I feel like we overreact way too much to uneventful races. Those complaining that 'f1 is dead' or 'f1 isn't what it used to be' seem to have been phrases that have been bandied about for the last 20 years or so whenever a bad race happens, conveniently forgetting that the last two Grand Prixs at Silverstone and Hockenheim were absolutely world class events. For me, last week's German GP and April's Azerbaijan GP were two of the best races I've seen in the last 10 years.
Yes - a few of this season's races, like today's have not been up to scratch but there have been plenty of brilliant ones that have excused the bad weekends. As a bonus, the championship is absolutely fascinating. Swinging one way and then the other. It may be in Hamilton's favour at the moment but if this season is anything to go by you can expect it to swing back in favour of Seb.
Why?
When Seb and Ferrari were expected to win in Hungary, they failed.
When Seb and Ferrari were expected to win in Monaco, they failed.
When Seb and Ferrari were expected to win in Singapore last year, they failed.
Three circuits that were expected to sustain their title challenge, and they couldn't do it.
Hamilton has all the momentum his way, and Spa and Monza should see him win both. If he does, that's a long gap for Ferrari to reel in.
F1 isn't what it used to be because the challenge is not what it was, not because of drab races. There have always been poor races, but there used to be challenging race tracks, and unpredictable races where drivers used to risk everything to win. Neither is the case today. Finishing first now has 7 more points than second, designed to make drivers look to finish as high as possible. Instead they're busy saving engines, fuel, tyres etc for other races down the line, rather than challenge for those extra points that could make the difference in the end.
Logged