In the round-up: Renault development driver Oliver Rowland believes he’s second in line for a drive with the team next year if Robert Kubica doesn’t get the seat.
Links
Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more from hundreds of sites across the web:
Rowland 'second favourite' for Renault seat (Channel 4)
"I see myself as not coming with the most backing in the world but second favourite behind Robert from that side of things."
Pirelli considering sixth compound for 2018 (Autosport)
"Depending on the results, we will decide the number of compounds. My opinion is to go up to six, which is possible."
Formula E not a threat to F1, says Haas boss (Motorsport)
"The easiest way, if it is a threat, we would just put electric motors in these (F1 cars) – because we have got a platform. Whatever happens, it will be F1."
Vettel: Ferrari more formidable (Sky)
"A long way to go but we have all the ingredients that we need to stay there."
Kubica 'won't be disappointed' if F1 drive doesn't happen (F1i)
"One thing is sure, if it doesn't happen, I will not be disappointed because I am looking at this situation very realistically."
My target is to get F1 role - Kubica (Racer)
"I think when we met for the first time I don't think anybody was thinking to let me drive in the Hungaroring official day but it happened. It shows the last two and a half months were quite important, not only for myself, but from this to move forward."
Villeneuve’s Trois-Rivieres legacy (Motorsport magazine)
"It was therefore quite a shock to Hunt, expecting a fight amongst his F1 rivals, when Gilles lapped half a second faster than him in practice, before finding even more pace to claim pole position. The race unfolded in a similar vein: Villeneuve opened up a 10-second lead at the start and cruised home to a comfortable victory ahead of Jones and Hunt."
"You can’t help but contrast it with Asif Kapadia’s triumphant Senna, which told its tightly focused story entirely through found footage, whereas Matthews resorts to bursts of dramatic reconstruction, rendered in soft-focus Super-8-ish style."
Got a tip for a link to feature in the next F1 Fanatic round-up? Send it in here:
Social media
Notable posts from Twitter, Instagram and more:
If Pirelli do, indeed, decide to introduce a sixth dry weather compound for 2018, *please* let it be an ultra-medium.
— Steve Matchett (@MrSteveMatchett) August 3, 2017
- Find more official F1 accounts to follow in the F1 Twitter Directory
Comment of the day
Ferrari said Raikkonen wouldn’t have to follow team orders until he’s mathematically out of contention, but @Loup-Garou says his chances have realistically been over for a long time:
Bottas has won two races and is close enough to Hamilton and Vettel to have an outside chance of the drivers’ title himself. There is always a chance that Vettel or Hamilton might retire in a crucial race or even take each other out. In each of those scenarios, the main beneficiary would be Bottas and would increase his title chances. And since their relative positions made no difference to the constructors’ championship situation, Mercedes did the right thing in swapping their cars at Hungaroring and keep Bottas in the running. If the same situation arose later in the season and Bottas was out of championship running, Mercedes would have had no hesitation in ordering him to make room for Hamilton.
Raikkonen on the other hand, is not only realistically already out of the title race, he really has not got the results to indicate that he was ever in it right from the start of the season. It therefore makes sense for Ferrari to maximise Vettel’s chances, especially when the outcome did not affect their constructors’ championship position.
From the forum
Happy birthday!
No F1 Fanatic birthdays today
If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is via the contact form or adding to the list here.
Ashwin (@redbullf1)
4th August 2017, 0:06
I think Renault should do a 3 driver program similar to what Mclaren did this year.
Give Rowland and Kubica alternate chances to take the race seat, that way they don’t risk their race results too much.
Rowland has an impressive record and not being mean but I think Kubica would struggle in some tracks where a lot of gear shifting under turns is needed :(
OOliver
4th August 2017, 0:46
I like it when a driver is confident, but Rowland should do his work behind the scenes and cross his fingers. I remember when Montoya left McLaren, when Gary Paffett was asked about the chances of Hamilton getting the drive, he felt being already McLaren’s test driver, he already had a leg in the car. But it didn’t turn out to be the case. Likewise many a driver have fallen prey to a false sense of security.
socksolid (@socksolid)
4th August 2017, 1:56
In the end renault should just choose the quicker driver. If kubica is quicker then choose him. If rowland is quicker then choose him. I think it would be great to have kubica back in f1 but I don’t want it to happen at the cost of some faster younger talent losing his seat just because kubica is a bigger name. Kubica’s been through rough time but regardless of what has happened before an f1 seat should always go to the fastest driver available. If that is kubica then great. If not then great for rowland.
prelvu (@prelvu)
4th August 2017, 4:30
Yes he may be second to Kubica
But In the end Renault will choose Sainz, Perez, Ocon or Wehrlein before them.
Wehrlein will need a seat coz
According to Marchione next year (Alfa-Romeo)Sauber will be young Ferrari academy drivers (Leclerc and Giovanaci)
So list is long.
Jay Menon (@jaymenon10)
4th August 2017, 5:40
I think Renault are in a pretty good position here. They hold all the cards.
They are a works team, which is always attractive, and there is grid out there rich with unsettled talent. As you mention @prelvu, Sainz, Perez, Ocon, Wehrlein are all up for grabs. It really depends on what Renault are after though. Picking anyone of the of these drivers comes with risk of unsettling the team. These guys are hotshot young drivers who’d want to make a mark on any team they go to, straight off the bat.
If Kubica has met the standard (lets hope he has), he will still pose a risk. For example, can he last the exertion of an entire season? Physical limitations aside, Kubica has to be the first pick. He would prove to be a solid team player a known quantity, and will be the type of driver who can provide the foundations of a world championship winning team.
The easy decision is that Palmer is out.
kpcart
4th August 2017, 11:00
You mean like hungary? 142 laps wasnt enough for you? Kubica will be 5 races into his return and people will still doubt him. Kubica knows what he is doing, and so do renault. This is the highest level of motorsport and renault arent playing games.
Ashwin (@redbullf1)
4th August 2017, 14:43
Yes I know , I could be completely wrong about Kubica,
I know the guy has talent and I wish the best for him to return, but sometimes I just wonder what situation he would be in inside the cockpit when you are fighting with another car and you need to do multiple things at once, sure he would have a modified steering wheel to help him do that but still.
Cm-cm
4th August 2017, 20:13
Your talking microscopic percentages, and of course that is valid in f1…. but if it takes him .001 of a second longer to hit a gearshift paddle mid corner on certain tracks, the planet will not stop rotating.
He will still be faster than Palmer or Hulk.
This drive was stolen from him, by the Motorsports gods. It will be epic to see him get another shot. I would put him in the car if I were Renault…
PeterG
4th August 2017, 0:33
Do we really need another tyre compound?
Although to be honest i’ve become so totally sick & tired of taking about tyres the past 6 years at this point I really couldn’t care less what they do with them. I just want to not having to constantly hear about deg, operating windows or whatever.
I was hoping that the harder compounds & push towards less thermal deg would end all the constant tyre chatter this year but now were just back to stupidly tiny operating windows again which is disappointing.
Mike Dee (@mike-dee)
4th August 2017, 1:28
I think we need 6 tyre compunds so the hardest one definitely never ever gets used.
Sensord4notbeingafanboi (@peartree)
4th August 2017, 1:36
I don’t think there are any more colours in the visual spectrum… Now seriously, just because other tyre manufacturers don’t colour code their tyres doesn’t mean they don’t have more than one specification of tyre. I have no numbers to back this up, but I’m pretty sure that in the past, 5 tyre compounds would be a very small range in f1, and a restrictive range, essentially the tyres differ in compound. In the days of the tyre war a manufacturer would bring several specifications and some tailored to each track nature. Michelin in motogp whilst adopting some colour coding have already gone through dozens of different tyre specifications during their 1.5 years back to motogp.
Honestly the Senna documentary pales in comparison to the work it’s based off, there was at least 2 previous brazilian documentaries that I saw, and they were pretty much the same but better, more footage and less of a journo trying to hog the camera.
Damon (@damon)
4th August 2017, 2:18
I’m totally with you on that PeterG. The entire tyre talk (types, strategy etc.) doesn’t excite me at all, and feels so redundant.
anon
4th August 2017, 6:57
@damon, and yet, the fans are often creating much of the talk in the first place – firstly they complained that the tyres were too fragile, then when the durability is increased they complain that there are too many single stop races.
Bullfrog (@bullfrog)
4th August 2017, 12:08
I want the option of a non-stop race back again. That made for a few surprise results, and near misses.
StefMeister (@stefmeister)
4th August 2017, 12:56
@bullfrog The 1990 French Gp been the most obvious example.
The 2 Leyton House cars go from non qualifying at the previous race (Mexico) to coming within a handful of laps of finishing 1st/2nd in the French Gp due to been able to pull of a no-stop race as all the front runners opted for at least 1.
Bullfrog (@bullfrog)
4th August 2017, 20:21
Mexico ’86 (not the World Cup) was another: a non-stop race brought the first F1 wins for Gerhard Berger, the Benetton team and their tyre supplier…Pirelli.
Chris V
4th August 2017, 22:49
Really nice stat @bullfrog !!
I would like to see the option of non-stop races as well. But then these tyres need to have a greater difference in performance and durability.
Unicron (@unicron2002)
4th August 2017, 9:22
I’m with PeterG and @damon on that. On a scale of 1 to 10, how much do I care about tyre compunds? 0.5. Honestly. I don’t care. It’s boring. I just manage to not listen when commentators talk about it. Fair enough if other (cleverer) people do care about it and think it adds to the dimension of a race (which of course it does), but I just don’t care, it’s dull. I guess that comes from my formative F1 years in the 90s when we had Goodyear and their brand of ’round black things’ that had little or no impact on the racing, and no-one talked about them.
Robbie (@robbie)
4th August 2017, 22:25
@unicron2002 ‘and no-one talked about them.’ And I’m sure Goodyear therefore felt little marketing impact from being in F1 then. And along came Michelin and Bridgestone. And at one point Michelin was explaining that they want a tire competitor in F1 so that people talk about tires, so there’d be marketing impact. The only reason Pirelli is feeling impact from being the sole supplier is because they have been allowed to make gadgety, tricky tires, and hence the constant chatter about them that those of you above dread. No chatter, no marketing impact.
Joao (@johnmilk)
4th August 2017, 8:25
No, F1 needs maximum 3 dry compounds, apart from that is just waste of rubber
Jeffrey (@jeffreyj)
4th August 2017, 14:13
@johnmilk 6 or more could be good imho. They can pick the right ones per track for 2 to 3 stops.
They should, however, stop with the different names and colors. For any given weekend just call the softest one you pick ‘Option’ (make it yellow-striped) and the hardest one ‘Prime’ (make it white-striped). Much easier for the spectators.
Fletch (@fletchuk)
4th August 2017, 2:16
+1 vote for the ultra-mediums
erikje
4th August 2017, 9:42
Only three would be sufficient.
Short life=SL (depending on track from 10 till 25 laps life)
Medium life =ML (depending on track from 20 till 35 laps)
Long life= LL (depending on track from 30 till 50 laps)
Intermediate= iL
Wet life =WL (monsoon)
Imre (@f1mre)
4th August 2017, 15:42
I also think 3 different compounds are enough. It is easier to everyone. Also easier to fine-tune 3 compounds than 6. Having 5 different compounds makes some unpredictable behaviour and sometimes the softer is the more durable, with 6 different compounds it will just become even more random.
The only way I could support 6 different compounds is by having a hard, medium and soft slick, an intermediate with higher working temperature than the current inters, a wet that is in between the current inters and wets and an extreme wet that is much more effective than the current wets and also has a much bigger circumference to allow racing in extreme weather conditions.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
7th August 2017, 12:20
Tracks vary too much for that to work, unfortunately. It takes 4 compounds just to have enough variety to cover all the circuits, and it could be argued that there’s space for the “hard” compound to be turned into an “ultra-ultra-soft” qualifying tyre (the ultrasoft was meant to be a qualifying tyre but at some tracks it’s also a legitimate option for race stints).
Mark G (@)
4th August 2017, 7:05
Hyper-Softs it is then.
I’d like Pirelli to do away with the names and just bring an option and prime to each race. They can have as many compounds as they like as long as they make them a bit less sensative than they are now and give manufacturers reliable specifications.
Nick Wyatt (@nickwyatt)
4th August 2017, 7:53
How about ‘Super-Duper Squishy Softs’ or ‘So Soft they are Stuck to my Hands’?
I thought one of the arguments for having a single tyre supplier for F1 was to simplify things. No?
nickfrog (@nickfrog)
4th August 2017, 9:11
@nickwyatt
‘So Soft they are Stuck to my Hands’
TBF, you can achieve that with any semi-slick on a track day when at the right temp. Although it might hurt a bit.
KaIIe (@kaiie)
4th August 2017, 8:36
Sixth compound, what? Where would this new one fit in? Surely not the hard side of the scale, as even the medium is never used (never mind the hard). I think they should just reduce it to three: soft, medium hard, with maybe an actual qualifying tyre thrown in. Or for the sake of simplicity, just have a hundred compounds but call them soft/medium/hard at each race.
ECWDanSelby (@ecwdanselby)
4th August 2017, 9:16
Would anyone else just prefer it if we just had soft and hard tyres for each race? Let Pirelli do whatever they want behind the scenes to adjust them. The colours look so unsuited to some of the cars, and it ends up dominating discussion.
Surely it’ll be easier for a new fan to pick up, too?
sean
4th August 2017, 9:37
is this seriously your argument? tyre colors? oh my…
Martijn (@)
4th August 2017, 9:35
How about just a single dry tyre? One might argue that it brings in ‘strategy’ to have multiple compounds, but let’s be real; it’s just another gimmic like DRS to stimulate (artificial) overtaking.
Gabriel (@rethla)
4th August 2017, 20:13
I dont think its a gimmick to have the teams choose the fastest tyre and strategy. It is a gimmick to limit the teams in what they chose however. Bring all the compunds and let the teams chose whatever they want and no mandatory pitstop or compund.
Will it be to many tyres to bring each race? No because the teams will never pick the hardest compunds anyways so just get rid of them entierly.
sean kettlewood (@skettlewood)
4th August 2017, 9:37
not going to happen, but 6th tyre being a qualifying tyre for Q3 – let’s go break some lap records.
Formula1 (@s2g-unit)
4th August 2017, 10:42
@skettlewood
That is THE reason why laps times aren’t as fast as they predicted this year. The Team engineers have done what they needed to but Pirelli on the other hand have once again provided tyres that are too hard, lack grip and have a” small temperature operating window”
Ju88sy (@)
5th August 2017, 11:22
@s2g-unit Let’s not be too harsh on Pirelli this year! they had a guide from the FIA on car performance for 2017, they didn’t get to actually run rubber on 2017 machinery until winter testing, design to an expected performance level with assumptions, inevitably they erred on the side of caution for this season given the ‘unknown’ car performance.
I think the tyres are o.k. this season, drivers can push again in contrast to 2014-16, the other issues are related to fiddly nature of car setup. If the tyres were lacking grip we wouldn’t be seeing the track records tumbling. I don’t mind the level of discussion around tyres, at least it is a level playing field for the teams, I was never comfortable with the old school tyre wars where manufacturers had preferred teams who got the best batches.
Robert
4th August 2017, 10:47
What they should do regarding the tyres is bring two sorts to each race, Slick tyres for dry conditions and Rain tyres for wet conditions, allow each driver a maximum of 10 sets of each sort to use for the whole event and then let them get on with it, so no more of these silly rules of having to use two sorts of tyre in a dry race or handing back tyres after practice. And allow multiple manufacturers, if you can have competition between engine manufacturers then they can have competition between tyre manufacturers too.
kpcart
4th August 2017, 10:57
It is obvious that renault wont retain palmer, but will possibly let him race to end of season.so knowing he wont be around mich longer, surely renault have to give kubica and maybe rowland fp1 sessions this year. I think kubica will be at spa or monza for fp1. Renault wont stop now with their invested time with evaluating kubica.
Damon (@damon)
4th August 2017, 11:24
“And allow multiple manufacturers,”
Please do NOT!!!!!! That’s the worst thing ever. USA GP 2005 anybody?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5DRJWw0R_w
Worse tyres have the capability of making the field more un-even than underpowered engines.
If this year’s McLaren not only had the worse engine, but also the worst tyres, they’d be running 5 seconds slower/lap than the top teams.
Seeing a final qualifying order where teams with the better tyre occupy the top spots and those with the worse tyre are at the bottom is a pathetic view. I don’t want to see it ever again.
TheBullWhipper (@thebullwhipper)
4th August 2017, 12:00
+1 totally agree.
Pirelli should bring a PRIME an OPTION and a Qually tyre to wash race, keep the colour coded standard for the fans but let Pirelli do what ever they want to this spec of tyre, we don’t need to know if the soft at spa is harder than the soft at Monaco it makes very little different cos everyone is using them.
Why they r not allowed to tweek compounds between races is just silly, Evey track is different. It’s just Pirelli being lazy I think, once they have made the choices for the year they just stick with it and start in next year’s. It’s a good job the teams don’t so that with the cars!
StefMeister (@stefmeister)
4th August 2017, 13:17
@damon The 2005 USGP is 1 race out of how many hundreds which were run without having 2 or more tyre suppliers causing any issues at all.
I personally would love to see them go back to tyre competition because competition is supposed to be what this sport is about, Competition between not just teams & drivers but also engines, oils, fuels, brakes, tyres & more.
And having more than 1 supplier constantly pushing one another forward prevents the sort of nonsense we have seen since 2007 with Bridgestone accused of been too conservative & bringing rock hard tyres & Pirelli been accused of going too far the other way since 2011. With competition each has to bring the best, fastest, most competitive tyre they can come up with so nobody can afford to bring tyres that are too conservative or too fragile.
It is true that you may have races or even seasons where 1 supplier struggles, But again that is part of this sport & the emphasis is then on that supplier to improve it’s product or risk having teams switch to the alternative option/s.
At times during the Pirelli-Era (And I don’t mean to sound like i’m bashing Pirelli here) it’s been clear that teams/drivers haven’t liked the product & at worst haven’t had any trust in it. And with the small operating windows we have also had teams hampered & rendered un-competitive by been forced to run them. In these cases I don’t see it as fair to force them to run a product they don’t like/trust or that causes them issues, They should be allowed to look at Michelin, Bridgestone or whoever else is open to supply them in order to have a product they trust & that suits there car’s characteristics.
I don’t see any real negatives in allowing tyre competition.
Damon (@damon)
4th August 2017, 13:44
No no no. Competition is not about making participants uncompetetive.
A number of teams showing up to a Grand Prix and not being able to compete is not what makes the “competition” interesting, and certainly not what fans tune into.
The competition fans want to see is one that takes place on the track, not one that kills it.
Seriously mate, @stefmeister, at what point in the season were you excited about, say, Mercedes having won the engine manufacturer “competition” with Honda, huh?
What we really enjoy is variety: variety of manufucaturers, not really the results of them competing, which basically just means that many or most of the field drives around the circuit without taking part in the actual competition for the win.
StefMeister (@stefmeister)
4th August 2017, 22:49
@damon I enjoy seeing the competition & I enjoy seeing that competition push the competitors forward.
If the result of that competition is that somebody finds an advantage which gives itself and/or those running there product an advantage over the rest I see zero problem with that because to me that is just a part of the sport.
I don’t have any issue at all with what Mercedes have done the past few years, They built the best engine & deserve every bit of the advantage they have because they simply did a better job than the rest. Yes it’s unfortunate that Honda are struggling & that there struggles have hindered McLaren, But thats part of the sport & in the past Mclaren have themselves benefited from having the best engine (The Porsche/Tag, Honda in 1988 & at times Mercedes). In fact ironically the team that is now Mercedes once struggled with an under-performing Honda engine themselves both as BAR & later the Honda works team.
I’d also point out that in the global fan survey conducted earlier this year over 80% of those that took part (More than 250,000) said they wanted to see more than 1 tyre supplier in F1 so it seems that it is the sort of competition which most fans want/like to see.
Ex F1 fan
4th August 2017, 12:28
Does anyone think the tire story is prevalent now and not back in the ‘glory days’ because they didn’t have the instant tech to tell you exactly when the tire is at its best? If you think any of the older drivers and teams would not have given their left nut to know exactly when the tires are ready, how much there’s left and how it will react, you’re clueless and delusional about the TEAM part of the sport. These guys know everything about their car and with a prime/option choice only at each track they will still be talking about when to push the tires. If you want F1 to be the pinnacle of technology in motorsport you have to accept that the technology covers EVERYTHING about the cars and running the cars to the ragged edge. The only options are what we have now and the engineers knowing everything they have to do to get the most out and have the car survive, or we, to use everyone’s favorite term, artificially spice up the racing by firing half the team staff and saying you get a radio and that’s it, no telemetry, no information. Watch how fast teams jump to other series.
Josh (@canadianjosh)
4th August 2017, 17:19
As much as I am not a fan of FE, it is a growing series but not a threat thus far. Will it be in 10 years?
Gabriel (@rethla)
4th August 2017, 20:06
I doubt it. If it becomes relevant for the top racing series to be all electric F1 will go that way.
1 stands for number one and not a gimmick like E.
Alianora La Canta (@alianora-la-canta)
7th August 2017, 12:22
At this rate it will be – and they’re taking exactly the steps they need to to make it work, if they can get past the coming recession. (The trick is to keep enough privateers to make that occur).
GT Racer (@gt-racer)
4th August 2017, 23:10
I don’t really see Formula E been a threat to F1 (At least not anytime soon) because while it has been attracting manufacturer’s it doesn’t really seem to be attracting fans.
I know that in the UK ITV dropped it due to poor figures & I also know that Channel 5 were extremely disappointed in how Formula E was performing which is why later in the season you started seeing them go with highlights rather than live coverage & dropping the season final down to spike where it attracted a rather poor (Especially for a title decider) 300,000 viewers.
For a series with full FIA backing, A bunch of big manufacturer’s already in & on the way & the amount of promotion it gets they really should be doing a whole lot better than they have been & unless they start showing real growth I don’t see the manufacturer’s retaining the interest in it they currently seem to have.