We have several quiet weeks in F1 but it has all kicked off today and, of course, sod’s law meant that I was out and about getting my Indian visa sorted out!
Anyway, here is the provisional official F1 calendar for 2013:
March 17, Australia; March 24, Malaysia; April 14, China; April 21, Bahrain; May 12, Spain; May 26, Monaco; June 9, Canada; June 16, New Jersey *; June 30, Britain; July 14, Germany; July 28, Hungary; August 25, Belgium; September 8, Italy; September 22, Singapore; October 6, Korea; October 13, Japan; October 27, India; November 3, Abu Dhabi; November 17, USA (Austin); November 24, Brazil.
The FIA said that the rules for next year have been signed off and that a new Concorde Agreement is expected to be agreed by the end of October.
joeblogsf1 
Whats your feelings on the *tbc beside New Jersey Joe? I’d like it to happen, its probably the one place other than perhaps London which has the capacity to trump Monaco and Singapore as an attention grabbing destination. If the championship can go to places like Budapest, Bahrain and Mokp’o (and perhaps even Northampton!) then i sort of feel it should be in New York (or 10 minutes by ferry) whatever hit Bernie and CVC need to take on it. F1 needs the glamour to survive and its surely a sponsors dream.
They need to pay up apparently
I’d guess New Jersey has paid up, otherwise they wouldn’t have been on this schedule.
Bernie didn’t fire that shot across bow for nothing. Their late payment may have violated any number of contracts that now need to be redrawn. That alone could explain their asterisked status.
Nope, last year Austin was on the schedule as well, yet had not paid up. You saw what happened last November as a result. Bernie was making the same comments last year about Austin. Just because they are on the calendar does not mean they have paid up. Austin put the check on the table hours before the final calendar was released in December… and saved the race.
Except in this case Bernie made an explicit threat that New Jersey would be removed from the calendar unless they paid by September 28th.
The fact that they were on the calendar (and other evidence) strongly suggests they came up with the funds.
Bernie did the exact same thing last year. At one point he said Austin would definitely not happen because they had not paid up.At that point in time, Austin was on the provisional calendar. So I am sorry, Random (if that is your real name)… but it is entirely possible (and most likely the case) for NJ to be on the calendar while not having paid.
Yes, the calendar is provisional, but can we please remove the asterisk from New Jersey?
I’m writing from New Jersey, and I hope that Bernie is just being his usual, well, Bernie, and that the race happens.
Tell us why Mclaren went witth Perez.
Why not someone like Paul De Resta ?
How many podiums have got Di Resta this year? Or any year by the matter. IMHO Di resta is a OK driver, not bad but not brilliant. Perez have a lot more potential
Rather depends on the car…
Joe, how, in your view, does the McL/Perez announcement sit with Perez’s own answer to the question “Have you had any approaches from the big teams?” “No” he said emphatically. That was just a week ago.
Granted there was a need to be discreet, but …..
Just wondered how you see this
regards, Rod
He may not have been approached until as late as Wednesday…
He might even have been lying through his teeth.
Joe – it would be great if you could do a blog post about your thoughts of the background to Perez moving to McLaren. After all, he was recently being touted as a possible Massa replacement.
Do you think Lewis’s announcement was held back until Perez was locked in? It seems odd that both were announced at the same time.
Because Perez is better than him.
That remains to be seen. There are a lot of things to say about both drivers. Perez is the star of the season in my opinion, with giant-killing podium drives. Di Resta might be the better driver in the long term, with such an impressive CV, like beating Vettel in the same car in the junior categories and dominating DTM. Perez hasn’t won anything particularly special, was a distant runner up to Pastor Maldonado in GP2, but has been significantly faster after every few races.
I’m a big Di Resta fan, but I think McLaren were wise to take Perez. Not only is it a steal from the Ferrari Academy, they can still line up Di Resta in the future when Button decides to retire, which could be in the next few years.
Right, anything can happen and all that. At the current moment in time, Perez leads DiResta in points, so at this moment in time… Perez is the better driver.
I think it’s very encouraging for the whole sport that Jean Todt’s FIA seems to be committed to nurturing all of its biggest assets, unlike the last administration.
In such a crowded season, having only two date clashes apiece for the World Rally Championship and World Endurance Championship sends quite a message of support, I’d have said.
Of course both series have a long, long way to go if they’re to reclaim past glories but it seems that they are at least being given the tools for the job. I haven’t checked the WTCC calendar – but who does?
Hopefully, giving oxygen to other forms of high quality motor sport will only enhance F1’s position. After all, to be top of the tree there has to be a tree in the first place, doesn’t there?
Joe,
Sorry to be off-topic. Have a look here:
http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/bilder/ferrari-chassis-auf-dem-autosalon-paris-carbon-zelle-fuer-den-enzo-nachfolger-5818138.html
I felt happy to see a smiling Rory Byrne at the Ferrari booth at the Paris show. There’s this gentleman to the right…. What a big surprise! Is this really Big Bad Ron behind Rory having a sort of… friendly chat? Can’t believe my eyes….
I know that since Todt left Ferrari’s relations with McLaren have vastly improved, thanks mainly to Stefano. But this is totally unbelievable!
I assume Perez got it as he’s quick, and has a similar driving style to Jenson (i.e. very easy on the tyres). Must be easier to design a car when both drivers have the same characteristics.
Re All this, I know you regard this as a bad move for Lewis but surely its got to be good for the sport? Might MSC fancy a go in a Sauber too? Nice engines….
A good mix up is no bad thing in my book, leads to good stories too.
Roll on the next GP+
And now Bernie is suggesting the 2014 engines will be dropped, thus shafting Lewis 😉
So, all these manufacturers have invested tens of millions in new engines that will all be thrown away so that the sport can go back to engines from the dark ages… How forward thinking.
I suspect they were people who didn’t like the introduction of jet engines to airplanes because they eliminated the use of propellers and didn’t make the same sounds.
From that Sylt fellow:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/motor-sports/topstories/New-engines-set-to-be-scrapped/SP-Article1-937322.aspx
Should we call B.S.?
Maybe that is what the organ grinder wants to see happen, so I guess we should watch the monkey dance to that tune.
Yeah, it does not make much sense to me at all. Like you pointed out to “Go-Jenson”, if they are looking to save cost… they should not start by throwing away the money already spent on development.
Shooting the messenger doesn’t change the message. Bernie is still the most important person in the sport.
When Bernie says the new engines are to be shelved, there’s a very good chance they will be shelved. For good or ill, this could have huge ramifications to the sport. Teams could leave because of this.
Speaking of schedules, any thoughts of an Audience with Joe in Austin, this year?
Working on it. It will be Friday night if it happens.
Is the German event in Hockenheim or Nürburgring? Couldn’t find information on that, what is your view?
It will be Nurburgring.
Are you saying there is news that Nurburgring’s funding issue has been sorted (for now), or only confirming that it is their turn unless they default?
More drivel from Christian Sylt….. see here http://t.co/lqjrDybr (in Hindustan Times Joe !!)
Why would anyone burn a pixel to read anything by Sylt???
More to the point, who reads the Hindustan Times let alone writes for it??! Joe. Is there anywhere we can read the proposed 2014 regulations so we can see what we are missing if Ecclestone ever happens to be right on this?
Current and proposed F1 regulations get put up here: http://www.fia.com/EN-GB/SPORT/REGULATIONS/Pages/FIAFormulaOneWorldChampionship.aspx
I think the below should have a warning it is a meta comment, but it ties my thought as to all the contention you note, which is quite real, to a broader scope and commercial forces, motivations and remedies. A few things have alerted me just this week, from reading here.
Only if the online regurgitation system is exceptionally hight on my BS-ometer and there’s no other obvious source. I feel a bit better, because they have a darker background, so so less electrons must be wasted.
But the other day, having had a few thoughts about it in different moods, thought I was being trolled by someone partisan and indisposed to this place.
Under a obit for a good man, no less. Bad form of me to riff off at a tangent but I was quite upset to see a reaction to one of my posts, under a good man’s obituary. The insinuation I was talking utter cobblers, when I was trying to convey why I thought the man significant, made me think it was deliberate to accuse me of being insensitive to a person, whilst in fact inventing all that and just provoking. Basically false blame, rather clever, and I thought a deliberately miscomprehension of what I wrote.
My take away from that was maybe there’s just no purpose in saying another publication is no good, because for a number of factors, things are tough again in life, and I don;t think for a moment anyone who came to read Joe via this blog was prompted to do so because someone noted some other writing was inferior. One of the fun debates I have had, and used to use as a interview question, was “Germany made it illegal to publish comparative advertising. Were they thinking that was because people would create unfair and artificial comparisons, or was there a higher purpose that benefited the overall post war economy, that a outgoing approach, including reducing acrimony, would have a positive economic effect?” There’s no certain answer to that, but it’s a very interesting one to pose to someone who might deal with a lot of publications, and by default will deal with quite a few who are rivals, time to time.
My apologies this is long, but one of the hints I would give to that question was “So one bank says “But we at least are not bankrupt.”” I tend to err on the side that there are some comparisons one should avoid entirely, no matter how valid.
Maybe I jump to conclusions, but being not much love lost between here and wherever Sylt is, and a larger distance between him and fact, the thought I was subjected to some ad hominem the other day.
Joe’s job isn’t to protect me from “off comments” nor did I fall on Joe’s side of opinion save by virtue it’s by a country mile more consistent with what I perceive.
But the end of the debate I am increasingly arguing professionally, rests with the internet devalues everything, and if you don’t have a product people pay direct cash for, I’m increasingly suspicious you’re a reader advertisers want. The smart geek crowd use adblockers. Many companies pay fortunes for the equivalent effect, the big name vendors of kit sell sophisticated kit to block such connexions.
Joe and a lot of commenters bin the blog discussion other than me have been consistently more on the ball than anywhere. Reason being there’s some very experience people drop by here, and that’s the reason I keep coming back, and waggle my pom poms in the discussion, because there’s a positive atmosphere.
I think that it may be rather moot now to do the other lot down.
As in, it’s a bitter pill to swallow, if you’re called out as a shill (Concerning known connexions of this other writer), and I think that’s why I was singled out the other day, actually, but I don’t shill, and Joe certainly never needed such a person boosting him that way.
I hope things don’t become ungraceful unnecessarily.
There’s still a old boy, obviously not Sylt, at the other place who can be eloquent, and to be reminded there was a GP at Clermant – Ferrand (scene of of Rrien Ne va Plus, a sweet late Chabrol movie which is a bit take it or leave it but highly enjoyable caper) is no disservice to the world. I think it was the same old boy who recently pointed out how small the F1 press was so short a time ago.
Print really has been devalued lately. I see parallels between the debasement of publication standards, and the way “rehypothecation” has allowed people to sell derivatives too many times over without owning the actual asset. What I see in that is that there is a imminent cliff edge for the majority of players in the online game who rely on advertising. I recall distinctly the phrase “content is king” entering common parlance. I thought at the time that if it was so heavily emphasised, there must be already a drought of genuine “content”, real writing analysis and thinking. That was nearly 20 years ago.
Anyhow, I think it’s not worth it to mention “sources” we don;t respect by name. First there are uncounted numbers of people who profess to be F1 journalists, so singling someone out is almost moot. Second, there’s a harsh market for advertising, and so people with publications may be squeezed and behaving under pressure. Third, really practical factors can make people come back here and attack in ways intended to devalue the virtues of good debate and observation. I reckon if I’ve not sent you to sleep, you have the basic idea by now.
I miss a sensation the comments exchange in this blog were more personal until recently, but that’s how things happen when a internet place of any kind gets much busier. I’m still kicking myself for some highly personal posts when I was unwell and not very much myself, which may have made us all want to step back a bit. But since everything’s been really on the ball since, lots of insightful on topic contributions, I hardly think things have been worse. Obviously some people conflate me with Joe’s outfit, but crikey that’s nonsense. I think comments along those lines are just “trolling” me. I do have a problem, that so much of what that other writer writes can be torn to shreds – and I mean this on a logical basis, I am a distant observer, and even if I did have some kind of personal contact with the F1 world, I say rubbish to any self proclaimed “insider”. Quite a few times I think people have tried to insinuate I was presenting myself as such. But I seriously question the motivations for such attitudes. Statistically, my detractors have been new visitors here. I know some businesses pay handsome money to try and monitor the origin of who has a malign effect on their reputation in the internet. But it’s often straightforward to spot those. They exhibit characteristic linguistic behavioured. You can profile such people with surprising useful accuracy. (conscientious people always have a very strong mechanism to eliminate “false positives”.)
All I’m saying, is maybe there’s no point calling out other “sources” in the media, not when it’s so blatant anyhow their pitch.
Please forgive me also if I personalized this, using myself as a example. I don’t think I am so sensitive, but I really thought some loaded questions aimed indirectly at me recently were the work of “trolls” and I don’t want to see this discussion section reduced because seemingly some people lack prose comprehension skills, or just think – I assure you misguidedly – that I am a egotist either pitching for Joe, or trying to steal his sunshine. Or are under pressure to try to spoil another person (being me, possibly) who has pointed out they are what the might want to accuse me of, in other words a “astroturfing” scribbler with a biased agenda. Seriously, the only thing I care for and accept I am partisan about is good writing and good debate. So I hold this place and Joe’s team’s writing is superior. Whoever wants to disagree should step up, not snipe personalities, and we ought to do the same.
Oh, well, end of another “missive”. The “too long did not read” is maybe aiming even legitimate criticism of some people could get unpleasant reactions from who is accused and doesn’t come here to positively further the debate.
For myself, I just want to stop apologising, or feeling apologetic, for when people misconstrue my scribbles and have a to at me, in ways that bring down the tone, and distract from the main game. Joe knows his subject, and the discussion ought not to take on board any denigration of others who are less fortunate in their ability.
To regulars I know out there, I am so sorry, but I felt lately I should be direct when I feel there is a issue, because my nature is to roll with punches and ignore sleights. Simply, there’s many man y more people who read here, and I felt responses were necessary. It’s been top racing discussion in the last few months, and if you’ve read the comments for a longer while, I can only say I am absolutely happy with the general direction, and also depersonalising the comments and getting right on with the subject. I don’t mind taking it on the chin, because I was often personal before. Many of you made my life so much more enjoyable, I owe a debt. But let’s move on, and it would be cool if the many personal voices shone through. I am still flabbergasted what I learned here from others. That’s the coolest thing. I’m just going to lay off slagging any imaginary “competition” as I see no value in that which can contribute to the good things Joe has permitted us and provided his time for.
Keep up the good work J(oJ). A few of us like reading your posts.
Any thoughts on Bahrain anyone? It doesn’t appear they’ve made any advancement on democracy – still got 90% of government positions held by someone with the surname Al Khalifa – guess they’ll just manage the rioters better next year.
Read my thoughts on Bahrain back in April. And read the papers today. Progress is being made. It is slow, but look also at what is happening in other places where there were revolutions in the last couple of years.
Mmm. Maybe.
In my experience that’s a cultural trait – agreeing to do something, but acting very slowly. Just because the disaffected haven’t turned to civil war like in Syria is no sign of acquiescence.
Whatever the reality of the circumstances and Joe will know better than most after being there, it was an unmitigated PR disaster for F1 a Bahrain. Top news story buildings on fire, molatof cocktails, riot police – all around the world. It looked like Syria.
Was talking to James Allen in Spa and he said he saw absolutely nothing and couldn’t understand why he was getting so many concerned texts checking on how he was.
I suppose my point is can F1 take the chance that it happens again?
I agree with James. I was deeply shocked by the extent to which the media exaggerated what was happening in Bahrain. It shook my faith in almost all news organisations. If you wanted to look for trouble, yes, you could find it, but that is true in so many countries around the world. Boths ides were obviously involved in trying to manipulate the media, but it was clear to me that the opposition was doing a better job. There is no doubting that bad things were done in the early stages of the conflict in 2011, but if you look closely you will see that things are gradually be sorted out with policemen being tried for crimes and some of the protesters being retried for what they did. The first thing that needs to happen in such a circumstance is to restore the rule of law. It will take a long time to mend the damage done, but if you look at other revolutions and hat is happening now, it is perhaps an indication that there are times when the devil you know is not as bad you think he is. I still do not believe that F1 should be involved in this process. It is a sport and should not become politicised, but I also feel very strongly that the western media is misleading the world. Having been there and seen it at first hand, I know that it is the case and I think that it would be best if there was more balanced reporting in Bahrain.
I think the whole point was that no brass tacks reporting happened until people were on the ground. Joe revised his views the moment he could see for himself. Hardly anyone else did, probably they were keen to hide possible embarrassment, or could not speak independently. I think influential factions led the whole debate, and coinciding with the Bahrain govt. being very coy, and not openly communicative, there was just a natural petri dish for misunderstanding and misinterpretation. Totally classical example of head shoved in sand on all sides, and some sides with preconceptions they wanted to promote. (I certainly was of the distant opinion things were far more serious, and was corrected) The fact is that by keeping too quiet, and hushing things, the Bahrain gvmt certainly made it look far worse than it was. There’s no shame getting it wrong, when you have not been on the ground, but it’s fairly awful how many people never retracted their views, just went all quiet, when it turned out to be a storm in the teacup. I’m tempted to assume those types were paid to present a line, since they shuffled into the shadows when the accusations blew over. It was all very difficult to report. Joe had been one of the first to highlight the concern, but also the first to change his mind when he had view of it himself. I never recall the BBC or Guardian newspaper saying they may have gotten the wrong impression. The story simply vanished from the media. Put it down to another side – benefit of sports, that sporting journalists are less likely to be beholden to political lobbies. There’s some student’s thesis to be had, having a look how it all happened. Would be a good one to do.
Joe – agree with your comments about the quality of the press. I think (most) F1 journalists acquitted themselves very well from the episode. Reasoned, level headed reporting from non-political observations are just what journalism should be. However, these days sensationalism trumps facts.
Joe – I’m reading “No Angel” at the moment and finding it fascinating. Whilst I do not expect everything to be 100% fact, I find it interesting that the Concorde agreement up for review has generated very little press or comment. This is in stark contrast to the inner conflict that typified previous agreements. In particular when “the Three” held out against the FOM.
Do you think that the reason the agreement hasn’t been signed highlights there is considerable disagreement between the teams. Obviously Mercedes appears to be a hold out. It would be interesting to see a blog post from you regarding what you about the horse trading negotiations going on.