A while back, I spoke about the decision taken by the WEC to get rid of grid girls. Naturally, this received a mixed response on Twitter - from many people agreeing to some others claiming that grid girls are a huge part of motorsport, it would ruin the event, and that I was just a man-hating feminazi, jealous of the girls. Let me address these latter points: no, grid girls aren't integral to motorsport; if you think removing grid girls will ruin the event maybe you should find another source of entertainment (maybe go to fashion shows instead?); I am not a man-hating feminazi nor am I jealous of grid girls. Anyway, today's post isn't about the grid girls, it's about an instance of objectification I spotted on Twitter this evening.
A certain driver responded to a picture of a female driver (with her back facing the camera) standing alongside her Austin Healey 3000. Rather than comment on the car (which, I think, is maybe the point of motorsport - feel free to correct me though), all the driver had to say was "GREAT ARSE". This particular driver has also in the past made comment about 'Huh, women drivers eh!', so perhaps I should just expect it, but instances like these are making me increasingly disillusioned with the motorsport world.
As I noted in my previous post, there's a huge deficit of women in motorsport. Bernie Ecclestone (the mad old fool) argued that we should have a separate women's championship to encourage women into F1, however as I wrote before this is a ridiculous notion. The lack of women in top-tier motorsport is not due to lack of a female-only championship, but rather because of a lack of women throughout the motorsport world at all levels. Why is this a phenomenon? In my opinion, it's largely a cultural attitude that prevents women from entering professional motorsport in the first place.
Sure, some of this might arise from simple parenting differences between the two genders. Boys generally play with cars and "masculine" toys, while girls get the dolls and "feminine" toys. Maybe because of this, girls are less likely to want to go karting when they're a few years old. However, there are other barriers to face once women progress through the ranks of motorsport. The Twitter driver's comments are an example.
The woman in the picture was obviously a driver. She may have been an excellent driver. She might have been the only woman in the field. All that could be said about her though was "GREAT ARSE". REALLY?! That's all you can say about this woman? That her gluteus maximus is nice-looking? Would you say that about a male driver? I'm a heterosexual female fan of motorsport, but I can move past drivers' physical attributes and appreciate their talent and skill. This is a barrier that sadly a lot of male fans (and apparently drivers) can't move past when they see female drivers, and this is something contributing to women not being taken seriously in the motorsport world - especially as it's accepted (and even expected!) by the majority.
Naturally, I'll get the response of "It's just banter, love". Sure, to you it's banter. To the minority group in the motorsport world (e.g. WOMEN), it's not though. Look at the everyday sexism project for examples of what we have to put up with on a daily basis. These aren't issues that affect you, and you're actively contributing to the problem. Until you recognise this, how can women progress in the mad world of motorsport? I'm not a 'feminazi' - I recognise that men have different problems in life, and these need to be equally addressed if we're to finally achieve true equality and get rid of sexism, but this is beyond the scope of my post. To conclude, I'd urge you all to think about what you post and what unconscious attitudes you may hold towards women in motorsport. Progress is being made, but until this objectification of women in overalls is ditched, there are limits to what we can do.
Sunday, 3 May 2015
Tuesday, 28 April 2015
Lotus F1 Filming Day
While at work on Friday afternoon, I received a message from the Lotus team simply asking what I was doing on Monday. Naturally, I was thrilled - it was pretty hard not to do a small victory dance while at work! I promptly phoned my Dad and told him that we'd be heading to Brands on Monday.
Over the weekend, I had work to do. I spent some of Saturday working on an essay (about bipolar disorder and the cerebellum, if anyone's interested!), but most of the weekend was spent baking the promised cakes for the Lotus team! I settled on baking half chocolate, half vanilla and raspberry cupcakes, but I needed to make them Lotus themed. I decided to buy black cupcake cases and top the icing with edible gold shimmer spray - I think they turned out rather well!
Once the cupcakes were ready, we headed off to the circuit on Monday morning. When we arrived, the 2015 Lotus was being prepared in the garage, and occasionally came out for the odd lap. The last time we saw a modern F1 car in the flesh was in 2013 at the Silverstone young drivers' test - with the old, loud cars. So, it was pretty cool to see this year's F1 car - especially at Brands Hatch! One thing that did strike me though was the sound. The sound itself was quite different, but still a nice noise, but the car was so quiet! I must say I'm looking forward to the next rule change aimed at increasing the loudness.
After the car had been out for a few laps on its own, the filming car was sent out to capture a few close-ups of the car in action. This was quite interesting - although I was hoping for a short race between the two!
Once the morning's filming was over, we headed off to the car to grab the cakes and waited for 2pm to roll around - the time of our garage tour! We met the other winners (all thoroughly great people!), and then headed down for the tour (walking past the trucks and Pastor Maldonado on the way!). First stop was to watch Pastor's pit stop practices from the pit wall (how many people get to say that?!). Dad managed to speak to an engineer to ask about some technical aspects of the car (side note - everyone at Lotus is incredibly friendly and amazing!), and I watched Pastor head out and through the pits for his stops. The stops were fantastic - Pastor's wheels were spinning before they touched the ground, so these were real racing stops (and my grin was getting bigger all the time).
After the practices were over, we also saw a Lotus road car speeding around the track - and I managed to get a great view from the pit wall.
Once Pastor was wheeled back into the garage, he left the car. He then came over to meet us! I know Pastor gets some bad press for race incidents, but he really is a thoroughly nice guy. We spoke about whether he liked Brands Hatch (yes), and how fast he thought he could go round the circuit (seconds, if the limiters were off). He also signed the only item I could find in our house with a Lotus on it - a vintage ice bucket of all things! We posed for pictures, shook hands, and carried on with our tour.
After meeting Pastor, we had another wander around the pits, past the trucks. We then bumped into Jolyon Palmer - Lotus's third driver. We had a great chat with him, talking about GP2, F1 and testing. He also signed my ice bucket, and I was a very happy fan! On our way out, we had a smile and wave from Romain Grosjean as he headed towards the cars. Overall, the tour was fantastic. Everyone is very friendly and happy to interact with us fans. Not bad, in exchange for 36 cupcakes!
The rest of the day was spent watching the final runs - including the old and new F1 cars running together on the track!
Overall, we had a really fantastic day. Although there wasn't a huge amount of running on the track, there was a great atmosphere, and it was interesting seeing the filming going on at the circuit. Of course, the garage tour was the highlight of the day, and the team were brilliant at welcoming us. So, massive thanks to Lotus F1 team - you've definitely confirmed us as fans for life! Best of luck in Spain, and we hope to see you at Brands again some day!
Thursday, 23 April 2015
Brands Hatch
Exciting news!
So, since I was a very small kid I've been going to Brands Hatch with my Dad. We've seen pretty much everything there - trucks, touring cars, DTM, historic F1... You name it! I have great memories of wandering round in the pouring rain, being somewhat deafened. Now I'm older, not much has changed. I'm a bit taller, and I can cover my own ears to stop being deafened, but we still go pretty often. We've even been in one of the fancy boxes courtesy of a friend of my Dad's! I do love Brands Hatch, and I'll always have a soft spot for the place.
Well, today Lotus F1 team announced that they are heading down to Brands for a filming day! I'm ridiculously excited, and I've already booked the day off to go and see them. Although I've seen historic F1 there, I've not had the chance to see an F1 car from my era charge around there, as Brands hasn't hosted a grand prix since 1986 - I was born 6 years too late!
Lotus are also hosting a competition to get a tour around the garage - which would be amazing! Although they've asked for tweets to enter the competition, I don't think 140 characters are enough to express why they should pick me, hence the blog! So, Lotus, if you lovely people are reading this, here are the reasons why I should be one of the lucky, lucky people who win:
So, since I was a very small kid I've been going to Brands Hatch with my Dad. We've seen pretty much everything there - trucks, touring cars, DTM, historic F1... You name it! I have great memories of wandering round in the pouring rain, being somewhat deafened. Now I'm older, not much has changed. I'm a bit taller, and I can cover my own ears to stop being deafened, but we still go pretty often. We've even been in one of the fancy boxes courtesy of a friend of my Dad's! I do love Brands Hatch, and I'll always have a soft spot for the place.
Well, today Lotus F1 team announced that they are heading down to Brands for a filming day! I'm ridiculously excited, and I've already booked the day off to go and see them. Although I've seen historic F1 there, I've not had the chance to see an F1 car from my era charge around there, as Brands hasn't hosted a grand prix since 1986 - I was born 6 years too late!
Lotus are also hosting a competition to get a tour around the garage - which would be amazing! Although they've asked for tweets to enter the competition, I don't think 140 characters are enough to express why they should pick me, hence the blog! So, Lotus, if you lovely people are reading this, here are the reasons why I should be one of the lucky, lucky people who win:
- I'm a car nerd!
- We follow each other on Twitter
- My Dad (who will be coming with me!) has a Lotus F1 Team cup which I force him to drink out of every F1 weekend
- I will be giddy with excitement, and thus possibly quite entertaining
- I will write a blog about the day afterwards (whether I meet you or not!)
- I bake EXCELLENT cakes
- It's my birthday on the 8th of May, so I guess this will be a pre-birthday thing?
- I WILL LOVE YOU FOREVER!
Friday, 3 April 2015
Grid Girls
In my last post, I spoke about Bernie's ridiculous idea to start an F1 championship for women only. I cited several problems which I feel were hindering women's attempts to be taken seriously within the motorsport world, one of which was the continued use of grid girls throughout different world championships, and the general objectification of women within motorsport. Well, yesterday the World Endurance Championship announced that they will no longer have grid girls at their races. This is, I think, excellent news, and largely this has been received positively. However, there are a number of people who disagree, and feel that grid girls don't cause any problem and are an integral part of motorsport. Without wishing to be sexist myself, most of the people saying this are men, who most likely don't feel the effects of female objectification (although perhaps they might experience this in some way when they look at Lewis Hamilton's - frankly ridiculous - posing on the cover of a recent magazine!). Let me explain why the banning of grid girls is a positive thing, and why it won't end motorsport as we know it.
As I mentioned previously, women are now making strides towards getting into the motorsport world - a world which is largely dominated by men. We now have two F1 team principals, several reserve drivers in F1 and a small number of drivers in other motorsport series who happen to be women. Undoubtedly there are a number of women who wish to become mechanics and have a greater direct involvement in the running of a motorsport team. If we accept that we're moving (slowly) towards gender equality in motorsport, then grid girls have no place in this world. Many promotional shots of female racing drivers ask them to pose sexily - something the men aren't asked to do. This is problematic, as it encourages individuals to think of the female racing drivers in terms of their physical appearance, rather than their abilities in the car. If we think take the view that this is unacceptable, and women should be rated for their skill, talent, and literally anything else beyond physical appearance alone, then why should grid girls be objectified at the same time? Objectification of women in many other areas of society is - rightly - condemned, and motorsport has managed to escape this for many years, proudly accepting this outdated practice.
Now, maybe I'm less qualified to speak on the opinion of the female racing drivers (and other motorsport personnel), as I'm not a racing driver myself. However, I can talk about the effect that grid girls has on female fans of motorsport, as I clearly fall within this demographic. I often attend motorsport events at circuits - I like looking at the cars, watching the racing, and generally getting involved in the atmosphere of it all. When the grid girls come out, there are always a group of men who leer, and grab their waists to take photographs. This is not a nice environment to be in. It sends a message that the women present at the event are just there to be looked at. Do you really think that the people engaged in the leeching are going to ask whether any of these women have any other attribute than looking attractive? Do any of these men even stop to ask the names of the girls?! No. These women are here to look good for the blokes - and that's something that is unacceptable in this day and age.
I can already hear the argument of "Well, these women choose to be grid girls". Yes, this is true, and they're absolutely free to do so. However, these women also have lives and attributes beyond looking pretty, and these attributes should be celebrated just as much. There's also the issue of the grid girls being pushed on to those who don't actually want to see this side of the world. People can choose to see models at fashion shows, but I don't go to Brands Hatch to look at the girls.
I've also heard the argument that 2grid girls are just as much a part of motorsport as the chequered flag". Erm, no. This is nonsense. The chequered flag exists to mark the end of a race. The chequered flag doesn't objectify 50% of society. The presence of the chequered flag won't offend anyone, or support an attitude making it difficult for individuals to be taken seriously in motorsport. But seriously, the point here is that motorsport has been around for an awfully long time. Maybe when the sport started it was perfectly acceptable to exclude and marginalise great swathes of society, and to see women as either housewives or sex objects. However, this is no longer the case. Indeed, if grid girls are an integral part of motorsport, then I would invite people to name at least half of the girls present in the WEC. Or F1. Or the BTCC. Or MotoGP. I bet you could do so with the drivers, and I'm sure you could name the team principals, engineers, and maybe even some mechanics. The WEC certainly isn't going to end by removing the grid girls, and in fact this may attract a portion of the audience put off by constant objectification.
The world has moved on, and the motorsport world's attitude to women has to move with it. The World Endurance Championship has started the movement, so let's hope the other sports follow suit.
As I mentioned previously, women are now making strides towards getting into the motorsport world - a world which is largely dominated by men. We now have two F1 team principals, several reserve drivers in F1 and a small number of drivers in other motorsport series who happen to be women. Undoubtedly there are a number of women who wish to become mechanics and have a greater direct involvement in the running of a motorsport team. If we accept that we're moving (slowly) towards gender equality in motorsport, then grid girls have no place in this world. Many promotional shots of female racing drivers ask them to pose sexily - something the men aren't asked to do. This is problematic, as it encourages individuals to think of the female racing drivers in terms of their physical appearance, rather than their abilities in the car. If we think take the view that this is unacceptable, and women should be rated for their skill, talent, and literally anything else beyond physical appearance alone, then why should grid girls be objectified at the same time? Objectification of women in many other areas of society is - rightly - condemned, and motorsport has managed to escape this for many years, proudly accepting this outdated practice.
Now, maybe I'm less qualified to speak on the opinion of the female racing drivers (and other motorsport personnel), as I'm not a racing driver myself. However, I can talk about the effect that grid girls has on female fans of motorsport, as I clearly fall within this demographic. I often attend motorsport events at circuits - I like looking at the cars, watching the racing, and generally getting involved in the atmosphere of it all. When the grid girls come out, there are always a group of men who leer, and grab their waists to take photographs. This is not a nice environment to be in. It sends a message that the women present at the event are just there to be looked at. Do you really think that the people engaged in the leeching are going to ask whether any of these women have any other attribute than looking attractive? Do any of these men even stop to ask the names of the girls?! No. These women are here to look good for the blokes - and that's something that is unacceptable in this day and age.
I can already hear the argument of "Well, these women choose to be grid girls". Yes, this is true, and they're absolutely free to do so. However, these women also have lives and attributes beyond looking pretty, and these attributes should be celebrated just as much. There's also the issue of the grid girls being pushed on to those who don't actually want to see this side of the world. People can choose to see models at fashion shows, but I don't go to Brands Hatch to look at the girls.
I've also heard the argument that 2grid girls are just as much a part of motorsport as the chequered flag". Erm, no. This is nonsense. The chequered flag exists to mark the end of a race. The chequered flag doesn't objectify 50% of society. The presence of the chequered flag won't offend anyone, or support an attitude making it difficult for individuals to be taken seriously in motorsport. But seriously, the point here is that motorsport has been around for an awfully long time. Maybe when the sport started it was perfectly acceptable to exclude and marginalise great swathes of society, and to see women as either housewives or sex objects. However, this is no longer the case. Indeed, if grid girls are an integral part of motorsport, then I would invite people to name at least half of the girls present in the WEC. Or F1. Or the BTCC. Or MotoGP. I bet you could do so with the drivers, and I'm sure you could name the team principals, engineers, and maybe even some mechanics. The WEC certainly isn't going to end by removing the grid girls, and in fact this may attract a portion of the audience put off by constant objectification.
The world has moved on, and the motorsport world's attitude to women has to move with it. The World Endurance Championship has started the movement, so let's hope the other sports follow suit.
Wednesday, 1 April 2015
F1 and Women
F1 returned for its 2015 season last month - and I have to say the first race was troubling. I stopped posting last September, partly because I was too busy, but mostly because I was pretty uninspired. The past few years in F1 have been characterised by the dominance of a single team. For years it was Red Bull and Sebastian Vettel. Now, it's Mercedes. Lewis Hamilton won the 2014 world championship, closely pursued by Nico Rosberg. The dominance of the Mercedes cars was insane. Their engine was clearly fantastic, and the team were usually miles in front of the rest. So much so, that the past nine races (the final eight of 2014 and the first race of 2015) secured 1-2 finishes for Mercedes.
Now, I am a die-hard Vettel fan, and for years I've heard all the excuses in the world - "he's just in the best car!". Well, Red Bull were never as dominant as Mercedes, and largely their success came from finding technical loopholes before anyone else. The Renault engines were never the fastest, but the overall package they had up until the rule changes was enough to secure four world championships. Mercedes are just wickedly fast, and waiting for the others to catch up. I don't agree that the Mercedes cars should be slowed down (indeed, I think F1 should be faster, louder, and more entertaining), but the constant 1-2 finishes made F1 last year a bit of a drag, and many of us were longing for the others to catch up.
However, last weekend's race started to show a glimmer of hope. Sebastian Vettel moved from his beloved Red Bull to Ferrari and everyone was waiting to see whether this was a gamble that would pay off. Ferrari hadn't won a race since Spain 2013, even with Alonso in the car (probably one of the best drivers on the grid), so not many people fancied his chances against the Silver Arrows. However, Malaysia showed that Ferrari was a great move for Vettel after all, and we had our first non-Mercedes win in nine races. Alright, it's early days, strategy and weather may have played its part, but the race overall was superb, with battles all through the field. We can only hope that this entertainment continues throughout the rest of the season.
Now, aside from the races, F1 has had some odd news stories surrounding it lately. Mostly, these have been linked to ideas from Bernie Ecclestone about how to improve the show. The latest madness he's come out with is linked to the idea of a separate F1 championship for female drivers. Looking at the comments on the articles in question (always a terrible idea), this seems to have divided opinion somewhat.
Many people seem to view the matter in the same way as myself; the idea of a separate F1 championship for women is absurd, and women should be given the chance to race in the main championship. Others take the view that the current pool of female racing drivers simply isn't good enough for F1, and that there's nothing stopping women other than their own ineptitude. Alright, I may be exaggerating slightly, but a significant number of comments suggests the age-old argument that women simply can't drive. As a female driver (not in F1 or competition, but someone who just gets behind the wheel on a regular basis), I couldn't disagree more.
In my opinion, there are a number of issues that prevent women from getting into race seats in F1. In recent years we've had several drivers who have made reserve seats and third driver places (Susie Wolff, the late Maria de Villota, Simona de Silvestro, and - controversially - Carmen Jorda), but nobody who has yet made a race seat. One of the biggest problems in my view is the fact that there are so few women at lower levels of single-seater racing. The pool of female single-seater drivers is just too small, and the sport in general is dominated by men. This therefore isn't an F1 only issue. Let's look at the GP2 and GP3 grids over the past few years...
The 2015 grids are still being formed for these feeder series, however, we can have a preliminary glance at the drivers:GP3 has eight teams, each with three drivers. All bar one of the places has been confirmed for 2015 - and all the drivers are men. Even if the final place is taken by a woman, men are clearly overrepresented. GP2 has 13 teams with two drivers each. Again, no women have been confirmed to drive. There are four places left, but again, even if all filled by women drivers, women are woefully underrepresented. In 2014, GP2 featured no women at all, and GP3 featured Carmen Jorda for seven races. The picture isn't much better across previous years either. While other championships do slightly better than GP2 and GP3 in terms of the number of female drivers, overall there are alarmingly few women across the motorsport championships.
F1 is currently made up of 20 drivers. That's not an awful lot of the total motorsport population. Undoubtedly there are drivers out there who are much better than the current crop of F1 drivers, but who simply don't have the opportunity to compete. This isn't necessarily an issue of gender - there are most likely women out there who would prove much better than men, but the lack of F1 places means it would be impossible for them to enter this strange circus. The pool of potential F1 drivers is huge, while the number of actual spaces is tiny. Given that women make up a tiny percentage of the motorsport population at large, it's not particularly surprising that there are no female F1 drivers. It's not necessarily about ability in this case, but more about opportunity. The solution to this problem? Giving more girls and women the chance to compete from a very early age and working their way up through the ranks - same as the men.
Women face another barrier to F1, and that's the differing expectation that go with the gender. A few weeks ago, I had a lecture on unconscious bias - the judgements we make in a split second upon meeting someone. We assume things. Everyone does this, and it's just human nature - not necessarily indicative of prejudice, but just something we're socialised into believing about people based on their physical traits. During this lecture, we were asked to write down a 'secret' about ourselves, and we all had to guess who had written what. I decided to write about my years spent driving Land Rovers in competitions, and how I learnt to drive age 12. When my 'secret' came up, the majority of my class guessed that one of my male classmates had written this - not the nerdy girl. This is potentially another indicator of why women don't get into top-level motorsport. Young girls are often socialised into liking Barbies and dolls, less cars and F1, just because this goes along with traditional notions of gender. Again, there's nothing wrong with this necessarily, but from the off girls have less inclination to pursue a career in F1.
Similarly, look at how women are represented when they get anywhere close to F1. By and large, the most women we see on the F1 grid are the grid girls. When we see photoshoots of drivers, men stand proudly with arms crossed, looking determined, while women have the wind blowing through their hair, perfectly made-up - sometimes draped across the car in a completely ridiculous manner. The recent appointment of Carmen Jorda is somewhat suspicious - she's not a great racing driver, but she does look very pretty. Every photo posted of her by the Lotus F1 team is of her looking glamorous, rather than getting in a car. I won't even go there with the comments posted under these photos. Now, until women are promoted away from grid girls and models and towards SERIOUS racing drivers, I doubt much will change. The women who do get into F1 are also going to be held to a much higher standard. While it might be acceptable for Will Stevens or Roberto Mehri to race around at the back with Manor, I doubt a female driver would be so accepted - her slow pace would have nothing to do with the car, and everything to do with her gender.
There has been some progress towards gender equality in F1 - but largely in relation to team principals. Claire Williams and Monisha Kaltenborn have been doing a fantastic job in running their teams (alright - ignore the Sauber vs van der Garde scandal recently, and look at what their cars are doing on track), and it's heartening to see women in serious roles within top-level motorsport. I'd be interested to see how many mechanics are women too - although, again, women are woefully underrepresented in this profession generally. While their skill may match the men, there are just too few to have a statistical likelihood of getting into the job.
Overall, there's still much work to be done in getting women into F1 and other championships, and this isn't something that will happen overnight. A women's only F1 championship is ridiculous, and there needs to be a broader attitude shift towards women who choose to like cars. We need to stop viewing women as decorative grid girls, and start taking them seriously as competitors. If women can be taken seriously as F1 team bosses, I don't see why they can't be taken seriously in any other role. It takes work though, and the entire motorsport community should be there to support this change.
Now, I am a die-hard Vettel fan, and for years I've heard all the excuses in the world - "he's just in the best car!". Well, Red Bull were never as dominant as Mercedes, and largely their success came from finding technical loopholes before anyone else. The Renault engines were never the fastest, but the overall package they had up until the rule changes was enough to secure four world championships. Mercedes are just wickedly fast, and waiting for the others to catch up. I don't agree that the Mercedes cars should be slowed down (indeed, I think F1 should be faster, louder, and more entertaining), but the constant 1-2 finishes made F1 last year a bit of a drag, and many of us were longing for the others to catch up.
However, last weekend's race started to show a glimmer of hope. Sebastian Vettel moved from his beloved Red Bull to Ferrari and everyone was waiting to see whether this was a gamble that would pay off. Ferrari hadn't won a race since Spain 2013, even with Alonso in the car (probably one of the best drivers on the grid), so not many people fancied his chances against the Silver Arrows. However, Malaysia showed that Ferrari was a great move for Vettel after all, and we had our first non-Mercedes win in nine races. Alright, it's early days, strategy and weather may have played its part, but the race overall was superb, with battles all through the field. We can only hope that this entertainment continues throughout the rest of the season.
Now, aside from the races, F1 has had some odd news stories surrounding it lately. Mostly, these have been linked to ideas from Bernie Ecclestone about how to improve the show. The latest madness he's come out with is linked to the idea of a separate F1 championship for female drivers. Looking at the comments on the articles in question (always a terrible idea), this seems to have divided opinion somewhat.
Many people seem to view the matter in the same way as myself; the idea of a separate F1 championship for women is absurd, and women should be given the chance to race in the main championship. Others take the view that the current pool of female racing drivers simply isn't good enough for F1, and that there's nothing stopping women other than their own ineptitude. Alright, I may be exaggerating slightly, but a significant number of comments suggests the age-old argument that women simply can't drive. As a female driver (not in F1 or competition, but someone who just gets behind the wheel on a regular basis), I couldn't disagree more.
In my opinion, there are a number of issues that prevent women from getting into race seats in F1. In recent years we've had several drivers who have made reserve seats and third driver places (Susie Wolff, the late Maria de Villota, Simona de Silvestro, and - controversially - Carmen Jorda), but nobody who has yet made a race seat. One of the biggest problems in my view is the fact that there are so few women at lower levels of single-seater racing. The pool of female single-seater drivers is just too small, and the sport in general is dominated by men. This therefore isn't an F1 only issue. Let's look at the GP2 and GP3 grids over the past few years...
The 2015 grids are still being formed for these feeder series, however, we can have a preliminary glance at the drivers:GP3 has eight teams, each with three drivers. All bar one of the places has been confirmed for 2015 - and all the drivers are men. Even if the final place is taken by a woman, men are clearly overrepresented. GP2 has 13 teams with two drivers each. Again, no women have been confirmed to drive. There are four places left, but again, even if all filled by women drivers, women are woefully underrepresented. In 2014, GP2 featured no women at all, and GP3 featured Carmen Jorda for seven races. The picture isn't much better across previous years either. While other championships do slightly better than GP2 and GP3 in terms of the number of female drivers, overall there are alarmingly few women across the motorsport championships.
F1 is currently made up of 20 drivers. That's not an awful lot of the total motorsport population. Undoubtedly there are drivers out there who are much better than the current crop of F1 drivers, but who simply don't have the opportunity to compete. This isn't necessarily an issue of gender - there are most likely women out there who would prove much better than men, but the lack of F1 places means it would be impossible for them to enter this strange circus. The pool of potential F1 drivers is huge, while the number of actual spaces is tiny. Given that women make up a tiny percentage of the motorsport population at large, it's not particularly surprising that there are no female F1 drivers. It's not necessarily about ability in this case, but more about opportunity. The solution to this problem? Giving more girls and women the chance to compete from a very early age and working their way up through the ranks - same as the men.
Women face another barrier to F1, and that's the differing expectation that go with the gender. A few weeks ago, I had a lecture on unconscious bias - the judgements we make in a split second upon meeting someone. We assume things. Everyone does this, and it's just human nature - not necessarily indicative of prejudice, but just something we're socialised into believing about people based on their physical traits. During this lecture, we were asked to write down a 'secret' about ourselves, and we all had to guess who had written what. I decided to write about my years spent driving Land Rovers in competitions, and how I learnt to drive age 12. When my 'secret' came up, the majority of my class guessed that one of my male classmates had written this - not the nerdy girl. This is potentially another indicator of why women don't get into top-level motorsport. Young girls are often socialised into liking Barbies and dolls, less cars and F1, just because this goes along with traditional notions of gender. Again, there's nothing wrong with this necessarily, but from the off girls have less inclination to pursue a career in F1.
Similarly, look at how women are represented when they get anywhere close to F1. By and large, the most women we see on the F1 grid are the grid girls. When we see photoshoots of drivers, men stand proudly with arms crossed, looking determined, while women have the wind blowing through their hair, perfectly made-up - sometimes draped across the car in a completely ridiculous manner. The recent appointment of Carmen Jorda is somewhat suspicious - she's not a great racing driver, but she does look very pretty. Every photo posted of her by the Lotus F1 team is of her looking glamorous, rather than getting in a car. I won't even go there with the comments posted under these photos. Now, until women are promoted away from grid girls and models and towards SERIOUS racing drivers, I doubt much will change. The women who do get into F1 are also going to be held to a much higher standard. While it might be acceptable for Will Stevens or Roberto Mehri to race around at the back with Manor, I doubt a female driver would be so accepted - her slow pace would have nothing to do with the car, and everything to do with her gender.
There has been some progress towards gender equality in F1 - but largely in relation to team principals. Claire Williams and Monisha Kaltenborn have been doing a fantastic job in running their teams (alright - ignore the Sauber vs van der Garde scandal recently, and look at what their cars are doing on track), and it's heartening to see women in serious roles within top-level motorsport. I'd be interested to see how many mechanics are women too - although, again, women are woefully underrepresented in this profession generally. While their skill may match the men, there are just too few to have a statistical likelihood of getting into the job.
Overall, there's still much work to be done in getting women into F1 and other championships, and this isn't something that will happen overnight. A women's only F1 championship is ridiculous, and there needs to be a broader attitude shift towards women who choose to like cars. We need to stop viewing women as decorative grid girls, and start taking them seriously as competitors. If women can be taken seriously as F1 team bosses, I don't see why they can't be taken seriously in any other role. It takes work though, and the entire motorsport community should be there to support this change.
Sunday, 14 September 2014
Formula One Fans
As usual, it's been a while since I've posted. Hey, I'm a postgrad student (well, now I am anyway), not a journalist. Anyway, tonight I feel compelled to get back to writing about F1 (and motorsport in general). In particular, I want to focus on the lunacy surrounding Formula One Management's strategies of late, and look to the future of the sport. I suspect I may be sued at some point for posting this, but what's life without a little risk?
Tonight, while wasting time on a boring Sunday evening, I was browsing the amusing WTF1 website, looking at various motorsport videos - Nascar, Narain Karthikeyen crashing into something in another formula, that sort of thing - when I came across what I thought would be an amusing video of Russian commentators going mental over Dani Kvyat's save at Monza, when the familiar YouTube error of 'This video contains content from Formula One Management, who has blocked it on copyright grounds' popped up. I've seen this so many times - and it's becoming infuriating.
If you've been following F1 related news in recent months, you may have noticed that many people are starting to worry that the sport is losing fans, one reason being F1, and FOM's reluctance to engage with social media. Many team managers have also expressed concerns that F1 is losing a large audience by not engaging with anything other than TV. Niki Lauda in particular stated that younger people (a demographic I suppose I would be part of, being 22 years old) don't want to spend a Sunday afternoon in front of the living room TV, but are more likely to consume their media on the move, or from sites like Twitter, YouTube or Facebook. It's a reasonable proposition - while I am one of those people who will give up at weekend to watch motorsport on TV (assuming I can't get outside to a circuit and watch it instead), I can see where Niki and all the others are coming from, and can understand that teenagers and kids (and even older people on the move, for example) want new ways of seeing motorsport.
Engagement with social media has worked extremely well for other forms of motorsport. The British Touring Car Championship has its own Twitter feed, full of qualifying coverage and race commentary. In addition, BTCC is shown on free-to-air TV all season (including all the support races all day - my Mum loves it when ITV4 is on for six hours). MotoGP has similar, with a Twitter page and YouTube feed. While this is no longer on free-to-air TV, there's a whole host of ways to follow the sport from its official website, albeit with a subscription fee. Contrast this with F1 - no official, central social media pages (although teams and some drivers do have their own pages), fan-made videos removed because of FOM's copyright, and only half a season available to those who don't wish to pay for a whole Sky Sports TV package. Why? That's easy to answer - money. There's no way of monetising social media at present, and Bernie Ecclestone has stated that until there is, there's no interaction with social media. Huh. What happened to doing things for the love of the sport?
The recent stirrings over the lack of fan engagement have reached a point where Tata Communications have launched the F1 Connectivity Innovation Prize, a series of challenges based around communicating more with fans, and engaging people more with the sport. A $50,000 prize is available for someone who comes up with a good idea. Well, here's an idea for you, Formula One Management (you don't even need to give me the prize money), how about dropping the profiteering for a second, and allowing people to follow the sport away from subscription-based TV?
It seems that F1 in particular is more concerned about what the sponsors think, and if ideas don't make money, they don't happen, even if they could do wonders for viewing figures and engagement in general. There are a huge amount of things that could be done to help F1 through this strange patch of its life - we could get away from mad rules (standing safety car restarts next year, anyone?), and back to proper racing. This, however, is another issue. What could be done now though is remembering that motorsport is built on the support from fans. If we don't engage people - dare I say, 'the youth of today' - through something so simple as a Facebook or Twitter page, they're not likely to pay for a Sky Sports subscription later. Sure, Bernie won't make his millions through chucking a tweet out now and again, but in a multimillion industry, does this matter? What we need to remember is that motorsport - of all forms - started not because people wanted to make buckets of cash, but because people had an inherent love for what they were doing. People were passionate about the sport: fans, drivers and officials alike. There was admiration for what people could achieve in a car or on a bike. Instead of focusing on bank balances, perhaps FOM would do well to remember this fact, and start to give something back to the fans, without whom the sport wouldn't exist in the first place.
Tonight, while wasting time on a boring Sunday evening, I was browsing the amusing WTF1 website, looking at various motorsport videos - Nascar, Narain Karthikeyen crashing into something in another formula, that sort of thing - when I came across what I thought would be an amusing video of Russian commentators going mental over Dani Kvyat's save at Monza, when the familiar YouTube error of 'This video contains content from Formula One Management, who has blocked it on copyright grounds' popped up. I've seen this so many times - and it's becoming infuriating.
If you've been following F1 related news in recent months, you may have noticed that many people are starting to worry that the sport is losing fans, one reason being F1, and FOM's reluctance to engage with social media. Many team managers have also expressed concerns that F1 is losing a large audience by not engaging with anything other than TV. Niki Lauda in particular stated that younger people (a demographic I suppose I would be part of, being 22 years old) don't want to spend a Sunday afternoon in front of the living room TV, but are more likely to consume their media on the move, or from sites like Twitter, YouTube or Facebook. It's a reasonable proposition - while I am one of those people who will give up at weekend to watch motorsport on TV (assuming I can't get outside to a circuit and watch it instead), I can see where Niki and all the others are coming from, and can understand that teenagers and kids (and even older people on the move, for example) want new ways of seeing motorsport.
Engagement with social media has worked extremely well for other forms of motorsport. The British Touring Car Championship has its own Twitter feed, full of qualifying coverage and race commentary. In addition, BTCC is shown on free-to-air TV all season (including all the support races all day - my Mum loves it when ITV4 is on for six hours). MotoGP has similar, with a Twitter page and YouTube feed. While this is no longer on free-to-air TV, there's a whole host of ways to follow the sport from its official website, albeit with a subscription fee. Contrast this with F1 - no official, central social media pages (although teams and some drivers do have their own pages), fan-made videos removed because of FOM's copyright, and only half a season available to those who don't wish to pay for a whole Sky Sports TV package. Why? That's easy to answer - money. There's no way of monetising social media at present, and Bernie Ecclestone has stated that until there is, there's no interaction with social media. Huh. What happened to doing things for the love of the sport?
The recent stirrings over the lack of fan engagement have reached a point where Tata Communications have launched the F1 Connectivity Innovation Prize, a series of challenges based around communicating more with fans, and engaging people more with the sport. A $50,000 prize is available for someone who comes up with a good idea. Well, here's an idea for you, Formula One Management (you don't even need to give me the prize money), how about dropping the profiteering for a second, and allowing people to follow the sport away from subscription-based TV?
It seems that F1 in particular is more concerned about what the sponsors think, and if ideas don't make money, they don't happen, even if they could do wonders for viewing figures and engagement in general. There are a huge amount of things that could be done to help F1 through this strange patch of its life - we could get away from mad rules (standing safety car restarts next year, anyone?), and back to proper racing. This, however, is another issue. What could be done now though is remembering that motorsport is built on the support from fans. If we don't engage people - dare I say, 'the youth of today' - through something so simple as a Facebook or Twitter page, they're not likely to pay for a Sky Sports subscription later. Sure, Bernie won't make his millions through chucking a tweet out now and again, but in a multimillion industry, does this matter? What we need to remember is that motorsport - of all forms - started not because people wanted to make buckets of cash, but because people had an inherent love for what they were doing. People were passionate about the sport: fans, drivers and officials alike. There was admiration for what people could achieve in a car or on a bike. Instead of focusing on bank balances, perhaps FOM would do well to remember this fact, and start to give something back to the fans, without whom the sport wouldn't exist in the first place.
Monday, 7 July 2014
The British Grand Prix
Hello all! It's been a shockingly long time since I've posted on my blog - university exams, work, there are plenty of reasons - but at long last I've decided to revive the old thing and get back to writing about motorsport. As you're all very aware, I am a huge F1 fan (the blog is testament to this), but this year I have to admit that my interest is waning somewhat. No, it's not because Red Bull aren't winning everything, but I've found that the races are mostly lacklustre this year, aside from the final 10 laps which are pretty good if the two Mercedes cars are near to each other. The British grand prix though was a gem of a race, despite an hour's delay after one lap when Kimi Raikkonen's crash led to a barrier repair. I'm not going to recap the race in detail - those of you reading the blog have probably already seen the race, and there are thousands of blogs that write race recaps - but I wanted to talk about attending F1 races, the state of the sport in general, and why Silverstone completely shocked me today.
I've attended two F1 races - Germany in 2011 and Belgium in 2012. Both were amazing experiences, and in my opinion the tickets were quite reasonably priced. The Nurburgring cost in the region of £85 per ticket, and Spa was 125€ (so around £100). Of course, you have to add on the price of camping, fuel and crossing the channel, but I think on the whole both trips were around £400. Not bad for a whole weekend of entertainment outside of the UK!
So far, both my F1 experiences have been at classic circuits, rather than the modern circuits. I hope that in time I'll visit all of the main circuits - with Monaco, Monza and Silverstone (to name but a few) highest on the list at the moment. Today, Silverstone released their 2015 tickets, and I was surprised to see yet another price rise. Now, a general admission ticket for the weekend will cost you £175. Let that sink in. For me to go and watch my home race with another person, I will have to pay £350. I know Silverstone is a classic track, and the atmosphere is reportedly amazing, but £350 for two tickets seems a little steep (putting it lightly). Let's also remember that to watch a weekend of motorsport, the costs of camping will have to be added on. During my last two GP trips, we stayed at the circuits' official campsites. To do so at Silverstone would cost £158 (two people over the weekend staying in a tent - with no electric hookup either by the way). So, £508 for a weekend in the UK. Is it really worth that much, considering you could go to other races for less? I'm not convinced.
The price hike seems to me to be an indicator of how the sport is progressing. To watch a whole season of F1 now, you have to pay for a Sky Sports subscription. Alright, the coverage is great, but considering everything used to be free, it's not ideal. I wonder how many potential new fans have been put off because of the cost of watching the sport? Bernie Ecclestone has also come under fire recently for refusing to engage in social media and internet coverage. The main argument? It doesn't generate any cash. That's all well and good, but the world has moved on from TV being the sole source of information, and now people follow sports from a number of media outlets. MotoGP manages all of these things very well (although that too has since moved to pay TV), with Facebook and Twitter coverage, plus endless videos on the website and regular email updates. You can't help but think that F1 is really missing a trick here.
As well as the huge price tags and lack of coverage away from TV, F1 and the FIA seem to be losing their touch a little bit. This year saw massive rule changes to try as reduce the dominance of Red Bull, and create closer racing. Instead, Mercedes have had greater dominance than Red Bull ever had (2011 excepted, perhaps), and most of the battles are between team-mates, rather than between all drivers. Granted, now and again you have some exceptional racing between teams (look at Alonso and Vettel this weekend), but it's now and again and not all the time. I don't think that the racing is as good as it has been in previous years, I still don't like the sound (or lack thereof), and the cars look ridiculous.
In order to tackle some of these problems (admittedly, my views aren't universally shared across F1 fans), the FIA recently announced some further rule changes for next year - followed by collective groans across Twitter, as the changes were completely out of touch. Standing starts following a safety car period (although we were deprived of a standing start yesterday when the race was stopped - go figure) was one of the rule changes, and it seems completely and utterly unnecessary.
Many F1 races now feature a lengthy middle stint where drivers are concerned with fuel consumption and tyre wear. The 2014 rules about carrying less fuel were introduced to cut costs and appear more 'green'. I have previously voiced my views about F1 being eco-friendly, and I find it ridiculous that limiting the fuel of 22 cars on the race track for two hours will make any difference in the face of the hundreds of lorries, planes, private helicopters and such used to transport everything to each individual circuit. Something having more impact in my eyes would be to hold races in a logical order - heading from Austria from Germany, for example, and moving Canada before or after the US race, rather than the madness we have presently. Still, F1 is all about image, and as long as it appears to be doing something, that will be enough.
Overall, F1 is moving more and more towards obsession with money, and away from the love of the sport itself. Consider the recent virtual ads saying 'F1 - the world's fastest brand'. Personally, I think of F1 as a sport, not a brand. Unless F1 moves with the times, I wonder for how long the 'brand' will last.
I've attended two F1 races - Germany in 2011 and Belgium in 2012. Both were amazing experiences, and in my opinion the tickets were quite reasonably priced. The Nurburgring cost in the region of £85 per ticket, and Spa was 125€ (so around £100). Of course, you have to add on the price of camping, fuel and crossing the channel, but I think on the whole both trips were around £400. Not bad for a whole weekend of entertainment outside of the UK!
So far, both my F1 experiences have been at classic circuits, rather than the modern circuits. I hope that in time I'll visit all of the main circuits - with Monaco, Monza and Silverstone (to name but a few) highest on the list at the moment. Today, Silverstone released their 2015 tickets, and I was surprised to see yet another price rise. Now, a general admission ticket for the weekend will cost you £175. Let that sink in. For me to go and watch my home race with another person, I will have to pay £350. I know Silverstone is a classic track, and the atmosphere is reportedly amazing, but £350 for two tickets seems a little steep (putting it lightly). Let's also remember that to watch a weekend of motorsport, the costs of camping will have to be added on. During my last two GP trips, we stayed at the circuits' official campsites. To do so at Silverstone would cost £158 (two people over the weekend staying in a tent - with no electric hookup either by the way). So, £508 for a weekend in the UK. Is it really worth that much, considering you could go to other races for less? I'm not convinced.
The price hike seems to me to be an indicator of how the sport is progressing. To watch a whole season of F1 now, you have to pay for a Sky Sports subscription. Alright, the coverage is great, but considering everything used to be free, it's not ideal. I wonder how many potential new fans have been put off because of the cost of watching the sport? Bernie Ecclestone has also come under fire recently for refusing to engage in social media and internet coverage. The main argument? It doesn't generate any cash. That's all well and good, but the world has moved on from TV being the sole source of information, and now people follow sports from a number of media outlets. MotoGP manages all of these things very well (although that too has since moved to pay TV), with Facebook and Twitter coverage, plus endless videos on the website and regular email updates. You can't help but think that F1 is really missing a trick here.
As well as the huge price tags and lack of coverage away from TV, F1 and the FIA seem to be losing their touch a little bit. This year saw massive rule changes to try as reduce the dominance of Red Bull, and create closer racing. Instead, Mercedes have had greater dominance than Red Bull ever had (2011 excepted, perhaps), and most of the battles are between team-mates, rather than between all drivers. Granted, now and again you have some exceptional racing between teams (look at Alonso and Vettel this weekend), but it's now and again and not all the time. I don't think that the racing is as good as it has been in previous years, I still don't like the sound (or lack thereof), and the cars look ridiculous.
In order to tackle some of these problems (admittedly, my views aren't universally shared across F1 fans), the FIA recently announced some further rule changes for next year - followed by collective groans across Twitter, as the changes were completely out of touch. Standing starts following a safety car period (although we were deprived of a standing start yesterday when the race was stopped - go figure) was one of the rule changes, and it seems completely and utterly unnecessary.
Many F1 races now feature a lengthy middle stint where drivers are concerned with fuel consumption and tyre wear. The 2014 rules about carrying less fuel were introduced to cut costs and appear more 'green'. I have previously voiced my views about F1 being eco-friendly, and I find it ridiculous that limiting the fuel of 22 cars on the race track for two hours will make any difference in the face of the hundreds of lorries, planes, private helicopters and such used to transport everything to each individual circuit. Something having more impact in my eyes would be to hold races in a logical order - heading from Austria from Germany, for example, and moving Canada before or after the US race, rather than the madness we have presently. Still, F1 is all about image, and as long as it appears to be doing something, that will be enough.
Overall, F1 is moving more and more towards obsession with money, and away from the love of the sport itself. Consider the recent virtual ads saying 'F1 - the world's fastest brand'. Personally, I think of F1 as a sport, not a brand. Unless F1 moves with the times, I wonder for how long the 'brand' will last.
Monday, 7 April 2014
The New F1
It's been a while again since I last wrote. You'll have to forgive me - I've been very, very busy with the other side of my life as an academic. Well, academic in training anyway.
So, what's happened in the mean time? We've had a few races and a lot of controversy arising from the new F1 rules. At the moment, it feels like a lot of unrest surrounds F1. There were fears that the new formula wasn't as much of a spectacle as it has been in recent years. I have to say, I am inclined to agree with these fears. However, last weekend's race in Bahrain proved that F1 is anything but boring, and if you think this you are, to use the wise words of Niki Lauda, an idiot. The race saw lots of battles between team-mates, and provided a thrilling final 10 laps once the safety car got off the track. However, brilliant racing aside, I still think F1 is facing a few problems.
Let's start with the obvious: the sound. It seems that the F1 fans are pretty divided on this issue: some like it, some hate it. I don't particularly dislike the sound, but I think it's far, far too quiet. A popular motorsport journalist wrote rather a scathing piece basically calling everyone that thinks F1 isn't loud enough an idiot, but I protest. In the article, it was stated that 'nobody likes coming away from a race having been deafened'. Well, no, being deaf isn't nice, but when you can feel the noise of the cars, it's hard to be in anything but awe. Another reporter also said that nobody leaves an F1 race commenting on the noise. This I can directly refute: when I left the Nurburgring in 2011 and Spa in 2012, the main thing I remembered was the sound. To be honest, when you go and see an F1 race you can't see a whole lot of racing compared to the television, but what you do get is the whole atmosphere. At the Nurburgring, my prevailing memory (apart from the frostbite) is standing a few feet away from the track, cars at head height, being completely blasted with sound from Schumacher's Mercedes. It was fantastic! Similarly, at Goodwood in 2012 one of the best moments was standing in the paddock, two feet away from Vettel suddenly doing a burnout. It was completely irresponsible of him, and I think my ears are still ringing from it, but it was amazing! We humans rely on all of our senses to experience the world. While F1 looks fantastic, you also need the sound. It's part and parcel of the racing and it contributes hugely to the atmosphere and spectacle. Admittedly, I haven't attended a race this year, but when watching on the television I feel that something has been lost. When the safety car in Bahrain was louder than the cars, something is wrong. Like it or not, the sound is part of F1, and this is something that should come back. The noise itself is alright (the turbo whistle sends my pet budgie absolutely insane), but it needs turning up to 11.
Another issue I feel could get bigger over the season is the racing. You're going to call me crazy given what we saw in Bahrain, but bear with me. The racing was fantastic at the last race. However, most of that was between team-mates. I love seeing team-mates racing, and I want to see more of it. I also want to see more racing between different teams. Red Bull in previous years have been utterly dominant, and the new rules were supposed to stop one team from dominating and improve the racing. What we seem to have at the moment is dominance falling to Mercedes and only team-mates racing one another. Well, ok, Bottas seems to overtake everyone bar Mercedes, but we need much, much more of this. In Bahrain, there wasn't the scare over fuel-saving over racing, but I'm worried that this will happen more often as the season progresses. Let's hope the Bahrain entertainment continues at other circuits.
Recently, there have been reports of health concerns for many drivers. Apparently, Jean-Eric Vergne was hospitalised due to the extreme weight-loss programme he was required to follow in order to maximise his performance and weight distribution in the car. When drivers are hospitalised, or pull out of other events due to health issues directly related to the new F1 rules, something is very wrong. It's not right that 'heavier' drivers are worse off than 'lighter' drivers due to absurd weight rules. I believe that this is something that will change next year, but I don't understand why this has to take so long. These drivers are at the peak of their physical fitness, and it shouldn't be compromised for the sake of regulations.
Speaking of regulations and rules, I think the stewards this year have gone crazy. In Malaysia, Daniel Ricciardo's race was ruined by an unsafe release in the pits when a wheel wasn't attached properly. Thankfully, nobody was hurt (think about Webber's unsafe release when the tyre hit a cameraman - horrifying), but Ricciardo's race was ruined. Once the problem had been fixed, Ricciardo headed back out onto the circuit, and was given a penalty. This is fair enough - the team have done something unsafe (not intentionally I will hazard to say), and the rules are clear that they should receive punishment. The madness sets in after the race when Ricciardo is also given a 10-place grid drop for the next race. In my mind, this is ridiculous. Ricciardo was punished once during the race, after having his race already destroyed by a mistake by the team, so why should he suffer even more at the next race? Apparently, the reasoning for this is that it will deter teams from unsafe releases even more. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't think teams set out to send their drivers off without wheels attached properly. Also, the mistake in Ricciardo's case didn't harm anyone but Ricciardo. It wasn't even his fault that the wheel wasn't secure - he stopped and was wheeled back to the pit for the problem to be fixed. So, what was wrong with fining the team? I don't get it.
The madness of this situation was further inflated this weekend, when Maldonado received a penalty. In Maldonado's case, a penalty wasn't given for an unsafe release, but for causing a collision (any surprises?). In the collision, Guttierez's Sauber was launched upside-down in quite an horrific manner - thankfully, he was unhurt, but it was a nasty situation that nobody wishes to see repeated. Rightfully, Maldonado received an in-race penalty. He also, like Ricciardo, received a grid drop for the next race. However, unlike Ricciardo, Maldonado's drop was only of 5 places. Let's just think this over: both Maldonado and Ricciardo receive in-race penalties. Fair enough. Ricciardo gets a 10 place drop for something he didn't do, and something that didn't hurt anyone. Maldonado causes a serious collision and gets away with only a 5 place drop. Nope, I don't get it either. Honestly, things like this are crazy, and detract from the racing. For F1 to improve, I think this is something that should be addressed.
Another thing I noticed this weekend was the return of GP2, F1's feeder series. GP2 has always had some spectacular racing, and I'm sure this will continue throughout 2014. The problem is, the GP2 cars all lapped within the 107% time of F1. This is worrying, as F1 is supposed to be the ultimate formula. I wonder whether in all the haste to be more environmentally friendly (ignoring the lights during the night races, the lorries, planes and helicopters that all go to the circuit) we've lost some of the notion of F1 as the highest level of motorsport. Also, it seems that the field is now spread out very, very far. The Mercedes-powered cars are much, much faster than Ferrari and Renault-powered cars. While it's great to see Williams and Force India near the top (indeed, Hulkenberg is now third in the driver's championship!), it's not so great that the others are so far behind. Think of the BTCC where 24 cars are separated by less than a second, and you're approaching something more interesting. If F1 can get like this, we'll be on to a winner.
One final issue that, to be honest, I don't really feel is an issue is the look of the cars. Before the season started, everyone was up in arms over the look of the cars. They are ugly (that hasn't changed), but I think that we've all got used to them. Cars always tend to differ year on year - look back to 2007 and the cars were like spaceships! I think that there are regulations coming into force in the years to come that will reduce the ugliness of the cars, but frankly, there are more pressing issues.
Overall, I think this new F1 needs some tweaking. The cars need to be louder, and the stewards need to sort things out and be more consistent. However, as long as we get some exciting racing, I think we'll be alright. Although, speaking as a slightly biased Red Bull fan, I hope the Renault-powered cars can overtake Mercedes by the end of the year!
So, what's happened in the mean time? We've had a few races and a lot of controversy arising from the new F1 rules. At the moment, it feels like a lot of unrest surrounds F1. There were fears that the new formula wasn't as much of a spectacle as it has been in recent years. I have to say, I am inclined to agree with these fears. However, last weekend's race in Bahrain proved that F1 is anything but boring, and if you think this you are, to use the wise words of Niki Lauda, an idiot. The race saw lots of battles between team-mates, and provided a thrilling final 10 laps once the safety car got off the track. However, brilliant racing aside, I still think F1 is facing a few problems.
Let's start with the obvious: the sound. It seems that the F1 fans are pretty divided on this issue: some like it, some hate it. I don't particularly dislike the sound, but I think it's far, far too quiet. A popular motorsport journalist wrote rather a scathing piece basically calling everyone that thinks F1 isn't loud enough an idiot, but I protest. In the article, it was stated that 'nobody likes coming away from a race having been deafened'. Well, no, being deaf isn't nice, but when you can feel the noise of the cars, it's hard to be in anything but awe. Another reporter also said that nobody leaves an F1 race commenting on the noise. This I can directly refute: when I left the Nurburgring in 2011 and Spa in 2012, the main thing I remembered was the sound. To be honest, when you go and see an F1 race you can't see a whole lot of racing compared to the television, but what you do get is the whole atmosphere. At the Nurburgring, my prevailing memory (apart from the frostbite) is standing a few feet away from the track, cars at head height, being completely blasted with sound from Schumacher's Mercedes. It was fantastic! Similarly, at Goodwood in 2012 one of the best moments was standing in the paddock, two feet away from Vettel suddenly doing a burnout. It was completely irresponsible of him, and I think my ears are still ringing from it, but it was amazing! We humans rely on all of our senses to experience the world. While F1 looks fantastic, you also need the sound. It's part and parcel of the racing and it contributes hugely to the atmosphere and spectacle. Admittedly, I haven't attended a race this year, but when watching on the television I feel that something has been lost. When the safety car in Bahrain was louder than the cars, something is wrong. Like it or not, the sound is part of F1, and this is something that should come back. The noise itself is alright (the turbo whistle sends my pet budgie absolutely insane), but it needs turning up to 11.
Another issue I feel could get bigger over the season is the racing. You're going to call me crazy given what we saw in Bahrain, but bear with me. The racing was fantastic at the last race. However, most of that was between team-mates. I love seeing team-mates racing, and I want to see more of it. I also want to see more racing between different teams. Red Bull in previous years have been utterly dominant, and the new rules were supposed to stop one team from dominating and improve the racing. What we seem to have at the moment is dominance falling to Mercedes and only team-mates racing one another. Well, ok, Bottas seems to overtake everyone bar Mercedes, but we need much, much more of this. In Bahrain, there wasn't the scare over fuel-saving over racing, but I'm worried that this will happen more often as the season progresses. Let's hope the Bahrain entertainment continues at other circuits.
Recently, there have been reports of health concerns for many drivers. Apparently, Jean-Eric Vergne was hospitalised due to the extreme weight-loss programme he was required to follow in order to maximise his performance and weight distribution in the car. When drivers are hospitalised, or pull out of other events due to health issues directly related to the new F1 rules, something is very wrong. It's not right that 'heavier' drivers are worse off than 'lighter' drivers due to absurd weight rules. I believe that this is something that will change next year, but I don't understand why this has to take so long. These drivers are at the peak of their physical fitness, and it shouldn't be compromised for the sake of regulations.
Speaking of regulations and rules, I think the stewards this year have gone crazy. In Malaysia, Daniel Ricciardo's race was ruined by an unsafe release in the pits when a wheel wasn't attached properly. Thankfully, nobody was hurt (think about Webber's unsafe release when the tyre hit a cameraman - horrifying), but Ricciardo's race was ruined. Once the problem had been fixed, Ricciardo headed back out onto the circuit, and was given a penalty. This is fair enough - the team have done something unsafe (not intentionally I will hazard to say), and the rules are clear that they should receive punishment. The madness sets in after the race when Ricciardo is also given a 10-place grid drop for the next race. In my mind, this is ridiculous. Ricciardo was punished once during the race, after having his race already destroyed by a mistake by the team, so why should he suffer even more at the next race? Apparently, the reasoning for this is that it will deter teams from unsafe releases even more. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I don't think teams set out to send their drivers off without wheels attached properly. Also, the mistake in Ricciardo's case didn't harm anyone but Ricciardo. It wasn't even his fault that the wheel wasn't secure - he stopped and was wheeled back to the pit for the problem to be fixed. So, what was wrong with fining the team? I don't get it.
The madness of this situation was further inflated this weekend, when Maldonado received a penalty. In Maldonado's case, a penalty wasn't given for an unsafe release, but for causing a collision (any surprises?). In the collision, Guttierez's Sauber was launched upside-down in quite an horrific manner - thankfully, he was unhurt, but it was a nasty situation that nobody wishes to see repeated. Rightfully, Maldonado received an in-race penalty. He also, like Ricciardo, received a grid drop for the next race. However, unlike Ricciardo, Maldonado's drop was only of 5 places. Let's just think this over: both Maldonado and Ricciardo receive in-race penalties. Fair enough. Ricciardo gets a 10 place drop for something he didn't do, and something that didn't hurt anyone. Maldonado causes a serious collision and gets away with only a 5 place drop. Nope, I don't get it either. Honestly, things like this are crazy, and detract from the racing. For F1 to improve, I think this is something that should be addressed.
Another thing I noticed this weekend was the return of GP2, F1's feeder series. GP2 has always had some spectacular racing, and I'm sure this will continue throughout 2014. The problem is, the GP2 cars all lapped within the 107% time of F1. This is worrying, as F1 is supposed to be the ultimate formula. I wonder whether in all the haste to be more environmentally friendly (ignoring the lights during the night races, the lorries, planes and helicopters that all go to the circuit) we've lost some of the notion of F1 as the highest level of motorsport. Also, it seems that the field is now spread out very, very far. The Mercedes-powered cars are much, much faster than Ferrari and Renault-powered cars. While it's great to see Williams and Force India near the top (indeed, Hulkenberg is now third in the driver's championship!), it's not so great that the others are so far behind. Think of the BTCC where 24 cars are separated by less than a second, and you're approaching something more interesting. If F1 can get like this, we'll be on to a winner.
One final issue that, to be honest, I don't really feel is an issue is the look of the cars. Before the season started, everyone was up in arms over the look of the cars. They are ugly (that hasn't changed), but I think that we've all got used to them. Cars always tend to differ year on year - look back to 2007 and the cars were like spaceships! I think that there are regulations coming into force in the years to come that will reduce the ugliness of the cars, but frankly, there are more pressing issues.
Overall, I think this new F1 needs some tweaking. The cars need to be louder, and the stewards need to sort things out and be more consistent. However, as long as we get some exciting racing, I think we'll be alright. Although, speaking as a slightly biased Red Bull fan, I hope the Renault-powered cars can overtake Mercedes by the end of the year!
Thursday, 13 March 2014
Start (and repair) Your Engines!
I have to say, it's been a very long winter break. The last F1 race was back in November - the last time we'll hear the screaming V8 engines in F1. This weekend, a new season, and indeed a new era of F1 begins.
Pre-season testing has been very interesting - and not so good from the perspective of a Red Bull fan. We all knew the regulations would shake things up, but seeing the four-time champion team spending most of the testing season in the garage was more of a shake-up than anyone had anticipated. The key problems of Red Bull have been mostly concerned with the Renault engine. In fact, most of the Renault powered teams have seemingly suffered. Red Bull didn't complete a race distance during testing. This is very unsettling news. While everyone noticed the problems straight away during the first test session, everyone figured that it was a blip, and Red Bull would have things sorted for the second and third tests. Not so. The problems were rife throughout all of the tests, and we go to the first race of the season none the wiser as to whether the car will actually work. All we can do is hope. Who knows, maybe it was all a bluff and Vettel will win the race as per usual? Well, I can dream anyway!
While the Renault teams have suffered, the Mercedes-powered teams seem to have done fantastically well, and Mercedes go into the season as favourites. A particularly noteworthy team during testing was Williams. I'm sure you won't find a single F1 fan who doesn't want Williams to do well, so let's hope that their form stays throughout the season.
There are mere hours before the practice session begins tomorrow, and I've already decided that F1 takes precedence over sleep this weekend. Given all the rule changes, I think this will be one of the most technically interesting seasons we've seen. One thing I do fear for is the spectacle. The past few seasons have seen some incredible races, and watching these it was difficult to comprehend why anyone would want to change the rules so drastically. There's no doubt that this year the cars are ugly. Really ugly. There are only a few that have managed to disguise the awful 'anteater' noses, and don't even get me started on the Ferrari. So, without the looks of the cars, what else is there? The sound. If you've never been to an F1 race in person, then it's difficult to describe the sound, and you won't have much of an idea of how loud these cars were. It would be a huge shame if the cars sounded unremarkable - and the fact that many people during testing were able to stand near the track without headphones is worrying. Still, when we see all 22 cars on track, maybe things will sound better.
Hopefully, Melbourne will give us the answers to all of our questions. Now we just have to wait and see who will be on the podium - assuming that anyone finishes the race, of course!
Pre-season testing has been very interesting - and not so good from the perspective of a Red Bull fan. We all knew the regulations would shake things up, but seeing the four-time champion team spending most of the testing season in the garage was more of a shake-up than anyone had anticipated. The key problems of Red Bull have been mostly concerned with the Renault engine. In fact, most of the Renault powered teams have seemingly suffered. Red Bull didn't complete a race distance during testing. This is very unsettling news. While everyone noticed the problems straight away during the first test session, everyone figured that it was a blip, and Red Bull would have things sorted for the second and third tests. Not so. The problems were rife throughout all of the tests, and we go to the first race of the season none the wiser as to whether the car will actually work. All we can do is hope. Who knows, maybe it was all a bluff and Vettel will win the race as per usual? Well, I can dream anyway!
While the Renault teams have suffered, the Mercedes-powered teams seem to have done fantastically well, and Mercedes go into the season as favourites. A particularly noteworthy team during testing was Williams. I'm sure you won't find a single F1 fan who doesn't want Williams to do well, so let's hope that their form stays throughout the season.
There are mere hours before the practice session begins tomorrow, and I've already decided that F1 takes precedence over sleep this weekend. Given all the rule changes, I think this will be one of the most technically interesting seasons we've seen. One thing I do fear for is the spectacle. The past few seasons have seen some incredible races, and watching these it was difficult to comprehend why anyone would want to change the rules so drastically. There's no doubt that this year the cars are ugly. Really ugly. There are only a few that have managed to disguise the awful 'anteater' noses, and don't even get me started on the Ferrari. So, without the looks of the cars, what else is there? The sound. If you've never been to an F1 race in person, then it's difficult to describe the sound, and you won't have much of an idea of how loud these cars were. It would be a huge shame if the cars sounded unremarkable - and the fact that many people during testing were able to stand near the track without headphones is worrying. Still, when we see all 22 cars on track, maybe things will sound better.
Hopefully, Melbourne will give us the answers to all of our questions. Now we just have to wait and see who will be on the podium - assuming that anyone finishes the race, of course!
Friday, 24 January 2014
Neuroscience and the Nature of Brain Injury
As I reported in yesterday's post, over Christmas we heard the news that Michael Schumacher had been involved in a skiing accident, and had suffered a serious brain injury. To date, Schumacher is still in a medically induced coma - prompting some media speculation that Schumacher might be in a 'vegetative state'.
During my year on placement, I had the chance to learn a lot about disorders of consciousness, and I worked with a few patients. As neuroscience and motorsport are two of my interests, I feel I should provide more information about why Schumacher is not in a vegetative state, and why this situation is different from the common media 'knowledge' being bandied around recently. At this point I should state that I will not be speculating about Schumacher's condition - the only people who are in any position to comment are those directly involved in Schumacher's care. Any news that you hear from anywhere other than Schumacher's medical team, his manager or his family is just speculation. Unfortunately, the media does like to jump over things like this, and so I feel compelled to give a brief overview of the science behind Schumacher's condition.
First off, let's be clear, Schumacher has suffered a serious head injury. Brain injuries of any sort are bad news, and we simply don't know enough about the brain and how it recovers to say how long and how much Schumacher will recover. As I stated before, this information is only going to come from Schumacher's medical team, and may not come for some time.
Despite Schumacher wearing a helmet, the impact caused a bleed in and around his brain. To understand why this is serious, it is important to realise how the brain sits inside the skull. The brain is an incredibly soft organ, surrounded by membranes and fluid. It also sits on the brainstem and spinal cord, meaning that despite the 'packaging' around it, the brain is subject to movements. On heavy impacts, the brain can bounce forwards and backwards, hitting the inside of the skull (these are called 'cou' and 'contra-cou' movements for those of you with a technical mind). The inside of the skull is remarkably rough, causing tears and, ultimately, bleeds.
You may recall that initially, Schumacher was reported to be conscious and lucid at the scene of the accident. It was a surprise, then, when it was later reported that he was in a critical condition. The reason this was the case was due to the increase of pressure inside the skull. As the bleeding inside the brain increases, the pressure on the brain also increases. The fluid can't move fast enough, and eventually presses down on the brain, and it is this that can cause the loss of consciousness and symptoms of brain injury. Don't forget that the brain is remarkably soft, and is very sensitive to pressure and damage of this kind.
So, Schumacher underwent surgery to relieve the pressure on his brain, an operation known as a craniectomy. Once the pressure came down, some sort of stability could be approached. However, Schumacher had to be placed in a medically induced coma, and he has remained in this state for some weeks now.
This medically induced coma is perhaps the source of the speculation that I read today, that Schumacher is in a vegetative state. So, to dispel this idea, let me explain in simple terms what consciousness means (well, I shall do my best at any rate).
Alright, I'll admit at the start that neuroscientists still aren't entirely sure why we have consciousness or what it is precisely. However, there is an easy way of classifying consciousness which can be used in clinical contexts, and it is this definition to which I will stick. In these terms, consciousness is made up of two concepts: wakefulness and awareness. Wakefulness is pretty much what it says it is: the extent to which someone is alert and able to respond to stimuli. Awareness is more linked to content: the subjective experience of things around us, being aware of who we are and what is around us. While wakefulness is necessary for awareness, the levels of each may vary. Thus, we can be wakeful without awareness, unawake and unaware, or wakeful and aware. It is in these terms that different disorders of consciousness may be defined.
In normal, healthy individuals we are both wakeful and aware (well, when we're not asleep anyway). The same applies to individuals who have locked-in syndrome (a condition in which individuals are unable to respond to stimuli due to paralysis, but nonetheless awake and aware of their surroundings).
By contrast, individuals in a coma are unawake and unaware. This goes beyond normal sleep, in which individuals can be woken. No stimuli can wake someone in a coma, they may only show reflex movements and their brain activity is generally depressed (although this may vary). Comas can last any amount of time, and may have different outcomes. What we must remember though is that Schumacher is in a medically-induced coma. While the same features are present - unawake, unaware etc. - this is more linked to anaesthesia, rather than a result of problems within the brain. Individuals in a medically-induced coma are placed in this state deliberately, to slow brain functioning and allow the brain some time to recover. The healthy, waking brain requires a huge amount of energy, and by slowing its function in a medically-induced coma it is hoped that recovery may be more successful. These medically-induced comas are controlled, unlike a normal coma. Physicians are able to lighten the sedation and test the brain's functioning when they deem it necessary. However, the amount of time this takes does still vary, from a few weeks to upwards of six months. Currently, Schumacher has been in this condition for almost a month, so it's definitely not the time to start losing hope.
Now, when coming round from a 'true' coma, it is impossible to say how complete this recovery will be. Some patients are lucky enough to gradually return to a normal level of consciousness, recovering their wakefulness and awareness. Others may linger somewhere in between. These conditions are disorders of consciousness and include vegetative states (now also termed 'wakefulness without awareness' or 'unresponsive wakefulness syndrome') and minimally conscious states.
When people think of vegetative states, they think of individuals in a coma for an extended period of time. These states are not the same as comas, and patients who are in this state are not 'vegetables' (hence the shift away from this term in the scientific literature). For those in vegetative state (herewith called VS), sleep-wake cycles may be present. Thus, they possess wakefulness. However, awareness is limited. Patients may respond to some stimuli, beyond simple reflexes, but they are not completely aware of their surroundings or sense of self. After one month of being in this state, patients are said to be in a persistent VS - something which Schumacher has not yet approached. After three months, if there has still been no change in this state following a traumatic brain injury (Schumacher's injury type), patients are then deemed to be in a permanent VS (although this term is too being debated, as patients have been found to recover months or even years after this).
For those patients who regain more of their awareness, a minimally conscious state may follow. Wakefulness is intact, as with healthy individuals, however awareness is still patchy. In some cases, patients may be able to respond to questions or simple commands, however this response is inconsistent and thus individuals may not have complete awareness. Like VS, this state may continue for years, and there is no predicting how much someone may subsequently recover.
So, the upshot of all this is that Schumacher is not possibly in a VS at this point. He is still in a medically-induced coma. While it can be argued that the longer someone is in a coma, the worse the prognosis, it's also good to remember that this is still a medically-induced coma, and this is different from a disorder of consciousness per se.
What we do have to remember over the course of Schumacher's recovery is that brain injuries are difficult things. Individuals with brain damage are, unfortunately, subject to a number of conditions and changes, and this often depends on the sites and the extent of the damage. As I stated before, I am in no position to make predictions. In all likelihood, neither are the medical team in this case. Brain injuries are a waiting game, and it takes an enormous amount of time to make progress. Aside from all the cognitive conditions which may arise from a brain injury, it's not unusual for individuals to experience changes in personality and demeanour. A recent article citing Dr Richard Greenwood at UCL stated that Schumacher may not be Schumacher if and when he recovers. Life will be profoundly different for Michael, even if he makes an apparent 'full' recovery. The brain is a remarkable thing, and I don't believe it's ever impossible for individuals to recover. However, changes are normal, and this is something that Schumacher and those close to him will have to adapt to. All the F1 community and media have to do now is let the medics work in peace. Uninformed speculation about permanent vegetative states and chances of recovery are useless and unhelpful, and I hope by writing this I can dispel some of the latest nonsense. Now all we can do is wait.
During my year on placement, I had the chance to learn a lot about disorders of consciousness, and I worked with a few patients. As neuroscience and motorsport are two of my interests, I feel I should provide more information about why Schumacher is not in a vegetative state, and why this situation is different from the common media 'knowledge' being bandied around recently. At this point I should state that I will not be speculating about Schumacher's condition - the only people who are in any position to comment are those directly involved in Schumacher's care. Any news that you hear from anywhere other than Schumacher's medical team, his manager or his family is just speculation. Unfortunately, the media does like to jump over things like this, and so I feel compelled to give a brief overview of the science behind Schumacher's condition.
First off, let's be clear, Schumacher has suffered a serious head injury. Brain injuries of any sort are bad news, and we simply don't know enough about the brain and how it recovers to say how long and how much Schumacher will recover. As I stated before, this information is only going to come from Schumacher's medical team, and may not come for some time.
Despite Schumacher wearing a helmet, the impact caused a bleed in and around his brain. To understand why this is serious, it is important to realise how the brain sits inside the skull. The brain is an incredibly soft organ, surrounded by membranes and fluid. It also sits on the brainstem and spinal cord, meaning that despite the 'packaging' around it, the brain is subject to movements. On heavy impacts, the brain can bounce forwards and backwards, hitting the inside of the skull (these are called 'cou' and 'contra-cou' movements for those of you with a technical mind). The inside of the skull is remarkably rough, causing tears and, ultimately, bleeds.
You may recall that initially, Schumacher was reported to be conscious and lucid at the scene of the accident. It was a surprise, then, when it was later reported that he was in a critical condition. The reason this was the case was due to the increase of pressure inside the skull. As the bleeding inside the brain increases, the pressure on the brain also increases. The fluid can't move fast enough, and eventually presses down on the brain, and it is this that can cause the loss of consciousness and symptoms of brain injury. Don't forget that the brain is remarkably soft, and is very sensitive to pressure and damage of this kind.
So, Schumacher underwent surgery to relieve the pressure on his brain, an operation known as a craniectomy. Once the pressure came down, some sort of stability could be approached. However, Schumacher had to be placed in a medically induced coma, and he has remained in this state for some weeks now.
This medically induced coma is perhaps the source of the speculation that I read today, that Schumacher is in a vegetative state. So, to dispel this idea, let me explain in simple terms what consciousness means (well, I shall do my best at any rate).
Alright, I'll admit at the start that neuroscientists still aren't entirely sure why we have consciousness or what it is precisely. However, there is an easy way of classifying consciousness which can be used in clinical contexts, and it is this definition to which I will stick. In these terms, consciousness is made up of two concepts: wakefulness and awareness. Wakefulness is pretty much what it says it is: the extent to which someone is alert and able to respond to stimuli. Awareness is more linked to content: the subjective experience of things around us, being aware of who we are and what is around us. While wakefulness is necessary for awareness, the levels of each may vary. Thus, we can be wakeful without awareness, unawake and unaware, or wakeful and aware. It is in these terms that different disorders of consciousness may be defined.
In normal, healthy individuals we are both wakeful and aware (well, when we're not asleep anyway). The same applies to individuals who have locked-in syndrome (a condition in which individuals are unable to respond to stimuli due to paralysis, but nonetheless awake and aware of their surroundings).
By contrast, individuals in a coma are unawake and unaware. This goes beyond normal sleep, in which individuals can be woken. No stimuli can wake someone in a coma, they may only show reflex movements and their brain activity is generally depressed (although this may vary). Comas can last any amount of time, and may have different outcomes. What we must remember though is that Schumacher is in a medically-induced coma. While the same features are present - unawake, unaware etc. - this is more linked to anaesthesia, rather than a result of problems within the brain. Individuals in a medically-induced coma are placed in this state deliberately, to slow brain functioning and allow the brain some time to recover. The healthy, waking brain requires a huge amount of energy, and by slowing its function in a medically-induced coma it is hoped that recovery may be more successful. These medically-induced comas are controlled, unlike a normal coma. Physicians are able to lighten the sedation and test the brain's functioning when they deem it necessary. However, the amount of time this takes does still vary, from a few weeks to upwards of six months. Currently, Schumacher has been in this condition for almost a month, so it's definitely not the time to start losing hope.
Now, when coming round from a 'true' coma, it is impossible to say how complete this recovery will be. Some patients are lucky enough to gradually return to a normal level of consciousness, recovering their wakefulness and awareness. Others may linger somewhere in between. These conditions are disorders of consciousness and include vegetative states (now also termed 'wakefulness without awareness' or 'unresponsive wakefulness syndrome') and minimally conscious states.
When people think of vegetative states, they think of individuals in a coma for an extended period of time. These states are not the same as comas, and patients who are in this state are not 'vegetables' (hence the shift away from this term in the scientific literature). For those in vegetative state (herewith called VS), sleep-wake cycles may be present. Thus, they possess wakefulness. However, awareness is limited. Patients may respond to some stimuli, beyond simple reflexes, but they are not completely aware of their surroundings or sense of self. After one month of being in this state, patients are said to be in a persistent VS - something which Schumacher has not yet approached. After three months, if there has still been no change in this state following a traumatic brain injury (Schumacher's injury type), patients are then deemed to be in a permanent VS (although this term is too being debated, as patients have been found to recover months or even years after this).
For those patients who regain more of their awareness, a minimally conscious state may follow. Wakefulness is intact, as with healthy individuals, however awareness is still patchy. In some cases, patients may be able to respond to questions or simple commands, however this response is inconsistent and thus individuals may not have complete awareness. Like VS, this state may continue for years, and there is no predicting how much someone may subsequently recover.
So, the upshot of all this is that Schumacher is not possibly in a VS at this point. He is still in a medically-induced coma. While it can be argued that the longer someone is in a coma, the worse the prognosis, it's also good to remember that this is still a medically-induced coma, and this is different from a disorder of consciousness per se.
What we do have to remember over the course of Schumacher's recovery is that brain injuries are difficult things. Individuals with brain damage are, unfortunately, subject to a number of conditions and changes, and this often depends on the sites and the extent of the damage. As I stated before, I am in no position to make predictions. In all likelihood, neither are the medical team in this case. Brain injuries are a waiting game, and it takes an enormous amount of time to make progress. Aside from all the cognitive conditions which may arise from a brain injury, it's not unusual for individuals to experience changes in personality and demeanour. A recent article citing Dr Richard Greenwood at UCL stated that Schumacher may not be Schumacher if and when he recovers. Life will be profoundly different for Michael, even if he makes an apparent 'full' recovery. The brain is a remarkable thing, and I don't believe it's ever impossible for individuals to recover. However, changes are normal, and this is something that Schumacher and those close to him will have to adapt to. All the F1 community and media have to do now is let the medics work in peace. Uninformed speculation about permanent vegetative states and chances of recovery are useless and unhelpful, and I hope by writing this I can dispel some of the latest nonsense. Now all we can do is wait.
Thursday, 23 January 2014
Updates and Upgrades
It's been two months since I've written anything on here. I feel terrible! I shall start by saying happy new year to all of you! I know, we're almost a whole month into 2014, but what can I say? I've been busy. Luckily, we're moving ever closer to the start of a new season of motorsport, and things are finally getting more interesting in the F1 winter break.
Today, we saw the new Williams car. Well, we saw a 'preview' image, anyway. Force India also revealed their new livery, but neglected to show us the front of the car. There had been a lot of speculation that the new cars would be pretty ugly due to the plethora of changes coming this season. Having seen the Williams, well, I have to agree. The 'anteater' nose (as it's being termed) is definitely a lot harder to love than the stepped noses of last year (which, to be honest, I didn't mind as much as many people), although I'm sure it's something that won't be that big of a deal once the cars actually take to the track. Tomorrow, McLaren launch their new car - hopefully this time we'll see a real car, rather than a computerised image. That way, we might get more of an idea of what they will really be like. In addition, rumours were abound that McLaren might return to the old orange livery - that will certainly be a change from the past couple of years!
So what else is new in the world of F1? There's currently speculation that Martin Whitmarsh, McLaren's team principal, is going to be off, as Ron Dennis has now taken over as CEO. Whether this happens or not, time will tell. Lotus had, up until recently, been under threat due to financial difficulty (although they were constantly reassuring us that this wasn't the case), however now this seems to have been resolved through a new partnership. Sighs of relief all around.
As we all know, 2014 is bringing considerable change to F1. First off, the technical regulation changes - new engines, for a start. I won't go into details, because everyone has written about this considerably everywhere else. However, what I will reiterate is that this change will bring huge upheaval to F1. Issues of reliability may become apparent, and nobody's entirely sure how things will unfold. As with every F1 season, the only hint of certainty will come in March once the Australian race is over.
Something else new for 2014 is drivers having a number for their career. Previously, driver numbers were based on championship position. However, this year only the current world champion has the option of using the number of their position in the previous year. Vettel has indeed opted for number 1 (he must be used to it after these years), and number 5 should he lose the championship. Raikkonen chose the number 7 because 'it was my number last year and I saw no reason to change it'. Ah, drivers and their superstitions indeed.
Speaking of drivers, we'll have some great line-ups on the grid this year. Ferrari have arguably the strongest drivers in Raikkonen and Alonso - you can be sure that Kimi won't be moving out of Fernando's way this year. Ricciardo pairs with Vettel at Red Bull, while Jenson Button will be driving alongside a rookie of Kevin Magnussen. Massa has managed to secure a drive at Williams, Kobayashi will be driving for Caterham, and everyone breathed a sigh of relief when Hulkenberg secured a drive with Force India.
One final note of news came just after Christmas, when Michael Schumacher was involved in a skiing accident. While early reports suggested that he only had minor injuries, it was later found out that he had suffered a brain haemorrhage and had been placed in an induced coma, a condition in which he remains now. This is of course terrible news, but the fact that we haven't heard anything new for a number of weeks may actually be a good thing given the extent of Michael's brain injury. Brain injuries take a huge amount of time to recover from, and even then it's unclear how much progress Schumacher will make. Sadly, we just don't know enough about the brain to make such predictions - and this is a reason why I would like to go into clinical neuroscience research. In any case, the world of F1 has united to support Michael, and will likely do so throughout his recovery.
Today, we saw the new Williams car. Well, we saw a 'preview' image, anyway. Force India also revealed their new livery, but neglected to show us the front of the car. There had been a lot of speculation that the new cars would be pretty ugly due to the plethora of changes coming this season. Having seen the Williams, well, I have to agree. The 'anteater' nose (as it's being termed) is definitely a lot harder to love than the stepped noses of last year (which, to be honest, I didn't mind as much as many people), although I'm sure it's something that won't be that big of a deal once the cars actually take to the track. Tomorrow, McLaren launch their new car - hopefully this time we'll see a real car, rather than a computerised image. That way, we might get more of an idea of what they will really be like. In addition, rumours were abound that McLaren might return to the old orange livery - that will certainly be a change from the past couple of years!
So what else is new in the world of F1? There's currently speculation that Martin Whitmarsh, McLaren's team principal, is going to be off, as Ron Dennis has now taken over as CEO. Whether this happens or not, time will tell. Lotus had, up until recently, been under threat due to financial difficulty (although they were constantly reassuring us that this wasn't the case), however now this seems to have been resolved through a new partnership. Sighs of relief all around.
As we all know, 2014 is bringing considerable change to F1. First off, the technical regulation changes - new engines, for a start. I won't go into details, because everyone has written about this considerably everywhere else. However, what I will reiterate is that this change will bring huge upheaval to F1. Issues of reliability may become apparent, and nobody's entirely sure how things will unfold. As with every F1 season, the only hint of certainty will come in March once the Australian race is over.
Something else new for 2014 is drivers having a number for their career. Previously, driver numbers were based on championship position. However, this year only the current world champion has the option of using the number of their position in the previous year. Vettel has indeed opted for number 1 (he must be used to it after these years), and number 5 should he lose the championship. Raikkonen chose the number 7 because 'it was my number last year and I saw no reason to change it'. Ah, drivers and their superstitions indeed.
Speaking of drivers, we'll have some great line-ups on the grid this year. Ferrari have arguably the strongest drivers in Raikkonen and Alonso - you can be sure that Kimi won't be moving out of Fernando's way this year. Ricciardo pairs with Vettel at Red Bull, while Jenson Button will be driving alongside a rookie of Kevin Magnussen. Massa has managed to secure a drive at Williams, Kobayashi will be driving for Caterham, and everyone breathed a sigh of relief when Hulkenberg secured a drive with Force India.
One final note of news came just after Christmas, when Michael Schumacher was involved in a skiing accident. While early reports suggested that he only had minor injuries, it was later found out that he had suffered a brain haemorrhage and had been placed in an induced coma, a condition in which he remains now. This is of course terrible news, but the fact that we haven't heard anything new for a number of weeks may actually be a good thing given the extent of Michael's brain injury. Brain injuries take a huge amount of time to recover from, and even then it's unclear how much progress Schumacher will make. Sadly, we just don't know enough about the brain to make such predictions - and this is a reason why I would like to go into clinical neuroscience research. In any case, the world of F1 has united to support Michael, and will likely do so throughout his recovery.
Friday, 15 November 2013
The Problem of Young Drivers
As you may be aware, Kimi Raikkonen has ended his 2013 season early. A bad back has required an operation, and thus the final two races will proceed without the Ice Man. This has sparked quite a debate within the F1 community, and it centres on who has replaced Raikkonen for the final two races.
The third driver for Lotus is GP2 champion Davide Valsecchi. GP2 is traditionally regarded as the stepping stone for F1, but in the past few years this hasn't been the case. Valsecchi won the championship in 2012, and was drafted to Lotus to undertake testing sessions in 2013. Now, the premise of having a third driver was to have a reserve, or at least someone to test and develop the car. It seems that Valsecchi however has had very limited running - and indeed was overlooked as Kimi's replacement for the final two races of the season, instead being replaced by Heikki Kovalainen.
Now, I take no issue with Heikki coming back to F1 - even if it's just for these few races. It's great to have him back and in a car that is right at the front, and Lotus do need a proven talent to grab them the points. However, I think the whole situation makes a mockery of the third driver system, and more generally of GP2's role in bringing the next generation forwards into F1.
I think that this goes right back to the start of the year. As soon as Valsecchi got the third driver role, he should have been given free practice sessions to prepare him for F1. Instead, he has completed very limited testing in young driver days and filmwork. For someone who grabbed a brilliant GP2 championship, this isn't acceptable.
The way GP2 works means that the champion for each year is prevented from returning to that particular championship. Instead, it used to be thought that these winners would progress to F1 - as was the case with Romain Grosjean (after his second spell in GP2 and following his GP2 championship win). However, I wouldn't call Valsecchi's place in F1 'progress'. He seems to have spent the entire year waiting for his chance, and now that it has arrived he is not experienced enough to take the opportunity. As I said, I completely understand Lotus's reasons for this - they are still fighting for points. But, without the chance to test and practice, how are young drivers expected to get into F1?
Next year, we do have a couple of young drivers coming into the sport. McLaren have recently dropped Sergio Perez in favour of Kevin Magnussen - a Formula Renault driver. Toro Rosso also confirmed Danny Kvyat as their replacement for Daniel Ricciardo - a move that received wide criticism, as Kvyat has competed only GP3, and was picked over Antonio Felix da Costa, Red Bull's Formula Renault driver. However, we currently have no new GP2 drivers for 2014. The only 2012 GP2 driver to enter the 2013 F1 season was Esteban Gutierrez. The winner (Valsecchi) and runner up (Luis Razia) from 2012 instead missing out on opportunities.
In fairness, a good many of these drivers do get the reserve/third driver positions. However, they often do not get the race drives, or even practice sessions. Despite this, even younger and more inexperienced drivers (but with a lot of cash) get the drives. Ok, they will probably have a lot of talent as well, but why are these drivers immediately expected to do well, while third drivers such as Valsecchi are not?
I think a lot of the problem comes from the lack of testing. If we had more in-season tests, the drivers would get the experience, and could be utilised appropriately if one of the main drivers drops out. What has happened to Valsecchi is disappointing. He should have been given more opportunity throughout the year, and you have to question why Lotus even hire him if they won't give him any chances. Instead, perhaps Valsecchi would have been better going off into another championship for this year, rather than being forced to sit in the garage and watch opportunities as they pass by. There has to be a change in this system, and talent should be rewarded.
The third driver for Lotus is GP2 champion Davide Valsecchi. GP2 is traditionally regarded as the stepping stone for F1, but in the past few years this hasn't been the case. Valsecchi won the championship in 2012, and was drafted to Lotus to undertake testing sessions in 2013. Now, the premise of having a third driver was to have a reserve, or at least someone to test and develop the car. It seems that Valsecchi however has had very limited running - and indeed was overlooked as Kimi's replacement for the final two races of the season, instead being replaced by Heikki Kovalainen.
Now, I take no issue with Heikki coming back to F1 - even if it's just for these few races. It's great to have him back and in a car that is right at the front, and Lotus do need a proven talent to grab them the points. However, I think the whole situation makes a mockery of the third driver system, and more generally of GP2's role in bringing the next generation forwards into F1.
I think that this goes right back to the start of the year. As soon as Valsecchi got the third driver role, he should have been given free practice sessions to prepare him for F1. Instead, he has completed very limited testing in young driver days and filmwork. For someone who grabbed a brilliant GP2 championship, this isn't acceptable.
The way GP2 works means that the champion for each year is prevented from returning to that particular championship. Instead, it used to be thought that these winners would progress to F1 - as was the case with Romain Grosjean (after his second spell in GP2 and following his GP2 championship win). However, I wouldn't call Valsecchi's place in F1 'progress'. He seems to have spent the entire year waiting for his chance, and now that it has arrived he is not experienced enough to take the opportunity. As I said, I completely understand Lotus's reasons for this - they are still fighting for points. But, without the chance to test and practice, how are young drivers expected to get into F1?
Next year, we do have a couple of young drivers coming into the sport. McLaren have recently dropped Sergio Perez in favour of Kevin Magnussen - a Formula Renault driver. Toro Rosso also confirmed Danny Kvyat as their replacement for Daniel Ricciardo - a move that received wide criticism, as Kvyat has competed only GP3, and was picked over Antonio Felix da Costa, Red Bull's Formula Renault driver. However, we currently have no new GP2 drivers for 2014. The only 2012 GP2 driver to enter the 2013 F1 season was Esteban Gutierrez. The winner (Valsecchi) and runner up (Luis Razia) from 2012 instead missing out on opportunities.
In fairness, a good many of these drivers do get the reserve/third driver positions. However, they often do not get the race drives, or even practice sessions. Despite this, even younger and more inexperienced drivers (but with a lot of cash) get the drives. Ok, they will probably have a lot of talent as well, but why are these drivers immediately expected to do well, while third drivers such as Valsecchi are not?
I think a lot of the problem comes from the lack of testing. If we had more in-season tests, the drivers would get the experience, and could be utilised appropriately if one of the main drivers drops out. What has happened to Valsecchi is disappointing. He should have been given more opportunity throughout the year, and you have to question why Lotus even hire him if they won't give him any chances. Instead, perhaps Valsecchi would have been better going off into another championship for this year, rather than being forced to sit in the garage and watch opportunities as they pass by. There has to be a change in this system, and talent should be rewarded.
Sunday, 27 October 2013
Quadruple World Champion
I couldn't really miss the opportunity to announce that Sebastian Vettel is now a quadruple world champion! He's joined the likes of Prost, Fangio and Schumacher, and should now hopefully be considered one of the greats (as if he wasn't after championship number three last year). The championship itself is rightly deserved - as is the fourth constructor's title for his Red Bull team.
Naturally, success always brings the naysayers - if people don't object, you're doing it wrong. However, Seb has been in a class of his own, and he should be applauded for all of his achievements. Sure, in the second half of the season he's been completely dominant, but this isn't all down to the car. You don't win four world championships with a car alone, you need huge talent and control. A combination of the best driver with the best car and the best team behind it all is what's caused these victories.
Of course, I am completely biased towards Sebastian. He is a thoroughly nice man - staying behind to have his picture taken with me at Goodwood, despite being urged away by officials. While we don't always see this on the track (the Multi 21 scenario etched into the memories of many), this is because he's a racing driver. Away from the circuit, Vettel is reluctant to show too much of his private life - and rightly so - thus leading to further criticism. However, today in the post-race celebrations we saw the real Seb. He was overcome with emotion and completely humbled by his achievements. Far from the arrogant picture painted by many.
With the regulation changes next year, there's no knowing where Seb will end up. The field could be much closer and the championship may go to the wire (as in 2012, when my adrenaline level was through the roof while watching the last race in Brazil). It could be that Red Bull's brilliance disappears, and other teams become the front runners. Maybe reliability will hamper everyone. It's impossible to tell. So, Red Bull and Sebastian should enjoy this victory. I'm sure that nobody within the F1 world takes anything like this for granted. The final few races of the season will be a chance to enjoy the racing without the pressure, and I'm sure it will still be a joy to watch.
So, congratulations once again, Red Bull Racing and Sebastian Vettel! Quadruple world champions - the stuff of legend.
Naturally, success always brings the naysayers - if people don't object, you're doing it wrong. However, Seb has been in a class of his own, and he should be applauded for all of his achievements. Sure, in the second half of the season he's been completely dominant, but this isn't all down to the car. You don't win four world championships with a car alone, you need huge talent and control. A combination of the best driver with the best car and the best team behind it all is what's caused these victories.
Of course, I am completely biased towards Sebastian. He is a thoroughly nice man - staying behind to have his picture taken with me at Goodwood, despite being urged away by officials. While we don't always see this on the track (the Multi 21 scenario etched into the memories of many), this is because he's a racing driver. Away from the circuit, Vettel is reluctant to show too much of his private life - and rightly so - thus leading to further criticism. However, today in the post-race celebrations we saw the real Seb. He was overcome with emotion and completely humbled by his achievements. Far from the arrogant picture painted by many.
With the regulation changes next year, there's no knowing where Seb will end up. The field could be much closer and the championship may go to the wire (as in 2012, when my adrenaline level was through the roof while watching the last race in Brazil). It could be that Red Bull's brilliance disappears, and other teams become the front runners. Maybe reliability will hamper everyone. It's impossible to tell. So, Red Bull and Sebastian should enjoy this victory. I'm sure that nobody within the F1 world takes anything like this for granted. The final few races of the season will be a chance to enjoy the racing without the pressure, and I'm sure it will still be a joy to watch.
So, congratulations once again, Red Bull Racing and Sebastian Vettel! Quadruple world champions - the stuff of legend.
Sunday, 6 October 2013
Thrilling or Boring
I'm typing this at 1:30pm, and already it's been a fair few hours after this weekend's F1 race. This really means only one thing: we're nearing the close of the season, and thus, early starts. Like many people, I work and study during the week. Unlike many students however, I tend to get up before 8am, and often before 7am. So, the weekends are a great opportunity to catch up on sleep. Unfortunately, I'm a die-hard F1 fan, and so we're nearing the part of the year when sleep at all times of the week is sacrificed. Honestly, I don't mind (although I probably look a little zombie-like during the days now) - that is, if I'm treated to an exciting race.
Today's race in Korea was stunning, I thought. One of the best races of the year. Yeah, alright, I'm a Vettel fan, and so I'm likely to say that. However, the entertainment value of today's race wasn't provided by Vettel's win today, but rather the battles that went on behind him. For the first stint of the race, many fans were worried that it would be a walkover for Vettel, and thus a boring race. Sure, it was a walkover for him, but the race was thrilling.
Nico Hulkenberg was undoubtedly my driver of the day - you have to give credit to a guy who runs in a mid-field team and can hold up Hamilton's Mercedes, Alonso's Ferrari, Raikkonen's Lotus (albeit not until the end of the race) and Webber's Red Bull. I have to say that I'm also one of the many people asking why he isn't in a better car, and I'm hoping that he'll take up the spare seat at Lotus next year.
Aside from the Hulkenberg drive, there were many more battles to be seen (Massa, Maldonado et al., anyone?). In addition, the drama provided by the misfortune of Rosberg losing his front wing and Webber's car catching fire (again) meant that the race was anything but boring.
So, I'm left wondering why people believe that a Vettel win equals a boring race? It's not as if the TV only follows the lead driver around the circuit - we do get to see the racing behind him. Sure, I get that people don't want a return to the Schumacher days, when the result was a foregone conclusion. And yes, I understand that Vettel does appear to dominate every season. However, when you look at the facts most of this isn't true.
2011 aside, Vettel's championships have been far from easy. In 2010, he won at the last race. In 2012, we were treated to the most exciting race I've ever seen in Brazil. In 2013 so far, there have been very close battles with Mercedes, Lotus and Ferrari - it's only towards the end of the season that Vettel has 'run away' with the championship lead. Red Bull have also had their fair share of reliability issues this year, and thus the 2013 F1 season is far from over.
While you could say that Vettel's leads in the races make things less unpredictable, I don't believe this is true. Sure, it might be that Vettel wins, but we can still see thrilling races. F1 is more than just one guy leading the championship - there are smaller teams fighting for points, young drivers fighting for a seat and there are still championship contenders chasing Vettel, all of which leads to a spectacle on track.
If you use results to determine how exciting a race is, you could also argue that MotoGP is boring on the strength of Marquez's performances. However, when you actually watch the races, you'll see nothing of the sort (and in fact, I doubt there is anyone out there claiming that it's boring anyway). So why the case with F1?
I honestly think that the problem lies not with what happens on track, but rather our perception of the champions themselves. It's no secret that many people dislike Vettel - the boos every time he's on the podium show this. Lots claim that this is because of Malaysia, however I believe it runs far deeper than that. I think that in general, we dislike sweeping success. We want underdogs to win - not former champions. At least, not multiple championships in a row. When this happens, we tend to detract from success: how many times have we heard the argument 'Well, he has the best car'? How many times has Vettel been accused of cheating (including the recent 'traction control' nonsense)? I think this is wrong - it's up to those behind to catch up, not for the champion to slow down something echoed by Fernando Alonso, Vettel's closest rival.
Recently, F1 pundits have become fed up of the boos on the podium, culminating in Martin Brundle telling the perpetrators 'Please don't do that. That's not correct'. Thankfully, Korea appeared absent of boos (although, this could be to do with the absence of crowds as well). We should remember that an individual's success doesn't detract from the performances of others. Being repeatedly successful doesn't make someone arrogant, a cheater or unworthy. We should celebrate everyone's achievements - whether that's one of the greats (Vettel, Alonso, Hamilton or Raikkonen), or one of the lesser known drivers (Hulkenberg being a classic example I'm sure). Whoever wins the championship this year, we've certainly seen thrilling races and we'd do well to remember this.
Today's race in Korea was stunning, I thought. One of the best races of the year. Yeah, alright, I'm a Vettel fan, and so I'm likely to say that. However, the entertainment value of today's race wasn't provided by Vettel's win today, but rather the battles that went on behind him. For the first stint of the race, many fans were worried that it would be a walkover for Vettel, and thus a boring race. Sure, it was a walkover for him, but the race was thrilling.
Nico Hulkenberg was undoubtedly my driver of the day - you have to give credit to a guy who runs in a mid-field team and can hold up Hamilton's Mercedes, Alonso's Ferrari, Raikkonen's Lotus (albeit not until the end of the race) and Webber's Red Bull. I have to say that I'm also one of the many people asking why he isn't in a better car, and I'm hoping that he'll take up the spare seat at Lotus next year.
Aside from the Hulkenberg drive, there were many more battles to be seen (Massa, Maldonado et al., anyone?). In addition, the drama provided by the misfortune of Rosberg losing his front wing and Webber's car catching fire (again) meant that the race was anything but boring.
So, I'm left wondering why people believe that a Vettel win equals a boring race? It's not as if the TV only follows the lead driver around the circuit - we do get to see the racing behind him. Sure, I get that people don't want a return to the Schumacher days, when the result was a foregone conclusion. And yes, I understand that Vettel does appear to dominate every season. However, when you look at the facts most of this isn't true.
2011 aside, Vettel's championships have been far from easy. In 2010, he won at the last race. In 2012, we were treated to the most exciting race I've ever seen in Brazil. In 2013 so far, there have been very close battles with Mercedes, Lotus and Ferrari - it's only towards the end of the season that Vettel has 'run away' with the championship lead. Red Bull have also had their fair share of reliability issues this year, and thus the 2013 F1 season is far from over.
While you could say that Vettel's leads in the races make things less unpredictable, I don't believe this is true. Sure, it might be that Vettel wins, but we can still see thrilling races. F1 is more than just one guy leading the championship - there are smaller teams fighting for points, young drivers fighting for a seat and there are still championship contenders chasing Vettel, all of which leads to a spectacle on track.
If you use results to determine how exciting a race is, you could also argue that MotoGP is boring on the strength of Marquez's performances. However, when you actually watch the races, you'll see nothing of the sort (and in fact, I doubt there is anyone out there claiming that it's boring anyway). So why the case with F1?
I honestly think that the problem lies not with what happens on track, but rather our perception of the champions themselves. It's no secret that many people dislike Vettel - the boos every time he's on the podium show this. Lots claim that this is because of Malaysia, however I believe it runs far deeper than that. I think that in general, we dislike sweeping success. We want underdogs to win - not former champions. At least, not multiple championships in a row. When this happens, we tend to detract from success: how many times have we heard the argument 'Well, he has the best car'? How many times has Vettel been accused of cheating (including the recent 'traction control' nonsense)? I think this is wrong - it's up to those behind to catch up, not for the champion to slow down something echoed by Fernando Alonso, Vettel's closest rival.
Recently, F1 pundits have become fed up of the boos on the podium, culminating in Martin Brundle telling the perpetrators 'Please don't do that. That's not correct'. Thankfully, Korea appeared absent of boos (although, this could be to do with the absence of crowds as well). We should remember that an individual's success doesn't detract from the performances of others. Being repeatedly successful doesn't make someone arrogant, a cheater or unworthy. We should celebrate everyone's achievements - whether that's one of the greats (Vettel, Alonso, Hamilton or Raikkonen), or one of the lesser known drivers (Hulkenberg being a classic example I'm sure). Whoever wins the championship this year, we've certainly seen thrilling races and we'd do well to remember this.
Tuesday, 10 September 2013
The Rumour Mill and Podium Boos
Well, the European F1 season is over for another year. Last weekend's race in Monza wasn't the most thrilling I must admit, although towards the end there was plenty to see. The Monza race is always a special one: one of only four circuits to have featured in the original 1950 grand prix series (the others being Silverstone, Spa and Monaco), the fastest race on the calendar, and of course the home of the tifosi (Ferrari fanatics). Given the strong links with Ferrari, of course most fans will be rooting for the guys in red overalls, and in particular, Fernando Alonso. As always, I'm a die-hard Vettel fan and so I was cheering on the guys in blue overalls. However, the high speed circuit of Monza is not normally a Red Bull strength (instead, the team is more suited to high-downforce tracks), therefore I never expect too much from this race.
This year, Red Bull must have done something right. On Friday afternoon, Vettel managed to top the timesheets during second practice. He did the same during all three qualifying sessions, giving him another pole position on the 5 year anniversary of his first at Toro Rosso. Right behind him was Mark Webber - a nice end to his final European F1 qualifying session I think. The surprise during qualifying was Nico Hulkenberg, who took third position on the grid (prompting a resurrection of the rumours that he'll be a man in red next year for the tifosi to cheer on - I'll come to that later). Right behind were the Ferraris, although not in the order you'd expect. It was Massa, not Alonso who took fourth position. So, with the scene set for Sunday, it was interesting to see whether the Red Bulls could hold their advantage, or whether the Ferrari fans would have something to celebrate.
Luckily for me, both Red Bulls had a great start, and pulled off into the lead. Massa however had an amazing start, and overtook Mark Webber early on. Alonso wasn't far behind, and once he passed Mark it was only a matter of time before Massa had to give up his second place. Of course, the Ferrari masses were thrilled with Alonso in second, although by this point Vettel was so far down the road that nobody could get anywhere near him. Eventually, Webber managed to regain his third position, and the podium finished with two Red Bulls and one Ferrari on its steps.
Now, Vettel is rarely a popular winner at the best of times - less so when he's beaten the fans' beloved Alonso at Ferrari's home race, so boos were to be expected. However, the lack of celebration at Vettel's wins is becoming a bit of a trend now, and frankly there are a lot of us who are fed up with this. A couple of weeks ago, I participated in Sky F1's 'Ask Crofty' feature and was overwhelmed by responses from Twitter fans (if you'd like your input by the way, find me @MooEvilBoffin). Among these responses, there seemed to be two main camps: those who disliked the booing of Vettel, and those who think he deserves every bit of hatred he gets (I, of course, fall into the former).
The reasoning behind the hatred goes at least all the way back to Malaysia - although I suspect that this may originate with Vettel's championships. The infamous 'Multi 21' incident has left a lot of fans very angry at Vettel's 'arrogance', however I'm sensing a lot of hypocrisy (as many of the same fans were annoyed that Rosberg didn't get past Hamilton in a similar situation in the same race!). Whether the incident was right or wrong in Malaysia will probably be debated forever. Personally, the whole team orders thing is wrong in my opinion, and teammates should be allowed to race - it's not the fault of an individual driver if they do not obey these orders (they're doing their job). Many fans aren't so forgiving, and so the Vettel hatred seems to be growing.
Booing on the podium is now a regular feature, and the F1 fandom is again divided on the issue. Half of us are fed up with it now - all of those guys on the circuit are great drivers. You can't be in F1 without at least a modicum of talent. Whether you're in the best car or the worse, you deserve to be there and I think that you should be respected. A lot of people keep harping on about Vettel only winning championships because he's in the best car - that's simply not true. The only year Vettel had a truly dominant car was in 2011 - and even then his own teammate couldn't match him. The fact that Vettel has broken so many records at such a young age should go to show that we're seeing a legend in the making - like Schumacher (also hated during his first time around), Senna and Fangio. Of course, you can't compare the achievements of these drivers directly due to the changing nature of the sport, but I'd certainly say that Vettel will go on to be one of the best drivers of this era. Whether you like him or not, that's got to be respected, not booed! Luckily, Vettel himself seems to be taking the hatred in his stride, remarking that 'the louder the boos, the better the job we're doing'. Long may that attitude continue.
Now, onto another recent feature of F1 - silly season. We were somewhat deprived of the rumours over the summer break (disappointingly, I thought), however now the rumour mill is in full swing and concerning Ferrari. Massa's seat is up at the end of the year, it seems, and a lot of thought is going in to who is his potential replacement. Many people thought that Nico Hulkenberg would be a great contender - Fernando Alonso wants a number two driver, who'll not get in his way should he be close to a win, and a younger driver like Nico would be a good choice. However, Ferrari now want a driver who'll push Alonso to get everything out of the car, rather than relying on his teammate to protect him. So, who should step into the frame, but Kimi Raikkonen. Recently, the rumour on Twitter that Kimi has signed has been doing the rounds, with an announcement supposedly set for Wednesday. An Alonso-Raikkonen pairing would arguably be the best in the whole grid, however nobody really knows how the two would work together. Alonso would arguably lose his number 1 status in favour of an equal pairing - I suspect Kimi wouldn't care either way. It'll be fascinating to see how the two cope - look at Alonso and Hamilton at McLaren.
A related rumour on Twitter was that Kimi has indeed signed for Ferrari - as Alonso's replacement. Personally, I can't really see Alonso leaving, but Dad had a great theory if that was the case. With Kimi out of Lotus and into Ferrari, there would be a free seat. Flavio Briatore was spotted at the Italian race - a former boss at Renault until the incident with Nelson Piquet Jr. at Singapore a couple of years ago. Briatore and Alonso worked fantastically well together, and it would be feasible to see the two working together once more. Lotus (formerly Renault) have had financial difficulties - something that could easily be solved with the return of Briatore. So, it might just be the case that Alonso and Briatore would be united at Lotus-Renault once more, and who knows where that might lead. It's a million to one chance, but it might just work...
This year, Red Bull must have done something right. On Friday afternoon, Vettel managed to top the timesheets during second practice. He did the same during all three qualifying sessions, giving him another pole position on the 5 year anniversary of his first at Toro Rosso. Right behind him was Mark Webber - a nice end to his final European F1 qualifying session I think. The surprise during qualifying was Nico Hulkenberg, who took third position on the grid (prompting a resurrection of the rumours that he'll be a man in red next year for the tifosi to cheer on - I'll come to that later). Right behind were the Ferraris, although not in the order you'd expect. It was Massa, not Alonso who took fourth position. So, with the scene set for Sunday, it was interesting to see whether the Red Bulls could hold their advantage, or whether the Ferrari fans would have something to celebrate.
Luckily for me, both Red Bulls had a great start, and pulled off into the lead. Massa however had an amazing start, and overtook Mark Webber early on. Alonso wasn't far behind, and once he passed Mark it was only a matter of time before Massa had to give up his second place. Of course, the Ferrari masses were thrilled with Alonso in second, although by this point Vettel was so far down the road that nobody could get anywhere near him. Eventually, Webber managed to regain his third position, and the podium finished with two Red Bulls and one Ferrari on its steps.
Now, Vettel is rarely a popular winner at the best of times - less so when he's beaten the fans' beloved Alonso at Ferrari's home race, so boos were to be expected. However, the lack of celebration at Vettel's wins is becoming a bit of a trend now, and frankly there are a lot of us who are fed up with this. A couple of weeks ago, I participated in Sky F1's 'Ask Crofty' feature and was overwhelmed by responses from Twitter fans (if you'd like your input by the way, find me @MooEvilBoffin). Among these responses, there seemed to be two main camps: those who disliked the booing of Vettel, and those who think he deserves every bit of hatred he gets (I, of course, fall into the former).
The reasoning behind the hatred goes at least all the way back to Malaysia - although I suspect that this may originate with Vettel's championships. The infamous 'Multi 21' incident has left a lot of fans very angry at Vettel's 'arrogance', however I'm sensing a lot of hypocrisy (as many of the same fans were annoyed that Rosberg didn't get past Hamilton in a similar situation in the same race!). Whether the incident was right or wrong in Malaysia will probably be debated forever. Personally, the whole team orders thing is wrong in my opinion, and teammates should be allowed to race - it's not the fault of an individual driver if they do not obey these orders (they're doing their job). Many fans aren't so forgiving, and so the Vettel hatred seems to be growing.
Booing on the podium is now a regular feature, and the F1 fandom is again divided on the issue. Half of us are fed up with it now - all of those guys on the circuit are great drivers. You can't be in F1 without at least a modicum of talent. Whether you're in the best car or the worse, you deserve to be there and I think that you should be respected. A lot of people keep harping on about Vettel only winning championships because he's in the best car - that's simply not true. The only year Vettel had a truly dominant car was in 2011 - and even then his own teammate couldn't match him. The fact that Vettel has broken so many records at such a young age should go to show that we're seeing a legend in the making - like Schumacher (also hated during his first time around), Senna and Fangio. Of course, you can't compare the achievements of these drivers directly due to the changing nature of the sport, but I'd certainly say that Vettel will go on to be one of the best drivers of this era. Whether you like him or not, that's got to be respected, not booed! Luckily, Vettel himself seems to be taking the hatred in his stride, remarking that 'the louder the boos, the better the job we're doing'. Long may that attitude continue.
Now, onto another recent feature of F1 - silly season. We were somewhat deprived of the rumours over the summer break (disappointingly, I thought), however now the rumour mill is in full swing and concerning Ferrari. Massa's seat is up at the end of the year, it seems, and a lot of thought is going in to who is his potential replacement. Many people thought that Nico Hulkenberg would be a great contender - Fernando Alonso wants a number two driver, who'll not get in his way should he be close to a win, and a younger driver like Nico would be a good choice. However, Ferrari now want a driver who'll push Alonso to get everything out of the car, rather than relying on his teammate to protect him. So, who should step into the frame, but Kimi Raikkonen. Recently, the rumour on Twitter that Kimi has signed has been doing the rounds, with an announcement supposedly set for Wednesday. An Alonso-Raikkonen pairing would arguably be the best in the whole grid, however nobody really knows how the two would work together. Alonso would arguably lose his number 1 status in favour of an equal pairing - I suspect Kimi wouldn't care either way. It'll be fascinating to see how the two cope - look at Alonso and Hamilton at McLaren.
A related rumour on Twitter was that Kimi has indeed signed for Ferrari - as Alonso's replacement. Personally, I can't really see Alonso leaving, but Dad had a great theory if that was the case. With Kimi out of Lotus and into Ferrari, there would be a free seat. Flavio Briatore was spotted at the Italian race - a former boss at Renault until the incident with Nelson Piquet Jr. at Singapore a couple of years ago. Briatore and Alonso worked fantastically well together, and it would be feasible to see the two working together once more. Lotus (formerly Renault) have had financial difficulties - something that could easily be solved with the return of Briatore. So, it might just be the case that Alonso and Briatore would be united at Lotus-Renault once more, and who knows where that might lead. It's a million to one chance, but it might just work...
Tuesday, 20 August 2013
It's Been A While...
Ok, I have no excuses. It's been a ridiculously long time since I updated my blog. There are many contributing factors, none of which are linked to motorsport (rather, work, university and life in general), however now I'm hoping that I can get back into the swing of things - especially given the weekend's forthcoming Spa grand prix.
So what's been happening over the past couple of months? Well, recently not that much to tell you the truth. We should be well into 'Silly Season', the part of the F1 calendar when we hear lots of rumours and speculation about who's moving to which team and so on. This year, it hasn't happened, despite a free seat at Red Bull for 2014. In fact, the only real news we've had over the summer break is that Kimi Raikkonen won't be going to Red Bull. I have to say, I'm slightly disappointed with the dearth of speculation - we all like a bit of gossip now and again, but the summer F1 break hasn't really delivered. Hopefully, we'll have some more exciting news when the season gets back underway this weekend, although I suspect all that will happen is the predictable announcement that Daniel Ricciardo will go to partner Vettel. Still, there's still an outside chance that Kimi might go to Ferrari - I doubt it, but we have to get our gossip where we can!
The 2013 F1 season has been exciting - arguably, not as much as in 2012, but still a complete joy to watch. A lot of people are unhappy that Vettel is seemingly running away with the championship once again (I'll admit that I'm not part of that crew), but given that we're only just halfway through the season, I think everything's still to play for - Lotus in particular are looking strong, and so there's every chance Kimi could get another championship. We'll see, come race 19.
With the lack of news in F1 so far, all I really have to talk about is past events that I've seen. A while ago Dad and I ventured up to Silverstone for the F1 young driver's test (YDT). This year was a little bit different: the FIA had bent the rules slightly to allow teams to use their race drivers during the test in order to get used to the new and (supposedly) improved Pirelli tyres following the horrific problems that had been occurring previously. While this didn't mean that the drivers would be racing, it was good news for us as we could see the current F1 drivers in the flesh for another year running, albeit at a 10th of the price of Silverstone proper. In an unexpected bonus, Red Bull announced that Vettel would be driving on Friday - the day we had planned to go and watch! Overall it was a pretty cool sight to see: Silverstone is one of the legendary tracks, but most fans are priced out of going to the race and so watching F1 cars in my own country has thus far been a bit of an elusive sight. However, at £15 per ticket the YDT was a great day out!
The only other news I can really report on isn't related to F1 at all, but rather MotoGP. Motorbike racing is something that I've never really been into - I've always preferred watching 4 wheels going round a track. Last year I started to watch MotoGP off and on, but was put off a little after Simoncelli's accident. However, this year I've gotten back into the swing of things - partly because I'm completely in awe of the new guy on the circuit, Marc Marquez. This guy is completely insane and completely brilliant at the same time. He's leading the championship in his rookie year, and he's a marvel to watch. Admittedly, it's hard to say whether he'd be leading the championship if Lorenzo and Pedrosa hadn't broken their collar bones, but Marquez's performances so far have been stunning. Winning all three American races, a podium in every race this year bar one... You've got to be amazed. Now all I hope is that he finishes the season without injuring himself - having worked in a neurorehabilitation unit over a year, MotoGP does worry me immensely, but with entertainment like this, I can't help but watch.
So, onto the F1 at Spa this weekend. It's scary to think that it's almost a year since Dad and I were there in person. I know that the race will be fantastic - Spa always is - so here's to the season restart (and hopefully more gossip)!
So what's been happening over the past couple of months? Well, recently not that much to tell you the truth. We should be well into 'Silly Season', the part of the F1 calendar when we hear lots of rumours and speculation about who's moving to which team and so on. This year, it hasn't happened, despite a free seat at Red Bull for 2014. In fact, the only real news we've had over the summer break is that Kimi Raikkonen won't be going to Red Bull. I have to say, I'm slightly disappointed with the dearth of speculation - we all like a bit of gossip now and again, but the summer F1 break hasn't really delivered. Hopefully, we'll have some more exciting news when the season gets back underway this weekend, although I suspect all that will happen is the predictable announcement that Daniel Ricciardo will go to partner Vettel. Still, there's still an outside chance that Kimi might go to Ferrari - I doubt it, but we have to get our gossip where we can!
The 2013 F1 season has been exciting - arguably, not as much as in 2012, but still a complete joy to watch. A lot of people are unhappy that Vettel is seemingly running away with the championship once again (I'll admit that I'm not part of that crew), but given that we're only just halfway through the season, I think everything's still to play for - Lotus in particular are looking strong, and so there's every chance Kimi could get another championship. We'll see, come race 19.
With the lack of news in F1 so far, all I really have to talk about is past events that I've seen. A while ago Dad and I ventured up to Silverstone for the F1 young driver's test (YDT). This year was a little bit different: the FIA had bent the rules slightly to allow teams to use their race drivers during the test in order to get used to the new and (supposedly) improved Pirelli tyres following the horrific problems that had been occurring previously. While this didn't mean that the drivers would be racing, it was good news for us as we could see the current F1 drivers in the flesh for another year running, albeit at a 10th of the price of Silverstone proper. In an unexpected bonus, Red Bull announced that Vettel would be driving on Friday - the day we had planned to go and watch! Overall it was a pretty cool sight to see: Silverstone is one of the legendary tracks, but most fans are priced out of going to the race and so watching F1 cars in my own country has thus far been a bit of an elusive sight. However, at £15 per ticket the YDT was a great day out!
The only other news I can really report on isn't related to F1 at all, but rather MotoGP. Motorbike racing is something that I've never really been into - I've always preferred watching 4 wheels going round a track. Last year I started to watch MotoGP off and on, but was put off a little after Simoncelli's accident. However, this year I've gotten back into the swing of things - partly because I'm completely in awe of the new guy on the circuit, Marc Marquez. This guy is completely insane and completely brilliant at the same time. He's leading the championship in his rookie year, and he's a marvel to watch. Admittedly, it's hard to say whether he'd be leading the championship if Lorenzo and Pedrosa hadn't broken their collar bones, but Marquez's performances so far have been stunning. Winning all three American races, a podium in every race this year bar one... You've got to be amazed. Now all I hope is that he finishes the season without injuring himself - having worked in a neurorehabilitation unit over a year, MotoGP does worry me immensely, but with entertainment like this, I can't help but watch.
So, onto the F1 at Spa this weekend. It's scary to think that it's almost a year since Dad and I were there in person. I know that the race will be fantastic - Spa always is - so here's to the season restart (and hopefully more gossip)!
Saturday, 22 June 2013
Tyres, Tests and Tribunals
Over the past few weeks there has been the traditional mid-season controversy among the F1 community. This time, the drama was centred around the Mercedes team and tyre suppliers Pirelli. Over the course of the season, tyres have played a large role in the outcome of the races. Drivers are reporting that they can't drive their cars to their full potential because the tyres tend to give up very quickly. Several teams are reporting that they simply can't make the tyres work properly over the course of a race. While tyres have always played a role in racing, a lot of fans and officials believe that they are now impacting far too much, and something has to change.
However, as ever in F1, nothing is straightforward. Some of the teams tend to be better of their tyres than others - Lotus, for example, tend to be pretty good - and so are largely opposed to any changes. By contrast, other teams are calling for reviews of the tyres - Red Bull being chief among these, as they feel they simply can't run the car flat out. One team that has been suffering quite heavily in the races because of the tyres is Mercedes. While they tend to be very good in qualifying, during the races they tend to fall away and lose pace.
With the ban on in-season testing, ultimately all of the teams are in the same boat. The tyres will remain the same, and it's up to individual teams to solve the problems however they can. Of course, it would be better if the teams had some way of testing the tyres outside of a race weekend, but the rules clearly stipulate that such testing is banned.
Or so you'd think. It turns out that Mercedes had been approached by Pirelli to conduct a 1,000 kilometre tyre test following the Spanish grand prix. The news of this test, however, only broke before the Monaco grand prix race day. Naturally, many teams were unhappy with the opportunity given to Mercedes, and were even unhappier with the fact that the test was conducted apparently in secret. The leaders of the complaints were the leading teams - Red Bull and Ferrari, who called for an enquiry to find out the details of the test. As the details emerged, it was discovered that Mercedes had not only had 1,000km of running, they did so with the 2013 car and with both current drivers (rather than a test driver).
Mercedes naturally defended the test, and stated that they did not get any data from the running as they did not know which tyres were being used. However, I find this a little suspicious, given the choice to use a current car and current drivers. With the usual F1 waving of fingers came counter-accusations by Mercedes - Ferrari had also ran a Pirelli test, and thus they should also be implicated in the apparently illegal activity.
Following the Monaco race, the case was referred to the stewards. On investigation, it emerged that yes, Ferrari had also taken part in a tyre test. However, the critical difference was that Ferrari had used a 2011 car - a two-year-old car being permissible within the sporting regulations. So, it was only the activities of Mercedes that were called into question, and the case was referred to an international tribunal which sat last Thursday.
During the tribunal, Mercedes defended the test, stating that it was a legal test, as it was undertaken by Pirelli, rather than Mercedes. This seemed to be a weak defence in my view - if a team is running a current car with current drivers, then it's clearly not completely down to Pirelli. Pirelli further argued that as a third-party supplier, they were able to do whatever they liked (in essence), as they were not subject to the FIA regulations. This argument was (thankfully) rejected - surely everyone involved in F1 should be subject to the regulations, or else all teams would be queueing up to help Pirelli test their tyres.
A further point raised by the tribunal was the secrecy of the test. Mercedes claimed to have permission from the FIA to conduct the test. The FIA responded by stating that Mercedes had phoned Charlie Whiting to ask in 'general terms' whether a tyre test with a current car would be legal. Whiting had responded by stating that in theory, yes, it would be possible, but only on the condition that all of the other teams had been informed and offered the same opportunity - hardly a resounding 'yes, go ahead'. Following these phone calls, Mercedes went ahead with the test, without informing the FIA of their intentions.
Perhaps one of the more amusing points of the tribunal surrounded the secrecy of the drivers. Mercedes had given Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton black helmets to disguise their identities. This was apparently for 'security reasons', given the lack of bodyguards at the circuit for the test. However, this begs the question of what the drivers did when they were out of the cars - did they wander around like Top Gear's Stig in full race gear until they could get away from the clearly hostile and dangerous environment of the circuit? I doubt it.
Once all the evidence had been heard, the verdict was announced the following day. Given that Mercedes had used a current car (rather than an old car, as in the case of Ferrari), had not gained explicit permission from the FIA and had kept the test secret from the other teams, the obvious decision was a guilty verdict. As with other scandals of F1 in the past, we were all expecting harsh penalties - points being taken away from the team, fines, possibly race bans. But no. Mercedes simply gained a reprimand, and were prevented from taking part in the young driver's test later in the year. Now, in my opinion, the only people that this 'punishment' will hurt will be the young drivers. Mercedes have at least potentially gained an advantage from the test, and have 1,000km more experience under their belts than the other teams. A clear breach of the rules was seen, and this was unpunished.
I wonder now whether other big teams will get in on tyre testing. It appears as though the only sacrifice will be running in the young drivers test - something that the big teams really do not need to worry about if their big name drivers stay on for 2014. Often in F1 teams tend to try and copy one another following investigations and tribunals - look at the number of investigations of Red Bull's aerodynamics over the previous years. While people complained that sporting regulations had been breached, the subsequent approval of the aerodynamics led to the other teams adopting the same technology. Thus, with the 'punishment' for 1,000 km tyre tests set, will this be a case of 'if you can't beat them, join them'?
However, as ever in F1, nothing is straightforward. Some of the teams tend to be better of their tyres than others - Lotus, for example, tend to be pretty good - and so are largely opposed to any changes. By contrast, other teams are calling for reviews of the tyres - Red Bull being chief among these, as they feel they simply can't run the car flat out. One team that has been suffering quite heavily in the races because of the tyres is Mercedes. While they tend to be very good in qualifying, during the races they tend to fall away and lose pace.
With the ban on in-season testing, ultimately all of the teams are in the same boat. The tyres will remain the same, and it's up to individual teams to solve the problems however they can. Of course, it would be better if the teams had some way of testing the tyres outside of a race weekend, but the rules clearly stipulate that such testing is banned.
Or so you'd think. It turns out that Mercedes had been approached by Pirelli to conduct a 1,000 kilometre tyre test following the Spanish grand prix. The news of this test, however, only broke before the Monaco grand prix race day. Naturally, many teams were unhappy with the opportunity given to Mercedes, and were even unhappier with the fact that the test was conducted apparently in secret. The leaders of the complaints were the leading teams - Red Bull and Ferrari, who called for an enquiry to find out the details of the test. As the details emerged, it was discovered that Mercedes had not only had 1,000km of running, they did so with the 2013 car and with both current drivers (rather than a test driver).
Mercedes naturally defended the test, and stated that they did not get any data from the running as they did not know which tyres were being used. However, I find this a little suspicious, given the choice to use a current car and current drivers. With the usual F1 waving of fingers came counter-accusations by Mercedes - Ferrari had also ran a Pirelli test, and thus they should also be implicated in the apparently illegal activity.
Following the Monaco race, the case was referred to the stewards. On investigation, it emerged that yes, Ferrari had also taken part in a tyre test. However, the critical difference was that Ferrari had used a 2011 car - a two-year-old car being permissible within the sporting regulations. So, it was only the activities of Mercedes that were called into question, and the case was referred to an international tribunal which sat last Thursday.
During the tribunal, Mercedes defended the test, stating that it was a legal test, as it was undertaken by Pirelli, rather than Mercedes. This seemed to be a weak defence in my view - if a team is running a current car with current drivers, then it's clearly not completely down to Pirelli. Pirelli further argued that as a third-party supplier, they were able to do whatever they liked (in essence), as they were not subject to the FIA regulations. This argument was (thankfully) rejected - surely everyone involved in F1 should be subject to the regulations, or else all teams would be queueing up to help Pirelli test their tyres.
A further point raised by the tribunal was the secrecy of the test. Mercedes claimed to have permission from the FIA to conduct the test. The FIA responded by stating that Mercedes had phoned Charlie Whiting to ask in 'general terms' whether a tyre test with a current car would be legal. Whiting had responded by stating that in theory, yes, it would be possible, but only on the condition that all of the other teams had been informed and offered the same opportunity - hardly a resounding 'yes, go ahead'. Following these phone calls, Mercedes went ahead with the test, without informing the FIA of their intentions.
Perhaps one of the more amusing points of the tribunal surrounded the secrecy of the drivers. Mercedes had given Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton black helmets to disguise their identities. This was apparently for 'security reasons', given the lack of bodyguards at the circuit for the test. However, this begs the question of what the drivers did when they were out of the cars - did they wander around like Top Gear's Stig in full race gear until they could get away from the clearly hostile and dangerous environment of the circuit? I doubt it.
Once all the evidence had been heard, the verdict was announced the following day. Given that Mercedes had used a current car (rather than an old car, as in the case of Ferrari), had not gained explicit permission from the FIA and had kept the test secret from the other teams, the obvious decision was a guilty verdict. As with other scandals of F1 in the past, we were all expecting harsh penalties - points being taken away from the team, fines, possibly race bans. But no. Mercedes simply gained a reprimand, and were prevented from taking part in the young driver's test later in the year. Now, in my opinion, the only people that this 'punishment' will hurt will be the young drivers. Mercedes have at least potentially gained an advantage from the test, and have 1,000km more experience under their belts than the other teams. A clear breach of the rules was seen, and this was unpunished.
I wonder now whether other big teams will get in on tyre testing. It appears as though the only sacrifice will be running in the young drivers test - something that the big teams really do not need to worry about if their big name drivers stay on for 2014. Often in F1 teams tend to try and copy one another following investigations and tribunals - look at the number of investigations of Red Bull's aerodynamics over the previous years. While people complained that sporting regulations had been breached, the subsequent approval of the aerodynamics led to the other teams adopting the same technology. Thus, with the 'punishment' for 1,000 km tyre tests set, will this be a case of 'if you can't beat them, join them'?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)