Reading the Runes

If this year's Spanish Grand Prix was in any way interesting, it certainly wasn't because of anything that was happening on the track. The Circuit De Catalunya is not a place at which modern Formula 1 cars can overtake each other, unless the car behind is several seconds a lap faster than the car in front. Hence, after the first lap was done, the only passing manoeuvres came when the delayed Nick Heidfeld came upon Giancarlo Fisichella's Force India, and a similarly out-of-position David Coulthard found himself behind Takuma Sato's Super Aguri. Towards the end of the race, we had Kubica, Hamilton, Massa and Raikkonen all circulating in fairly close proximity, but it was hard to get excited when one knew there was no chance of any of them actually swapping positions. As Keith Collantine pointed out recently over at F1-Pitlane, it's as much about the cars as about the track. We can only hope that the new-for-2009 aerodynamics and tyre regulations do something to address the problem.

If the Spanish Grand Prix was in any way significant, it was for what it seems to tell us about the rest of the season. One of the ongoing question marks about 2008 is just what the extent of Ferrari's advantage actually is. Everyone, it seems, is in agreement that Maranello have produced the best car on the grid. What is much harder to determine is just what margin of superiority they enjoy over the opposition. Winter testing suggested it might be huge. The Australian Grand Prix, on the other hand, left us wondering whether they had the quickest car at all. Bahrain, and in particular, Malaysia, will have reassured them on that score.

Those are odd races, though. Australia is a street circuit, and the track was unexpectedly 'green' owing to overnight rain. Malaysia and Bahrain are undoubtedly affected by the heat, while the latter was Ferrari's testing destination of choice over the winter. The Spanish Grand Prix perhaps gives us the most accurate picture we have yet had of where the teams stand relative to each other.

It's a circuit which all the teams test at constantly. Everyone on the grid will have a reasonable working set-up, and the drivers know the place like the back of their hand. On top of that, it's fairly typical circuit - not a Monza, a Monaco or a Montreal. If you're quick here, you really should be on the pace almost everywhere. It is as close as we get all year to a simple test of the relative out-and-out pace of each of the teams.

So what did it tell us? Well, it would seem that Ferrari are indeed a step ahead of their main rivals, but there isn't nearly as much in it as we might have thought. In qualifying, the Ferraris were a shade quicker than the Mclarens and the BMWs, but then they were also fueled a lap or two lighter than Hamilton or Kubica (Kovalainen's shunt leaving us unsure as to how much heavier Heidfeld and Kovalainen himself were, as a safety car intervened). Although the question of just how good a lap each of Hamilton, Raikkonen and Kubica strung together remains unanswered, the times tend to suggest that, on qualifying pace, the Mclaren and the BMW are much of a muchness, and within about 0.2s of the Ferrari.

Now a margin of 0.2s is interesting, because it suggests that, while Ferrari may be the team to beat, Mclaren and BMW are close enough that, should the Scuderia stumble, or should the track simply not suit their car, any of Kovalainen, Hamilton, Kubica and Hamilton might be in a position to take advantage. It may be Maranello's year, but we are not looking at a repeat of 2002 or 2004. A margin of a couple of tenths a lap is also the kind of gap that a particularly inspired bit of driving might be sufficient to overcome - especially when qualifying and track position are so crucial to the outcome of the race. In the modern era, it might be hard for even the best driver to overcome a performance deficit in their car, but if the car disadvantage is small enough, it is not impossible (just look at the variations in pace between team mates, which can easily exceed 0.2s).

All this, of course, counts for little if Ferrari's race pace advantage greatly exceeds their qualifying pace advantage. It has been suggested that, while the Ferrari F2008 struggles to generate sufficient heat in its tyres over a single lap, it is much much kinder to its rubber over a whole stint than the Mclaren and, especially, the BMW. Before the Spanish Grand Prix, I would have been inclined to agree, but I'm no longer so sure. After all, the Ferraris of Massa and Raikkonen were rarely more than 5 seconds or so up the road from Hamilton's Mclaren, and the BMW of Kubica had no difficulty staying on in touch either (that despite the fact that the BMW, in particular, had a reputation early in the season for eating its tyres). Now it could be that the Ferrari pair were taking it easy - not pushing as hard as they could have done - and certainly Kimi Raikkonen's fastest lap at the very end of the race hints that this was in fact the case. On the other hand, if the Ferrari duo were pushing only as hard as they needed to, wouldn't they have built up a slightly larger margin than they did. A five second lead, after all, is not going to be enough to allow a driver to stay in front in the event of even a brief off-track moment (and let's face it, Felipe Massa has had a few of those this year). If Massa and Raikkonen could have done so, surely they would have stretched the gap to a more comfortable 10 or 20 seconds?

The other major point of interest last weekend was, of course, the pace of former World Champion Fernando Alonso's Renault at his home race. After struggling to make the top 10 in Bahrain (despite a bit of attrition up ahead) Alonso shocked everyone by getting the Renault onto the front row, just a tenth of a second slower than Raikkonen's pole-winning Ferrari. OK, so he was fueled light (Joe Saward was particularly scathing of Renault's approach over at grandprix.com) but he wasn't fueled as much lighter than his rivals as we might have feared. He pitted three laps before Massa and four before Raikkonen. Enough to explain how he was able to get ahead of the Mclarens and split the Ferraris, but not enough to explain the massive leap he and the team appear to have made since Bahrain, when he was 2 seconds away from the pole. On the admittedly very rough assumption that each extra lap of fuel slows a car by around a tenth of a second, it appears that Renault, at least when Alonso is behind the wheel, are about two or three tenths of a second a lap off the pace of BMW and Mclaren, perhaps even a little less.

It's hard to know if the Enstone team, whose budget is not in the same league as the three teams up at the very front, can keep up this rate of progress. On the other hand, in Fernando Alonso, they have, to my mind, probably the best all-rounder in F1 today, and there is little doubt that Renault is one of the most closely knit teams on the grid - a group of real racers who are able to go about their business with relatively little interference from the parent company. It will be a tall order for them to find race winning pace, but I wouldn't quite rule out the possibility.

We may not be on course for the epic season-long battle we saw last year between Ferrari and Mclaren. I can't help thinking that, over the balance of the season, Ferrari will prove to be a little too far ahead for that. On the other hand, when it comes to individual races, things could be a good deal more interesting this year. BMW's pace suggests that they really are close enough to the pace to pick up a victory if the cards fall right for either Heidfeld of Kubica this year. Mclaren certainly have race-winning pace, if the circuit suits them, and with Alonso at the wheel, Renault might at least be quick enough to crash the party whenever any of the big three teams stumble. I'm not sure we're in for a classic F1 title battle of the kind we saw last year, but, however dull the Spanish Grand Prix might have been as a race, it hints that we could still be in for an interesting season.

A Delicate Balance

When were there last so many drivers still in with a shot at the title by the half-way mark? Last year was all about Alonso and Schumacher, the year before it, Alonso and Raikkonen. In 2004, by the time the season reached its mid-point, there was no way, realistically, that anyone other than Michael Schumacher was going to be world champion. I reckon you have to go back to 2003, when Juan Montoya, Michael Schumacher, Ralf Schumacher, Kimi Raikkonen and, at a stretch, Rubens Barrichello, were all still very much in the running.

What makes this season's title fight such an intriguing affair is that it is both an inter-team fight between Mclaren and Ferrari, and a two-way intra-team battle. Lewis Hamilton and Kimi Raikkonen may lead their team mates in the standings, but it seems to me unlikely that either will be able to rely on any support from their team mate in chasing the world championship. At McLaren, they have the near impossibility of asking their double world champion £30m signing, himself second in the points standings, to play second fiddle to his rookie team mate. At Ferrari, the problem is subtly different. Felipe Massa might have been content to play a supporting role to Michael Schumacher, but the gap to his team mate is too small, at just a single point, and Raikkonen's performances this year too uneven, to justify the Scuderia putting all its eggs in one basket just yet.

Both teams, in any case, would face an additional obstacle in attempting any such strategy anyway. Chances are, events would end up conspiring against them, even if they try. There may have been races where one team has had enough of a performance advantage that they could dictate the finishing order if they chose (Mclaren at Monaco and perhaps Indianapolis and Ferrari at Magny Cours and, had Massa not hit trouble in qualifying, at Australia). They have been many other races though, where the gaps between the teams has been too marginal to indulge in such games. Bahrain strikes me as a particularly good example, but Barcelona and, perhaps, Silverstone, fall into the same category.

Take Mclaren as an example. At Bahrain, the maths dictated that the team would prefer Alonso to finish ahead of Hamilton. That, though, could not be arranged, as it would have meant giving points away to Heidfeld and Raikkonen, who were sandwiched between the pair on the road. Likewise, by the time they reached Silverstone, the numbers would point towards favouring Hamilton. There was little doubt, on the day though, that it was Alonso who was quicker, and who offered the only serious hope (forlorn as it ultimately was) of depriving Raikkonen of the win.

Which of the four, then, is my bet for the title? On the numbers, you might to conclude that it was Lewis Hamilton's to lose. Certainly, with the difference between 1st and 2nd just 2 points, and with four drivers in with a serious shot at victory at every race, a 12 point lead could look very useful indeed. On the other hand, though, while it might take Hamilton's nearest challenger, Alonso, 6 races to overhaul a 12 point lead if Lewis just keeps finishing second, a single engine failure or accident, could see that lead cut to 2 points at a stroke. What this serves to highlight is that a championship this tight is perhaps as likely to be decided by who is luckiest as by who is quickest.

It is I suspect no mere coincidence that Hamilton is the only driver not to have lost points to mechanical problems all season, and that he now leads the driver's standings. Massa lost points at Australia and at Silverstone when he had to start from the back. Raikkonen retired with gearbox problems at Barcelona, and Alonso's challenge was severely blunted by gearbox problems in qualifying at Magny Cours.

If it doesn't come down to sheer luck, then it could be little driver errors which decide the title. Last year, Alonso won the title not because either he or the Renault was quicker than Schumacher's Ferrari but because Schumacher lost points to driver errors - most notably at Monaco and Hungary. Once again, it is Hamilton who has so far avoided costly errors. This year, to my surprise, it is Alonso who comes out worst on this score - with silly first corner antics costing him points in Spain and Canada, and an unusual race error under pressure costing him another point at Bahrain. Felipe Massa has two significant mistakes to his name. The first, a botched pass on Hamilton at Malaysia, was understandable, but just might have cost him a win, and certainly a second place. The second error - ignoring the red light at the end of the pit lane in Montreal, was more fundamental (and it must be said, the team have to shoulder their share of the blame for failing to remind him of it).

Kimi Raikkonen hasn't really made any mistakes per se but unlike the other three, there have been occasions when he has just plain underperformed - failed to get enough out of the car. Hamilton, by contrast, has made mistakes (during the race in Melbourne, and in the pits at Silverstone) but the mistakes have been small, and he has been lucky enough not to have paid a points penalty for any of them.

Lets assume, though, that over the remainder of the season, mechanical reliability and driver errors somehow balance out. There's no reason to assume they will, and indeed, if I were a betting man, I'd suggest that one of the Mclaren boys will walk away champion for the simple reason that the 2007 Ferrari seems that bit more fragile. But let's just assume for a minute. Who, then, looks the likely winner? The honest answer, and perhaps what has made this season such a fascinating contest, is that I really don't know.

Contrary to what some would have you believe, I really don't think that there has been anything between Hamilton and Alonso in terms of sheer pace this year. Sometimes, as at Malaysia and Silverstone, Alonso has been clearly quicker. On other occasions, such as Bahrain and Canada, Hamilton was. On still other occasions, most notably Monaco and Indianapolis, the finishing order reflected minute differences in their qualifying performances, and the fact that one car has to finish in front of the other, more than anything else. Over the whole season, you might expect Alonso's greater experience to come to the fore, but to be honest, if it hasn't done so by now, it probably won't.

Over at Ferrari, things are a little more complex. Its fair to say, I think, that during the opening part of the season, Massa was demonstrably, though not vastly, quicker than his more celebrated team mate Raikkonen. At the last four races, though, things have seemed more finely balanced. In Canada, Raikkonen qualified ahead on a heavier fuel load, but damaged his car early on in the race and was never at 100% thereafter. A week later at Indianapolis, Massa finished ahead, thanks to track position, but its hard to ignore the fact that Raikkonen simply looked quicker for much of the race. Indeed has he not been compromised by being on the wrong tyre early on, he might have been able to give the Mclaren drivers something to think about. In France, there was again little to separate the two, but it was Raikkonen who held the whip hand in terms of strategy, and so finished ahead. As for Silverstone, we never really got to see what way a Massa/Raikkonen battle might have gone.

So, delicately balanced indeed. We may have had few really classic races this season, but it may nonetheless be a very memorable year.

GP2 in review - Hamilton at a canter......

If nobody quite knew what to expect in the first season of GP2 last year, then this time our hopes were high. Close fought racing between almost F1-quick single seaters with no electronic trickery or driving aids and most of the best aspiring young would-be F1 drivers at the wheel. With slick tyres this year, they edged still closer to the back of the F1 grid in performance terms - on occasion they might have been in a position to give at least the earliest version of the Aguri F1 car a fright in lap speed terms. In other words - more often than not the most interesting part of the Grand Prix weekend. I think its fair to say that GP2 entirely lived up to these elevated expectations this year.

At the start of the year, I predicted that the title battle would be fought between between Premat, Lapierre, Carroll and Piquet. Which shows how much I know. In my defence, I can only point out that, of the newcomers, I did single out Glock and Hamilton as the series debutants most likely to upset the applecart. Certainly I didn't expect Hamilton to take the championship by the kind of margin that he eventually did.

If the championsip battle was not as close fought as that between Kovalainen and Rosberg last year, the same could not be said of the individual races, some of which were very hotly contested indeed. The battle between Jose Maria Lopez and Timo Glock in the sprint race at Hockenheim stands out in particular, while the last lap of the feature race at Barcelona, where ART team mates Premat and Hamilton fought it out was a graphic illustration of how close it sometimes got.

In all there were 9 different winners in the 22 races this year. For sure, the feature/sprint race split, with the latter being run with semi-reversed grids, probably inflated this number a little (neither Andreas Zuber nor Michael Ammermuller ever really looked like winning a feature race) but there were still 6 different winners in the 11 feature races - not a bad total when compared with F1, or especially with this year's world rally championship.

With 5 wins, three of them in feature races, and a further 9 podium finishes, Hamilton was clearly the dominant force this year, and the way he dominated his second-year team mate, Alexandre Premat (who, after all, was not really any slower than Nico Rosberg last year, merely a little less consistent) indicates that he is something really rather special indeed. Whether or not he gets the Mclaren seat alongside Alonso next year, it seems pretty clear that this is a young man who is going places.

To my mind, the numbers are about right in placing Nelson Angelo Piquet best of the rest. Like his father, he seemed happiest when out in front, and never really seemed to have the same racer's instinct as Hamilton. Neither was he as consistently quick, but on the other hand, it was hard to evaluate the competitiveness of his team (Xandi Negrao never really figured in the other Piquet Sports car) and he perhaps didn't have as good a car as ART were able to provide Hamilton with. He also showed impressive speed in the wet at Hungary, winning both races, and wet weather speed is always a sign that there is something special about a driver. He deserves his Renault testing role, now that Heikki Kovalainen has been promoted to the race team for 2007. Whether he has the mental toughness and racer's instinct to be a really first rate F1 driver, on the other hand, remains to be seen.

There remains the tantalising thought that had Giorgio Pantano done all the races, or had Timo Glock started the season with ISport, rather than with BCN, with whom he never really seemed to gel, one of these two ex-Jordan F1 drivers might have given Piquet and Hamilton a serious run for their money. The numbers suggest they probably would not quite have been able to, but Glock, in particular, looked more than a match for anyone in the second half of the season. Certainly it is a mystery why he was quite so slow in the BCN Competition car, and does beg questions about the degree to which team, rather than driver ability, plays a part in a series where the cars are supposed to be identical.

Equally intriguing were the sheer number of occasional one-off outstanding performances that were witnessed over the course of the year. Franck Perera, for instance, might not generally have made much of an impression, scoring just 8 points all season - but he got all 8 of those at Monaco, where he started and finished 2nd, behind Hamilton. There was another front row start for him at the Nurburgring - just enough perhaps, to suggest that the Toyota junior driver might make rather more of an impression if he gets another run next year - but still very much against the run of form. On other occasions, Hiroki Yoshimoto, Tristan Gommendy, Adrian Valles and DPR boys Olivier Pla and Clivio Piccione all showed flashes of real front running pace (Gommendy's front row start at Valencia, Valles' podium at the same, Yoshimoto's performances at Imola and the Nurburgring and the DPR drivers' performance at Monaco. None though, were able to threaten the front runners on anything like a regular basis - though whether this boiled down to inexperience, the limitations of their team, or their own foibles as drivers was very hard to tell. Yoshimoto, though, does look a rather more sensible bet for a Super Aguri drive than either Yamamoto or Ide did.

There were a few notable disappointments this year as well. Arden failed to recapture the form that took them to so many F3000 titles, and perhaps have lost the momentum they had before team owner Christian Horner took up Dietrich Mateschitz's offer to run Red Bull Racing. Of course, it might be the fault of the drivers. I, for one, expected Nicolas Lapierre and fellow Frenchman Alexandre Premat to figure a little more strongly after their dominant winter double act over in A1GP, but Premat was rarely close to his team mate Hamilton, while Lapierre came no closer to actually winning a race than he did last year. He was at least a little closer to the front than he had been last year, though an injury at Monaco put paid to any kind of a serious challenge.

Another man to struggle despite high pre-season hopes was Racing Engineering No1 driver Adam Carroll. In race trim he was as aggressive as ever, but he was often off the pace in qualifying, seemed to be harder on his tyres than just about anyone else in the field (for which he often paid a heavy price in the longer feature races) and, in the first part of the season at least, simply made too many mistakes. Whether the problem lay with Carroll, or Racing Engineering (whose other driver, Jose Villa looked utterly lost after being talked about as the 'new Fernando Alonso' in F3 the year before) was hard to tell. Perhaps it was a combination of the two - Carroll has always struck me as being a 'seat of the pants' kind of racer, and he might have suffered for not having an experienced team mate to help get car set up pointing in the right direction. Champ Cars seems the obvious place for him, if you as me.

Of the rest, Ferdinando Monfardini occasionally impressed, Lucas DiGrassi had a reasonable mid-season run, Felix Porteiro looked like a driver who might shine given a little more experience, and that was about it. Jason Tahinci, Fairuz Fauzy, Sergio Hernandez and Vitaly Petrov, in particular, seemed to represent a waste of a good cockpit.

So, not a bad sophomore year, all in all - the series did a pretty good job of establishing itself as not only the most important European single seater championship outside F1, but as being at least as competitive and suffused with talent as the IRL and Champ Car series. With the big names once again moving on to bigger and supposedly better things, lets hope that 2007 proves as exciting.