Australian fans should be ecstatic. Formula One has exercised its option by extending the Australian Formula One Grand Prix's contract for another two years. This takes grand prix racing in Melbourne up to and including 2025. That's 30 years racing around Albert Park's idyllic lakeside street circuit. Punters have always supported our GP, so let's continue to do so. We trust you're enjoying our look back at this year's AGP in the Final Sector. 
    As F1 approaches its mid-season summer break, the driver market rumour mill for the following season usually steps up a gear. Who'll drive for which team? Who's going to retire? Who's going to make their debut? Another topic of discussion is the makeup of the next year's calendar. Whilst Australia's future is assured, a couple of other races are in jeopardy of dropping off the calendar. 2020 sees a new race in Vietnam, plus the reemergence of the Dutch GP at Zandvoort. This means that F1's already bulging calendar needs to drop two races. Where once it was under threat, Silverstone has shored up the British GP with a contract extension. A deal at Monza for the Italian GP is all but done. At the time of writing it seems Mexico, Spain and Germany are under threat. Despite Mexico only just coming back onto the calendar, it has history, is extremely well patronised, yet has asked for government assistance to remain viable. Last weekend's epic German GP is rumoured to be cut despite having an option in place for next year at this year's conditions. The resurrected Dutch GP is slated for May. Bearing in mind Monaco is also in May, what does that say for Spain? We have to ask though. Would the Dutch GP be on the calendar if it wasn't for the Max factor? There's no doubt that Red Bull's Dutch ace Max Verstappen is a huge talent. A potential world champion. His presence on the grid has largely bolstered numbers at almost all the European circuits. The sea of orange clad punters at races like Austria, France and Germany will attest to that. Just wait until Belgium. The Ardennes will look orange from space. 
    The last 20 years or so F1 has branched into new markets, mainly in Asia. Now Vietnam is the latest addition. Exploring new markets broadens F1's appeal and captivates new audiences, but at what cost? At the expense of F1's European heartland in an attempt to create new traditions in countries that year after year, may not be able to sustain F1's costs? Anyone remember the Indian, Malaysian or Korean GP? Don't misinterpret our sentiments. We sincerely hope the Vietnam GP is a success and around for a long time. 
​    Question is, can F1 accommodate both history and tradition at older established circuits whilst promoting itself at new venues? Conversely, are the new venues capable of creating traditions of their own by continuing lengthy tenures? 

    Ever wonder why Formula One drivers speak so fondly of a track like Japan's Suzuka? Or perhaps Spa-Francorchamps in Belgium? Both challenge the drivers. Not simply because of their configuration, but because driver errors are punished. Get it wrong and they're beached in the gravel trap, or uncontrollably skidding across the grass into the barriers and out of the race. Conversely, construct a near perfect lap on the edge and their job satisfaction skyrockets.
    The last F1 race in Canada had a shroud of controversy draped over the result. Relentless pressure from Mercedes' Lewis Hamilton resulted in race leader, Ferrari's Sebastian Vettel missing the Turn 3 + 4 chicane, skating across the grass and rejoining just in front of Hamilton who took avoiding action. Deeming the rejoining on track unsafe, the stewards handed Vettel a 5 second penalty, gifting the race win to Hamilton at the chequered flag. It's been debated ad nauseam, but technically the penalty was a slam dunk. Morally, well, you decide. 
    We could add to the debate, or even comment that Vettal made another mistake when the pressure was on. It did however got us thinking about circuit layout. Modern day circuits have replaced grass and gravel traps with tarmac runoffs. Now if a driver makes a mistake, they can just continue on. Where's the penalty in that? Time lost perhaps or driving around a bollard to rejoin the circuit? Imagine if the grass that Vettel drove over at Canada was covered with asphalt. You could conclude he gained an advantage. Then what's he supposed to do? Cede the place to Hamilton? After his mistake, upon sliding across the grass Vettel should be applauded for barely avoiding crashing himself. We understand that circuit safety is the reason for tarmac runoffs, but is it eliminating a challenging element for the drivers? Look at Monaco. St Devote at Turn 1 and the entrance to the swimming pool section were both guarded by the walls and made a formidable challenge. Now the walls are moved back. Don't fans deserve to see F1 drivers challenged to the best of their ability, or are the punters unable to see clearly because they are too far from the action due to the tarmac runoffs?
    Cynically yours....

    Midday is fast approaching. Better make your way to your favourite vantage point before the crowd stake a claim for your preferred real estate. Camera's charged and at the ready. The venue is Albert Park, Melbourne and once again Australia is the first race of a new Formula One campaign. Can't wait to get our first glimpse of the latest spec F1 cars. Anticipation crescendos as you listen for the sound of the cars leaving pit lane. 12 midday passes and then....nothing! 
    The recent edition of the Azerbaijan Grand Prix saw virtually all of first Friday practice lost after George Russell's Williams dislodged a manhole cover. The cover responded in kind by ripping the Williams floor to pieces only to fall millimetres short of George Russell himself. This prompted officials to red flag the session and ensure circuit safety. F1 being F1 though, the teams were able to adapt to reduced track time, complete their programmes and find a desirable setup for their cars. Later various team principals were quizzed as to how much of a disadvantage it was to miss Free Practice 1. The consensus was that it was no big deal. Maybe they didn't want to alert their rivals of any perceived shortfalls. They also stated that in the interest of reducing the physical demands required of their race teams, even entertained the idea of scraping Friday practice permanently. There's no doubt the F1 schedule is gruelling for the teams, but is compartmentalising a race weekend into two days good for F1? Have they forgotten something? By that we mean, the subjective tone of their answers reeks of a perspective issue. What about the fans?
    Many fans base their holidays around attending a Formula One Grand Prix. They spend their hard earned to travel nationally or even internationally just to be part of the spectacle. The fans want to see "The Pinnacle Of Motorsport" on track. At Melbourne, we've chatted to Germans who've come to see Michael Schumacher race, Colombians to see Juan Pablo Montoya race, Finns to see Kimi Raikkonen race. Would a punter from the Czech Republic be inclined to travel to the Red Bull Ring in Austria, a Californian to Texas for the US GP, or an Australian to the UK for the British GP at iconic Silverstone if the cars are only on track for 2 days? You get the picture? Not to mention television. F1 is heading globally down the Pay TV route. Would F1 still be tempting enough to pay for TV for the average punter?
    Let's hope there's more on track on Friday than just the support categories. Cheers.
    

    Australians are well versed in colloquialisms and are renown for it. Down Under we have a saying, "Shut the gate. The horse has bolted." Translation. It's too late to stop something that has already happened.
    The first four rounds of Supercars for 2019 have been run and won. Ford's new Mustang has claimed the victory spoils in dominant fashion. 9 wins out of 10 races with 8 pole positions. Defending Supercars champion, DJR Team Penske's Scott McLaughlin has 7 of those wins coupled with 6 pole positions. With Supercars being a parity category, after further testing through Computational Fluid Dynamics, this has prompted Supercars to decree some aerodynamic tweaks to the Mustangs ahead of this weekend's round at Barbagallo Raceway, Perth. After ballast adjustments at the start of the season to both the Mustang and ZB Commodore to bring them into line with the Nissan Altimas, now the Mustangs have to sport smaller rear wing endplates and a lower rear wing Gurney flap plus a reduced undertray extension. 
    Whenever a new make enters competition, there's quite often a perception of some sort of advantage. Whether it be mechanical or aerodynamic, the teams running the established makes nearly always cry unfair. Remember last season when the new ZB Commodore came fresh out of the blocks and won? But how much of it can be contributed to the car and how much of it is down to the driver and team? Maybe the Mustangs need to be reined in. Pardon the pun. We also think that we can all come to the same consensus when we say what a massive boost it was to Dick Johnson Racing when they orchestrated a collaboration with Team Penske a couple of seasons ago. Every category of motorsport always has a dominant team, and right now in Supercars, DJR Team Penske are reaping the rewards of that partnership. With Scott McLaughlin at the top of his game, who's to say the parity adjustments to the Mustangs will stop their winning momentum? Are DJR Team Penske and Scott McLaughlin simply in a class of their own at present? If not, how come Tickford Racing who are also running Mustangs, not on the same level?
    So, to translate. Is it too late to shut the Supercars paddock gate because the McLaughlin Mustang has bolted?

    Do you recall when Formula One qualifying was a flat out blast for one hour? All the drivers would run as their teams' desired, each run improved upon the previous, only for the likes of say Ayrton Senna or Michael Schumacher to demolish their times at the last possible moment, thus demoralising the opposition. Would have to erode the other drivers' confidence, wouldn't it?
    It was refreshing to see that psychological warfare is still prevalent in today's F1, as evidenced by last week's Australian Grand Prix. To gain the ascendancy over not only your team mate, but the entire field through unyielding determination, resilience, tenacity or what ever you want to call it, all adds to driver confidence. When racing, driver confidence is paramount. 
    Anyone who's ever attended a Grand Prix weekend can feel how the momentum builds through Free Practise towards Qualifying, culminating in the Grand Prix itself. We found it intriguing and never more evident at Albert Park. Looking to justify his signing and cement his place in the team, newcomer at Ferrari Charles Leclerc was quick  during practise into qualifying, often faster than team mate, Sebastian Vettel. Would a four time champion let a kid with only one year's F1 experience beat him? After all, Vettel is the undisputed leader at Ferrari, isn't he? When the pressure was on, in the end, it was Vettel who outqualified him and beat him in the race. To Leclerc's credit though, he applied strong pressure to Vettel in the race until Ferrari put a halt to the attack in favour of bringing both cars home in the points. A tussle we hope will run all season.
    However the driver that warrants applause is Mercedes' Valtteri Bottas. Here's a driver that endured a woeful 2018. No wins despite driving the best car. Retirements whilst on the cusp of winning. Told to pull over for team mate Lewis Hamilton for the sake of the championship. Labelled a good "wingman" to Hamilton by team boss Toto Wolff. Now he has Mercedes sponsored Esteban Ocon waiting to take his seat if Mercedes opt not to exercise their option on Bottas next year. He could be forgiven if his motivation waned for the forthcoming season. Not Bottas though. He distanced himself from not only F1, but all distractions, reflected, trained hard and returned reinvigorated, determined to put his own stamp on F1. With the scars of last year's Australian GP still fresh from when he crashed in qualifying, he turns up at Albert Park and despite Hamilton being quickest in all practise sessions, puts the car on provisional pole. Hamilton responds only the way he knows how by summoning all his experience and talent to place the car on pole in the dying moments of qualifying. After qualifying a lesser driver than Bottas may of acquiesced. Which leads us to the race itself. Whose confidence will skyrocket after they land that psychological body blow? Bottas not only won the start, but he destroyed the entire field by winning the race by 20 seconds over Hamilton and nearly a minute over Ferrari, also absconding with the bonus point for fastest lap. 
    Hamilton doesn't win five world championships by chance. He knows how to mount a challenge and is renown for being unrelenting in the second half of the season. Former team mate and 2016 champ Nico Rosberg has stated that it took all his mental strength to defeat Lewis Hamilton. Question is, does Valtteri Bottas possess the intestinal fortitude to sustain a serious championship assault? Australian GP domination undoubtedly boosted Valtteri's confidence sending a chilling message to the opposition, but are we yet to see the full depth of a Bottas ruthless reserve? Psychological pistols at ten paces, or should we say 21 races? Cheers....    
    
    
    

    This time in a week we'll know who has claimed the spoils of victory at the 2019 season opening Formula One race at Melbourne's idyllic Albert Park. Comes around quick doesn't it? Formula One is ably supported by Supercars, Porsche Carrera Cup, Australian GT, Formula 4 and Ferrari Challenge Asia Pacific. Not to mention a big presence in the skies courtesy of the Royal Australian Air Force and a massive music festival. For the first time ever Formula One and the Australian GP Corporation are bringing years of planning to fruition by staging a F1 season launch in the heart of Melbourne at Federation Square on the Wednesday before the event starts on Thursday. All this to create a bonanza for the senses over a hectic 5 day period. 
    As usual F1 winter testing revealed little regarding a potential pecking order. No one knows what programmes the teams are running and we think it a frivolous exercise to try and dissect who's hot and who's not. However, the consensus at this early stage is that Ferrari look strong. One thing we did notice amongst all the teams is that reliability seemed to be at a higher level than at this time in previous years. Bodes well for Melbourne.
    Aerodynamically speaking, F1 cars are designed to be as fast as possible when travelling in clear or undisturbed air. Upon approach to another car, the disturbed air created behind the car in front compromises the pursuing car's aero  rendering it difficult to overtake the car in front. The loss of downforce counters any speed differential. Therefore a number of aerodynamic changes have been mandated for the forthcoming season. They are designed to assist F1 cars punch through the dirty air when chasing another car. In short, the complex endplates which adorned front wings are banned. Front wings are now higher, wider, further forward, thus devoted to creating downforce and less likely to stall when in dirty air. Brake ducts are smaller, thereby having less surface area for dirty air to mess with. The bargeboards which guard the sidepods are smaller and moved forward to better link up with the air coming from the front of the car. There's a ban on blown axles. Rear wings have also had extensive reworking. The Drag Reduction System (DRS), whereby the rear wing opens in designated spots to reduce drag and therefore increase speed, has had its gap widened. The rear wing is also wider and higher, having the duel effect of increased downforce and punching a larger hole in the air so the car behind can follow in less disturbed air.
    To date, opinions are divided on whether the changes will have the desired effect or not. During winter testing, Haas' Kevin Magnussen commented that it was easier to follow another car and that the changes are a step in the right direction. But did he know what fuel load or tyre compound they were running? Contrarily Red Bull design genius Adrian Newey thinks not much will change. Remember even when aero was in its infancy in F1 design when the cars had relatively simple front and rear wings compared to today's standards, F1 cars were still difficult to follow, let alone overtake. Hasn't it always been difficult to overtake in F1?
    So will the revised aero rules have the desired effect or will it still reminisce of groundhog day? Melbourne's always been notoriously hard for overtaking. Will some of our questions be answered next weekend, or will we have to wait for subsequent races? Either way, Melbourne's still the place to be....
    
​        

    Welcome back to all our friends and surfers. It's that time again where we outline the motorsport events we plan on attending in 2019. So here goes....
  As you see, we've already attended the Bathurst 12 Hour in early February at majestic Mt Panorama. What a marvellous event it is, with it continuing to grow year on year. We trust you are enjoying the many images we've posted.
    March 14th-17th - Australian Formula One Grand Prix at Albert Park, Melbourne featuring F1 and Supercars.
    April 19th-21st - Bathurst Motor Festival featuring the Bathurst 6 Hour.
   May 3rd-4th - Nitro Thunder at Sydney Dragway featuring 400 Thunder Series with their earth shattering Top Fuel  and Pro Slammers.
    May 18th-19th - The Nationals at Sydney Motorsport Park (SMSP) featuring S5000 and Radical Australia Cup.
    June 8th-9th - Sydney Classic at SMSP featuring historic racing.
    July 6th-7th - NSW Kart Championship hosted by Sydney Motorsport Kart Club.
    August 3rd-4th - NSW Motor Racing Championship at SMSP featuring Formula Ford.
    September 28th-29th - SMSP featuring Formula 3.
    November 1st-2nd - East Coast Thunder at Sydney Dragway featuring 400 Thunder Series.
    November 30th-December 1st - Summer Festival at SMSP featuring historic racing.
   
​    This of course is subject to change. Roll on 2019....
    
    

    There's a term bandied around Formula One that as an avid fan our palette simply finds unsavoury, let alone being able to digest it. "Tyre Management." Do not misconstrue our sentiment though. By no means is this a condemnation of F1's sole tyre supplier Pirelli. Since taking over the tyre tender from Bridgestone in 2011, we think Pirelli have done a marvellous job. They have complied with F1's requests regarding tyre composition and degradation characteristics. Now in 2018 they have introduced 2 new compounds, with all compounds softer than the previous year, yet degrade in a linear fashion. They supply the teams with 3 dry weather compounds for each race, with the teams mandated to use two of those in the race, thereby deeming at least one pitstop.
    Some of 2018's races made compelling viewing, while others were, well, processional. Despite Pirelli and the rule maker's best efforts to induce multiple pitstops in each race, the teams were able to bring one stop races to fruition through measured tyre management. Remember F1 teams have the best motorsport engineers in the world. Anything taken away from them, they'll find a way to claw it back. Therefore, is qualifying now the only time F1 cars are driven on the limit? 
    Fans want to see F1 cars driven to their potential, raced to the maximum of their capability all the time. They also don't want to see engines "turned down" to preserve them because they are only allowed 3 a season. So what options are there to achieve this? Perhaps legislating the use of all three tyre compounds in the race, rendering two stop races with shorter stints on each set of tyres. This would allow the drivers to push all the time. Alternatively, would it be too contrived to decree pitstop windows to determine when teams can service their cars? Would dispensing with the maximum fuel flow rate while still governing the total fuel limit allow the teams to push? All options have pros and cons.
    Formula One is set for a major design and rule upheaval in a couple of years with the tyre supply contract also up for tender. Despite a number of worldwide motorsport categories adopting a single tyre supplier in the name of parity, could F1 benefit from a tyre war? Pirelli have desire to renew, while Michelin and Hankook have expressed an interest in applying.  Seeking an advantage between the tyre suppliers would be the catalyst to drive up competition through tyre development. Anyone who's raced anything knows that the most important factor in the package is the rubber.
    So, does anyone find a tyre war palatable?

    A very happy Christmas and exciting New Year to all our friends and surfers. God bless and see you all in 2019.
    
    

    A message comes over the radio, "David, you're seriously compromising your position at McLaren." If you remember that, you'd remember the 1998 Australian F1 Grand Prix, where McLaren driver David Coulthard had to honour a pre-race agreement and cede his place to team mate Mika Hakkinen. Not only was DC reluctant to comply, perhaps you remember Ferrari driver Rubens Barrichello also reluctantly waiting to the absolute last possible moment to allow championship aspirant and team mate Michael Schumacher to pass and win the 2002 Austrian Grand Prix.
    That's right. The contentious issue of team orders in Formula One has raised its head again with a rather sheepish Mercedes driver Lewis Hamilton claiming the spoils at last weekend's Russian GP after team mate Valtteri Bottas was instructed while leading the race to allow Hamilton to pass.
   Team orders in F1 are nothing new. They've been around since the series inception. For example, at the 1956 Italian GP, Peter Collins famously handed his Ferrari over to Juan Manuel Fangio. In those days team mates even shared cars if one expired.   
    Don't forget, F1 is a team sport and therefore you win and lose as a team. Obviously the desire is to win both the driver's and constructor's championships. Mercedes team principal Toto Wolff stated after winning the Russian GP that team orders are something that he is not particularly fond of, but he has an obligation to the hundreds of employees at Mercedes F1 to deliver the best possible result for the team. Now Mercedes have a 2-race points buffer to Ferrari in the driver's championship. Imagine the explaining he would have to do to the Mercedes board of directors if he didn't implement team orders and Hamilton lost the championship by a few meagre points?
    Is there something that the teams have glaringly neglected to consider though? The fans! The 2002 Austrian GP orchestration by Ferrari was met with mass "booing" from the fans accompanied with the universal sign of disapproval, thumbs down. Recognising the unsavoury taste this left in the fans mouth, the governing body tried outlawing team orders between 2003 and 2011. Teams easily found a way around this though. A slow pitstop here, a fumbled wheelnut there. Or a cryptic radio message like "Fernando is faster than you", which was delivered to Ferrari's Felipe Massa at Hockenheim in 2010.
    With the diminishing number of viewers globally watching F1, wouldn't the casual punter be more inclined to shell out their hard earned for Pay TV if they knew that the racing was pure and simply the best driver won on the day? The championship would consequentially take care of itself. Can you imagine how high the level of self satisfaction the team that won would have? Can you also imagine the number of fans that team would acquire knowing that they abandoned team orders, let their drivers race from the start of the season til the end, and still won the championship?

    
    

    Inspired, astute, shrewd, questionable, contentious or controversial. Where does your opinion lie? From a Red Bull Racing perspective, a contract renewal was imminent. After all, what better options were there? Demands were met, including a 1 year deal adhered to in case F1's big hitters came calling. He even recorded a video announcing his own resigning.
    Astonishingly during F1's traditional summer break, it became apparent that Red Bull does indeed "Give You Wings." Australian Daniel Ricciardo shocked everyone by announcing he's signed for Renault for 2019.  Was it the unknown entity of the Honda power units propelling Red Bull next year? Was it the money? Was it not being afforded the opportunity to win because of the Max factor? Ricciardo states that it was time for a fresh challenge. Perhaps Ricciardo knows more than we think. Recently Red Bull design guru Adrian Newey was questioned as to whether Renault had made him an offer. He would neither confirm or deny. 
    Renault are no doubt on the ascendancy. Since re-entering F1 as a full works team, they've invested and expanded and are currently the fourth best team. But can they provide Ricciardo with a championship challenging machine? How will they handle the regulation changes in a couple of years? Is Renault the team that Ricciardo can galvanise around him? Remember the last time an Australian didn't sign with Renault. They came out and won the 2005 season opening Australian GP and stopped the Ferrari juggernaut by winning the 2005 championship....

    Is Formula One unfinished business for Fernando Alonso? The two time world champion has started over 300 Grands Prix, won 32 and stood on the podium 97 times. The summer break saw Alonso announce what we all were unfortunately expecting. He is leaving F1 for other motorsport challenges. In his quest to become a more complete driver, he's dovetailed this season with the World Endurance Championship which he currently leads. The triple crown, that is, Monaco GP, Le Mans 24 Hour and Indianapolis 500 is something that he's expressed desire to capture. Having already won Monaco and Le Mans, and sampled the Indy, it is expected that he'll announce a full tilt attack on next year's Indycar championship with implied intent on winning the Indy 500.
    Still considered by many to be the best driver in F1, he's often outspoken and not afraid to express his opinions. Despite having driven for the best teams, but maybe not always at the best time, Alonso has always extracted the best from his car. He was careful however, not to use the dreaded retirement word, leaving the door ajar for a possible return. 
    Let's hope F1 is unfinished business for Fernando Alonso, because it feels like it is for us fans.
    Chao "El Nano."