten
54. 2009 Spain 5.33
55. 2009 Malaysia 5.284
56. 2009 Turkey 5.276
57. 2008 Spain 5.085
58. 2010 Spain 4.919
59. 2010 Bahrain 4.587
60. 2008 China 4.446
61. 2008 Europe 3.977
62. 2011 Europe 3.871
63. 2010 Germany 3.74

Do you agree with the ratings? Which races do you think should be ranked higher or lower? Have your say in the comments.

Image © Red Bull/Getty images

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

68 comments on “New rules produced most popular races in four years”

  1. I’d say that half the reason why this year’s European Grand Prix was rated so low is because it was preceded by some fantastic races.

    This year is going down as a classic in terms of on track action. The only issue is the result stays largely the same!

    1. That’s probably true, it was a huge let-down after Canada. And the quali-engine map thing not doing much after having been talked about so much didn’t help.

      I think the tyres have had the most consistently big effect. Not so much that they have a bigger difference in performance, as that worked against the race in Valencia, I think. But mostly the differences in performance for the teams at different races and under different circumstances.

      I do fear this will lessen with time tough as the teams gather data.

      The DRS worked barely in Australia, making it a good addition, but in Valencia I don’t think it did much for anyone while in Turkey it probably was an extra push that they could have done without.

      DRS seems very dependent on the particulars of the track, and sensitive to placement of the zones. The biggest issue is when it becomes too easy to overtake with it, but it is also pretty frustrating when it has no effect at all, making it feel worse than in 2010 without it.

    2. Yeah I think this year’s European GP was one of the best there, I know I’ve changed my voting to account for the new rules, otherwise I’d be giving 8+ to every race.

    3. I agree, it was certainly the best race we have had at Valencia so for.

      1. I can’t remember it, does that sound like a classic?

  2. I don’t think the 2011 European Grand Prix was the second worst race since polling began… People were way too harsh on it! And I think Canada and China should be equal. Canada had an unprecedented finish, whilst China had entertainment for the whole race.

    I’d still probably rate Canada 0.0001 higher though. ;)

    1. I think in China everyone was so relieved to have finally got a fight for the lead that it boosted the ratings.

      Also holding Canada back a bit was the the big stoppage and the overlong SC periods.

      I do agree that Valencia should be above the rest of the Valencia races at least.

  3. The objectivity of these polls does bother me. I know Keith does his best to encourage people to vote based on the quality of the racing and not how their favoured driver/team performed, but it is notable that eight of the top ten races (including all of the top six) were won by McLaren, while only one of the bottom ten races was. Is that a fair reflection of the quality of races over the last three-and-a-half years?

    1. this is a very good point and notable data. in my opinion china 2011 is a bit overrated, so is turkey 2011. the thing is there was a lot of overtaking in turkey, but most of them due to DRS, which lets be honest is not as exciting as a hardly fought overtake. i think the credit should go to pirelli

    2. I thought about that too, but looking at it differently, at least the ones from the last years were races where a lot happened, and the winner more often than not had to drive and fight for the win.

      I don’t know if the connection with McLaren is accidental or not. Maybe it is Hamilton and Button being good at it? Or the team not being very good at getting poles/dropping the ball with pit-stops even/especially when fast, so they have to fight for it?

      For example, Alonso has either not had a car to do much at all, or he was able to get a good grid position and/or start to get a lead earlier in the race.

      Also, surely before crashgate came, well crashing in on our minds, Singapore’08 seemed a great race. Yeah. And Germany last year was pretty good, apart from the driver swap.

      Not sure that means anything. Perhaps Alonso grabbing every opportunity during the weekend when he knows the car can do it?

      About Vettel: well, in 2009 it was still amazing to see how fast he could be, but by now, it is very impressive how he has kept the upper hand, but we expect it, and it isn’t giving us a good race at all (except for what happens behind him perhaps).

    3. Well, to be fair, McLaren only tends to win under extraordinary circumstances! :P

      I’m Australian and I voted similarly to a lot of these people that are supposedly demonstrating British bias. Take Australia, Canada and Spa 2010, and China and Canada 2011 for example. All four of these races were won by McLaren, but they were also absolute classics.

    4. How about marrying up each race’s out-of-ten score with that race’s “driver of the weekend” winner. I think that would be an interesting concept and might show some correlation between winning drivers/teams, who performed best, and how highly the race was regarded.

    5. Actually, all but 1 of the races either saw a McLaren race winner or a world champion. To be fair, China 2011, Canada 2011, and Brazil 2008 were really epic races, regardless of the winner. I’m no McLaren fan, but I completely agree with those races as the Top 3. Belgium 2008 should’ve been here (and that was won by a McLaren too), although I guess the post-race debacle put paid to that.

      For what it’s worth, here are the respective winners:

      1. 2011 China – Hamilton (McLaren)
      2. 2011 Canada – Button (McLaren)
      3. 2008 Brazil – Massa (Ferrari); Hamilton (McLaren) clinched title here
      4. 2010 Canada – Hamilton (McLaren)
      5. 2010 Australia – Button (McLaren)
      6. 2010 Belgium – Hamilton (McLaren)
      7. 2010 China – Button (McLaren)
      8. 2009 Brazil – Webber (Red Bull); Button (Brawn GP) clinched title here
      9. 2008 Monaco – Hamilton (McLaren)
      10. 2008 Britain – Hamilton (McLaren)

      1. streetfightingman
        18th July 2011, 11:38

        lol I noticed this too. It’s a British site ain’t it? :D surprise surprise

      2. Belgium 2008 should’ve been here (and that was won by a McLaren too), although I guess the post-race debacle put paid to that.

        Indeed – I remember the ratings for that race turned very negative after the stewards intervened. And quite rightly too – that was a complete joke of a decision and it ruined what had been an excellent race.

        To counter the claim that British success gets the most favourable responses I’d point out that the majority of F1 Fanatic users are not British (less than 40% are) and British success does not prevent very poor races from receiving low scores (e.g. China 2008).

        I don’t think there are any examples of really good races won by non-British drivers that aren’t rated as high as they should be.

    6. Yeh, because China 2008 and Singapore 2009 got such a high score :roll:

      Is that a fair reflection of the quality of races over the last three-and-a-half years?

      Yes. McLaren seem to design cars that excel in wet conditions, which provide good races. Throw in two classic dry races and voila.

      1. They also have drivers who are better in changing conditions – senna, hamilton, button etc

      2. I feel the same, its more about McLarens current strength to get to the top in these exiting races than it is any form of McLaren win = great race voting.

        I think that if the system had been in place in 2005-2006 we might have seen more Alonso and a few Schumacher races as well in there.

      3. Yeh, because China 2008 and Singapore 2009 got such a high score

        That doesn’t mean all McLaren-won races have to be nice – but look at the last race, Germany 2010. I think it was boring, having not seen it, apart from the start, but I guess many negative votes were due to the team orders :roll:

        1. Any race where the results reflect the points standings is unlikely to be a great race,we need to see cars coming forward to make a good race. McLaren have been the most likely to challenge RB superiority, but maybe Ferrari can do it now, here’s hoping.

  4. No big change to me, with the exception that this year’s races are a bit more intriguing to me, again, less pit stops at Turkey would have been nice.

    Next year adjusting the DRS zones and fixing the regulations should produce more contenders, thus better races overall. Because, so far, I haven’t seen anyone else besides Red Bull, Ferrari and McLaren challenging the win, which is a bit boring.

  5. And both won by Englishmen…….. objectively they were crackers though.

  6. And another thing, how can a race ever be rated a 10? It can happen but once a lifetime. Brazil 2008 maybe but it seems many voters rate a 10 hence the 9 plus ratings of the two races this year.

    1. I’m so sad that Brazil 2008 is now third. That race is history. The race was interesting, and the there was a championship-battle going on. Remember the drama when Vettel overtook Hamilton (I literally exploded with joy) and then when Hamilton overtook Glock (I nearly had an heart-attack) and both teams exulting. It deserved to be number 1.

    2. Probably need the drivers to finish in reverse order they started and all passes to happen on track.

  7. Thank you Pirelli

  8. It is interesting that all the races in the top 10 were British victories – both Brazil races resulted in championship wins for British drivers, while the rest of the races have been won by either Jenson or Lewis. To be fair some of the British wins are in the bottom 10 list too. Whatever the reasons, except for Spa ’10 I think all those races were fabulous and deserved to be in the list. I must say I enjoyed the ’08 Japanese GP a bit more than Spa ’10.

    1. 2008 taken by Alonso at Fuji? Great race. Very eventful with Lewis and Massa fighting for the WDC but I’d pick 2007 Japanese GP over 2008.

      I think it was the best showing of rookie Lewis Hamilton. It was too wet (I think if it was today Charlie would call it “too wet to race”) but Hamilton was tremendous. The other noteworthy event of that race? Webber hit by Vettel saying something like “That’s what’s happening when they give the wheel to little boys”… I guess I should not apply for fortune teller

      Brazil 2008 was probably the best season finale in years! Seb Vettel and Glock playing villains to Hamilton’s hopes :)

  9. Interesting that even though most of the races this year have been brilliant, only 2 have made it into the top 10.

    And Hockenheim 2010 is only so low because of the Ferrari Switcharoo. No doubt that race’s score would’ve been a lot higher if that hadn’t have happened, leaving this year’s Valencia Grand Prix plum(b?) last.

    1. I’d say it was that low for that reason, but it was hardly a great race to start with.

      1. Not down in the three’s though, surely? When you consider all the races that have taken place in Spain that we’ve endured in the past 4 years.

      2. It would have scored pretty high if Massa had won that from 3rd on the grid to celebrate getting over the accident, I guess.

        Not that the race itself was that special, but above 7.5 for certain

  10. I find it quite tough to rate races high unless the Pirelli’s came into play to spice up the racing. Every DRS move is just plain annoying. People may think this is “better” racing but it simply isn’t.

    I guess I am a bit of a purist and would just love for F1 to go back basics but of course the FIA are just trying to appeal to the people who before wouldn’t give F1 the time of day, sorry but you either love F1 or you don’t, regardless of how boring races are it still focuses on one goal and that’s who the best Driver/Team is, that’s what appeals to me not how many overtakes can be manufactured in a race.

    It’s as if now it’s complete opposite ends of the spectrum, before, getting within 1 second was where the real challenge came in, finding a way to get past the guy in front whether it’s by late braking or hugging the diffuser getting as much slipstream as possible. Whereas now drivers just back of, maintain the 1 second deficit and just wait to breeze past with DRS. I simply don’t like it.

    I’m not saying overtakes aren’t made outside the DRS since that’s not true but the inclusion of it is ruining races. Take Canada for example, that race went from a 9 to a 7 for me simply because the DRS overtakes wrecked what could’ve been a great battle between Schumacher/Button/Webber, apparently DRS is supposed to give the drivers an opportunity to overtake yet the defending driver is being left in the cold and having to practically give up the position as soon as they get onto the straight.

    This is not the F1 I have loved for the past 15 years and the sooner the new rule gets scrapped the better.

    1. I agree for the most. However, on tracks like Barcelona, Monaco and probably Hungaroring, I liked how DRS added to the suspense. But in Turkey… Beh!

      1. Agree with that Verstappen.

    2. Completely agree with Riise, I gave Canada a 5 rather stupidly in a fit of annoyance at the DRS passes. For me it ruined the end of the race. I should have given the race a 7, but the DRS is cheapening the show even if we do see more overtakes.

  11. I think that what is making it more popular for me is that team-mates are dominating their less talented ummm… team-mates. Vettel/Webber, Rosberg/Shumacher, Alonso/Massa, Di Resta/Sutil and so on and so forth.

    They can adapt and exploit the newer regs better than their closest rivals. The big exception here might be Macca with Lewis and Button, but their driving styles are so different it’s hard to say.

    But I’d speculate that if the team-mates had better team mates to race against the popularity of F1 would be even better. Rule changes or not.

    1. Webber has barely been beaten and was ahead for most of last yar.
      Schumacher has 7 titles
      Sutil is barely beating Di Resta.

      Hardly ‘less talented’.

  12. Why is it that the top ten rated races since 2008 are all won by either Button or Hamilton? Kinda concludes that the result is more important over the spectacle.

  13. Thought I would jsut troll a bit

    OUt of the top 10 races as judged by F1Fanatics…

    2011 China – Hamilton Wins
    2011 Canada – Button Wins
    2008 Brazil – Hamilton wins WDC
    2010 Canada – Hamilton wins
    2010 Australia – Button wins
    2010 Belgium – Hamilton wins
    2010 China – Button wins
    2009 Brazil – Button wins WDC
    2008 Monaco – Hamilton wins
    2008 Britain – Hamilton wins

    Now, I’ve said before that F1Fanatic people do tend to be British people or atleast the largest block is British but honestly…..

    No Raikkonen, No Webber, No Vettel, No Massa, No Alonso, No Kovalinian etc….

    6 where Hamilton won
    4 where Button won

    0 Where any other driver won

    1. Not troll, simply stats.

      I also agree that public polls can be skewed by the fans who wish to see their driver win.

      This being a UK site (hence the it would therefore correlate that most readership would be from the UK, and most UK fans be supporters of British drivers.

      1. Well I’m an Alonso and Ferrari fan and I disregard the favourites as they tend to be a popularity contest regardless of what site they are on.

        What you seem to be missing is of this site is the across the board lack of bias in this site’s reporting.

        But I’ll agree that polls like opinions are like *** *****. everyone has one ;)

      2. But I would like to think British fans are more objective than that. It would appear not, which really disappoints me.

        1. Why should I be objective? I want English Drivers/Teams to win..

      3. Lets wait for Keith to pull out his “60% of views come from outside of the UK” stat.

    2. I genuinely wonder what the point is you are trying to make.

      So an English-language F1 blog seems to attract more readers that tend to favour British drivers or teams, or enjoy the races they win – why does it matter? You can see looking at the comments on any post that there are plenty of readers of the site who seem to be always ‘against’ Hamilton/Button/McLaren, regardless of the issue. The ratings are a reflection of the opinions of the readers – nothing more, nothing less – they aren’t evidence of Keith displaying ‘bias’, and the ratings don’t actually have any affect on anything else.

      If you disagree with the ratings, then great – it would get boring if everyone just said “I agree” to every comment or post, but it doesn’t make anyone ‘wrong’ if they rate a race they enjoyed higher because their favourite driver won without running through an ‘objective’ checklist of scientific points.

    3. First of all, keep in mind, that Raikönnen did not do that much winning in 2008-2011, so having a race won by him on there was always small chance.

      And the Ferrari have often won from the front, just like Red Bull do, something not going to get that high ratings. For Alonso his best rated race was the only one he won in 2008, because we did not yet know the background.

    4. Only 40% of F1Fanatic readers are from the UK which means that 60% are not.

      1. And I wonder how many of those 40% are people having UK proxies, might be another few%

      2. Not to nitpick or anything but doesn’t that mean that the UK is the largest represented region on this site?

        1. Yes, which is what I said.

          I’m making the point that the feeling of an exciting race may be being confused with that of their favourite driver/s winning. The top 10 races being Hamilton/Button wins/WDCs shows that there is a large skew that makes any race more ‘exciting’ for the average F1Fanatic voter.

          I’m adding 1 + 1 and coming up with this. I see 40% or whatever being British, 10/10 races being wins/WDCs for the only two Brits to win since the ratings started (2008) and then coming up with the theory (for others to read as a comment) that Brits are either biased who are confused themselves between an exciting race and a moderately exciting race where a British driver wins.

          2008: 5/18 races won by a British driver + 1 where Hamilton won the WDC. so 6/18 wins for a British driver
          2009: 8/17 races won by a British driver + 1 where Button won the WDC. 9/17 wins for a British driver
          2010: 5/19 races won by a British driver
          2011 to date: 2/9 races by a British driver.

          So doing some maths, that is including races where a British driver won the WDC, 22/63.

          So that’s 34.9% of all races won by a British driver, yet 100% of all exciting races. I just find that shows quite a bit of bias

          1. There’s nothing meaningful in that pile of numbers. Correlation does not prove causation.

            What I still haven’t seen in any of these predictable, by-the-numbers accusations of bias is any suggestion that there are good races won by non-British drivers or teams that are being under-rated, or vice-versa.

            Has anyone said Canada ’10, China ’11, Canada ’11, Brazil ’08 etc… weren’t great races? No, because they obviously were.

            Has anyone said China ’08 (won by Hamilton in a McLaren, by the way), Europe ’08 and ’11, Germany ’10 etc… were great races? No, because they obviously weren’t.

          2. Keith, this thing about correlation not proving causation is a true but weak argument – you know, many a correlation do arise from causation. In fact, testing correlation in order to prove causation is a standard way of testing a hypotesis. Of course, first you have to set a reasonable argument: in this case that the British fans will, all else being the same, find a race more exciting when it is won by a British driver than when it is not (by the way, this is also a reasonable argument for any other nationality). Add to that the fact that, if the info going around is correct, 40% of the people that visit this site is British. Now you can reasonably formulate the hypotesis that since i) the largest national group visiting this site is, by a large margin, British and ii) people will tend to find the races won by their fellow country mates more exiting than the ones that are not; iii) one can expect that races won by British drivers (or the ones in which they won the championship) will rank higher in the exitement ranking than the other races. That is it, now you have a causality hypotesis, based on what I think most of people would call reasonable arguments. Time to test it: 35% of the races were won by a British driver against a backdrop of 100% of the races voted the most exiting being the ones won by the British. Conclusion? The correlation found in the numbers seems to support the cause-effect relation formulated by the hypothesis. Is it proven beyond doubt? No, it isn’t – strangely enough, the scientific method only really gives a final judgement when it rejects an hypothesis. There could be other reasons, beyond or in place of chauvinism that make all the top 10 most exciting races being races won by British drivers. I can’t think of any, though. Can you? And just as a food for thought: 1) The British GP of 1987 would not make the top 10 list of the most exiting races ever in most non-English “spoken” F1 sites, were they to conduct such enquire. Do you have any doubt that it would make it to the top 5 in this site? 2) How do you think the Monaco GP this year would have ranked if, for instance, Vettel and Alonso had run a bit wide at Saint Devout in the final laps and Button had gone through to win the race? Above or below China?

          3. unocv12, your conclusion is a perfect show of not using logic but falling into one of the pifalls of argumenting.
            The same is done by antifia.

            You put in a wrong presumption, i.e. voters vote a. according to who won the race and b. they vote for a driver from their country and then go on to show this is true.

            But to prove this is bias, you would first have to prove these points, which you did not. Just look at how many UK regulars are Ferrari fans as an example of how misguided that is.

            And to prove you have bias, you would have to be able to come up with a fair amount of great races that did not get to the top as they were won by non-brits (since polling began). Do you have any such examples?

          4. Pretty damming, but for me China 11 was great not because Hamilton won but because Webber carved through the field from 18th. to 3rd. like a hot knife through butter. Does this spoil your hypothesis? Yes! but then again No! Afterall I am Australian.

          5. There could be other reasons, beyond or in place of chauvinism that make all the top 10 most exciting races being races won by British drivers. I can’t think of any, though. Can you?

            There need not be any reason for it other than chance. That you think there has to be a reason for it only shows your eagerness to push a particular point of view.

            (Of course not all ten were won by British drivers, but I know what you mean.)

          6. If you want to take a shot at explaining the reasons for any given phenomenon, and you want to do it using what is known as the scientific method, that is how you do it: start with a general principle that is already known and generally accepted (in this case that people tend to be biased towards the group they are affiliated to – believe me, the evidence supporting this point are plenty and robust), use this general principle to infer how it affects an outcome on the face of the specific circunstances in play (in other words, formulate your cause-effect hypothesis: here it is that the overrepresentation of a national group vis-à-vis others in a F1 forum will lead to favorable bias in the opinions towards that group compared to the rest). You see, not unlike a standard syllogism: general + specific = conclusion. But if philosophers would perhaps be happy to stop at this point, scientists will test the hypothesis against real world data. True, the data available to us here is somewhat insufficient, but the 35%/100% ratio seems to strongly support the hypothesis formulated. There will be a margin of error in this conclusion, which includes the possibility that the pattern showed in the data is due to chance. Keith, for instance, is eager to stick to this possibility – the probability of all the 10 best races being won by a Brit due to chance is negligible, but it is not zero, so there are certainly some straws to be clutched at here.
            But this denial really amuses me – the rest of the world may be biased but we, the British, we are immune to these flaws of character. One can easily see that by observing how, for instance, Arsenal fans are as likely to buy a ticket to watch Chelsea playing someone else on Sunday as they are of buying a ticket to watch their our team: you know, the expectation for excitement is the same……. Even on the face of a something as blatant as this list – see, if it was 7 out of 10… but no, all of them – they are outraged at the suggestion of bias. Close to 50% of all races won by the British drivers in this period (including the races they did not win but in which they clinched the championship) were classified in the top 10. Zero percent of all the races won by the other drivers made to the list (none of the 41 out of a total of 63 races, mind you).

          7. this denial really amuses me – the rest of the world may be biased but we, the British, we are immune to these flaws of character

            I’ve never said or even come close to implying anything of the sort.

            Again, I refer you to the fact that the majority of the site’s users are not British.

            This is just a crude attempt at ascribing to me an abhorrent view that I do not hold.

  14. China and Canada ahn? How cute.

  15. I am sure if it were a non-British driver who wins a race on the last lap, the rating will be similarly high to China 2011 and Canada 2011.

  16. jsw11984 (@jarred-walmsley)
    18th July 2011, 10:58

    I think people are reading far too much into the british/McLaren correlation with the top 10 voted races, as has been said before developing cars that work well in wet/mixed conditions is a McLaren strength and with Button they utterly dominate any race that has mixed conditions, i.e Australia 2010 and Canada 2011, two races with mixed conditions that produced exciting racing and Canada was especially good as it halted some RBR dominance.

  17. The only thing I have noticed is that on this blog – which I like very much – the highest rated races are always those won by McLaren or British drivers. Alonso and Vettel have won races far more astonishing than China 2011 in these years, IMHO.

    1. really, which ones?

      Alonso is high up with Singapore 2008. Bahrain 2010 was a bore-fest, Korea was high up despite being a gifted win for him.

      And I seriously cant remember a more exiting race win for Vettel than Monaco and Spain 2011 where he had to defend a lead. But to say they were better than Canada, China 2011 or Australia 2010 for example is a bit far off for me.

    2. To add to that, if it was just about British drivers/teams, you would expect to see more of Buttons 2009 wins in there, wouldn’t you? Many were just as exiting as Vettel’s.

  18. I’m thoroughly sick of everyone moaning about the number of highly ranked British victories. Not only are there four British wins in the bottom ten, but just look at the list, they were all amazing races! It’s very telling that despite all the protests, no-one has been able to produce a list of races with non-British winners that deserve to be up there! If you’re so sure that this list is not a fair representation of the best races since 2008, why don’t you post a list of what they should really be?

  19. Most people have complained about the British bias, which I think unfortunately does influence the result. But I think the biggest problem is that voting has become far more extreme this year, especially when it came to the European GP. It really wasn’t a bad race in comparison to some races in 2008, yet its ranked lower than Europe 2008 which was without doubt the dullest since we’ve had polling.

    1. Maybe the race was judged on the potential of the new regulations to produce better racing and was judged to have failed.

Comments are closed.