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 ?? Daimler/Hoch Zwei

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

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3 4 5
  1. Pablo Martinez (@)
    17th March 2013, 7:49

    8/10; good overtakes, and nice racing between Hamilton and Alonso at the middle of the race

  2. Remember guys:
    1-2 – Nothing happened or Bahrain
    3-7 – Bad
    8 – Good
    9 – Pretty good
    10 – Really good race

    1. I’m guessing you’re being tongue in cheek, but 9 is worse than 8?

      1. Yep, got them mixed up somehow.

    2. I disagree 5 equals mid place or average, more than 5 is good less is bad.

      1. @hohum

        You’re right. In my comment, I was mocking the widely popular internet misconception about 0-10 scale, where if, say, 7/10 is given, some people think “Meh, that’s NOT the best score” or with 4/10 they don’t think “That’s almost average”, but rather “That’s terrible”.

        I think this is why thumbs up/thumbs down voting system was implemented all around the internet. Before, people voted either 1 star or 5 stars, 1-2 or 8-10 and so on. People seem to completely miss the “middle ground” when it comes to voting.

        1. @xivizmath, sorry I missed the humour, I do it myself sometimes but as you say what you wrote seemed representative of most of the voters, why I took it seriously.

  3. 5/10.
    Far too much of the easier DRS/Tyre related passing for my liking.

    Watching Perez get mugged & be totally defenseless to stop it because of the effect of the DRS & tyres was just stupid to watch & was the same later on watching Sutil 5 seconds a lap slower with cars just cruising easily by him.

    This current style F1 is seriously starting to kill my interest in F1, I just don’t appreciate watching passing become so easy that its boring to watch & watching drivers been completely defenseless against it.

    1. Perez was defenseless because his car is bad, it’s not tyres’ fault.

      All in all, I don’t get the complaints about the tyres, it’s still the the fastest driver-car-combination who wins the race. Only different parts of performance are more important than others.

      Nothing has really changed in that sense.

      1. it’s not tyres’ fault.

        Not for Perez, but look at how the super-softs performed for god’s sake both in the first part of the race and on Sutil’s car at the end! Perez and Button simply didn’t feel the effects of the tyres acting up because McLaren just got the car fundamentally wrong but that doesn’t mean the Pirellis are spot-on.

        it’s still the the fastest driver-car-combination who wins the race

        Not the case here. The fastest car winning would have meant Ferrari or Red Bull or maybe Merc and the fastest driver Massa, Vettel or Hamilton. Today was about the most equillibrated drive and the car that was easiest on its tyres. Simple as that.

        1. I dunno, I’m pretty sure the fastest car was Raikkonen’s Lotus today, seeing as it crossed the finish line first

          1. If you think the fastest car and the fastest driver are variables determined by whoever crosses the finish line first, you got the whole motor racing concept wrong, I’m afraid. Let’s just agree to disagree here.

          2. I’ll disagree then. The figures will show in no uncertain terms that Kimi in his Lotus had the highest average speed over the full race distance.
            Therefore the fastest car/driver combination won the race.

            Cook up however many “what if’s” you like, this will not alter the fact that the winning driver was faster than everyone else.

            I think this is a common factor in winning a race.

          3. One less pit stop saved 20 seconds, how far ahead did he finish?

          4. @HoHum

            And made him do stints longer by 5 and 6 laps than his rivals. 11 more laps on badly worn tyres, when his rivals had new ones for that period. And how far ahead did he finish?

            Your stat is not the only one to consider.

        2. The tyres, as Hamilton pointed out earlier in the week, are the same for everybody. Teams have built their cars with these challenges in mind.

          You can’t just exclude one variable and say “Red Bull were fastest if you discount the effect of the tyres.” It’d be the same as arguing who would be the fastest if the cars didn’t have engines, or wheels. It’s not relevant, because they’re part of the overall package.

          1. The tyres, as Hamilton pointed out earlier in the week, are the same for everybody. Teams have built their cars with these challenges in mind.

            The tyres are the same for everybody but they do not behave the same for everybody. Teams to build their cars with these challenges in mind but (unlike the engines and other components your refer to) not everything about the Pirellis is a known-factor, that’s the difference. Plus, if you take the top teams into account, they either build their own engines or get them supplied along with the support, the data, everything. Tyres are just consumable goods supplied by a third party, so there’s a different level of comparison there.

            And yes, I can say one team could be the fastest, excluding the effects on the tyres (the negative effects, out of the usual performance window that applies to everybody). It’s just like saying Red Bull and Vettel were fastest in Valencia last year until the alternator gave in. Which is perfectly true.

            Either way, it’s the start of 2012 with bipolar rubber once again. Pirelli have learned NOTHING.

          2. Either way, it’s the start of 2012 with bipolar rubber once again. Pirelli have learned NOTHING.

            Actually this is exactly what they intended and it served up some unpredictable action and indeed results.
            It may not be the purists way to race F1 but it’s the way that is maintaining a significant level of interest for a sport that needs as much interest as it can maintain for lots of $$$$$’s.

          3. @red-andy, they could decide the winner by making the team managers play darts and it would be “the same for everybody” but it would be lousy racing.

        3. What makes you say that the fastest car-driver did not win? Kimi set the fastest lap on lap 57(i think) with tyres which were 4-5 laps older.I’d say that was pretty fast.
          As for tyres, i remember in older “classic F1” times they used to have the special qualifying only tyres and engines which wouldnt last more than 5-6 laps
          Dont see much difference.

        4. I think that the fastest car was Lotus, because Kimi set the fastest lap on lap 57 when his tyres were 5 laps older than Alonso and he was very consistent.

      2. Perez was defenseless because his car is bad, it’s not tyres’ fault.

        The car was not good, However him getting passed as easily as he was earlier in the race was purely down to the tyres. If you looked at the timing screen at that time he was 6 seconds slower than he had been a few laps earlier & than he was after he pitted.

        If the loss of performance in these unfit for purpose tyres was not so stupidly high then he’d have been able to put up a decent defense.

        I’ve said this before but everyone goes on about Montreal 2010 been what Pirelli is doing, But they have totally failed at it!
        In Montreal in 2010 the Bridgestone’s were suffering higher than normal wear, However the drop-off was not so high & the performance difference between worn/fresh was not so high that racing between 2 cars on tyres at different stages of wear was impossible & that meant cars on worn tyres could still defend.

        On the Pirelli’s if your on worn tyres & someone’s coming at you 3-5 seconds a lap faster then your completely defenceless & to me that is not racing & certainly the ‘passing’ it produces ain’t exciting to watch as a fan!

  4. At last .. it took a Force India of Adrian Sutil to stop the flying bulls !

  5. 5/10

    Quite boring race, not much action at all even at start.

  6. 5/10 F1 becoming more boring. It is not racing just nursing the tyres, who does best is the winner. No more racing skills required.

    1. I wouldn’t say that no racing skills are required but you’re right.

  7. We are back…come on ferrari time to dominate….let’s go

  8. Good race. 7/10

  9. 9/10
    The race was a lot better than I expected after the qualifying result. Though it was pretty clear by halfway how the various strategies were going to play out, it was still entertaining waiting for them to work out. I think the relative lack of overtaking was compensated for by the uncertainty of the tyres and it being the first race of the season.

  10. A solid race, juggling for position for most of the race, sutil providing a teaser. Apart from Mclaren, maybe Merc., the pace is indeed a bit as if development continues from Brazil, but we only know that now it is over. Enjoyed it a lot 8/10.

  11. 6 / 10 good race but nothing special,nice to see that bulls are not that mighty in the race pace and we would have thought,but looks like williams and mclaren have really gone backward btw great drive from sutil after a year off sadly get undone by poor tyre strategy from FI

  12. 7/10 Exciting opening few laps, slight lull in the middle. 2nd half was very entertaining with Alonso, Vettel and Kimi duelling and trying to make their strategies work though. Great to see several cars having chances to win/get on the podium throughout the race, looks like we’re definitely in for another great season!

  13. Hate these tyres! They can help a race, but they can destroy it, too! Even SS should last at least 15 laps, come on Pirelli! Ridiculous how Sutil suffered just because he had new tyres on.

    1. Ridiculous how Sutil suffered just because he had new tyres on.

      Usually being on new tyres benefits that driver.

      1. Ridiculous how Sutil suffered just because he had new tyres on.

        That’s exactly my thoughts as well. He’s one of the guys that simply had the performance come to them backwards from the tyres. He was lapping faster than Alonso, Massa and Vettel with mediums 10+ laps older than what they had fitted and then he gets a train of super-softs on in order for them to last one lap and be 2-3 sec. off the mediums’ pace. Ridiculous.

        Third stint, Ferrari and Red Bull made the mediums work for 13-15 laps, Lotus for 20-some-30 and still, Raikkonen managed to put in faster laps than both Alonso and Vettel.

        It’s true the conditions didn’t help either and that Pirelli made the wrong choice bringing the super-softs here, instead of softs…but this extremely wide performance range made available for different teams shouldn’t happen, really.

    2. @magon4

      Ridiculous how Sutil suffered just because he had new tyres on.

      The reason Sutil lead twice during this race was because the cars in front of him had already done a supersoft stint. He was very aware that he would have to drive on the supersofts too, so taking that into cosideration, he couldn’t have ended higher than 5th anyway.

        1. @andae23 I still don’t agree with the impact these tyres have. The window is too small. At the beginning, track temp was around 24 degrees and the SSs worked better than at the end, when the track was quite a few degrees less. What I’m saying is that a few degrees shouldn’t make that kind of difference, the window is much too small! And new tyres should always start out being faster, not slower!

          1. @magon I agree with that.

        2. Right the first time.

  14. Chris (@tophercheese21)
    17th March 2013, 8:02


    Quite enjoyed that. Really happy to see Kimi win, and Fernando beat Vettel.

    – Kimi winning

    – Close racing all up and down the field

    – Massa returning to form

    – Only seeing Vettel’s finger once a weekend is better than twice. Especially if it’s on a saturday. (Sunday morning)

    – TOO MANY PITSTOPS – Pirelli brought the wrong tyres. Should have brought the soft. Not the super softs.

    – Lewis’s lack of race pace

    1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
      17th March 2013, 8:02


      Sutil deserved to finish 5th or 6th.

      1. +1, never imagined fresh tires would ruin someones race.

        1. @illusive …..hahhahaha so true

    2. You hit the nail right on the head. Bringing the super-softs made no sense on this track. Drivers had everything to lose and nothing to gain by using them.

      How on earth are races like Monaco and Canada going to work this year with the super-softs behaving as they do?

      1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
        17th March 2013, 10:29

        Agreed. They made entirely the wrong choice. I can see why they made the choice, because the majority of corners are slow/medium speed corners.

        But it was just 1 step too soft. It could have been a 9 or 10 had they brought a combo of soft/mediums or soft/hards.

    3. @tophercheese21 You are right about the tyre assesment. Pirelli was aware of the situation from the beginning, they wanted it that way (as Brundle analysed). Pirelli did not want this to turn to a 1 stopper or a 2 stopper, hence they did not want to bring the Soft. If they did, how many of us would be talking about tyres today…
      Having said that, Pirelli would only continue this mayhem for the first 5-6 races, at the later part of the season, it would revert to conservative tyres, like it did last year…

  15. A strong 8.

    If this race would’ve happened in like 10 years ago, it would be rated as a classic among the like of Suzuka ’05 and others. Now, it being only an 8 tells you a lot about how great era this is in the history of F1, despite of the all Pirelli-DRS-whining really.

    It’s kind of amazing how people don’t see this.

    1. David not Coulthard (@)
      17th March 2013, 8:38

      I’d like the DRS to be used whether or not any car is in front of you. You’re right about the tyres, though (Though I can’t disagree this, though. If only teams aren’t allowed to solve it as the season goes.

      1. David not Coulthard (@)
        17th March 2013, 8:42

        Siorry, the link was supposed to be this

    2. “Now, it being only an 8 tells you a lot about how great era this is in the history of F1”
      I completely agree tmekt

  16. I think it was pretty good, really should have been a safety car Maldondo to tighten things up at the front.

    1. NO,NO,NO,NO!

  17. Boring race to be honest, they were all driving like District Nurses mostly. Whoever’s got Perez’s and Grosjean’s balls please give them back for Malaysia!

    Webber needs replacing, what a bore.

    Massa really surprised me, looks very focused, dodgy pit wall decisions there unfortunately.

    All the rookies behaved themselves and finished, well done to them. Bianchi a cut above the rest IMO.

    Had a £10 bet on Kimi to win at 20/1 though, and £5 on Alonso for Podium so not all bad!

    1. Congrats on the bets.

      I myself had Kimi for the win and both Vettel and Alonso in the top-5 in the prediction championship.

      1. Cheers, forgot to mention that I had the following bets too:

        Rosberg to be 1st retiree – £5
        Rosberg to get fastest lap – £5 (covering myself!)
        2 cars to retire on Lap 1 – £5
        Safety Car to be deployed – £5
        Alonso to be Lap 1 leader – £5

        Still made a nice profit! Can’t believe there was no safety car, almost got it right with Rosberg. He’s got dodgy DNF history in the past few races plus his gearbox went tits up in practice. Was considering Hulkenberg for first retiree, since he’s failed to ever complete 1 lap in Australia but decided against it, Doh!

    2. Whoever’s got Perez’s and Grosjean’s balls please give them back for Malaysia!

      @f1bettingguru That was classic… take a bow

  18. 7 for me – very intriguing in regards to the battle for the win, aided by the flexibility in strategies. Not much on-track/wheel-to-wheel action bar the few overtakes. At least Red Bull didn’t run and hide, so on that aspect I couldn’t ask for anymore in the inaugural race for hopefully a great season.

  19. Thank you, Kimi! But McLaren.. oh

  20. Jared H (@thejaredhuang)
    17th March 2013, 8:09

    Anyone watch it on Sky? Is it me or did Croft and Brundle completely forget that Raikkonen was on a 2 stop when they said Alonso was in position to win? This was before Raikkonen’s 2nd stop when Alonso was pushing. Also Massa should have tried the 2 stop.

    1. Also noted that, yes -was seeing him consistent on timing thinking ‘what am I missing that they see’ @thejaredhuang

Jump to comment page: 1 2 3 4 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.