Rate the race: Italy

What did you think of the Italian Grand Prix? Rate the race out of ten and leave a comment below:

Rate the 2010 Italian Grand Prix out of ten

  • 1 (3%)
  • 2 (2%)
  • 3 (3%)
  • 4 (5%)
  • 5 (9%)
  • 6 (18%)
  • 7 (24%)
  • 8 (18%)
  • 9 (8%)
  • 10 (10%)

Total Voters: 2,871

Loading ... Loading ...

1 = ‘Terrible’, 10 = ‘Perfect’

F1 Fanatic holds polls on each race to find out which fans thought were the best and worst races during a season. Please vote based on how entertaining and exciting you thought the race was, not on how your preferred driver or team performed.

See the results for past seasons here:

2010 Italian Grand Prix

Browse all 2010 Italian Grand Prix articles

Advert | Go Ad-free

170 comments on Rate the race: Italy

  1. It wasn’t a great race, but we’ve been spoilt this season. You can’t expect every one to be a classic.

    Well done Fernando and Ferrari. That was what an F1 team should be doing!

    I’m not bothered that he didn’t pass him on the track because I’m sure every one of those tyre mechanics was under huge pressure and they delivered. They are the unsung heroes of this victory and will sleep well tonight I’m sure.

  2. Charles Carroll said on 12th September 2010, 17:01

    I gave it a 5, for it was not a bad race, but not the most exciting either.

    Good for Alonso taking a solid fight to Jensen, who also had a nice race. They both drove well and it was a fair fight for a change.

    As for Red Bull, Vettel’s “engine problem” was probably more dubious that Ferrari’s “he is faster than you” remark. THAT was team orders once again, but Vettel managed to overcome them by staying on his tires for so long.

    I predict that Weebs will not win the championship this year.

    • “As for Red Bull, Vettel’s “engine problem” was probably more dubious that Ferrari’s “he is faster than you” remark.”

      Vettel was the one complaining to Red Bull so was he giving himself team orders?

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 12th September 2010, 17:17

      As for Red Bull, Vettel’s “engine problem” was probably more dubious that Ferrari’s “he is faster than you” remark. THAT was team orders once again, but Vettel managed to overcome them by staying on his tires for so long.

      That’s just preposterous. The team control his strategy, there’s no way Vettel would have the information to know it would be advantageous to stay out. Remember how poor his conception of what was going on in the race was at Montreal?

      • It’s teamorders Keith. Plain and simple.
        And that’s just fine. If people don’t want team orders, we would need to run single car teams.

        • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 12th September 2010, 18:00

          It’s teamorders Keith. Plain and simple.

          I don’t see any reason to think it was and you haven’t said anything to convince me otherwise.

          • Well, before a race starts, the drivers get instructed.
            Vettel was probably instructed that when he was in front of Webber, he would claim an engine problem, and let Webber pass.
            This way there are no instructions sent over the radio.
            In theory it would help Webber. But you can’t predict the future.
            In this case, Vettel still finished before Webber.
            That’s how I see what happened.

        • I’m not a RB fan, but I think there is no chance in hell Vettle would have agreed to let Webber pass.

        • So you seriously think that a) after all we’ve seen from RedBull, now they’re issuing team orders in favour of Webber and b) Vettel would agree to such team orders? Not too likely.

      • No Keith, pretty likely.

        This situation is similar to that BMW faced at Montreal 2008. Kubica was allowed to pass heidfeld because he was on a different strategy.

        Red Bull might have instructed Vettel to let Webber through because if not, Webber would have had a terrible race result today.

        These could be team orders, but team orders to ensure both drivers get an equal chance not to favor one over other.

        • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 12th September 2010, 18:45

          How is it anything like that? Heidfeld and Kubica were on completely different strategies. Vettel might have been holding Webber up, but no more than Vettel was being held up by the car in front of him. And it still doesn’t explain why he was “allowed” to finish in front of Webber.

        • Webber’s race was compromised by Hulkenberg if anything. His bad start didn’t do him any favours either.

          • from Vettels pit team!

            Vettel first reported what he felt to be an apparent loss of power when he got up to seventh gear coming out of Parabolica to start lap 20. He continued to suffer later round the lap, and was passed by team mate Mark Webber at Ascari.

            The problem then cleared itself almost as quickly as it had appeared, and he did not have any more issues with the pedal for the remainder of the race. The telemetry told the team that there was slight brake pressure applied during that lap, despite Vettel having his foot off the pedal.

      • Charles Carroll said on 12th September 2010, 23:14

        Based upon what Will Buxton and the Speed TV crew had to say, especially in light of the fact that it allowed Mark to pass and then Seb began to set some of his fastest laps times, it looked extremely suspicious.

        I would say that it most likely was team orders by Red Bull, and that in the end they did not get the result that they had hoped for.

        • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 12th September 2010, 23:42

          I would say that it most likely was team orders by Red Bull

          So why did the same people you think sabotaged Vettel on lap 19 then gave him a strategy that got him ahead of his team mate and several others at the end of the race?

          • Charles Carroll said on 13th September 2010, 1:31

            I believe that when it became apparent that ol’ Weebs was having too much trouble with young Nicole Hulkaburger, they decided to push Mr. Vittles to the end and see if they got lucky.

            Ol’ Weebers thus managed to get by his arch nemesis without incident, for a change, but was unlucky with the Hulk later on.

            I still see team orders all over this “sudden engine problem that miraculously corrected itself immediately after Weebs passed him and then went on to set fast lap times” bull-honkey.

            Yes, I did say “bull-honkey”.

            Just because it did not work out as Mr. Hornblower had wanted does not mean it did not happen this way. What is good for Luca is surely good for the Horn, no?

            I happen to think so.

          • what?

            Surely the reason to let Webber by would be to maximise the number of points Webber could get. Then why would they put Vettel on a strategy which put him back in front of Webber? The most advantageous thing to do would be to leave Vettel behind, putting Webber up one more place.

            Hoping Vettel would get lucky? Lucky how? The 3 leaders were way in front, he would never have had a hope of catching them, and he still would have been depriving Webber of points.

            Putting Vettel on a strategy which put him back in front of Webber completely blows any ideas of team orders away, there is absolutely no advantage to what they did.

            BBC said during the telecast that the Renault mechanics told Vettel to change engine settings which is what rectified the problem. It didn’t just miraciously disappear.

            And you’re also missing the fact that there is no pit-to-car telemetry, only car-to-pit. The days of mechanics in the pits being able to alter car settings is long gone, its been outlawed for many years and I’m poisitive are checked fairly rigorously by the scrutineers.

          • I find red bull telling vettel what to do in the sense of “team orders” laughable.

            Sorry, but Red Bull are not in a posistion to be telling vettel what to do. Sebastian is the key to getting a mercedes engine under that car, since Mercedes love giving german drivers their engine.

            Vettel’s holding the rope to his own neck and Red Bull’s future. One small whiff of team orders against him and that kid will jump ship to Mercedes quicker then a HRT looking for a “faster” car…

            I repeat again, vettel? number 2 driver? team orders? don’t make me laugh…

          • quattro said on 13th September 2010, 10:02

            @F1silverarrows,

            You are probably right and Vettel probably knows that as well. That explains how he manages to remain that confident and outspoken in spite of making enough misstakes to earn the title “The Crash Kid”. Any other driver would try to be more humble and learn from past experiences.

            What would be even more laughable though, is RB managing shoot themselfs in (what is left of) their feets one more time. Would anyone feel sorry for them if they lost the championship then? I would not. Poor Webber…

  3. Marcello said on 12th September 2010, 17:07

    Agree with Quattro. Eddie always trying to discredit the sport…. I laughed like crazy when he implied Vettels engine problems were a ploy to let Webber through……proven wrong yet again when Vettel got rid of his problem and set fastest times galore finishing 4th..infront of his team mate! Do us a favour Eddie

    • bosyber said on 13th September 2010, 10:59

      To be fair, Eddie Jordan himself didn’t take that very seriously, and said that it was quite unlikely right after.

  4. David-A (@david-a) said on 12th September 2010, 17:09

    I’m delighted that Ferrari won. But looking at the quality of the race, I give it a 7/10. It was great to see the top three so close, however the way Hamilton retired on lap 1 denied us a 4 way battle like at Istanbul. Good entertainment provided by Mark Webber, making a few nice passes (after yet another bad start), and close racing in the top 10.

  5. Marcello said on 12th September 2010, 17:12

    Hi Keith Collantine…was wondering if you knew at all who were the stewards this weekend, and if their surnames started with the letter H and finished with the letter G

  6. Fantastic race! It kept me without breath for all the 53 laps! The duel which never stopped between Alonso and Button and Alonso’s mistake and the dream come true of a Ferrari winning at Monza!

  7. We would have seen much more overtaking (or attempts at) without the mandatory tyrechange. Alonso wouldn’t have been waiting for the pitstop, but would have needed to attack like a man. On track.

    • qUattrO said on 12th September 2010, 18:20

      As I see it, the problem is not the single “mandatory tyrechange”. It is rather the lack of pitstops. Bridgestone are being chickens and produce tyres that will potentially survive a hole race or two (even with the soft compound!).

      Imagine if the tires were (as should) designed to only make say 30% or 35% of a race distance. That would add a whole new dimension to the races (remember Canada?). Unfortunatly Bridgestone are being cowards and does not want to take risks that will potentially damage their image in case accidents would happen (tyres exploding…). FIA is not reacting either which is a big shame.

      • bosyber said on 13th September 2010, 11:03

        You do have a point there, I still think that getting rid of the mandatory pit stop would work as well, but with it, we do really need “option” tires that are a lot less enduring. Bridgestone should have brought the super softs.

        But it seems that they need to start preparing those tires months in advance already and maybe that means that they had to be conservative? Still a it silly that Vettel could have gone without a pit stop if it had been allowed, although the stop itself did give some entertainment in the last lap :)

  8. Gave it a 2… Meh.. I feel asleep with 10 laps to go, reasonably sure I knew how it was going to end. Sure enough, I was right.

  9. 7/10. A bit like Malaysia this race. A decent amount of overtaking, but not too many pulse raising moments.

  10. 6! Not much happened…

  11. Good Race but I Sometimes think that Aerodynamics have Superseded Raw Speed of F1 cars Which means everybody makes great cars for other circuits which needs better Aero.

    This eventually results in the fact that the F1 cars of today are not bringing out the true Potential of the fastest F1 circuit “Autodrome Nationale Monza”. It is a little sad stuff but I would’nt complain much.

    I would love to see the F1 cars Flexing their Macho Speed muscles at Monza in the future rather than being aero beauties !!!

    Remember those early 2000s when Williams BMW showed off the Raw power wow :)

  12. It was an interesting race; the battle between Messrs Alonso and Button proving to be quite riveting. Lewis Hamilton was the victim of his own misjudgment; I must admit I felt a bit bad for him. I was looking forward to seeing him race.

    Nick Hulkenberg was quite unsportsmanslike. (Even if the description of his behavior seems to follow Germanic grammar! :-) ) He should have been penalized. Mark Webber’s pass was both well-deserved, and well-earned.

    Other than that, I still think the cars are ugly and the FIA is taking homogeneity lessons from NASCAR.

  13. wasiF1 (@wasif1) said on 13th September 2010, 6:50

    I voted 7, it was one of those race where you just wait for the leader to change position. Not much racing but some good driving by Alonso to keep the pressure up to Button & some good moves by Webber, who to me was the driver of the day.Also a nice drive by Roseberg.

  14. Icthyes (@icthyes) said on 13th September 2010, 13:44

    Just finished watching my recording, and it’s a 6 for me. Ironically even though we had a battle for the lead mos of the rest of the race was dull, and it would have been a 5 otherwise.

    Was tempted to vote 1 to counteract a lot of suspicious 10s but I thought better ;)

  15. BigJamoke said on 13th September 2010, 13:44

    One of the most boring races I’ve ever seen…..in any form of racing. I actually fell asleep watching this race. A new low of F1.

    Monza has all this history and everything, I get that…..But maybe the sport has outgrown this type of track. Maybe it’s time to move on

    • wasiF1 (@wasif1) said on 14th September 2010, 3:03

      I doubt Monza will ever be removed from the calender not just for it’s history but there are some tracks where the teams & drivers love to come & for sure this is one of them.

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.