[Official] Rate the race - Chinese Grand Prix

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by nicanary

It seemed to go on forever. I thought it must be over soon and then noticed it was lap 28/56. May be the last one I watch. Sorry.

It did drag on but I'll continue watching,I've been following F1 for so long, it's difficult not to watch and you never know the next race could be a cracker. I forgot it's Bahrain.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by FordCosworthPanoz

I'm so tired I rated it wrong. Gave it a seven by accident when I was giving it a 4.

Honestly I was half asleep between lap 30 and 50. Complete lack of overtaking as expected just like the re-fuelling days, but with slower more boring, ugly cars racing at five tenths for most of the run. The same people criticising the refuelling days and claiming how ''boring'' it was are the same people acting like Pirelli is the best thing to ever happen to the sport and Paul Hembery is the second coming of Christ.

Some good battles early made it decent and the last lap with Vettel and Hamilton was cool, but still below average. 4

Listen you leave Paul Hembery alone, his mum just called me complaining ..

[FordCosworthPanoz]

Originally Posted by ECW Dan Selby

Today, they basically told the drivers 'don't bother racing'.

I mean, why would they? Why screw up your tyres when you could breeze past, with no resistance from matey in front?

The DRS zones were just plain dumb, I can't think of any other way of putting it. It's not fair on the spectators to see drivers not bothering to have a race.

It felt like a series of time-trials where everyone moved out of eachother's way, and that's sad.

Selby

It does suck to pay 200-600 quid, plus the travel costs, plus the hotels, plus the ridiculous concession stands, plus the gaudy overpriced merchandise to basically see an auto 'race' amongst some of the world's best drivers where nobody actually races.

[TrapezeArtist]

You're a miserable lot! I enjoyed it, so I'm one of those who gave it an 8.

So lots of drivers chose not to defend an undefendable overtake? It's the wisdom of knowing which fights to pick. (Obviously Webber and Vergne lacked that wisdom, and both paid the penalty.(I think the stewards penalty for Webber was harsh though.))

[IceMan_PJN]

6

It had its moments, I guess.

[ECW Dan Selby]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

You're a miserable lot! I enjoyed it, so I'm one of those who gave it an 8.

I'm really struggling with my opinions elsewhere. Well, more people are painting me with the same brush as the naysayers.

You look at any of my other 'Rate the Races'. I never criticise unless it's a horrible dull race. I'll always try and see the positives.

I don't know whether today was particularly bad when it come to the DRS/tyres, or whether it was something that just snapped in my mind and changed.

But we had the first few laps, which are always great. Fine. Nice movement, cool overtakes, lots of action.

Then we have the start of the DRS activation in the race, which is always cool cos you'll have 3 cars abreast at points. Love it.

Then after, things settle. But they didn't really settle. A would be close to B, A would cruise past B down the DRS zone. Done deal. Ok. C would then close on D, overtake D down the DRS zone. Hang up a minute..

"I swear usually it's SLIGHTLY more difficult than this?" I was thinking. Nope. It carried on and on and on. It was incredibly easy.

It was a bitter cocktail of 2 needless DRS zones (look, i'm not one of these 'RID of DRS right now! It's not needed!!' people - I get that teams have developed this part of their car, and some teams have better DRS than others. It wouldn't be fair. I get that). All i'm after is some common sense in the most technologically advanced form of motorsport (going by what it prides itself on, anyway).

So tell me why, after multiple years of DRS use, and being told that DRS was going to be used to create 'extra overtaking opportunities' (not a direct quote, but i'm 90% sure that was the general aim), do we still occasionally get the most needless zones you can imagine, that are not just wrongly positioned, but usually far too long?

Do they honestly think we just won't get an overtake all race? You have a 1km straight that was DESIGNED to create overtaking, and never had any issues in doing so. Why put one there??

The start-finish wasn't so bad, but even that was a little too long. It took the magic away from those 'hold yer breath' Nelson Piquet Hungary '86 style moves.

My problem is, an overtake shouldn't be done half way down a straight. An overtake, or at least a proper racing overtake should be through who can brake the latest and use the correct/quickest line, in my opinion. That's now robbed.

I just ask for common sense. You have tyres that fall away (far too quickly now. And I totally gave it a chance this season and was all for it. I have loved the Pirelli F1 era thus far, but today highlighted that there's a very serious issue), so why do you need these ridiculously long and ill-thought out DRS zones? Aren't the guys who decide these zones privy to mass amounts of data?!

I sadly think common sense has been left behind.

We need some stronger compounds (because you shouldn't have drivers simply not defending through choice - absolutely absurd), and DRS zones that don't make a good overtaking zone a guarenteed overtaking zone. Let's make ANOTHER!

It seemed to me that last season/season before, the only guy that adopted the strategy of 'just let em through' was Paul di Resta, one of the reasons I didn't particularly like the guy (well, other than having zero personality and coming off a little whiney, but that's just my opinion). I just hated that it went against the whole ethos of RACING. I get it, totally. But it went against that ethos of wheel to wheel competition.

/rant over

Sorry, it's rants like these as to why I get painted with the same brush as others, I guess. I just wanted to clarify that i'm not a serial offender, I just felt this race highlighted a severe issue that needs rectifying extremely quickly, and that can be rectified quite easily with a little special ingredient known as 'common sense'.

Selby

[Adam43]

Quite frankly this race demonstrated all that was wrong with F1. Nothing to really whinge about. Pa-thet-ic.

[Flavio Galtieri]

I don't understand what you lot are moaning about! I've been following Formula One since the sixties and this is without doubt a classic era for competitive racing.

It's a team sport remember. The object of the exercise is to get your two cars from the grid to the chequer before anyone else. That does not necessarily mean in the shortest possible time or leading the most laps and has always necessitated strategy decisions, it's just that the options are far wider now and also more transparent to the viewer.

All teams will have done "simulations" of their race based on data from the practice sessions and that forecast will be updated in real time by their engineers during the race depending on what the variables are. Making a lousy start for example.

Fighting for or defending a position mid-race could have a devastating effect on the updated forecast of where that driver may end up, two cars fighting always go slower and one or both could destroy their tyres requiring an unscheduled stop or requiring them to save fuel. On the other hand there are times when a driver simply must pass in order to hit his predicted numbers.

It was always thus before computers, just that the drivers and teams had to work it out for themselves and communicate by pit board.

I think it was a "7", a good race and Vettel's charge was great to watch but there were never any points on offer for leading lap 30 anyway.

[FordCosworthPanoz]

I'm not saying this 'era' is boring, its been just the opposite with some exceptions. I was saying this season is starting to become that because it's basically what it was during the fueling era, but worse. Tire Wear is a part of racing and I've been the first one to defend Pirelli, especially last year, but it shouldn't be 98% of the focus of the race with the exception of the first and last 5 laps.

The 2012 spec tires were fine, even Melbourne's tires were reasonable. F1 does not need to go to rock hard tires like we had with Bridgestone. We just need a good tire that wears but also allows the driver to do something that I thought F1 and especially the last 2 seasons were all about, racing.

[Aysedasi]

The point is, does it deserve the label 'racing'.....? There really wasn't very much 'racing', IMO....

Fighting for or defending a position mid-race could have a devastating effect on the updated forecast of where that driver may end up

I respect your opinion Flavio, but the conversion of the art of balls-out racing to 'updated forecasting' leaves me thoroughly depressed when you're talking of a race lasting an hour and a half. Where a driver ends up really ought to depend on how hard he depresses the loud pedal.....

[Knowlesy]

Look, we can debate any aspect of F1 all day long. What absolutely is not up for debate is bringing a tyre that lasts less than a tenth of the race and having that as a mandatory compound. An absolute joke, I'm sorry.

[nicanary]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Look, we can debate any aspect of F1 all day long. What absolutely is not up for debate is bringing a tyre that lasts less than a tenth of the race and having that as a mandatory compound. An absolute joke, I'm sorry.

Quite. Some fans like the randomness of it all, some don't. Personally I'd rather see the whole field given their own freedom as to what they use, and when. Otherwise it becomes too regulated. Obviously enforced wets when the conditions dictate, but otherwise they decide for themselves.

[Aysedasi]

That would be sensible though. Can't be having that!

[Metzo]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

The point is, does it deserve the label 'racing'.....? There really wasn't very much 'racing', IMO....

its more show than racing

[chunder]

Difficlt to "rate the race" when you hear Button on the radio

Can we battle?

I know F1 is trying to be green, but playing tyre conservation for a whole weekend is frankly pathetic!

Sorry Pirelli, but you got this weekend completely and utterly wrong!

I think they all did a bloody good job in the circimstances, Ricciardo stood out for me, but most of them were conserving a lot of the time which isn't really racing to me.

[Lancsbreaker]

I think the complaints about no ovetaking are a bit harsh.....I'm sure I saw several overtakes around the outside in several corners where you wouldn't expect it, where a driver was "motivated"......but I do agree that tyre tactics have become o'erweaning......

[ECW Dan Selby]

The only one that springs to mind is Vettel on Massa in to the non-DRS hairpin.

Selby

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Quite frankly this race demonstrated all that was wrong with F1. Nothing to really whinge about. Pa-thet-ic.

Truly awful, it was.

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Look, we can debate any aspect of F1 all day long. What absolutely is not up for debate is bringing a tyre that lasts less than a tenth of the race and having that as a mandatory compound. An absolute joke, I'm sorry.

How long should a tyre last? The entire race? Two races (we're going green)? Three races (greener still)?

Point being, If Pirelli were to use only their hard tyre at each race, it's more likely to suit one car in particular if the tyres are to last for a race distance.....or slighly more.....or less.....how long should the tyres last for?

But yeah, It was a truly awful race.

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Look, we can debate any aspect of F1 all day long. What absolutely is not up for debate is bringing a tyre that lasts less than a tenth of the race and having that as a mandatory compound. An absolute joke, I'm sorry.

Please do not be sorry my girlfriend called during the race, and the race could have been the parting of the red sea. Which is was not, she on the other hand is superb. It must be that German accent of hers..

The tyres are complete rubbish aren't they Adam ?

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Marbot

How long should a tyre last? The entire race? Two races (we're going green)? Three races (greener still)?

Maybe they should bring tires that only last 1 lap because having to wait till lap 6 for pit stops was horribly boring.

I suppose it's interesting that having realized pole wasn't an option in q3, SV made his quali run on the harder compound and the irony is that the team which has complained the loudest about the tires is the one that almost made the reverse strategy work but bringing one compound which gives you 5-6 laps and the other which gives your 14-18 is too large of a gap. It's not about how long a certain compound should last for its got to be about the balance between the two.

Gave it a 7 as there were some smart overtakes outside of the normal spots/drs straights and DC's constant mentioning of Alonso girlfriend. Crowd seems to be getting bigger there too.

[Notso Swift]

Yawn inducing 5
DRS and Tyres dictated the
When a driver has to ask the pit wall if they try or not it is bad for the sport
Seb's charge was the main entertainment

[stripedcat]

I gave it a 4. The tyres were not the right choice for this race. Plus, having two DRS zones did make the racing rather contrived.

After Alonso got by Hamilton then the fight for the lead sort of lost its appeal. None of the midfield battles were any good.

[GT6]

I think i was very generous giving it a 4

[steve_r]

Tyres made out of chewing gum is a step too far. 7 from me.

[Greem]

I'm really mixed up about it. I enjoyed watching it, but it wasn't by any means a classic. Or was it? A massively tactical race where strategy won out over sheer bravado sounds like a classic to me, but...

I gave it a 6. It would have been lower were it not for Vettel's munching of the gap to 3rd at the end.