Rate the race: 2013 United States Grand Prix

2013 United States Grand Prix

Sergio Perez, McLaren, Circuit of the Americas, 2013What did you think of today’s race? Share your verdict on the United States Grand Prix.

F1 Fanatic holds polls on each race 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 United States Grand Prix out of ten

  • 1 (5%)
  • 2 (5%)
  • 3 (7%)
  • 4 (11%)
  • 5 (21%)
  • 6 (23%)
  • 7 (17%)
  • 8 (7%)
  • 9 (1%)
  • 10 (3%)

Total Voters: 608

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 United States Grand Prix

Browse all 2013 United States Grand Prix articles

Image ?é?® McLaren/Hoch Zwei

Advert | Go Ad-free

224 comments on Rate the race: 2013 United States Grand Prix

  1. sbl on tour (@sbl-on-tour) said on 18th November 2013, 8:08

    very disappointing, had thought it might have been pretty good, but it turned out to a bit of a procession, by the time the overtakes were happening I was already nodding off

  2. Big Al said on 18th November 2013, 9:07

    Hey Keith,

    With all these realistic but negtive comments, you might want to find yourself another job!))

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 18th November 2013, 11:44

      I don’t know what you mean?

      • Keith, can you maybe consider an article on the disappointment of F1? Negative press from an F1 website granted, but the comments in this post alone sum up how fans of F1 feel at the moment and someone needs to take notice. F1 should be about racing from start to finish, this isn’t endurance; and improvements need to be made to prevent the air being spoilt behind the rear wings to allow the opportunity for overtaking without this daft DRS method.

  3. dev_IanT (@dev_iant) said on 18th November 2013, 9:11

    I feel I’m being generous to give that a three – as predictable as a pantomime but without the innuendo. Roll on next season (or tie one of Vettel’s arms behind his back.)

  4. Tomsk (@tomsk) said on 18th November 2013, 9:23

    Not a thriller, but it was a proper race around a great track – not the fake parade of gimmicks we had last time at Abu Dhabi. Like Silverstone, it’s a track that compels overtaking drivers to defend through two or three croners before the move is complete, so the class and bravery on display from Alonso, Hulkenberg and Bottas stood out – even if there weren’t many of them.

    DRS was good for once – it maybe set up an extra move or two into turn one, but the other guy could still defend.

  5. Corrado (@corrado-dub) said on 18th November 2013, 10:13

    3/10. Worst race so far in my opinion. Half of the race there was absolutely NO ACTION in top 10. Bad indeed.

  6. 4/10. I fell asleep. I hate 1 stop races; the tire choices were wrong. I think, perhaps, they could have used a softer compound tyre to encourage more pit stops/strategy.

  7. I would be surprised if this race gets anything more than 4!! Every race weekend I read comments from fans who say that the tyres and DRS are killing the races, there’s no real overtaking, being tired of Vettel’s dominance, etc.. Now I understand why. No, i have no issue with Red Bull and Vettel being dominant. They are doing something that others are not. And they deserve it. But what killed yesterday’s race for me was that there was hardly any race at all! I mean apart from Bottas overtaking Esteban and Alonso defending Hulkenburg, it was a total drab. I would give a 9 to the track, its great, but for the race, a generous 3!

  8. 4/10
    I’d usually give it a 5 because I enjoy every race anyhow, but what are the other numbers there for? Apart from the boredom, the lack of any seriously thrilling battle, though Alonso did what he could to make overtaking interesting, the incompetence of the race directors who failed to give us any decent camera angle on the Maldonado/Sutil or the Vergne/Gutierrez incidents, but brilliantly switched to the rotating camera on Bottas’ car (who we never saw from the t-cam) made what was already a boring race unwatchable.

  9. Paul (@frankjaeger) said on 18th November 2013, 14:14

    I felt Brundle and crew were trying to fill the naturally occurring dead air since they wasn’t alot to really get excited about. Did enjoy Alonso’s defiance and Bottas’ point post. Gave it a generous 6/10

  10. Paul A (@paul-a) said on 18th November 2013, 14:33

    Boring. The first eight were more or less predetermined by the starting grid:
    Grid Finish Driver Gain/Loss
    1 1 Vettel 0
    3 2 Grosjean +1
    2 3 Webber -1
    5 4 Hamilton +1
    6 5 Alonso +1
    4 6 Hulkenberg -2
    7 7 Perez 0
    9 8 Bottas +1
    I watched my first F1 race more than 60 (yes, sixty) years ago, and have followed it very closely ever since then. From 1962 to 1975 I served as a marshal and several times as an interpreter at more than seventy F1 races. F1 is no longer motor racing, it’s a financial circus like WWE (professional wrestling.)

    And it was not helped in North America by the scandalous TV coverage by NBC — more than 50% advertizing, useless commentary, no awards ceremony, no post-race podium interviews.

    • Robbie said on 18th November 2013, 23:26

      Wow, @paul-a 60 years including your participation…intriguing. I started in ’78 when Gilles’ signing with Ferrari caused the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation), the BBC’s equivalent, to televise F1 for the first time.

      I hear you about the NBC coverage, however here in Ontario at least, we got an hour of pre-race as well as the trophy and interview session.

      For years I had access to U.S. channel SpeedTV, later changed to Speed, who are now defunct, and I was never impressed with the coverage, always watched on CBC and then TSN, who both used the British feed of coverage ie. Murray. Speed were clearly not at the races and were simply commentating on the same pictures we were watching, and half the time I’d see an accident, an incident, or something in the background, or something in the time differentials that would indicate some action on the track, before they would notice. Especially when I used to watch with the live timing on my laptop beside me. Not the ideal way to promote F1 in the US. Far far away from infectious Murray Walker. That’s a high standard I admit. He covered a race like there was nothing more important going on in the world.

      • Paul A (@paul-a) said on 19th November 2013, 1:38

        Thanks. You say: ” however here in Ontario at least, we got an hour of pre-race as well as the trophy and interview session”. I’m in Ontario (with Bell satellite after my cable co. – Eastlink – said they couldn’t give me TSN2 during Wimbledon) and I can assure you that NBC started in the “dressing room” (3 drivers just chatting) with a terrible dose of “mains hum” and went to advertizing — that was the end of it. They tried once to go back to the FIA feed, mains hum, advertizing…

        And yes, Murray Walker — one of the greats of all time, enthusiastic, knowledgeable. NBC had Will Buxton who tried to be over simple and pander to “general American public” and it sounded like Dave Hobbs in the background having a terrible day.

        If Bernie E. thinks that this USGP and the NBC will promote F1 in the USA, he’s sadly wrong. The US motor sport viewers will go on watching NASCAR and see F1 as a petty pantomime.

  11. spoutnik (@spoutnik) said on 18th November 2013, 14:50

    Still there is 3% of people who gave a 10… I wonder how this race could even have any rating? They have a strange conception of an ideal F1 race!

  12. Total waste of gasoline………….

  13. Neil (@neilosjames) said on 18th November 2013, 16:42

    Was quite boring, but had a few saving graces. Some nice late-braking action which doesn’t seem to happen in F1 these days, Bottas on Gutierrez and…

    That’s about it. Lots of tyres, lots of procession and no fight for the lead. I think I gave it a 5.

  14. Bobby (@f1bobby) said on 18th November 2013, 18:05

    The general apathy and negativity expressed in these comments shouldn’t just be swept under the carpet. The people who are passionate enough about F1 to have an account on a website called F1 Fanatic are the sport’s most loyal fanbase. So if this is what we think about the sport then goodness knows how F1 hopes to attract new people.

    • Timothy Katz (@timothykatz) said on 18th November 2013, 20:52

      I totally agree. As a money intensive sport, F1 has got to appeal to a wide audience otherwise it will atrophy back into the ‘specialist sport’ of the fifties, totally devoid of public attention or money.
      But how do you entice a new audience into supporting a sport that is almost bereft of excitement and that has increasing arcane and intricately restrictive rules that seem to stifle innovation and differentiation? I really do not know what the answer is, but an answer is desperately needed.
      Several weeks ago, I wrote that I thought F1 was constipated. Sadly since then a ‘senior’ driver has found a place at a ‘senior’ team instead of making way for someone new and we have endured two alleged races that promised lots but delivered little. And if that’s not the definition of constipated, I don’t know what is.

  15. Jason (@jmwalley) said on 18th November 2013, 18:59

    I was pleased to see so much action in the stadium section, that is so often considered not a challenge. Lots of people dicing it out after the long back stretch made it really enjoyable for me. Wish those battles had been for the top finishing positions, but were still entertaining.

    Also wish the stands were more full. Hopefully attendance picks up in years to come.

    • CeeVee (@ceevee) said on 19th November 2013, 0:16

      American consumers have short attention spans and demand action in spoon-sized pieces. American Business wants lots of advert breaks to promote whatever the latest product is they are pushing. Look at an NFL match. It’s nominally 90 minutes of action on the field but the programs usually last about 3 hours. Lots of intense action, broken up my formation changes, timeouts, advert breaks and expert analysts who are very articulate and knowlegeable. F1 currently is 90 odd minutes of mundane boredom with commentators who think that talking excitedly means will convince the audience that something exciting is happening. It will never catch on in the USA because not enough action happens on the track to get and keep the channel-surfer hooked. I was watching several NFL streams on my computer Sunday so that I could follow several matches in real-time. I sacrificed one of my streams to watch the race but turned off after hald an hour and went back to watching an extra NFL match. More excitement in the next few minutes than there had been in 30 minutes of F1. Unfortunately F1 is in competition for TV-eyes in the USA with NFL, NBA, NHL, Nascar and IndyCar and it won’t convince anybody wo is a fan of one of those that F1 has anything to offer. Without the audience numbers the channels won’t bother with promoting or showing any sport.

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.