Russian GP Thread - Contains Spoilers of Qualifying & Race

First topic message reminder :

For those who don't know what it looks like plus those who play the video game


The 2014 Russian GP preview: Everything you need to know about this weekend's race!

F1 heads to the Sochi Autodrom for the inaugural Russian Grand Prix around the site of this year’s Winter Olympics.

So read on below as Sky Sports Online provides your one-stop shop for everything you need to know about the grand prix weekend. You can also watch a virtual flyover of the brand-new circuit in the video above.

The 2014 Russian GP in a nutshell

Track: Sochi Autodrom. Temporary Circuit.

Designer: Hermann Tilke


Race start time: 12pm UK time Sunday (3pm local).

Laps: 53.

Track length: 5.853 km (the third longest of the season after Spa & Silverstone).

Corners: 12 right and six left-handers.

Predicted average lap speed: 215 kph

Tyre allocation: Medium (white) and soft (yellow).

DRS Zones: TBA.

Driver steward: TBA.

Sebastian Vettel, who drove the circuit in a road car in August, said: "Having driven the full circuit for the first time in the Infiniti Q50, it’s an interesting layout with a good mix of high speed corners and technical sections. It’s going to be a huge challenge in a Formula 1 car for sure and I’m really looking forward to coming back in October.”

Sergio Perez: “The location of the track inside the Olympic park is very unusual. If I get the opportunity I will definitely explore a bit. From the photographs I’ve seen it looks to be a very impressive facility. There are some long straights, some tight corners, and I think it will feel like a street circuit because the walls are close to the track in a lot of areas."

Nico Hulkenberg: “It’s hard to look at a track on paper and really get an understanding of how it will feel to drive. I prefer to go there and experience things before I make judgements and talk about track characteristics. So in that sense it’s too early for me to compare it with another circuit. What is clear is that there are some really quick sections and a lot of right-angled corners."

Ferrari Technical Director James Allison: "The dominant corner is a really quite aggressively fast long flowing left-hander, shortly after the start-finish straight. So you can see just by a casual look that this is going to be a track where there is going to be a competition between what you want on the straights and what you want for that series of slow speed corners. The slow speed corners are going to be crying out for downforce, the straights, the opposite."

Tyre allocation

Pirelli will bring the white-marked medium and the yellow-banded soft to Russia this weekend after carrying out “advanced computer simulations in collaboration with the teams to prepare for the demands of a new venue and predict the likely strategies”.

“Russia is a key territory for Pirelli, along with all the major automotive companies in the world, so we are very much looking forward to Sochi and the first Russian Grand Prix, which is a significant milestone in the sport’s history,” said Pirelli Motorsport Director Paul Hembery.

“From a tyre perspective it should be an interesting challenge; we’ve got a wide variety of corners that should test every aspect of performance. As has been the case at every grand prix this year, we’re aiming for between two and three pit stops per race and the nomination we have made reflects this. In terms of overall tyre energy demands, Russia is somewhere in the middle, and measurements also indicate low-abrasion asphalt.

“Regarding the weather, initial forecasts suggest that conditions will be temperate. Going to a new circuit is always exciting and it’s only when we get there that we will have a complete idea of what to expect, so the work done in free practice will be particularly important for everyone.”

CaledonianCraig wrote:

GSC wrote:If evil is having a F1 where success isn't rewarded, then I best start growing a pencil moustache and goatee.

As before, if you can't afford it, don't waste your money. City and Chelsea could afford it, unsurprisingly Tony Fernandes has been proven a failure in F1 and Football.

Oh great so in this elitest world lets just say - may the richest team win.

Welcome to the real world Craig.

GSC wrote:And I understand the point perfectly. I just don't agree with the idea of being rewarded for participation and biting off more than you can chew.

Well I think with that mentality (and if the FIA see it that way) you'll soon have a threadbare grid of perhaps 14 cars and only six or eight of those will compete for wins. Pretty pathetic really and any news teams incoming won't last long on a breadcrumb diet whilst the big teams diet on steak and red wine.

GSC wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

GSC wrote:If evil is having a F1 where success isn't rewarded, then I best start growing a pencil moustache and goatee.

As before, if you can't afford it, don't waste your money. City and Chelsea could afford it, unsurprisingly Tony Fernandes has been proven a failure in F1 and Football.

Oh great so in this elitest world lets just say - may the richest team win.

Welcome to the real world Craig.

And you are happy with that? Nobody should. F1 should be about who can create the fastest car using different technologies and not just be about what team has the biggest budget. As I said looks at the SPL - money created a two team league there and the same has now happened in the EPL with only four teams viable EPL winners - the same situation exists in F1 and it is a closed shop for anyone else. Exciting? No.

Similarly, you'd rather English teams were uncompetitive in Europe just so City and Chelsea were dragged down to Hulls level. Mediocrity is all nice and fair, but its still mediocrity. Progression would slow to a crawl, and as these new engines have shown, F1s progression has implications beyond F1. (hell even heart monitors and such have been adopted elsewhere).

Sounds like my idea of 4 out in Q1 and Q2 will be adopted over no Q1.

The Forza Rossa car is apparently identical to what would have been the Caterham car for 2015.

What actually is happening with Forza Rossa?

CaledonianCraig wrote:

GSC wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

GSC wrote:If evil is having a F1 where success isn't rewarded, then I best start growing a pencil moustache and goatee.

As before, if you can't afford it, don't waste your money. City and Chelsea could afford it, unsurprisingly Tony Fernandes has been proven a failure in F1 and Football.

Oh great so in this elitest world lets just say - may the richest team win.

Welcome to the real world Craig.

And you are happy with that? Nobody should. F1 should be about who can create the fastest car using different technologies and not just be about what team has the biggest budget. As I said looks at the SPL - money created a two team league there and the same has now happened in the EPL with only four teams viable EPL winners - the same situation exists in F1 and it is a closed shop for anyone else. Exciting? No.

Agree once again.

Its not healthy for any sport to have such financial demands that entrants / competitors are restricted to a handful of teams.

Do we really want to see a grid of 8 - 10 teams, running 3 cars each? I know I don't.

Don't think the teams would be all that keen on having to finance an extra car, driven in all likelihood by a rookie, which will probably get smashed up on a regular basis.

Everyone (apart from GSC) can see there are gross funding problems and mismanagement of funds in F1. Max Mosley has referred to it and Sauber are also voicing their concerns as have Lotus. Something has to be done and even BE is saying we could have a 14 car grid come next year.

It won't be a 14 car grid next year, Bernie is just scaremongering the media & trying to make us think that three cars per team is the only viable option, instead of redistributing TV money & other finances that are generated from F1. It can't be 14 cars because the FIA agreed a few weeks ago that as a safety measure, that if entrants pulled out, then it would become compulsory for three cars per team to become reality.

Bernie is at it again though. Coming across as caring about lesser teams though he is the one making billions from F1 whilst teams go bust. Growing disdain and disharmony amongst Sauber, Lotus and Force India's Bob Fernley is the latest to complain about the current financial set-up of F1 and who can blame him for suspecting the FIA and the big five teams are happy with things as they are chiefly because they cream off the majority of the TV monies etc.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Bernie is at it again though. Coming across as caring about lesser teams though he is the one making billions from F1 whilst teams go bust. Growing disdain and disharmony amongst Sauber, Lotus and Force India's Bob Fernley is the latest to complain about the current financial set-up of F1 and who can blame him for suspecting the FIA and the big five teams are happy with things as they are chiefly because they cream off the majority of the TV monies etc.

Bernie is good at talking the talk, to try and keep up a good public image, but I think most people know he only cares about keeping the money rolling in to CVC.

The sooner he is gone the better.

For F1 to really thrive and open up to new competition, there really does need to be a major restructuring of the way TV money and other funds are distributed among the teams.

The top teams are mostly supported by parent car companies, or else have principal sponsors with very deep pockets. Plus they can attract bigger sponsors, based on their history or recent performances.

The mid and back-of-the-grid teams can't do that and so are usually dependent on wealthy individuals investing in them as their prime source of funds.

Who knows, more equal distribution of funds might even reduce teams' reliance on pay drivers and we might get to see more genuinely talented rookies getting a chance.

Absolutely spot on dyrewolfe.

I am concerned nothing will change though as Bernie is openly saying it was his idea of three cars per team but the third car would be leased out to another team IE Cater ham and any points scored by that car would see half going to Caterham and half going to the parent team IE Mercedes. Sounds absolutely awful to me.

the drivers are happy with a 3 car team- 7 teams can cope with that. 12 teams cannot cope with 2 car teams.

its a logical move IMO. all the teams left will still get the same money per car back(well hopefully) and all the other drivers and staff at other F1 teams can go for jobs at the major 7 teams..

Its a decent solution and heck it can only make things more competitive in the short term. Instead of a 2 horse race this year we could have had a 3. If 3 teams next year are competitive we could have almost half the grid competing for the title.

Sorry but the day F1 becomes a glorified car hire sport it loses me as a fan.

Well we just have to wait it out and see what happens. Because it looks like anything might. But unless we get the cars on the grid there will be a lot of unemployed people in the sport and that isnt a good thing.

All fans want at the end of the day- is lots of cars on the grid and lots of competition. thats it. and that will bring more money to the sport.

I'm just shaking my head at this 'car for hire' shambles that is being considered. Essentially, Mercedes will loan their car out to a little team, basically put a young/test Mercedes driver in it, that little team will run the team, put their stickers on it & score points, but half the points will go back to Mercedes. Embarrassing stuff. What the f**k is happening?

Mysti, it wouldn't of made any difference this year in making the championship a three horse race or more competitive. The third car is for rookie, young drivers, as I believe & just a way of keeping cars on the grid, keeping people employed & to keep the Bernie show rolling agonisingly along.

I am not sold on any lease car idea at all. 7 3 car teams is the only way forward for me in the short term anyway.

mystiroakey wrote:I am not sold on any lease car idea at all. 7 3 car teams is the only way forward for me in the short term anyway.

Not for me it isn't. F1 has fared just fine with two car teams virtually since its creation and so it can in the future if it is managed better and in a fairer manner. However, with those that are in charge of the sport they have their own warped ideas how things should be. What needs done?

1. The FIA to quit the favouritism to the big teams by paying ALL teams equal monies from the TV pool of money.

2. Release more money to the teams than it currently obviously does. I mean something stinks to high heaven when BE is a billionaire and getting richer when countless F1 teams are going bust.

3. If the FIA are not willing to do the above then they have to quit charging astronomical fees for teams to enter the sport.

4. They must look to find ways to encourage new teams with more solid financial footing and motorsport background into the sport ie Porsche, Audi etc etc.

I cannot see any of the above happening sadly and I dread to think what will become of F1 in the future with such a blinkered and money-obsessed outlook.

i don't get it, would the little teams just be hiring one car (the third car) or would they hire two?

in my opinion, the third cars will just be cannon fodder with young test drivers in them & they will just be put it to please casual fans, please the sponsors & the backers of F1. they won't be the top spec works car's & won't be getting the maximum output, that the works teams would be able to set them up at.

It doesnt make sense in the sightest liam. yes they would only get one car - not two- or would they lease 2 cars from different teams?

mystiroakey wrote:It doesnt make sense in the sightest liam. yes they would only get one car - not two- or would they lease 2 cars from different teams?

The whole idea stinks to high heaven and it almost feels like (as Bob Fernley is hinting) the whole current situation has been manufactured (pardon the pun) by BE as this car hire idea is Bernie wants it so this is a way of making it happen.

Well Martin Brundle also agreeing payments 'are out of kilter' as well. Big teams basically are happy creaming off the vast majority of the F1 money and don't want to give that up and I believe that this was probably the outcome of the Concorde Agreement when the big teams were threatening a breakaway then backed down. I'd assume they got themselves set up with this cute deal for them and screwed the smaller teams and now they are adopting the 'We're alright Jack' and haul up the ladder type of attitude. Pretty pathetic really.

The point is until the agreement is up(2013 concorde) there is nothing more that can be done.

but there is a rule saying the teams have to field 3 cars each if x amount of teams go bust and cant race. so that is why i am saying in the short term the best thing to do is have 7 teams with 3 cars each.

mystiroakey wrote:The point is until the agreement is up(2013 concorde) there is nothing more that can be done.

but there is a rule saying the teams have to field 3 cars each if x amount of teams go bust and cant race. so that is why i am saying in the short term the best thing to do is have 7 teams with 3 cars each.

Well on principle I would disagree. Apparently, to run an extra car it would cost the team an extra £35 million now sorry but the teams were beefing about having to cut costs so this goes totally against the grain. Also I just would not see it as either exciting or beneficial to F1 to add more points scoring power with an extra car in their team. All that will do is make points scoring a closed shop between Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull and McLaren.

Why do you say it will cost them more. I have explained so many times the teams will get the same back per car. The prize money will not be reduced. It will be split between 7 teams rather than 12

mystiroakey wrote:Why do you say it will cost them more. I have explained so many times the teams will get the same back per car. The prize money will not be reduced. It will be split between 7 teams rather than 12

That is a figure widely quoted from teams within F1 that is why I use it.

Yes it will cost more. But they will get more revenue on the back of it.

But It will actually cost less overall due to economies of scale.

I cannot see sponsorship altering. I'd bet anything sponsors won't cough up more money for advertising on a third car as they'd deem they already pay enough or if teams do eexpect higher sponsorship fees they may be in for a shock.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/29868355

I think this just confirms what I, and others, have been saying. A sad state of affairs.

Also reading Bernie's remarks kind of confirms what I thought. When the big teams threatened to leave F1 he made them some legal and binding financial offers giving them much greater strength but that deal only applied to the big teams.

Again this mirror images the unjust way the Old Firm used to get their way in SPL negotiations. Their two votes held (I think it was) 80% voting power so basically what they wanted they got. That was the case with TV deal money and I recall when the Sky TV deal was not to be renewed the Old Firm wanted Setanta to get the deal as it meant they kept getting the majority of the money whilst the other clubs preferred going it alone and setting up a new SPL TV channel where money was distributed equally. Of course the Old Firm got their way but months into the deal Setanta went bust and the deal collapsed leaving many clubs out of pocket thanks to the greed of the Old Firm.

Anyway back to F1 and looking at the figures mentioned in that report you quickly see why Caterham and Marussia were non-competitive - it is all about money and the big teams starving the smaller teams of money. We know this as you can see how Lotus have fallen away this season. Last year they were very competitive and frequently in contention but when backers pulled out and new owners came in then they had to cut-back in areas and hence they have been rank rotten this season.

Unless you have £180 to 300m to cover your 1st 3 season in F1 so 60-100m on the car without staff cost etc a season you are wasting your time entering F1.

It seems to be unless you can hit the ground running you will not survive with the payments you get. I can't remember who said it but GP2 spend £4 or 6m to go 6 seconds slower then an F1 car and sounds better too that's 294m less then the rumored amount that Mercedes haven't supposedly spent this year.

Fernando wrote:Unless you have £180 to 300m to cover your 1st 3 season in F1 so 60-100m on the car without staff cost etc a season you are wasting your time entering F1.

It seems to be unless you can hit the ground running you will not survive with the payments you get. I can't remember who said it but GP2 spend £4 or 6m to go 6 seconds slower then an F1 car and sounds better too that's 294m less then the rumored amount that Mercedes haven't supposedly spent this year.

The point is that the big teams in F1 have arranged for themselves to get the sort of money to survive comfortably from the FIA (when it is questionable whether they need that much considering they generate s much from other avenues) whilst the lesser teams who really need that money do not get it whereas they did before. It is plain wrong and something has to be done but even BE is at a loss as to a solution but clearly there are some. BE's bank balance is growing faster and faster and presumably that comes from the spoils of running F1 so since he is agreeing he is the cause then he can make up the differences from his own huge profits to pay the smaller teams what they should be getting.

Well, props to Bernie for at least admitting there is a problem and that he has had some hand in it.

Now its out in the open, perhaps public (or internal) pressure will force some changes through.

Fair enough BE owned up but does no one think it suspicious that as teams go bust and people lose their jobs in F1 his bank balance gets bigger and bigger and bigger. Now I have said the bigger teams are fleecing the smaller teams but I would say it is pretty obvious Bernie has been fleecing all the teams. It is all very well for him to say there is nothing he can do but obviously there is.

We all know the lengths BE has gone to in order to keep control of F1 and why shouldn't he when he is making so much out of it. But now is the time that has to stop.

He can either lessen the exorbitant entrance fee of £75 million a season I think it is and so lessen the financial burden of teams or do a system whereas those teams getting the lions share of TV monies have to pay the lion's share of the entrance fees with lesser teams paying less.

CVC Capital Partners, the majority shareholders in Formula One, look ready to pay out an extra £100m to help the struggling smaller teams in the sport.

Lotus owner, Gérard Lopez, said on Monday: “I know CVC and Bernie have been looking at this. It’s going to be a base payment [over and above the money paid for positions in the championship] given to the smaller teams, which is essentially going to make it possible for a normal budget to work.

“To be honest, it’s really not a complicated thing to do. It just requires a bit of goodwill. The overall amount we’re discussing, once you start dividing it by the number of teams, is not that massive''.

Too little too late? Is it any wonder teams struggle to survive with the FIA charging £75 million entrance fees. Bloody mind boggling.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Too little too late? Is it any wonder teams struggle to survive with the FIA charging £75 million entrance fees. Bloody mind boggling.

Too right! Thats close to £4million per race.

Even if they reduced it to £1million, that would still be £19million from each team, for a season (£228million total for 12 teams). I'm sure the smaller teams would welcome having an extra £56million.

I'm sceptical the big teams will agree to this rescue package.

Also hearing that Mercedes have agreed in principle to an engine unfreeze during July 2015, whereby modified, upgraded engine units can be used for the remaining part of the season. Mercedes wanted a complete freeze to keep their advantage, but pressure from other teams has led them to voting for a compromise. I still see Mercedes engines dominating but at least this gives scope for improvement for engine suppliers in 2015 & that if your engine is s*** come Australia, at least it's not the end of the world or your season.

LiamB wrote:I'm sceptical the big teams will agree to this rescue package.

Also hearing that Mercedes have agreed in principle to an engine unfreeze during July 2015, whereby modified, upgraded engine units can be used for the remaining part of the season. Mercedes wanted a complete freeze to keep their advantage, but pressure from other teams has led them to voting for a compromise. I still see Mercedes engines dominating but at least this gives scope for improvement for engine suppliers in 2015 & that if your engine is s*** come Australia, at least it's not the end of the world or your season.

The big teams might not like the rescue package, but if something isn't done to make the financial rewards more equitable for the lesser teams, F1 will end up a small exclusive club for a handful of teams...which would undoubtedly make it less attractive for fans and sponsors alike...which in turn would be bad news for Bernie and his bosses.

I think for once Ecclestone will do the right thing - or at least squeeze as many concessions out of the big teams as possible, if they object...if only to preserve the integrity of the sport, maintain the interest of the fans and sponsors, thereby keeping the money rolling in to CVC (even if its a reduced amount).

I'm happy about the thaw on engine development. I still think it needs to be controlled - say new designs permitted every 5 years or so, but these hybrid powertrains are still pretty new technology, plus there is the gulf betwen Merc and everyone else. There is still plenty of room for improvement.