[Official] Rate the Grand Prix: Australian Grand Prix 2017

[bjohnsonsmith]

I did enjoy the 'strategic' aspect of the race; Mercedes v Ferrari but otherwise there was no overtaking or getting anyway near overtaking. However, as a season opener the result made a difference.

4

[fieldodreams79]

Melbourne isn't inspiring, but is a decent backdrop for a motor race. The new cars were pretty good, race was average and first race of the new year after a long wait. 6.

-6 for NBCS coverage; far too many ad breaks.

All is normal in F1.

[Armco Bender]

5....A complete lack of kangaroos.

[Pingguest]

6 - the race was decent but nothing special.

[Grandpa_Rob]

7, Being at the track it seemed a lot more exciting than it probably was.

[chunterer]

A generous 5 from me just because it's a nice venue, it was the first race, and there were some good drives throughout the field.

Ross Brawn will have his work cut out forcing through the changes that everyone has been pining for for donkeys years!!!

[RichardRenes]

4. I expected more.. it was driving in line for most of the race, with almost no overtaking for position.

[newlaprecord]

Originally Posted by Adam43

The 50% criteria is exactly what I applied. I meant typical.

.

Well your math, while applying this criteria was quite a bit off then. This race has offered 5 overtakes, compared to 37 last year on the same venue.

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/f...-11950186.html

Thats -luckily- quite a way off from anything typical. Even tho the most votes went to "4" (hardly a typical outcome i would imagine) , I still think that the reaction to this "race" is hugely influenced by the fact that it was the season opener.

The cars being back on the track (which is by definition, the absolute bare minimum thing to happen in any F1 race), was actually a huge part of the show this time. As a mid-season race it would have been an absolute outrage.

Ive read some comments of engineers, blaming the rather bumpy nature of the track for the lack of close racing...lets hope the purpose-built tracks will deliver....

[F1Pete]

5. Disappointing for sure. My heart raced from the lights and almost stopped beating at the end.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by newlaprecord

Well your math, while applying this criteria was quite a bit off then. This race has offered 5 overtakes, compared to 37 last year on the same venue.

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/f...-11950186.html

Thats -luckily- quite a way off from anything typical. Even tho the most votes went to "4" (hardly a typical outcome i would imagine) , I still think that the reaction to this "race" is hugely influenced by the fact that it was the season opener.

The cars being back on the track (which is by definition, the absolute bare minimum thing to happen in any F1 race), was actually a huge part of the show this time. As a mid-season race it would have been an absolute outrage.

Ive read some comments of engineers, blaming the rather bumpy nature of the track for the lack of close racing...lets hope the purpose-built tracks will deliver....

So if we are defining exciting as overtaking. This is interesting:

http://cliptheapex.com/overtaking/

My 30 years wasn't a bad stab, a little keen, but it was on its way down then. Since 1995 the number of overtakes on average in a dry race looks to be about 10-12. I don't have the standard deviation, but it would surprise me to find to five was considered typical (say within a couple of sd).

Of course it shoots up to much higher in 2011. However I did specify real overtakes!

[JeremySmith]

Originally Posted by Compromised

Lol at those wanting more overtaking. The drivers start in order of fastest to slowest based on qualifying, simple enough, but doesn't this imply overtaking will be scarce? Although not always the case, if someone out qualifys you, short of strategy, how exactly does one expect to catch and overtake a car that started ahead of you because it was faster than you??? Deviations from the general rule of course happen, but can really be shocked when the grid is set fastest to SLOWEST???

Your post is an extremely logical overview of what we have and racing will continue this the way until there is more parody among the teams ..

[dsg]

Originally Posted by JeremySmith

Your post is an extremely logical overview of what we have and racing will continue this the way until there is more parody among the teams ..

McLaren is almost a parody team.

[Sodemo]

F1 getting the starts right is the key to having more overtaking. I know ive been banging on about this for a while, but if the starts were more variable, you would have a mixed up grid more frequently. Plenty of times back in the 90s we saw the pole guy get a bad start and drop down to 6th - 7th place. We then saw that same driver ploughing through back up to the podium positions. Take the 1996 Japanese GP when JV fluffed his start and dropped to 6th and then did some amazing overtaking moves to get back up to 3rd.

Perhaps someone can explain why we don't see drivers actually getting wheelspin any more at the start? Why is it we don't see plumes of blue smoke from the rear wheels that we used to. This is key for me, as it indicates that a driver has exceeded the rear grip available and is getting a bad start. For the last 10 years its almost as if there has been some kind of launch control system in place via the back door.

[mikuni]

I've got time for this man (Martin Brundle)
http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/125...ative-concerns

I don't necessarily see things entirely the same way, but he makes many great observations and points in that brief blurb. It's basically a summary of every article you will read between race finish in Australia and practice start in China.

[S griffin]

I give it a generous 8. Not the best race, but at least the race wasn't as predictable as quali suggested. And often to see 3 abreast manoeuvres that work?

[stripedcat]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

F1 getting the starts right is the key to having more overtaking. I know ive been banging on about this for a while, but if the starts were more variable, you would have a mixed up grid more frequently. Plenty of times back in the 90s we saw the pole guy get a bad start and drop down to 6th - 7th place. We then saw that same driver ploughing through back up to the podium positions. Take the 1996 Japanese GP when JV fluffed his start and dropped to 6th and then did some amazing overtaking moves to get back up to 3rd.

Perhaps someone can explain why we don't see drivers actually getting wheelspin any more at the start? Why is it we don't see plumes of blue smoke from the rear wheels that we used to. This is key for me, as it indicates that a driver has exceeded the rear grip available and is getting a bad start. For the last 10 years its almost as if there has been some kind of launch control system in place via the back door.

Ahhh, I think Martin Brundle talked a little bit about this on Sunday's race. He said that the clutch that they have for the starts nowadays - has virtually no feel, even compared to the other hand-clutches of old - it's very difficult to find the bite point. I think the anti-stall sort of kicks in to prevent too much wheelspin or something like that.

[chillibowl]

would creating the potential for more difficult starts lead to more first corner incidents?

[Mike E]

A 5 from me.

Dull race but the cars are visibly quicker and more dramatic to watch.

There will be some massive shunts this season. That will lead to the cars being slowed down again and/or even more trackside space being disfigured with tarmac run off.

[TrapezeArtist]

6. A very disappointing race. Instead of giving the cars more downforce for 2017 they should have taken the wings off altogether.

[275 GTB-4]

Originally Posted by Compromised

Lol at those wanting more overtaking. The drivers start in order of fastest to slowest based on qualifying, simple enough, but doesn't this imply overtaking will be scarce? Although not always the case, if someone out qualifys you, short of strategy, how exactly does one expect to catch and overtake a car that started ahead of you because it was faster than you??? Deviations from the general rule of course happen, but can really be shocked when the grid is set fastest to SLOWEST???

Yep! So why have a race at all?

Sprinters could all give up competing because Usane Bolt is the fastest...

Your words above are some of the saddest I have ever read...its a great indication of how sterile, predictable, contrived and pathetic the pinnacle of motorsport has become...

[mikenunn-78]

A generous 3 from me. No overtaking, no pressure proper chasing down for an attempt at an overtake.

The cars may be quicker, wider and prettier but if they can't race each other then what is the point?

[Neil22]

Gave it an 8. First race, long winter.

[Compromised]

Originally Posted by 275 GTB-4

Yep! So why have a race at all?

Sprinters could all give up competing because Usane Bolt is the fastest...

Your words above are some of the saddest I have ever read...its a great indication of how sterile, predictable, contrived and pathetic the pinnacle of motorsport has become...

I think you'll find a parity series, maybe GT3, more satisfying to your taste.

Formula 1 is all about disparity and personally, it's why I love it. That disparity is essentially someone engineering a better car than someone else and isn't that the essence of the pinnacle of motorsport?

BOP, spec chassis/engine, ballast etc. are all things that would increase overtaking, but to me, they make the racing contrived, sterile etc.

NASCAR has a lot of overtakes, big exciting crashes too!!! Might even get to see some punches thrown!! I reckon you'd love it

[275 GTB-4]

Originally Posted by Compromised

I think you'll find a parity series, maybe GT3, more satisfying to your taste.

Formula 1 is all about disparity and personally, it's why I love it. That disparity is essentially someone engineering a better car than someone else and isn't that the essence of the pinnacle of motorsport?

BOP, spec chassis/engine, ballast etc. are all things that would increase overtaking, but to me, they make the racing contrived, sterile etc.

NASCAR has a lot of overtakes, big exciting crashes too!!! Might even get to see some punches thrown!! I reckon you'd love it

Hah! Ya Think? When in doubt...go for the man

[PS not the person you may have pigeon-holed me into, there are some aspects of F1 that I too lerve...]

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Compromised

BOP, spec chassis/engine, ballast etc. are all things that would increase overtaking, but to me, they make the racing contrived, sterile etc.

I guess it depends for each of us what 'racing' actually means. For many (most, perhaps) racing connotes challenges between drivers for position - on track - not just strategy by the engineers dictated by tyres and other limitations. I'm not a fan of BOP either, because sometimes those dictating it get it very wrong (as with Ford and Ferrari at Le Mans last year) but for me, the very essence of 'non-racing' is a processional Grand Prix.