F1 needs to be “unpredictable” – Horner

F1 Fanatic Round-up

Posted on

| Written by

In the round-up: Christian Horner says this British Grand Prix shows Formula One needs to be less predictable.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Horner: F1 needs unpredictability to thrive (F1i)

"You can understand on the other hand that when the results are extremely predictable that it does not add to the appeal, whereas what we saw after the first lap it was going to be unpredictable and then after the rain it was going to be unpredictable."

McLaren urges Honda to put corporate culture aside (Motorsport)

"If you are in F1, you have to do things the F1 way and at the standard of F1. Nothing else."

Wolff sympathetic over Williams’ tactical dilemma (Crash)

"It's very difficult to expect bold calls and, probably, Valtteri would have built a gap if they had let him go."

Jenson Button - will he stay at McLaren? (The Telegraph)

"Dennis is correct to say Button has a two-year deal, but like almost all Formula One contracts, it is not a straight two years. It is what’s known as a 'one plus one', whereby the team decide whether they would like Button to stay beyond the first year. Crucially, the ball is in the team’s court."

Jenson Button has no guarantees over 2016 McLaren seat (BBC)

"It is fair to say that when McLaren signed Button for this season they had very little intention of him staying into 2016. In fact, Dennis did not even want him for this year."

Sainz wants answers on first stints (Autosport)

"Sainz has confirmed the car's handling characteristics are very different at the start with 100kg of fuel on board compared to when it is even at least 20kg lighter."

Marussia ‘over the moon’ with Stevens and Merhi (F1)

"We threw two rookies in with no pre-season testing and missing the first race altogether, and just to expect them to perform - which they have done - they’ve done an outstanding job."

Will Aston Martin return to Formula 1? (Motorsport magazine)

"How likely is Aston Martin to return to F1, even as only a name on an engine cover? When asked about it at the British Grand Prix, Aston boss Andy Palmer said, 'If something drops into our lap and if suddenly those stars align, would I consider it? Yes.'"

Martin Brundle: F1 finally finds its silver lining at the British GP (Sky)

"Silverstone 2015 was a turning point for F1; the bottom of the curve for the naysayers and doom-mongers."


Comment of the day

A view on Hamilton’s pit call from someone who was watching near the pit entrance:

I was at Vale. The rain macs and umbrellas were coming out about a minute before Hamilton pitted and the clouds were getting darker behind us. It has been raining lightly for about ten minutes there.

Hamilton could see it and so did Vettel. I didn’t realise it was raining at the other end of the circuit as the sky seemed light so was a little confused why they pitted at the time.

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Happy birthday to Ev!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Ivan Capelli came close to taking a shock win for Leyton House in the French Grand Prix on this day 25 years ago, despite both the team’s cars having failed to qualify for the previous race.

He had taken the lead by declining to make a pit stop while the other front runners did. However Alain Prost claimed the win when Capelli slowed with a technical problem. Ayrton Senna took third behind Capelli.

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.

136 comments on “F1 needs to be “unpredictable” – Horner”

  1. Totally dominant for 4 years, no where since then, well done Christian your contribution to F1 unpredictability has not gone unnoticed.

    1. For many, 2010 and 2012 are two of the best years of Formula 1. And no, I’m not talking about Vettel fans.

      1. Er, I found 2010 & 2012 to be great F1 years (despite the DRS we’ve had since 2011). 2003 & 2008 being the other best years since I started watching the sport.

        1. Starting watching in 2003. Definitely, the best years for me were 2007, 2008, 2010 and 2012, with honorable mentions going for 2003 and 2005. 2009 was interesting for the unpredictability (almost every team I think got a podium on merit).

      2. Let’s not forget that Vettel led the championship only once in 2010– At the end. Alonso *should* have won, but Ferrari made a call only slightly worse than Mercedes in Monaco this year.

        2012 really should have been a close-fought battle between Hamilton and Vettel, but McLaren had (and really, still has) so many operational issues that Hamilton never stood a chance of winning, in spite of having what appeared to be the faster car for much of the season.

        So, yeah– 2011 and 2013, were pretty predictable– the question was not who would win, but by how much. 2010 and 2012, not as much.

        1. Even 2013 was relatively open in the first half. Mercedes were very good in qualifying, Lotus was generally going quite well and Ferrari won from time to time as well. So even though it was probable that Vettel would end up WDC quite early on, there was generally a lot of competition in the races up to the middle of the season.

        2. 2011 was probably the most ‘boring’ of those years, but it still had 2 of the best races in recent memory (Canada with Button’s come back and Germany with Hamilton, Webber and Alonso fighting for the lead)

      3. 2006, 2007, 2008 were better than 2010 and 2012.

        1. Imo: No. Definetely not. Even with DRS it was much better, and there was no refueling. More teams were able win races and multiple drivers from different teams were fighting for the WDC.
          In 2010, there was 5 different guys from 3 different teams fighting for the championship. 3 of them were WDCs, and by the end of the year the only one who didn’t lead the championship, who didn’t have any championship, who was the youngest ever pretty-much-everything won the WDC.
          In 2012, there was 7 different race winners, and at least half of them were fighting for the championship.
          And, this was not because there was no one good enough or no car fast enough. It was because throughout the season different cars with different characteristics were good enough for some very talented drivers to fight for the wins.

        2. +1 Best races, best looking cars.

          1. Really? I thought people hated how they looked around 2007-2008.

    2. “Horner: F1 needs unpredictability to thrive”.
      Horner in the start of 2012: “F1 has become too unpredictable”.

      1. And he was right on both occasions.
        Currently we know that two Mercs and a Ferrari will finish on the podium whereas in 2012 half the grid won races due to the comedy tyres with their patented 3 degree operating temperature wndows.

    3. When Red Bull were dominating, the only unpredictability was whether or not his drivers would follow team orders

      1. Really? It’s very unjust that people have this rose-tinted view regarding the “good old times”, but some people call one of the most exciting period of F1 “predictable”.
        That’s not to say I don’t agree with the unpredictability regarding RB drivers obeying the team orders. Both of them.

  2. Inconceivable! (some know where this if from)
    When everyone is using the same tires, are forced onto the same pit strategy, have cars that due to cost cutting measures are designed to be reliable rather than fast and you line the cars up fastest to slowest, what did he think the result would be. He’s had a hand in framing the rules for several years now and is he saying he’s just had this revelation? Gee Chris, how do you think we got here?

    1. This problem didn’t exist for several years though. We had some fierce WDC battles couple of years ago. What you are saying about reliability etc is true though, but we need cars on similar level for a good competition then. Imagine there are no Mercedes this year. Yeah, at the moment cars make more difference than drivers, but still, it would be a lot better season without them.

      1. This season with out the Mercs would actually be much worse. Seb would have 6 wins and 201 points. When his next rival Bottas would be 83 points down with 118 points. Compared to this season with the Mercs where Hanilton has 5 wins 194 points and is only 17 points ahead of Rosberg.

        Of course you could argue that Hamilton let a win or two get away this season (Monaco and Austria), but give credit to Rosberg and Vettel. When a win was possible they took the opportunity.

  3. Great insight from COTD! Thanks Stephen and Keith. Even though he didn’t see the clouds’ progress over time, what he says makes sense and pretty much matches with what Vettel already said.

  4. There is no proper broadcasting. We missed 2 spins and I heard Hamilton had some off-track excursions too. They are doing a very poor job. We didn’t get to see a proper shot of first lap incident. We didn’t see this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oPCmf8v6sk How can they not show this? What else have we been missing off-camera??

    1. Wow, thanks for sharing, that is some epic driving.

    2. RP (@slotopen)
      8th July 2015, 2:54

      Talk about unpredictable. Good dog, how does he keep that thing on the pavement.

      I also miss grandstand shots. What did it sound like when Hamilton came around in front of Massa after the undercut? I saw fan video of the stands in Austin last year, it made me want to be there.

    3. A lot is my answer. In Montreal, after his pitstop, Lewis kept locking up his front wheel in the hairpin lap after lap causing the spectators to believe it was only time before Rosberg got ahead. It was gripping and very tense but when I watched the BBC broadcast there was none of it except his first after the pitstop. We at the track felt it was a hard fought win given his constant lookups but when I read the forums, there was a general feeling that the win was easy.

      1. Every win of his is (or should be) easy.

        1. I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t be able to come close to being able to do what he does in that car, so I’d be careful accusing him of having it “easy”

          1. me??? Of course not lol. Get a grip.

            Hamilton, in relation to the other drivers on circuit, should have an easy time of it – as there’s not been any true competition throughout 2014/15. Clear enough for you?

    4. incredible !
      Vettel is the rain master :)
      His first win in Toro Rosso was in rain
      and his first win for RedBull too :) :) :)
      a glimpse of Michael Schumacher in Spain 1996 in Ferrari :D

      1. @malik His first win for Ferrari was in a baking hot furnace, what’s your point? :)

        1. He’s good at extremes :p lol

        2. Wet quali in Malaysia too. He almost almost! got the pole. That was an impressive piece of driving too.
          He already got some front row results in quali for the last 2 years. He may just be the first one to seize the first non-Mercedes pole.

          1. *to seize a non-Mercedes pole

    5. Thank you very much for sharing! So that was how he overtook Kimi! Impressive bravery and car control

    6. Yep the coverage could be a lot better. Formula1.com is a disgrace too.

    7. ColdFly F1 (@)
      8th July 2015, 9:37

      Thanks for sharing that link – impressive skillfull driving by Vettel.
      If I’d seen that my Rate the Race would have been 1 point higher.

      Why did Vettel stick his hand out of the cockpit? wave to fans? Feel the rain with gloves on? ???

      1. I was thinking the same. First I though he was apologising to another driver but nobody was around at the time (unless the camera missed it)

      2. I think he was checking out the rain. No?

      3. Waving goodbye to Kimi’s career?

    8. We didn’t see this

      Hang on, how can you claim you “didn’t see” something which was obviously broadcast by FOM?

      1. I think they showed a couple of seconds him trying to control the car on-board, then they showed him overtake Raikkonen from another angle. It was totally unrelated to what they have been showing previously, and it was for a couple of seconds that it just flashed on the screen and was gone. But this video of 66 seconds gives off an entirely different feeling. Live it looked like he couldn’t control the car or something, completely the opposite of how it should have been perceived. That whole sequence is amazing to watch. How he controls the car while it’s stubbornly trying to snap out, then feels out the rain, then closes the gap and then overtakes his teammate.
        Also, I realized there are differences between Sky and BBC coverages. How is that so?

        1. Also, I realized there are differences between Sky and BBC coverages. How is that so?

          There are no differences in terms of the main broadcast, Both carry the same world-feed as every other broadcaster does.

          The only differences are what else is available, Sky carry a dozen extra in-car camera feeds on there ipad app & red button interactive tv service while the BBC only take the main onboard mix (Which is where that vettel shot is from with the telemetry graphics).

    9. I saw the overtake live, looked even more spectacular seeing both cars come onto you and then Vettel outbraking Kimi + nice sparkles.

    10. Poignant.

    11. I cannot comprehend what the fuss is about Vettel overtaking Kimi. The driving and constantly applying opposite lock to a car trying to snap out, yes. But catching Kimi and overtaking him, no. Kimi was no the wrong tires at that moment for God’s sake!

      1. I don’t think the biggest thing is the overtake either. Like you said, the previous part with his driving, that’s what’s magnificent.
        That said, they are both on slicks, Raikkonen is not on inters yet. So, no, he’s not on the wrong tyres at that moment. (Well, maybe wrong tyres for Raikkonen…) That is the lap he decides to come in. Maybe prompted by what happens on the video, don’t know. But, he outbrakes Raikkonen (who is his teammate!) there on the wet track with slicks on a car that’s been snapping out like crazy. That’s awesome too.

      2. I think it’s the whole 65 seconds, everything that happens, everything he does, the video is really striking.

      3. Didn’t Kimi box and changed his tyre right after that lap though? From what I read they were both on the same tyre when that pass took place, with Vettel having changed 1 lap later than Kimi.

      4. @kbdavies They were both on slicks though.

    12. That drive is the reason I advocate durable tires and a bit of tarmac in the run off areas. I want to see drivers push and find limits without having tires blow off in 3 laps or end up in gravel. One can’t expect a driver to know the slippery spots without being given at least one chance to go over them. Vettel could have easily lost it there and end up spinning on the runoff tarmac and lose 3rd place; I think that would have been enough punishment, there’s no need to see him retire in the gravel merely because he was pushing the limits.

      1. I somewhat agree with that, but not huge tarmac areas please, as long as it’s not a safety concern. Just some little space, and then gravel. If Hamilton/Rosberg were to spin that would have made little difference to him, since they have a huge pace advantage over everyone. Durable tyres is a good thing too.

        1. @peras
          I’m with you, I should have been more specific and say “a little bit of tarmac”. Of course with the exception when it becomes a safety issue.

      2. I don’t think the car is snapping out because he runs off though. He might have put the right front on curbs before the first snap, and after the last part, but Ferrari didn’t look really stable on-track either. Much like what’s been happening to Raikkonen. But he controlled it superbly…

    13. From the moment it started to rain until the end he was the fastest on track. Very very impressive.

    14. Rick Adami calls him “Master Vettel”.

  5. That picture of Bernie is very cute. If only he was like the Queen and we could just wheel him out on important occasions without him holding any actual power.

    Oh wait, that’s Jean Todt.

    1. That picture is begging for a caption competition!

      1. Mommy got me this costume for Halloween. I’m so excited!

    2. COTD!

    3. @george while I agree that the little girl is adorable, I cannot agree with Bernie, he looks a little…erm… creepy

  6. Good article by Benson, which again underlines why Honda and McLaren need a B-team, ART-Honda, for the engine mileage and data, along with getting Kevin Magnussen and Stoffel Vandoorne F1 experience before stepping up to McLaren. After that, it gives an outlet for drivers like De Vries, Barnicoat, even a Japanese driver if Honda feel so inclined..

    1. Thinking again, Manor-Honda is more likely, Vandoorne & Stevens (or King). But 3 into 1 without that means 2 of them (also JB, KMag) are bound to be unhappy..

      1. Then again, Manor were quicker than the McLaren in the speed traps at the last race with last year’s Ferrari engine. Do they want to lose that performance or chance to get the 2015 Ferrari engine which is clearly very decent?

        1. They will never get the 2015 Ferrari engine. Next year they will have the 2016 Ferrari engine if they stay with Ferrari. The reason they are using the 2014 engine this years is because their car is last years chassis and can take the 2015 engine.
          But that will not continue next year.

          As about Honda. Wel Manor is small budget team. If Honda offer massivly cheaper engines then it might be very good for them even if the performance is a risk. Besides certainly they will expect Honda to be better than it is now.

  7. Man, this Christian Horner guy is boring.

    This race was as predictable as Suzuka 2013. Or others, like Korea 2011 and Spa 2013, where Vettel didn’t even wait for us to think it was predictable. He took the lead within seconds.

    Of course, these days Horner must have loved. The sport at is finest.
    Worst loser ever.

    1. That’s why we don’t see Ron Dennis and Frank Williams making such comments because they’re in F1 long enough to understand that one day you’re up and the other you’re down.

      F1 is not a spec series so some will hit spot and others will fail, only focus and hard work can serve the interests of those currently behind.

  8. Chris (@tophercheese21)
    8th July 2015, 1:53

    Yes Formula One needs to be unpredictable, but that unpredictability needs to come organically in the natural course of the sport. So, Bernie’s ‘Sprinkler’ idea will indeed make it less predictable, but it will be a sham because it’s totally artificial. If you want F1 to become more unpredictable, the regulations need to be set so that the cars are far more equal, and spending 1 billion Euros per year (as Mercedes are doing), will make no difference in performance compared to a team that spends only 30 million per year.

    When the cars are more equally matched, the drivers have more of a chance to be the difference maker, which is what sport is all about: Human performance. Fans want to see their favourite drivers leading a race, or chasing someone down because they’re genuinely a faster driver, not because the car they’re driving is that much better. Look at GP2 for example, Vandoorne has proven himself to be a tremendously quick driver, and it’s not because he’s in the best car because all the cars are equal, it’s because he’s genuinely the best driver this year and he has made the difference, not the car.

    Take almost any other sport as an example, and the athletes are the difference maker. Do you think Messi is that good because he gets to play in special shoes that help him run 10% faster and kick 20% harder than anyone else? Of course not, it’s because his skill comes to a fore in Football, because the playing field is equal.

    1. The driver isn´t the only competing person, though. It´s an engineer´s sport, and the engineers should be able to make a difference. Taking out the engineers would be like a football team with 10 standardized robots and only one human striker tells the teams apart. The current problem with that is that the cars are far too much the same in concept and appearance, and all the difference in engineering is thus hardly understandable for viewers. To improve that, we need far more room for the engineers, so they can build cars in different shapes again, have engines with differing number of cylinders, different concepts.

      1. Like WEC.

      2. @crammond, @Rhys L,

        Yeah like WEC.
        Except for the fact that one is endurance racing, another is sprint type. Opening up the technical specs and allowing separate approaches isn’t quite possible for F1. Even skipping the cost control part or the new regulations being simple enough for all kind of fans to have a grasp on(even this restrictive V6 hybrid regulation appears to be impossible for us to comprehend properly)…., how do you ensure performance equivalence for different approaches? Endurance racing does it & performance differences can be overcome due the length of the races, tyre characteristics, strategies etc(also adjustments according to the rule book).

        For F1, that amount of difference will yield a far more disastrously boring racing than we currently have. So now what, a single-spec series like the other open wheel feeder series or Indycar, so only driver skills shine?

        I’ll refer to what @optimaximal wrote below:

        F1 is as much a constructors championship as it is a driver championship.

        Also, comparing it to some other sport(e.g. football) for regulations, appears a bit ridiculous.

        1. the weight of the car/fuel is the limiting factor on performance. The bigger the engine and fuel load the slower the car becomes. There is a natural balance, and efficiency has always played an important part in winning. It’s just some people with political agendas have taken to making it look like efficiency needs to come at the expense of all non and some factory teams (Austerity).

          GDI is great, and it has raised the bar, but the culture of technology is F1 is to closed and limited to produce anything remotely predictable as everyone is running the ‘same’ (monolithic/regulated) formula.

          1. *in F1 is too

        2. @praxis

          Opening up the technical specs and allowing separate approaches isn’t quite possible for F1.

          It has been possible in the majority of years F1 has run. Yes, not totally open, but there have been V8s, V10s and V12s in most of the naturally aspirated times, old turbo-times had straight-4, V4, V6.

          Even skipping the cost control part

          Cost control through technical regulations has never worked in the slightest, quite the opposite, dozen of tries have proven technical regs do not have any impact on the budgets.

          how do you ensure performance equivalence for different approaches?

          Not at all, I´d hate any try to do so. Any kind of performance-equivalence formula takes away from the competition, as we can´t find out which approach is the strongest.

          For F1, that amount of difference will yield a far more disastrously boring racing than we currently have.

          F1 was never boring, it´s just the current hype to say so. Yet, artificially producing close racing hasn´t proven to be that popular, whereas there has always been a fluctuation between seasons with bigger gaps or seasons with closer racing and multiple competitors, and something has changed that people, who were impressed when a team managed to dominate in the past, are now bored when another team does it.

    2. @tophercheese21 So you want a spec-series? That’s why we have GP2, FR3.5 etc…

      F1 is as much a constructors championship as it is a driver championship. There are kudos to be earned up and down the field for doing good work to make these flaky prototypes work. If a driver has an off-year because of poor reliability or team screw-ups, then that’s that – so be it.

    3. Mercedes are NOT spending 1 billion euros per year.

  9. Bernie’s favorite trick is the disappearance trick. He can make half of F1’s profits disappear into thin air. He also often likes to perform, for his personal amusement, a disappearance trick with back-of-a-grid teams.
    But his most notable disappearance trick is the one with viewing figures.

    1. Viewing figures don’t matter. Money is what it’s all about. If you can screw money out of the few and still show a profit, then it’s all good. That is what F1 is all about.

    2. Obviously you don’t understand how FOM’s profit is distributed

    3. Viewing figures are still higher than they were 7-8 years ago.

      1. How did you figure that? That’s definitely not true. There’s like 200 million people missing.

        1. Like I said the TV figures are still higher today in most regions than they were 7-8 years ago.

          The ‘decline’ people talk about the past 2-3 years is a decline from the all time high that F1 was hitting in 2011/2012 as things like DRS/Pirelli tyres & the wild unpredictability & at times craziness they introduced brought a ton of casual viewers. The past 2-3 years those casual viewers have left & a few regions (Germany been the prime example) has seen a huge drop in figures.

          But in most places the TV figures are indeed still higher than they were 7-8 years ago & I believe the overall worldwide figures are still on-par with what they were 10 years ago.

          As an example the yearly TV averages for the UK dating back to 1992-
          1992-96 (BBC) – 5.1m/3.9m/4.1m/4.5m/5.3m.
          1997-2008 (ITV) – 4.6m/4.8m/4.5m/4.1m/4.0m/3.7m/3.6m/3.1m/3.1m/2.9m/3.8m/3.9m.
          2009-2011 (BBC) – 4.4m/4.3m/4.6m.
          2012-2014 (BBC/Sky) – 3.92m/4.06/4.01m.

          1. I’m not talking about “most regions”, I’m talking about the world. Also the period starting from 2010 wasn’t an all time high, it was a stable period of time despite the transition to pay tv. But figures have already dropped in the previous couple of years.
            Widely the era that’s called Vettel/RBR domination has been one of the best patches of viewership in recent times. There were small fluctuations from year to year, even though more pay channels were being brought into the fold every season.

  10. Just as I did last year, I find it totally unbelievable that McLaren would look anywhere other than Button! The talk that Magnussen might have had the seat this year, or that he might again take the seat next year seem totally and utterly ridiculous! Exactly how badly must a driver be destroyed by his team mate before not being considered to replace that team mate? Button totally and utterly smashed Magnussen last year – there is no other way to describe it. Button is still one of the very fittest on the grid and still one of the very best drivers. Give him a competitive car and he will be in the title hunt – just as he has EVERY year he has been given a competitive car.

    As to whether Button would want to stay, well that’s another matter!

    If I was Jenson, I would be instructing my manager to broker a deal with Ferrari for next year at all costs! I’m even willing to bet he’d do it for free – which considering his pedigree, skill and ability would be a slap in the face and a tragedy – but worth it to get into a decent car again and end his career on a high. He’s a much better driver than Kimi and would take it to Vettel all the way.

    Button to Ferrari for 2016!!!

    1. Don’t know how Button ‘smashed’ Magnussen last year. Magnussen was in his rookie year, and was still improving. He did show better quali pace than Jenson on most occassions, and matched him in races more often than not. He also got the highest finishing position for Mclaren that year, 2nd in his debut.

      Honestly, Magnussen wasn’t as hot out of the box as many people predicted, but he showed enough potential to improve over the next couple of seasons. On the other hand, Button has shown that he has no scope to improve, and although he is consistent, he has nothing left to show in terms of ability.

      Give him a competitive car and he will be in the title hunt – just as he has EVERY year he has been given a competitive car.

      Maybe you didn’t watch the 2012 season. Given the pace of the Mclaren and the increased reliability of his car as compared to Hamilton’s , there should have been NO reason why he didn’t win that WDC. Instead, he spent all his time complaining about poor balance, lack of grip, oversteer, understeer in a championship winning car. Some of his performances that year (Monaco 2012 comes to mind) , were ridiculously poor. While his teammate was fighting for wins, Button was scraping through the points. That season did a lot of damage to Button’s “give him a championship winning car, and he’ll deliver” status

      1. Don’t know how Button ‘smashed’ Magnussen last year.

        Ummm…Button 126 points, Magnussen 55 points. That’s Button scoring 129% MORE points than Magnussen, taking just under 70% of the teams points for the year. If that is a smashing, I don’t know what is!

        He did show better quali pace than Jenson on most occassions

        No he didn’t. Button, not known for his qualifying, out qualified Magnussen 10-9. Not a thrashing at all, but considering you and many other Button haters continuously tell us how bad he is at qualifying, I’d say that leaves Magnussen nothing to boast about.

        and matched him in races more often than not.

        Again, total nonsense. Button finished ahead of Magnussen over 82% of the time and also spent over 66% of racing laps ahead of Magnussen.

        Honestly, Magnussen wasn’t as hot out of the box as many people predicted, but he showed enough potential to improve over the next couple of seasons.

        How do you come to that conclusion? If anything, considering his start to the season, Magnussen only showed signs that he was going backwards. Who’s to say that he would ever have improved? That’s purely an assumption because he is young.

        On the other hand, Button has shown that he has no scope to improve, and although he is consistent, he has nothing left to show in terms of ability.

        Once again, how’s that exactly? Considering the equipment he has been given the last few years, the only thing he can do is beat his team mate which he has done emphatically.

        Maybe you didn’t watch the 2012 season. Given the pace of the Mclaren and the increased reliability of his car as compared to Hamilton’s , there should have been NO reason why he didn’t win that WDC

        2012 was not a great season for Button, it has to be said, but perhaps it is you that needs to watch it again. BOTH McLaren drivers suffered 2 mechanical retirements each. Button’s car was just as unreliable as Hamilton’s.

        1. Except that when Hamilton retired in those races (Singapore and Abu Dhabi) on both occasions he retired from the lead of the race. You have to take into account the context of those retirements, not just that they both had 2 mechanical DNFs. Hamilton also got taken out by Hulkenberg in Brazil in a collision that was not his fault, with Jenson the ultimate beneficiary given he went on to win that race. Again, while leading. That’s 75 points down the drain straight away. I think it’s you who has selective memory somewhat about what happened in 2012.

          1. Are we taking into account the position you DNF’d from then?
            Did you count how many times Alonso/Hamilton inherited the lead because Sebastian Vettel DNF’d from the lead?
            Up until then I would have thought we saw it all with Raikkonen’05…

            All part of the game…

          2. Except that when Hamilton retired in those races (Singapore and Abu Dhabi) on both occasions he retired from the lead of the race.

            Except, no one was talking about how many points were lost when the retirements happened. The statement made was that Button had better reliability than Hamilton. I merely pointed out that this was nonsense.

            But seeing as you mention Brazil and Button being the beneficiary, I guess we’ll just not mention that both Hulk and Button were catching Hamilton at a vast rate of speed at the time of the accident and would have been past him soon within a few laps anyway. I guess we’ll also not mention the fact that Button was over 55 seconds AHEAD of Hamilton before the safety car allowed Hamilton to catch right up again. I think it is you who has a somewhat selective memory of 2012. Brazil 2012 was OWNED by Button, whether you want to remember it that way or not.

        2. How do you come to that conclusion? If anything, considering his start to the season, Magnussen only showed signs that he was going backwards.

          @nick101 And so did Button (3rd in the 1st race, no other podiums rest of the year) because McLaren failed to keep up the development of there car compared to the teams around them so as a team slipped backwards from where they started.

          Who’s to say that he would ever have improved?

          Because he was improving in the areas he had been struggling.

          Like I said in my initial post Kevin’s biggest problem last year was he was struggling to get to grips with the tyre/fuel management, Something Button was of course used to.

          I said at the end of last year that a lot of the engineer’s at McLaren who had access to all of the data felt that Kevin would have been the better long term option because they could see how good he was, where he needed to improve & if he was showing signs of improving in those areas.
          They only went with Button because they knew this was going to be a difficult year & his experience would be more suited to the struggles they knew were coming. If they had not made the change to Honda for this year I can guarantee you based on speaking to some people from McLaren that they would have gone with Kevin alongside Fernando.

          1. .I can guarantee you based on speaking to some people from McLaren that they would have gone with Kevin alongside Fernando.

            Really, speaking to people from McLaren? And tell me, what did God tell you when you were speaking to him about it?

            Exactly what data were your friends looking at because if that data showed that Magnussen was better, then something was seriously lost in translation, because the data that determines how much money the team makes, showed Button scoring well over twice as many points as Magnussen.

            Button destroyed Magnussen in every sense of the word.

          2. @nick101 The teams, Especially the engineer’s look at more than just who finished where because they have far more data & knowledge than we do just watching the TV feeds.

            Its easy to just look at the results & say 1 driver was 4th & the other was 10th so that shows 1 driver is better… But results don’t always tell the full story.
            For instance the driver in 10th may have had a slow pit stop, A car problem, Some damage, A post race penalty, Been pushed off by another driver that cost them time etc…..

            There were 2 races last year (Spa/Monza) where Kevin finished ahead of Jenson on track but got post race penalty’s, So there’s 2 races where the results in the record book don’t show a true reflection of his pace compared to Jenson on those weekends.

            I’m not suggesting that Jenson isn’t good or doesn’t deserve a seat in F1 or anything, I’m glad he kept the seat & can see why they went with him over Kevin (As I said because his experience should be a benefit this year), But I also do believe what I was told about Kevin probably been a better long term prospect. He showed good pace last year, He had a couple of very good races & was in raw pace just as fast as Jenson (As the qualifying results show).
            The areas he struggled with (Tyre/fuel management) are areas that you improve on with experience so another year in F1 would give a true reflection of how good Kevin really. Its always difficult to judge based on 1 year because everyone learns at different speeds, Some drivers can jump in & be stunning from day 1 but others need a year to really get into the groove before they really start impressing.

            Take Romain Grosjean as an example, His 1st year & a half in F1 (2009/2012) was a disaster, Yet his 2nd full year was better & he was matching Kimi by the end of 2013 & putting in some fantastic races. If you had judged Romain after 2012 most woudl have kicked him out of F1, But the team had the data that showed potential so they gave him another shot & he payed them back for it.

    2. Lol Jenson has challenged for the title, erm, precisely once, the year he won it in 2009. In 2010 he was competitive but realistically he was never in the title hunt. 16 points covered the top 4 and then Jenson was another 26 points back. Close but no cigar. In 2011 he came second but given he finished over 120 points behind Vettel he was hardly ‘in the hunt’, and then we have 2012 where he was off the pace of Hamilton all season, and only ended up close to him in the points because he had far superior luck and reliability.

    3. @nick101 @todfod Given how impressive Stoffel Vandoorne was/has been in WSBR & GP2 i’d suggest if there going to replace Button with anyone it would be Stoffel rather than Kevin Magnussen as while Kevin is good, Stoffel is quite clearly something very special.

      Kevin does deserve another shot at F1, He’s got the speed & was actually faster than Button last year in terms of raw speed… His results didn’t always show it because he struggled to figure out the tyre management aspect of F1 having come from WSBR where tyre management wasn’t something you did.

  11. With all these images, we really need to pay tribute to the English F1 fans, they really know to do and enjoy the F1 show.

    Kudos for them!!

    While there’s all this talk about crisis, they went to the track – like they always do – and put it in a great show!!

    Hamilton win was great gift to the best F1 fans in the world!

  12. “Silverstone 2015 was a turning point for F1; the bottom of the curve for the naysayers and doom-mongers.”

    Silverstone is the prime example that there’s pretty nothing in F1 2015 that can rob Mercedes of dominating every aspect of F1. Silverstone has no silver lining. Silverstone was the definitive showcase of a sport turn show. There’s no positives, it rained which made the race half interesting, and that has nothing to do with racing.

    1. @peartree I really didn’t get Brundle’s point there. What is there about a good start by the Williams drivers and a useful sprinkling of rain which means that the next race won’t be rubbish?

      Don’t get me wrong, I hope we have lots of great races from here on. But I don’t see what his cause for optimism is. I wish I could…

      1. I agree with you. It’s illogical.

        1. I agree with you guys as well. But you can look at Brundle’s words from different perspective. If he really thinks Silverstone (which was a good race with the most boring result, nowhere near Suzuka 2005 or Montreal 2011) was fantastic and means F1 is great again then he must be really thinking that F1 is in terrible state if that’s enough for him.

          Formula 1 needs competitive field not another episode of Mercedes star wars.

          1. I don’t think the result was boring though. Just because it was Hamilton-Rosberg-Vettel again, it didn’t mean it was expected. Who was 100% sure Hamilton win? Well, even if you were, did you expect Rosberg to finish 2nd? Vettel finishing 3rd was pretty much unfathomable at one point while he was down in 9th.

          2. I call that Formula Mercedes lol :p

          3. You summed it up in the second comment Lol. It’s hard to get excited when once in 10 races someone gets up to the Mercedes especially if you consider those very boring looking cars.

          4. I’m not particularly against how the cars look. Just those ridiculous front wings… I don’t understand how they dare sticking their wing out for an overtaking move. They are so chunky, it looks ridiculous.

  13. I can’t believe I actually agree with something Horner said.

    Specifically, a support race with equal cars and F1 drivers. That would be fun.

    1. ColdFly F1 (@)
      8th July 2015, 10:07

      a support race with equal cars and F1 drivers

      Actually I think that is a daft idea. F1 drivers should focus on the F1 weekend in their F1 car.
      Doing a ‘equal car’ race once a year like Filipe’s carting event, or the Top Gear comparisons, etc. is more than enough IMHO.

      1. I agree with that. There is a support race with equal cars, it’s called GP2.

    2. @casjo, isn’t that essentially what they tried to do with the BMW M1 Procar Championship back in 1979-1980? It didn’t make much of a long term impression and was eventually dropped after BMW decided it didn’t want to spend its resources on that series and also compete in F1.

  14. F1 has a lot of unpredicatability. Will the Renault engines last the race. Will the Honda ones start the race.

    Will it Manor or Alonso who get the first points of the season before the other (it was Alonso, answered on Sunday).

    RB have been quiet about Renault for sometime now. Hope they continue and Renault brings a good upgraded engine to the races soon.

    Mercedes might never be caught (or caught but not beaten) but at least there will be battles behind. RB seem close based on evidence of the British GP.

    1. *unpredictability.

  15. “If you are in F1, you have to do things the F1 way and at the standard of F1. Nothing else.”

    So if McLaren reject Honda engines, then whose engine will they choose? Back to Mercedes?

  16. i suspect Horner is happy at the moment, he had one car up with the main pack on the weekend, had he not spun we may have seen a different result on the podium,
    i have this funny feeling Renault just may have made a little progress,
    lets hope so, even if its just to shut him up between races…

  17. Horner is a bloody hypocrite: Red Bull’s team principal Christian Horner has said that he is happy with driver Sebastian Vettel’s progress and not concerned with his ‘boring’ dominance. http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/report-red-bull-boss-horner-says-sebastian-vettels-boring-dominance-fine-by-him-1897646

    1. Hardly comparable, is it?

      According to Metro.co.uk, Vettel goes into the last six grand prix races with a 60-point cushion to nearest rival Fernando Alonso, while Red Bull are 103 points clear of Ferrari in the constructors’ standings.

      Goodness me, how shockingly ‘dominant’! With ten races still to go this year, Mercedes are already 160 points clear of second place Ferrari in the constructors standings, and Hamilton already has a 59 point lead on the best placed non-Mercedes driver.

      And at that stage in the supposedly “boringly dominant” 2013 season, non-RB cars had won 6 of the 13 races. In ten races this year non-Mercedes cars have won just a single time.

      If 2015 turns out to be half as competitive as 2013 was, it will be a very pleasant and unexpected surprise.

  18. I personally think Jenson Button should retire proudly this season, and should announce it himself before getting sacked from the team. Last year already he was close to quit by the backdoor – which he doesn’t deserve.
    He is a great individual, a team player, a world champion after all; he gotta feel the end won’t be long and he better have a proper farewell at the last Grand Prix of the season than an unknown exit on December 2.
    Going that way, he should even have announce his retirement before the British Grand Prix, I’m sure the fans and teams would have made something special for him.
    Same for Raikkonen.

    1. Yes we all know McLaren would be leading the championship if only they had some decent drivers.

    2. The Blade Runner (@)
      8th July 2015, 8:46

      Button to Williams to replace the Scuderia-bound Bottas…

      1. Williams can’t afford Button.

      2. Pat Ruadh (@fullcoursecaution)
        8th July 2015, 10:34

        I think we’ll see Hulk in that red car next year. I can see him putting that new Force India mk2 in the top 5 a few times before the year is out, and Le Mans has pushed him to the shop front.

        I think Hakkinen will lobby Bottas into the second Merc.

        1. Pat Ruadh (@fullcoursecaution)
          8th July 2015, 10:41

          P.S. Kimi and Jenson to retire.
          Werlien takes Hulkenbegs seat at Force India,
          K-Mag replaces Jenson at McLaren,
          Rosberg back to Williams, straight swap with Bottas.

          Watch this silly season space :)

  19. Horner wants unpredictability but is a broken record when it comes to [I’m paraphrasing]:

    All one-stop races are boring
    We should ban one stop races

    He needs to realise that unpredictability means that each race is different. This means different performances of cars (preferably through innovation and upgrades), different types of overtakes (preferably not along the main straight using DRS), different strategies (preferably non-stop and one-stop and two-stop and three-stop strategies – flexibility for the teams to choose their own strategy rather than have it mandated by Horner) and therefore very different race results throughout the grands prix in a season.

    1. we should ban racing too.

  20. Great clip Keith, Capelli, Prost, Senna French Grand Prix. One of the best ever races, especially in the modern era. That was un-predictability at its finest

    1. There can’t be many examples of a team failing to qualify for one race and then leading the next one!

  21. I’m bit fed up of this navel gazing wondering what the fans want. We need to remember what F1 is – a sport. Get the sporting regulations fair and sensible, and one you have a good sporting base, see if you can present it in a way that people want to watch.

    If you can’t, then maybe F1 as a global super-sport has had its day.

    F1 doesn’t need overtaking, or unpredictability or any other gimmick. It needs fairness, transparency, and the best engineers and drivers competing on a level playing field. Anything else is just a fix under any other name.

    1. @fluxsource
      Back in the 80’s there was a lot of unpredictability, which resulted in multiple (5 or more) GP winners almost every season without resorting to gimmicks.
      A problem now is reliability, as many important components are expected to last several GP weekends instead of a single race we’ve lost a lot of the tension associated with race ending failures.
      Prost, Senna, Lauda et al could get themselves a half lap gap during the race but you’d still be wondering if their car would make it to the end of the race, while these days once a driver has that kind of advantage we know they’ve effectively got the win barring a change in the weather or a safety car period.

      I’m not sure how we’d change this, even if we got rid of multi-race requirement for components I doubt we’d get teams pushing the limits as we did back in the 80’s and we can’t make them forget what they’ve learned about building reliable parts.

      1. Don’t you think making things unreliable would be another kind of gimmick? Very artificial.

        1. Depends on how you do it. If you simply scratch the rules saying components should be used a number of races, and make wins as important points-wise as they were under the void-results-system in the 80ies, you don´t have anything artificial in that and they will build to a 305kilometers-goal again. Which would also have far more of a “engineering to the edge”-feel to it.

  22. “F1 needs unpredicatability”, or, you know…. at least Red bull domination predictability…

    At least with Mercedes we can’t say for certain Lewis will win the championship or any race, or get pole… (I am no Rosberg fan, but thanks god for him… Had it been Ferrari dominating, Vettel would be crushing every one).

  23. “To adopt such a policy would need a shift of Honda culture in traditionally wanting its own engineers to solve problems in a methodical way.”

    Sorry Eric, engineering is all about doing things in a methodical way! To suggest otherwise tells me McLaren is in blind panic mode. Panicking = more mistakes. Oh dear…

    1. ‘Methodical’ is clearly Eric’s euphemism for ‘blinkered’ and ‘closed’. It seems Honda have been determined to learn their way into it themselves and not take in help from people who already know.

      Add in deciding to be radical and produce the smallest most jewel-like unit out there, miles more wonderful than the Merc, and there you have the recipe for what we’re seeing.

      The F1 way, as Eric is saying, is to poach and copy to the max, everyone learning from each other, and add just a dash of bright young thing to it. His reference to various different nationalities is striking too. Nationalism is a real loser in F1.

  24. Prediction: More whining from Christian Horner about F1 next week.

    Your move, Red Bull.

  25. I heard that Vettel will be racing in ROC this year. Who else will be racing for Germany, since Michael cannot be there? Is there any news on Hamilton joining the competition?

  26. On the “pressure” McLaren are putting on Honda:

    How long will it be before McLaren-Honda either start performing, or they descend into a Red Bull-Renault grump-fest?

    McLaren do not have unlimited financial resources. They have no lead sponsor, the car is notably short of logos, and poor results mean less prize money. A few years of this and there will have to be staff redundancies, and the wilderness years of Williams loom.

    If things start to get tight, the Bahraini Royal Family (who own 50% of the company) might put up some money, for a while, but Ron Dennis and his partner Mansour Ojjeh (who between them own the other 50%) would probably have to sell some of their holdings. I can’t see RD wanting to do that.

    At some point soon, a decision will have to be made in Woking: who do we approach for an engine? Or do we build our own? A poor 2016 on top of a lean decade, and especially the dismal last couple of years, and McLaren could be in serious difficulties. Since 2000 McLaren have had only one driver’s championship (2008) and no constructor’s success. Several great names have come and gone in F1. Could it be that the mighty McLaren team will also fade away?

  27. I think Button will stay at McLaren next year. I cannot really see why they would get rid of him. However, if he had the opportunity to go to another team at the end of this season e.g. wiilliams, Ferrari, etc I would jump at the chance. I just cannot see this happening though and I don’t think McLaren will want all the hassle of changing drivers and media storm this will raise.

    1. On the driver market for 2016 I don’t see Hulkenberg going to Ferrari next season. I see Kimi being dropped but I don’t think they will want two German drivers. Bottas or even Ricciardo I think are more likely.

      If Williams lose Bottas they may even decide to get rid of Massa as well. I don’t know what sort of contract he is on. I could see Button being offered a place there in these circumstances. There would be a nice symmetry in him starting and ending his career at Williams.

      Then there is Lotus. If Renault decide on a buy-out I think there could be a space there. I think they would want to keep Grosjean, being French but they may want a big name to join him. Who could that be?

    2. Yeah I agree about JB, surely Mac must see they need a mature driver in their situation.

      I’m not giving up on Hulk at Ferrari. He wouldn’t have let Lewis and then so nearly Rosberg through in that soft way at Village.

  28. Saintz’s statement is very strange. How does he think this?

  29. I’d vote Horner for ‘Whinge King Of The Year’. Everything he says is total contradiction, definitely not a good looser IMHO.

Comments are closed.