Rate the race: 2013 Australian Grand Prix

2013 Australian Grand PrixPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Lewis Hamilton, Mercedes, Melbourne, 2013What did you think of today’s race? Share your verdict on the Australian Grand Prix.

F1 Fanatic holds polls after each Grand Prix to find out which fans thought of every race during the season.

Please vote based on how entertaining and exciting you thought the race was, not on how your preferred driver or team performed.

Rate the race out of ten and leave a comment below:

Rate the 2013 Australian Grand Prix out of ten

  • 1 (1%)
  • 2 (0%)
  • 3 (1%)
  • 4 (1%)
  • 5 (2%)
  • 6 (9%)
  • 7 (25%)
  • 8 (39%)
  • 9 (19%)
  • 10 (5%)

Total Voters: 995

Loading ... Loading ...

1 = ‘Terrible’, 10 = ‘Perfect’

You need an F1 Fanatic account to vote. Register an account here or read more about registering here.

See the results for past seasons here:

2013 Australian Grand Prix

Browse all 2013 Australian Grand Prix articles

Image ?ť?ģ Daimler/Hoch Zwei

273 comments on “Rate the race: 2013 Australian Grand Prix”

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3 5
  1. 7/10 – really enjoyable.

    1. Good result but only an ok race in terms of action and intensity. Quite a bit of it was a bit dull and there were only a few good moves.

      1. Mostly a “tyres & DRS” race but no doubt a lot of people rated it highly just because Lotus and Ferrari had the better of Red Bull, and Mercedes and FI were in the mix.

    2. 1) lotus = excellent…Kimi is #1 and I think the car is good enough to win the championship!!!!!
      2) ferrari = very good… good teamwork….good threat to Kimi
      3) red bull = honorable mention otherwise asleep at the switch….too slow…what happened….time to wake up…. especially Weber???
      4) mercedes = lewis hung on and got beat up through the whole race…. Nico goes boom….otherwise need a good car and some pace.
      5) force india = very good Sutil…got beat up through the whole race….the best B team by far !!!! Welcome to the big leagues.
      6) mclaren = pure junk….disaster…Button and Perez have to wake up….this was an A team???? Is Perez an A driver????
      7) sauber = disaster…. did they actually race in the Oz GP??? I don’t remember seeing either car in the broadcast….2 top tens in Oz 2012…..garbage in 2013. Next time pay for Kobayashi and get some air time for your sponsors! This team is heading from the best B team in 2012 to best C or D team in 2013
      8) williams = what happened to this team???? disaster….Maldonado better scrape up more $$$$
      9) the rest of the teams….sorry but you all got minimum air time….too few battles back in the field???

  2. I’ve gone for a 6: a lot of jumbling of positions and variety of strategy, but it just seemed to lack that something.

    1. Lack what? Red Bull domination? Thankfully! :p

      1. +1, hahahaha!

      2. It lacked the jaw-to-the-floor magic moments of a Brazil 2008, or a 2011 Canada. It also lacked a battle for the lead, as the winner was pretty much decided 5 or 6 laps before the end.

        1. @driftin at least the winner was decided in the later parts of the race than at the beginning like take pole win race

        2. That makes just about every other race in history a 6 or worse if those are the ingredients a race needs.

      3. Feels like the usual plan from Red Bull, being very fast in qualifying in order to have the advantage in the race; however, other cars were up to speed during the race.

        1. @hzh00 – I think the problem here was more to do with the fact the Red Bull just wasn’t very kind to it’s tyres: Vettel had to pit earlier than the chasing pack and although he had good consistent pace it just wasn’t good enough. They do look to have qualifying nailed though.

          1. @vettel1 – that is my point in the first place. I mean that the focus on qualifying was given the priority among the Red Bulls, and their lack of similar superiority in the race is due to several thing, including tire management. An example is the set of tires that Vettel has started the race with, as he has shown very fast sector times during the pole lap and the lap he did after it (which he has aborted), at the cost of consuming that set as compared to his rivals.

      4. @kingshark – Red Bull domination wouldn’t have improved the race! The lack of a proper battle at the top though kind of did put a damper on the latter part of the race for me though. :/

    2. I agree – only 2 guys were able to race today. Kimi and Fernando the rest had to manage tires.

      1. If there was someone who was managing his tires it was Kimi: if it wasn’t for that, Raikkonen wouldn’t have won this race by country miles!

        1. but he was able to get way more energy out of the tires. Just like Fernando he had way better average lap times than the rest of the field.

          1. Notice how he always kept space to a car in front and how he did not push right after the pit stop where you destroy your tyres the most (aka Hamilton). Sector times by Kimi were just amazing.

        2. firstLapNutcaseGrosjean (@)
          17th March 2013, 16:55

          When you are managing your tyres you are slower. If Raikkonen would have done 3 pit’s, then he would have been more faster. That’s logic. We don’t know how fast is Lotus when the drivers don’t mange their tyres.

      2. They were all racing. tyre management is part of racing too, and the best drivers know how to do it best. it has been like this in every catagory of motorsport since the beginning of time. if your favourite driver does not win, it is such a simple pathetic excuse to say they were not able to “race” because of the tyres, everyone is in the same boat – the top drivers still come to the fore, as do the best cars.

        1. Unfortunately tyre management is BORING.

          1. @hohum – when it gets to this level then yes, I agree :/

        2. Raikkonen is one of my favorites, and this “race” sucked, there where NO overtakes, only drive bys. We did not see a race today, rather a sunday cruise, there we no pushing at any time, sans a bit in the opening lap.

          1. Well said,in fact the ‘race’ is so lacklustre i’m posting this while watching it for 1st time on BBC Red Button,this is tyre strategy etc gone mad,beam me back to the 70s for some proper RACING !! Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

      3. @tmf42 – it did appear that way: most of the guys just weren’t able to push at all. I think that accounted for the strewn-out field towards the end. The situation will hopefully improve in Malaysia though as it is a more permanent circuit so should rubber in better hopefully!

    3. It was a great spectacle whether you like it or not. It was a great race, the qually pace had nothing to do with the race pace and that’s why we love series like GP2 and apparently F1, some teams this year seem to not only be able to extract the better from the tyres but set up the car to protect the tyres as well.

      1. It certainly wasn’t a 10/10 race…

        1. It’s a matter of perspective. It takes all sorts to make an F1 forum after all. :)

    4. @vettel1

      The Red Bull legend is over now…
      Red time are coming now

      1. David not Coulthard (@)
        17th March 2013, 8:08

        When a Toleman won the 1st race?

      2. Vettel finishes third and therefore, by the transitive property, “The Red Bull legend is over now”…

        1. The Next Pope
          17th March 2013, 10:48

          It’s too early for this!
          I want to be happy that teams are bringing the fight to the bulls but I’m just satisfied for the race today. No expectations at all.

    5. Haha, classic @vettel1 . Obviously it was missing your favorite driver’s win.

    6. I’ve gone for 9, just because another driver except Vettel won the race

      1. Confirms my thoughts as to why the ratings are so high for a race that was all tyres and DRS.

        1. David not Coulthard (@)
          18th March 2013, 10:53

          @hohum Except that the Vettel fan whose comment is the one you’re reading also gave the race a 9? :-)

      2. @tifoso1989 – that shouldn’t matter. If we renamed Alonso driver x and Vettel driver y I bet your rating would change…

    7. Dion (@infinitygc)
      17th March 2013, 9:00

      I do agree, it lacked something. I gave it a 7/10, if only for the unpredictability and finishing line-up (especially the 9th, 10th and 11th places).

    8. I gave it a 7. Exciting start and middle, but it lacked overtaking at the front and was a straightforward finish for Kimi.

      Webber really needs to sort his starts out, it’s getting a bit embarrassing .

      1. you can say that again, and again, and again……

        1. Not Mark’s fault this time, though my initial reaction was *** again.


          “Red Bull team principal Christian Horner revealed that the McLaren-supplied ECU had stopped telemetry getting back to the race engineers and as a result Webber wasn’t given an ideal clutch bite point and then suffered a KERS failure.

          “Mark’s problems were hugely frustrating because it was an ECU issue and that is supplied by a third party,” Horner said. “We lost all telemetry on the formation lap and then you can’t do the preparation you need to at the start. That meant he was blind for the start and that ECU issue shut the KERS down as well. By the time we reset the whole system he’d lost the ground at the start. It’s something that they need to get on top of because there has been a lot of issues during testing.” “

          1. Thanks, as a Webber supporter I find the starting problems he has suffered more than frustrating.

    9. I vote 8 due to have seen Adrian Sutil leading. Great race from Kimi and Alonso. Wish McLaren come back to the game soon. As we seen in previous years Sepang will be very different.

      1. The ‘Sutil train’ was quite entertaining.

    10. Probably a 6 was harsh, a 7 would be more appropriate. The ending was quite dull I found though with the field strewn out and there was very little in the way of gritty passes (Mark Webber’s was pretty good but other than that it was just a DRS procession).

      To clarity also, I don’t rate a race by who won it – it specifically states at the bottom of the article not to do that and I adhere to it. Few could argue it was an enthralling race though!

      1. Right on, I gave it 5 for average as it really was all tyres and DRS, the best part was the mixed up field at the front but that is a high for the season but doesn’t mean the racing was good.

    11. I feel exactly the same. 6 for me. I think that had something to do with the broadcasting though, I mean, what happened to Nico Hulkenberg in that race for example?… didn’t see the car once.

      1. @john-h – he didn’t start the race due to a fuel system problem, but they could’ve made it more obvious from the broadcasts! I did notice that some of the few good overtakes were missed though by the TV cameras.

        1. @vettel1 Ha!! That makes my comment a little embarrassing! Still, I guess my point stands that we didn’t see enough of the midfield/minnow action.

          1. @john-h I think it was a result of qualifying being too late to finish the repair! Agreed though, they seemed to follow the front runners rather a lot towards the end despite the fact they were incredibly spaced-out.

          2. Well thats points for the USA broadcast on NBC S they made 2 or 3 mentions of Hulks problem at the start and after.

          3. @hohum – it was also mentioned on Sky but perhaps it could have been made clearer, as obviously some people missed it!

      2. (@vettel1)
        Red Bull domination wouldn’t have improved the race!

        How, exactly?

        Just watched the BBC highlights;
        Top 3 best bits-
        1. Kimi’s victory, thoroughly well deserved, though it’s a shame Hamilton couldn’t have completed the podium.
        2. Sutil’s excellent drive, especially after a year out – was brilliant to see a FI leading.
        3. The great moment between Alonso and Hamilton, where Alonso almost seemed to know Hamilton would defend to senna-esque to the last, and compensated accordingly.

        Criticisms –
        1. I thought people were over-reacting about the tyre degredation, but it really was utterly ludicrous on the options. When option degredation so bad it’s effectively nullifying quali results, you know there’s something not quite right.
        2. McLaren’s dire showing, would’ve liked to have seen more from Perez on his debut.
        3. Webber’s poor start – I’m a big Webber fan but he just can’t seem to get off the line properly.

        1. *meant Massa complete the podium.

        2. @sgt-pepper – I don’t quite get you: I’m saying a Red Bull light-to-flag victory would be rather dull if we are to take a neutral perspective, which I’m sure you agree with. It’s never fun to see a driver dominate unless it is so comprehensive it is admirable, such as Senna in the wet at Estoril in ’86.

    12. Couldnt agree with you more. It definitely lacked something; can’t put my finger on it.

      1. Damnit, I just got it! It had no build up, no tension!

        1. I think the early Sunday Qualy – take a break come back and race, dunno it seem to me that it was possibly too much for the drivers, fans , viewers. Tension and energy were just not there, plus tons and tons of pit stops made the field shuffle way too much, even with live time and scoring was a big mess, too many thinks going on at once. lets give this race : 8.

  3. 7/10 – much more enjoyable and much less predictable than a lot of people thought it would be. Not many incidents or anything like that, but just good honest wheel-to-wheel racing and a lot of strategy.

  4. 8/10 Excellent win for Kimi, and Vettel not winning as expected is great stuff :)

    1. @zippyone i can only agree with you there! :)

  5. 9/10

    Multiple race leaders, different strategies, overtaking galore, non-stop action. An incredible enthralling and entertaining race. Only thing that could’ve made it better was a true battle for the win at the finish.

    1. +1. And DRS sort of worked.

      1. +1 DRS did work well today

    2. You are going for 11 @magnificent-geoffrey agreed, and it was all dry Q3 as well, don’t remember a dry weekend as good as this.

      1. Dry and dynamic, that was what I wanted to say.

    3. A good season opener it was a 9. No incidents, no SC, 7 different leaders. Its nice to see a hand of teams in the mix. It seems to me that at the moment the fastest are: 1. Ferrari, 2. RBR, 3. Lotus, 4. Mercedes, 5. FI, and every team has a different attribute.
      -1 for the backmakers (is it just me or did Alonso lose +/- 8,0sec laping them in the final stages?)
      So 8 overal. But somehow I miss the “all or nothing races” that we had up until 2009…

      1. @arrrang

        It seems to me that at the moment the fastest are: 1. Ferrari, 2. RBR, 3. Lotus

        I saw it as Red Bull hold a clear advantage in qualifying, but in the races the Lotus comes into it’s own and is quicker than both the Red Bull and the Ferrari. The Ferrari does hold an edge over the Red Bull though on race pace and is slightly better in qualifying, so it’s pretty much even I think. Malaysia will probably give us a better picture as to where everyone is though!

        1. Red Bull for 1 lap
          Ferrari for race pace
          Lotus for tyre management.

          1. @hohum – I second that. Although I’d say precisely because of the tyre conservation of the Lotus, at this stage it had the edge on overall consistent race pace. That may very well change as the season progresses though and pure pace will be more of a factor (to the benefit of the racing, Red Bull and Ferrari I imagine).

          2. That’s exactly what I was thinking.
            I think that RBR may be faster in race pace than it looks like. Seb did an amazing quali but as a result his Pirellis died, they didn’t have life left for two full laps of the race. Mark also found the proper pace in the finishing laps.
            And how much better tyre management does that Lotus have compared to Ferrari will be seen soon in Malaysia. If im not wrong it’s not as big as some think after today.
            Oh and one more thing: these super softs are ridiculous!

    4. You into pro-whrestling much?

      I mean if you thought that was overtaking you must either be very new to F1 (overtaking is supposed to be hard) or just think that the show of seeing cars drive by each other is good enough.

      1. @tvm To be honest, I find your suggestion rather insulting. I’ve watched Formula 1 my whole life and find it amazing that some people just can’t appreciate the challenging nature of modern Formula 1. Too many fans look at F1 through rose-tinted nostalgia glasses, in my view. Give me more races like today over the predictable, unremarkable processions of old, thank you very much.

        1. @magnificent-geoffery, “unremarkable processions of old”, how old? I hope you are not referring to the Schumacher years as the “old days”.
          Its true that a driver/car combination in the 50’s,60′ and 70s often was superior to the rest of the field but barely did they dominate at all tracks or for several years and immediately behind them the action was usually intense with cars swapping positions all round the track.

        2. Yeah well, here is an exercise for you, hit the “back” button in your browser to get to F1 Fanatic overview, then browse the articles and count the number of mentioning on tires and strategy, vs. the mentioning of great overtakes or moments of the race.

          All the talk about tires from all the teams and everyone involved in in F1 is smoke from a fire, but you don’t see the issue with f1 racers nursing around for 58 laps, or pitting bloody 4 laps into the race?, or are you just trying to the oh-so pragmatic smart guy?

          Sorry but calling those drive by’s overtaking is insulting to racing.

  6. Good for Kimi! I thought Mercedes were up to something, but their car surely is :( – Bummer Rosberg. Looks like Ferrari and Lotus are strong this year, this is great!

  7. Gaston (@golarrazabal)
    17th March 2013, 7:39

    Good race, but I cannot shake the feeling that the tyre management thing has gotten a bit excessive.

    1. Absolutely, the tires are horrible in my opinion. The medium seems alright, but the super softs were super bad. They hardly last 10 laps for crying out loud. We don’t need tires that last all race, but we don’t need this either.

    2. @golarrazabal РI second that: it seemed only Alonso and Räikkönen were really able to conserve them yet still maintain good pace. Hopefully the issue resolves itself though in time Рa whole season of that will be dire!

      1. Even a half season of that will render the ‘racing’ a joke,the cameras spend more time in the pitlane than ever,,no thanks,lets get back ontrack,just when you think F1 is regaining some of the thrill factor it takes a step backwards.If some of you guys think that was a good race you’re easily pleased.

    3. I applaud Pirelli for acknowledging that the tyres are important in producing exciting races and their campaign to produce tyres that challenge the drivers to balance the way they push their cars around the track, but after seeing Sutil’s SS immediately melt under him and ruin what was a great performance I hope we don’t see the SS compound too much over the course of the season.

      There’s so much negative comments about the tires but atleast they’re the same for every single driver. Each driver can control the way they drive, and thus degrade their tyres, and push/conserve where needed. I really hoped for a weekend where they would have DRS completely disabled just to see one weekend where drivers did not have the option of waiting for the DRS zone to make their “pass”.

      DRS often forces drivers to maintain the gap until the checkpoint so they do not get re-passed on the DRS zone, to think of how many potential exciting moves the drivers have decided not to make because of this unfortunate fact.

      Pirelli tires, love them or hate them, are still much better for “the show” than DRS will ever be.

    4. Agreed, I’m surprised everyone isn’t hearing alarm bells ringing when drivers are having to change tyres after FIVE laps

    5. I think it’s ok now. What I think will be a problem is teams looking at Sutil’s progress from 12th and attempting to qualify 11th or 12th instead of 8th or 9th. That’s just not right.

      Either the top ten rule has to (finally) change, or the gap between the tyres needs to decrease – those super-softs were a bit ridiculous.

  8. Sankalp Sharma
    17th March 2013, 7:39

    Brilliant race! – 9 it is.

    Well done Kimi, Alonso, Massa. And the Legend: Adrian Sutil!!

    1. yes many here own Sutil (and force india’s choice of) and apology.

      He started 2013 as he ended 2011 so its no real surprise well shouldnt be. Great drive.

      1. And Force India started the year as it finished the previous one: leading a race. Hopefully we’ll see a victory from them along the season. Great choice for Force India to bring back Sutil. On the opposite we’ll have another doomed year for Catheram.

  9. I gave it a 7 or 8 great win for Kimi great job for sutil for the race

  10. 6/10 – it was a good race but after last years US grand prix, I think that races could be better if tires would allow racing.

  11. A solid race & great strategy for Kimi & Lotus. Ferrari looking strong but Redbull won’t be happy with their race pace. Mercedes clearly improved on last season but still some way to go and as for McLaren . . . . unless their gamble starts to pay off by the time we get to the Euro races then they will be a midfield team this year. However it’s early days & I have faith but it will surely put a smile on Hamilton’s face.

    Shame for Sutil but I am very pleased to see teams going on different strategies. Di Resta has he work cutout this season if he wants to get the upper hand.

    Finally well done Bianci. Marussia with the slight upperhand over Caterham

    1. I voted 7/10

  12. 7/10. Not the greatest race, but very enjoyable. The variety of strategies was excellent, and I can say it’s a start for a very promising season. Red Bull is nowhere near to the uncatchable status I thought it wouldhave been and Lotus, Ferrari and Mercedes have promising future.

  13. I went for an 8/10. Could have been better had both Mercedes and FI been better at strategy calls. And off course Ferrari cutting back Massa was not all that great a move, he might have even gotten closer to Kimi than Alonso did. But what we did see was a worthy start to the year. We saw RBR are vulnerable on race pace, Massa is better than his team allows, Mercedes promising, Lotus good, and clever, and Sutil in the FI very good, but have to learn a bit of strategy. Lovely race

    1. @bascb

      You clearly dont understand how decisions are made regarding strategy. Each side of the garage makes their own decisions and when one wants to pit, they ask if the other side is expecting to pit on the same lap. If they both want to pit on the same lap, then the lead car gets priority.

      As you would have seen, Alonoso’s side of the garage was risky in how they came in extra early, catching both Vettel and Massa off guard.

      If Massa’s side of the garage had been more on it, they could have done what Alonso had done, leaving Alonso out a lap longer. But they never.

      1. I was really tempted to write something about the reeeally bad strategy they took for Massa, just to see if you copy/paste your reply more than once! ;)

      2. So according to your explanation of how thing are at Ferrari, it was Massa’s team the one asking him to let Alonso past him, because that is in Massa’a interest.

    2. Sorry to contradict you, but I don’t see how Ferrari cut back Massa. What I saw, was that Alonso was all the way behind Massa, and he made the move for the undercut on the second pitstop, which was very early in that second stint. After that, neither Massa nor Vettel were capable of catching him. I don’t see your logic here that Massa would have been closer to Kimi, if he was going to get closer he should have done it. Massa couldn’t even overtake Sutil, despite having a better car. This thing about Ferrari favoring Alonso over Massa is getting sooo old.

      1. Fully agree. Were Massa faster Alonso shouldn’t have been able to catch him, but he did. Besides, this is always said to be a “team sport” Is it or isn’t?

        1. so are you saying its a team sport, and therefore its good that Ferrari give Alonso the better pit calls, or are you saying Massa would have been slower even if he had been given the advantage some teams give to the guy in front?

          Because both together just don’t make sense @madp

      2. Both were stuck behind Vettel @caci99, that was the reason Alons could catch up, and it was why it was a very good call to have him stop and get the undercut.

        But Ferrari could safely have called Massa in the same lap Vettel pitted and have given him less of a disadvantage (as being on the slower tyres had him drop back further behind Vettel and got him behind Sutil who he had to pass before being able to go forward again).

        1. This exactly. Massa was faster in the first stint at least. Staying out for too long ruined his race. When Smedley told him to stay out and see what he can do without traffic, after literally everyone had seen how much slower you are on old tyres, it was same procedure as always with Ferrari.

  14. A very solid 8. A genuine battle for the lead until near the end, some fantastic overtakes, and genuinely exciting racing. It wasn’t a classic, but it was never dull. A very good start to the season.

    1. Bob (@bobthevulcan)
      17th March 2013, 8:03

      I completely agree. Not to mention Sutil’s remarkable performance – it really has changed my opinion of him as a driver.

      1. I think this may have been blown a bit out of proportion. He did a great job, but was only up there to begin with because he didn’t quite make the cut for Q3, and the supersoft tyres were a nightmare today, causing a huge disadvantage for the top 10 runners at the beginning of the race.

        1. Agree, Sutil’s early performance was largely illusory, as he hadn’t yet used the difficult super-soft tyres. Once he put them on, he struggled, just like everyone else.

        2. I think his performance was quite remarkable, he proved he has lost nothing of his race craft by being quite a challenge to pass, and had his car been a little easier on the medium compound he would have faired better still. For a driver who has the most to lose in the court of public opinion, it was a perfect day for him

        3. The supersofts as they are certainly made their impression on the race, although even with these almost qualifying tyres to handicap them, there still were big differences in how far the SS took people (contrast Button, Webber vs. Raikkonen and the Mercedes cars).
          I would say that the cooler temperature at the end made Sutils troubles on them then far worse than FI expected, maybe they should have kept him out for another couple of laps on the mediums before changing over. On the other hand, its likely Sutil also could have given them a more carefull heatup to help his plight. But that is all in hindsight.

      2. To me, the Sutil factor in this race, more killed it than added to it. I mean, Sutil was there in the lead pack since the first stops, mixing the leaders. It really looked like he could have been there until the end. But his last change to SuperSoft, was so terrible. The only good thing his strategy produced, was impending the leaders for way too long, and then fall back behind at once.
        Nothing against his driving though, of course he was doing his own race, so congratulations to him. But for the leading pack it wasn’t that great, we could have seen a different story, with more close battles for the win, imho.

        1. Not sure how you can say his strategy “impending” the leaders. (?) The leaders were able to pass other vehicles and in the end, Sutil pulled away. Even after pitstop Sutil stayed right with everyone else without falling back. It wasn’t until changing to the SS that Sutil hit tire issues.

      3. Look up his results prior to F1 on wiki, he is actually one of those drivers Martin Brundle refers to as “Champions” – same cannot be said about some recent rookies.

    2. I agree 100%. This was a race where you genuinely couldn’t tell who would win until the final stages. Very interesting. Can’t wait for Malaysia. 8/10

  15. 6/10 Too clean of a race for an Australian GP.

  16. 8/10 – Very decent race, plenty of battles, and nice to see Sutil with the frontrunners, though he faded terribly.

    Kimi Raikkonen just sneaked up on everyone and took it by surprise, with a solid drive.

  17. 9/10
    Great race, not much overtaking, but a lot of good strategies.
    Lotus is the best handling the tyres.
    About pace, i think Lotus, Ferrari, Red Bull and Mercedes (if they decided 3 stops since the start, i think Hamilton could have a chance to finish on the podium) are close.

  18. I don’t Know why but I get the feeling that the dull weather had an affect on the Ratings possibly. Although I gave it an 8/10 I wonder whether this may be a factor.

  19. 7/10. A bit less predictable than expected.

    Tyres acting a bit artificial again and more or less the usual suspects in the top 10 brought it down a bit for me, but nevertheless, a very solid start of the season.

  20. 8/10 Alot of action, alot of surprise. Good Race :)

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3 5

Leave a Reply

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

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.