Alpine F1

It's safe to say that the buzz from both the punditry and the fans about this Formula One season has been, development.  After the relative developmental paralysis of both the 2008 and 2009 seasons, be it because of uncertainty about the rules, restrictions like KERS and both McLaren's and Ferrari's weak start to the 2009 season. Development was not at the forefront of the discussions for both the media and the Formula One fans.

In 2009, this was particularly interesting because. As there were three different and diverging ways in which to develop a car. KERS, non-KERS, with a double diffuser or without one. 

Ross Brawn's design was clearly the class of the field in the early part of the season mainly because of the extra downforce that having a double diffuser gave the BGP001.  Even as the team ran out of money as the season went on the Brawn's advantage was great enough to hold back the charging Adrian Newey designed RB5.

The RB5 was the second fastest car on the grid throughout the 2009 season without KERS and without a double diffuser. If the RB6 is a clear evolution of the RB5 with a purpose built double diffuser, imagine what the boys from Milton Keynes could have done if they had the amount of downforce they have this year on last years car.

Now both McLaren and Ferrari were the only teams that stuck to using the Kinetic Energy Recovery System (KERS) throughout the season, while Renault only sometimes used it. The KERS equipped machines seemed to be have less balance and were harder to handle as shown by how much Luca Badoer and Giancarlo Fisichella struggled in the F60 and Kovalainen in the MP4-24 compared to Hamilton.  They were never close to competing with either the Brawn or the Red Bulls even as the season came down the stretch.

Both giants of the sport adapted their chassis and the McLaren was able to take a win at high down force circuits like Hungary and Singapore and Raikkonen was able to win the Belgian Grand Prix largely thanks to a lack of downforce and KERS.

Talk of 2009 is important to this conversation, because it also sets up the intriguing developmental discussions of the 2010 which are both similar and largely very different from the 2009 edition. For 2010 the issue is F-Ducts v Blown Diffusers, or low drag v high downforce.

The RB6 has dominated so far this year at the very least in qualifying if not with the outright race "pace." The current technical regulations have been in place for only two years, but this will be the peak of what can be done with a Formula One car under 2009 regulations because the FIA has said it will ban the double diffuser and possibly the blown diffuser.

The RB6 takes the best attribute of the RB5 chassis which was good at almost every circuit in the course of the 2009 season, but especially in low downforce configurations mated with the BGP001 and added even more downforce to that formula by adding a blown diffuser.

While its main rival the McLaren MP4-25 introduced the so called F-Duct, in order to reduce drag during long straights which has resulted in the cars pace in low downforce tracks like Spa, Silverstone and Canada.  That is the fight of the 2010 season, Red Bull against McLaren and each will have tracks that fit their cars coming down to the end of the season.

Ferrari and Mercedes are known variables so far this season, with the potential to be fast and no assurance of it and most importantly some very good drivers in their respective stables. However, they haven't proven to be up to par with the RB6 and the MP4-25.

Leaving the month of August and entering into September both the Drivers and Constructors championships are too close too call and a few precious points gained or lost in the next six races will be difference between victory and defeat and the team most capable of affecting the results of races against the top two teams is certain to be Renault and their low downforce configuration

In the six remaining races three will be at notoriously fast and loose circuits where low drag will be more important than high downforce and that is where Robert Kubica and the Renault R30 will become important and play a role of spoiler.

The R30 has no chance of competing with the Red Bulls at Interlagos or Singapore with many high downforce corners and not much place for it to use the new F-duct that was introduced during the Belgian Grand Prix.

However, at Monza, Suzuka and Abu Dabhi where low downforce setups will rule the paddock, the R30 will be able to reproduce some of its earlier results that have exceeded the expectations of people in and around Formula One. At Canada, potentially so after qualifying sixth at Silverstone and last weekend in Spa. Also don't count out Vitaly Petrov who has proved to be capable of some impressive race pace if not with consistency as of yet.

The battle of F-Ducts and Blown Diffusers will undoubtedly be influenced by teams other than the main antagonists in the fight and the new Renault with much competitive spirit and verve-and-vinegar will be more than happy to oblige and mess up the predictable order in the coming months.

A point of interest at the start of every season is how fresh blood will fare in the cut and thrust of Formula One.

2010 has blessed us with no fewer than five fresh faces, as well as two other drivers who had not yet completed a full season in motorsport's pinnacle.

It has been far from an easy ride. No rookie has been given a top-notch car that Lewis Hamilton landed in back in 2007, and they have either been rooted to the back of the grid or been in the shadow of their more experienced teammates.

Take the German GP2 champion Nico Hulkenberg. For a man with such an impressive CV going into his debut season, the 22-year-old has been quite underwhelming when you weigh his performances against his expectation. 

For the early part of the season his Williams was not the easiest car to drive, and if that wasn't enough, sitting in his sister car is a man close to reaching an astonishing feat of taking part in 300 races.

Understandably, the Williams team are more likely to turn to the vastly experienced Rubens Barrichello for technical advice, and for this reason the car is probably being more tailored to the Brazilian's needs. 

Credit Hulkenberg though: in recent races he has at least matched Barrichello's qualifying pace, even if he is not matching him blow-for-blow in races. 

Vitaly Petrov finished behind Hulkenberg in GP2 and faces a similar situation at Renault. His teammate Robert Kubica is a car obsessive and a perfectionist, never happy unless he is getting the maximum out of the car and always striving for further improvement.

Renault know how lucky they are to have Kubica and it has been publicly known that they listen to him a lot, giving him more command over the car.

Kubica has also been near-flawless this season, outperforming his machinery and battling amongst the front, bringing Renault two slightly unexpected podiums. 

Petrov shows flashes of what he is capable of and can be happy with a few points finishes, but in reality he is nowhere near his teammate on raw pace or in the long haul of a race distance.

Renault say they are happy with Petrov, but understandably want to see more consistency from him.

With recent speculation of former World Champion Kimi Raikkonen returning to Formula One dying down, as well as a very static driver market, Petrov could well be on course to book his seat for 2011.

But Renault, and Kubica in particular, have very high ambitions for the future.

If Petrov cannot prove that he has the talent to match these ambitions, he will undoubtedly move on.

With Adrian Sutil, Kamui Kobayashi, and the two Toro Rosso drivers looking more promising all the time, as well as the possibility of Hulkenberg one day switching teams, Petrov has to get into gear before he finds himself glued to the lower half of the Formula One grid.

The choice of team can often be a make or break decision for a Formula 1 driver.

On one end of the spectrum, you have the damaging decisions to avoid, such as Alonso’s destructive move to McLaren, or Zanardi’s ill-fated blip with Williams.

These left both drivers in a position of uncomfortability, and in the latter’s case resulted in the end of a career in Formula 1.

Yet, if you chose wisely you will reap the rewards. Michael Schumacher would not have become a seven time world champion if his career had not switched to a floundering Ferrari team.

Or at least you would think that is true.

Having an ounce of talent does of course help, and if you portray the ability to cause waves in a sea of competent drivers then you must put yourself in a position to capitalize on this talent.

Throughout his career thus far, Robert Kubica has become something of an enigma.

From his opening mediocrity at BMW Sauber his career was transformed following his sensational Canadian accident, which seemingly edged him into a flourish of results in 2008. He was firmly on the radar of all neutral spectators at this point.

Here was a man who could upset the form book. Here was a man worthy of a celebration.

His team was more intent on designing future cars, which sadly and consequentially scuppered the Polish drivers chances of continuing his glorious and consistent results.

He was left down and out, and with hardly anywhere to go at the end of the 2009 season.

Then after noticing his potential possibilities behind the wheel, Renault salvaged his career by taking him in. They themselves required a rejuvenation in the aftermath of their crash-gate scandal.

They were not to be disappointed.

Kubica re-emerged as one of the outstanding drivers of the current season, taking his arguably average Renault chassis to momentous and unexpected peaks.

Near flawless podiums in Australia and Monaco have thankfully overshadowed a continuation of the lack of winning ability that the Renault team has failed to subvert.

He is the golden boy once more. Unsurprisingly, this has not gone unnoticed by rival teams with Ferrari reportedly showing interest in acquiring the Pole’s credentials for next season.  

And now we are left with Kubica announcing that he is yet to sign on the dotted line for Renault for 2011.

So can you blame him? After all a highly regarded potential champion needs a car equipped with the means to acquire a triumphant return.

If Renault wanted to keep a firm grip on Kubica then they must improve, of that there is no doubt.

Now Kubica has a choice. What benefits can he foresee if he were to stay at Renault?

Or would the grass be so much greener in another team, a team who could promise bigger and better things.

Staying at Renault

With teams such as Red Bull, McLaren, and Mercedes competing with closely matched pairings, Robert has found himself in a comfortable lead driver position.

Despite his teammate Petrov’s solid performance in Turkey, the Pole has instated himself comfortably as the runaway No. 1 for the French outfit.

With regular performances which have seen him penetrate the "big four" teams he is causing a stir. Only Adrian Sutil seems remotely close, as it is Kubica who is always reaching for the stars.

Therefore, a stay at Renault could see Kubica under no threat of relinquishing his dominant position.

Would you give up a position of such credible power? Especially after the demoralising scenes which were founded by the BMW team and both its drivers during the 2009 season.

The car is currently underwhelming and not deserving of such a wondrous talent.

But if your reputation stands in such high recognition as a result of comparative team mate performance then as an individual you can garner an illustrious history.

What we must also remember is that drivers in similar positions have thrust their teams further into the front of the pack.

Michael Schumacher was a stunning example of a driver who took Benetton out of the doldrums and elevated them into multiple and inspired victories.

Could Kubica do the same? Maybe.

If he were to stay at Renault, with Petrov as a teammate, you would expect that he would have it relatively easy. He could continue his leadership for a team who are a small fish in a big pond at this moment in time.

Petrov could show an improvement, making him worthy of a more equal in team battle, or maybe Renault could replace him with a more suitable second driver who is able from the offset to provide Kubica with a demanding opposition.

Whichever the occurrence, the consistent driver would expect more from a team who are proven champions.

A Switch

What we have seen from Kubica is that in a team who is not expected to win but able to perform, he excels.

His consecutive points and podium finishes in the first half of 2008 warranted him an early championship lead. This was all done in a car that wasn't capable of winning multiple Grand Prix.

Instead, the team seemed content with being the best of the rest. Yet Kubica threw that idea out of the window and was rewarded justly.

Sadly when the chips were down so was Kubica. In a car that was far from competitive he faltered and faded into the scenery.

Yet what we have failed to see is the Pole in a car which is proven to lead a field. He has yet to drive behind the wheel of a car which is recognised and known to be the fasted on track.  

This is a sad fact, given his gradually increasing trophy cabinet.

He is a driver who deserves at least one season of his career in the best of the best.

And you can imagine that his emergence in such a car could leave him streaks ahead of the rest of the pack. A title could come his way as easy as a moth to a flame.

So could a move to a team like Ferrari set up such a mouth watering scenario? The form book would say yes.

Despite Ferrari’s inconsistency of the last few years, as long as they afforded the Pole a good run of years at the team then the results could come.

Raikkonen, Massa and Alonso have all proven this by highlighting their talents in a car that forced damage limitation out of their main man Schumacher’s exit.

Kubica’s main challenges in a team able to be the quickest would be the expectations and also the teammate.

David Coulthard was a driver who could not cope with the pressure of winning a title. It resulted in a lack of consistency and victories and left him without a title to his name. Kubica does not want to full into the same trap.

In a teammate you know that he would also have to tackle a driver regarded as highly as himself. Unless he is fortunate enough to have a driver of Kovalainen’s average skill set to contend with.

If a move to Ferrari came into fruition the opposition would appear in the form of Alonso or Massa. Both are proven title contenders and of course one is a double World Champion. Not an easy task at all then!

So yes in a big team, Kubica would have some large shoes to fill, and some great drivers to compete against.

Should He Stay Or Should He Go?

It will be up to him to decide whether he will play it safe at Renault or move onto a challenge that many would react to in a rabbit in a headlights manner.

The "what if" question comes into play with many wondering whether Kubica will always be a nearly man.

Will he be remembered as a quick and competent under-performer and a driver unable or unwilling to drive a car worthy of him?

Stage fright does not appear to be a concept that Kubica is aware of. He is admirable in victory and enticing in performance. And this is good, this is very good.

So if nothing else we should urge him to consider a position of greater optimism, to a team where he can show the world that he is the strongest Polish driver ever to grace a race track.

If the choice is to move, then a new era may begin, a new champion may be born.

Due to the uniqueness of the Monte-Carlo track, it has had a tendency to produce surprise results most years.

There are a number of reasons why this has been a common theme here including:

The slow nature of the circuit means that aerodynamic efficiency is much less important than at most tracks. Therefore this takes away part of the advantage that the top teams often have. Only Hungary and Singapore come close to matching Monaco’s slow and twisty configuration.

With Armco barriers surrounding most of the layout there is no margin for error, and this often catches out even the best of the best. Due to this the Monaco GP is very often a race of attrition. As a consequence the safety car is often required, which can completely turn the race on its head.

The best drivers can have a huge influence on the lap time unlike the last race in Spain. Perhaps more importantly the track exposes those with weaknesses. It’s no coincidence that the best drivers in F1 history all have a phenomenal record in the principality.

The Monte-Carlo lap is short in length and laptime, which results in bunching up the field.

Backmarkers are harder to deal with in Monaco than at any other track. Some drivers handle this better than others. This can result in surprises in both qualifying, and the race.

Due to the near impossibility of overtaking in Monaco it’s possible for a slower car out of position to comfortably keep a much quicker car behind them.

Recent Surprises in Monaco

Probably the biggest shock result Monaco has produced was in 1996 when adding just a few drops of the rain made the immense challenge of tackling the streets of Monte-Carlo even tougher. In that race only four cars finished the race. It was Olivier Panis, starting from 14th on the grid, who won the only race of his career in the Ligier.

Looking back over the last decade, Jarno Trulli surprised many by putting his Jordan on the front row alongside Michael Schumacher in 2000. Unfortunately he wasn’t able to finish the race.

In 2001, Eddie Irvine made the most of Monaco’s ability to produce a high number of race retirements to put his Jaguar on the podium alongside the two Ferraris of Michael Schumacher and Rubens Barrichello.

In 2002, Ferrari absolutely obliterated the opposition all season long. Monaco, though provided a brief respite. David Coulthard won the second Monaco GP of his career. That season Mclaren was never anything more than the third best car on the grid.

In the final laps Coulthard managed to hold off Schumacher’s mighty machine, tailor made to his every strength, on strong Bridgestone tires, and let’s not forget his incredible record in the principality. This made this victory all the more remarkable. Coulthard was always very strong in Monte-Carlo, and this was a fine example of a Monaco GP where the driver made the difference.

2004 was another season, which Ferrari completely dominated, but again at Monaco they were beaten. Jarno Trulli secured a stunning pole position in his Renault, and led the race from beginning to end, closely followed by Jenson Button’s BAR.

In 2005 Mclaren and Renault were the pacesetters. Kimi Raikkonen duly won the race but Williams surprised by claiming the other two places on the podium. Both Williams drivers impressively overtook Fernando Alonso in the closing stages of the race.

Williams provided the shock again in 2006 as Mark Webber competed with Fernando Alonso and Kimi Raikkonen for race victory. He was right on their tail for a number of laps, and more importantly had more fuel in his car, so could have leapfrogged the pair of them during the pit stops, and won his first race. Unfortunately the reliability of the Williams that year stopped him from claiming a historic result.

2008 was a wet race and although Lewis Hamilton won, BMW’s Robert Kubica was the star of the show finishing in second place. Arguably he would have won that race had Hamilton’s tag with the barrier not inadvertently placed him on the optimum strategy.

Who will provide the surprise this year?

If you are currently making your mind up on who to place your outside bet on, then Robert Kubica is your man.

So far Renault have been just behind the top four pace wise, and been relying on grabbing every opportunity possible to win big points. The rain affected weekends in Australia, Malaysia, and China were all opportunities they took with both hands.

Monaco represents another great opportunity. However they may not have to just resort to relying on rain or errors. They have the pace this weekend to potentially compete for a podium on merit.

Due to the refuelling ban the wheelbases on most of the 2010 challengers have grown longer as a result. The exception to the rule is Renault. The Renault engine has very good fuel consumption so therefore doesn’t need as much fuel to finish the race. This meant that Renault were able to install a smaller fuel tank.

This in turn allowed the team to use a shorter wheelbase, one of the shortest of all the 2010 cars.

On most circuits the length of the wheelbase doesn’t make a huge difference to the performance of the car. However on circuits, which are either very slow or very fast (one of the two extremes), it can be a massive influence.

A very slow circuit such as Monaco suits a short wheelbase car. A short wheelbase makes the car more nimble and driveable in slow corners. The longer wheelbase cars will find it more difficult.

Monaco will also throw away one of Renault's weakest playing cards. Although the Renault engine may be the best to have in terms of fuel consumption, it lacks power compared to Ferrari and Mercedes.

In Monaco there are no really quick sections (with perhaps the tunnel as an exception) so this weakness won’t disadvantage the team. Better still, teams who use an F-duct won’t be able to make much use of them if at all, which also plays into Renault's hands.

Also this is the sort of track that Kubica thrives on. He is one of those drivers who can extract more pace than the car actually has. We have seen this time and time again throughout his career so far. Therefore expect him to do very well at a track where the drivers make a big difference.

Already during free practise he has looked very happy and confident in the car and was one of the most impressive drivers to watch tackling the circuit.

A win is probably unlikely (but shouldn’t be ruled out altogether) for Robert this weekend, however a podium is very much a distinct possibility.

Other surprises could include Force India’s Adrian Sutil. Sutil was running fourth in the 2008 Monaco GP until Kimi Raikkonen right behind lost control of his Ferrari and took Sutil out of the race. Sutil will probably be delighted Raikkonen isn’t racing in Monaco this weekend.

Williams are also a team with a good recent history on street circuits, where their aerodynamic disadvantage to the top teams doesn’t hamper them as much.

Overall with Mclaren, Ferrari, and Mercedes’ bid to prevent Red Bull from winning, and seeing who can spring a surprise it should be an interesting Monaco GP weekend.

Go to www.yallaf1.com for more Daniel Chalmers content and other groovy F1 features.

Other Monaco GP articles:

Monaco critical race for Red Bull's rivals

Monaco qualifying debate is nonsense

Snooker is a sport in decline, there are no two ways about it. If it was to not exist in a visibly competitive manner in years to come few would be surprised.

This weeks fresh match fixing accusations therefore just seem to edge the sport closer to extinction.

Credible and often highly regarded Scotsman John Higgins is under investigation after footage emerged showing him accepting over quarter of a million pounds to throw four frames in a future tournament.

Other competitors such as Stephen Lee and Stephen Maguire have also found themselves in similar positions. Stephen Lee was caught amidst betting irregularities earlier this year and Maguire came under investigation due to a barrage of bets being placed on the eventful final 9-3 victory against opponent Jamie Burnett prior to the game.

All three incidents have brought the sport into disrepute, leaving it hanging by a thread.

What makes things worse is that it provides the only real focal point for discussion as little in the way of intrigue is being displayed at the table.

Only Ronnie O’Sullivan’s outbursts seem to have garnered much more attention in the past couple of weeks, as an unexpecting Neil Robertson claimed victory in the World Championship final.

Prize money for trophies is still in freefall, as ranking tournaments have fell as the way side. Now players overall get less for their efforts, however glorious they may be.

Amongst the likes of football, rugby, cricket and golf the world just doesn’t seem to care anymore. It hasn’t done so for a good few years.

So from a financial point of view is there validity to such a controversial match fixing agreement being made?

Food has to be laid on a plate, and sports stars earn a living that they become accustomed to. It is not necessarily their fault if the sport is not kept alive and kicking. They are not entirely responsible for keeping the rewards fruitful. 

Only as a collective should the action be enticing enough to warrant a continuation of previous benefits, and with the likes of Ronnie O’Sullivan in the sport this is still achievable.

The organisation of Snooker in general seems more at blame for the downfall in prize money. With the loss of profitable sponsors they have mishandled the sport and increased the decline through a lack of urgency being portrayed.

A new wave of ownership however has heralded a promising reverse for the depressing downwards trend .

New snooker chief Barry Hearn outlined some clear aspects of the current saga in what he sees as important to the outcome. He proclaimed that if there is ‘sickness in snooker, it will be the death of snooker if it is not removed.’

Dennis Taylor has somewhat backed his opinion by announcing that John Higgins should be permanently banned from the sport if the allegations are revealed to be true.

Such affirmative action is definitely required to attempt a resolution for the sport in crisis.

And although some may symapthise with the Scottish champion Higgins, in his claims that he took the agreement for fear of a ‘Russian Mafia’, others will instead echo Taylor’s thoughts.

Should a player really be allowed to continue in a sport that through their actions they have shown little respect for? Should they be forgiven for further shattering the illusion that Snooker is full to the brim of respected and professional talents?

Most if not all sportsmen in other fields will tell you that they thrust themselves into their position for the love of their sport and for their ability to perform in it.

Consequentially to love a sport as such means you partake in the responsibilities that accompany it and that you relish in the opportunities given to positively portray your position of influence.

Would you in any sport want to risk the occurrence of such an envied position being tarnished? Of course you wouldn't. Even if you did your conscience must surely get the better of you and you'd be tempted more convincingly to alert the correct authorities.

If you are caught ultimately, the price to pay would be career destroying.

In alternative sports where similar derogatory behaviour has been displayed the punishments have been detrimental. 

Flavio Briatore was banned from Formula 1 race events after his Renault teams race fixing scandal in Singapore. Nelson Piquet Jr as a result lost his Formula 1 career.

Similarly Luton Town’s demise in the English football league was born out of illegal operations taking place. Their subsequent points and financial losses left them lacking in the chances afforded to reverse their misfortunes. 

Maybe with Snooker the temptations are easier due to the financial constraints. You cannot afford a Rooney mansion on a snooker players wage.

Yet the same principles must still apply. To be a sportsman, and to be merited for your inspirational gifts you must adhere to a certain set of ideals that will encompass the reputation that you leave behind you. This must also not compromise with the sports reputation which should always go hand in hand.

Of all people John Higgins had his legacy set in stone with multiple title triumphs. Now this may be destroyed by a momentary lapse in moral direction.

This would be a shame for such a consistently admired player as it is certain that redemption if the outcome is negative would be almost impossible to strive for.

When Nelson Piquet Jr. was dumped from the Renault F1 team and the allegations surrounding his crash in Singapore in 2008 were beginning to surface, it sent a shockwave through the world of Formula One.

Piquet, still smarting after his ignominious exit, testified that he had crashed deliberately to allow Fernando Alonso to go on to win the race. He further testified that he had been ordered to do so by team bosses. His illustrious father must have been thrilled at having his good name trashed.

According to the FIA’s official finding into the Renault race-fixing allegation, they found Renault guilty as charged and referred to it as being of “unparalleled severity." They went on to further to say, “Renault F1's breaches not only compromised the integrity of the sport, but also endangered the lives of spectators, officials, other competitors, and Nelson Piquet Jr. himself."

This statement seems to imply that the FIA thought that it was pretty bad, so you would expect a pretty tough punishment—wouldn’t you? But what did the FIA deliver? A mild slap on the wrist with a piece of floppy asparagus.

Flavio Braitore received a life ban from the sport—after he had already walked away stating that he wouldn’t come back. Engineer Pat Symonds received a five-year ban and Piquet Jr., the man who actually committed the deed, got immunity because he helped in the investigation.

The team received a suspended permanent ban—only enforceable in the event of a further breach of equal severity. No fine, no points, nothing!

Admittedly, Renault had put on one the great all-time a**-kissing performances, promising to pay for the investigation and fund some safety research. And, of course, their lenient treatment had nothing to do with the fact that Renault is French and the FIA has its headquarters in Paris which, from memory, is somewhere near France.

Earlier this year, a French court decided the FIAs World Motor Sport Council did not have the authority to impose bans for procedural reasons. In addition, because neither Briatore nor Symonds were FIA licence holders, they were not subject to FIA rules.

The court overturned the WMSC bans, effectively allowing Briatore and Symonds back into the sport. It seems that the FIA couldn’t get even this ridiculously insipid punishment right.

Now the two sides have finally settled out of court to avoid further costly legal action that would inevitably flow from the FIA's appeal. The official statement (from F1.com) from the FIA included this gem.

“Each of them (Briatore and Symonds) recognising his share of responsibility for the deliberate crash involving the driver Nelson Piquet Jr. at the 2008 Grand Prix of Singapore, as 'Team Principal' of Renault F1 where Mr. Flavio Briatore is concerned, they have expressed their regrets and presented their apologies to the FIA.”

Briatore sees things differently, also claiming on F1.com that the compromise was reached "without any admission of a personal guilt in these events and without any recognition of the fact that the decision of the World Council rendered against him would have been well-founded."

Both are now free to return to F1 as early as the end of the 2012 season, a long way short of Briatore's life ban and well short of Symonds' ban too. Whether they will or not is irrelevant, the FIA have again been shown to be inept yet again. Surprise, surprise.

With news that the last Concorde Agreement allows teams a three race grace period to set up their 2010 cars, many are still at unease with how the FIA have handled the entry for the new season.

Bernie Ecclestone of all people was one who had judged certain teams' inclusions in recent weeks.

As mentioned in one of my previous articles, hindsight would have been a wondrous thing, if financial hindrances at Campos and developmental issues at US F1 had been predictable  before they managed to receive a race seat for 2010. Yet such deficits have forced both teams to delay pre-season test advantages, which may now transcend into missing up to three Grand Prix races.

So the season could begin with four men down; 22 drivers and 11 teams ready and willing to get going, but minus the two teams and four drivers that were to finalise the most fulfilling field of drivers seen for nearly twenty years.

What should then be the aim then for the able to compete in Bahrain?

Well, with the top ten drivers now in a position to rewrite the history books being accompanied with extravagant points values, they will be given the opportunity of a head start in their campaigns.

Last season, twenty drivers competing for eight points finishes gave a forty percent chance of scoring. These odds were slightly reduced for drivers with the new system of ten points scoring positions for twenty-six drivers giving roughly a thirty-eight percent chance of glory. If only twenty-two drivers compete in the first three races this though advances to forty-five percent.

Evidently therefore the first few races will gift drivers, especially in early season periods of acclimatisation and uncertainty, the chances to put points on the board early on.

This tallying achievement for teams can always set a precedent for further season successes.

If a team scores consistently early on, the maintaining of that replenishment is seen as adapting to the enhancements made to the cars as the season progresses. Simply then if a team fails to score after the introduction to the season they will be portrayed as sliding backwards.

This was a vision sadly all too common for teams such as Sauber and Jordan in the early noughties, with their early season promise being dashed as other teams overtook them as the year marched on. This was in part due to such teams being independent outfits attempting to subvert the larger and more able manufacturers, so was always tragic to witness. We do all like our underdogs after all.

So if Campos and US F1 decide not to turn up to Bahrain, Australia and Malaysia all teams must seize the opportunity to delve deep into the top ten finishers and set themselves up for hopefully more of the same.

For teams such as Force India and Renault, who struggled last year for the most part to achieve points registering finishes, it can allow the convenience to edge away from the dreaded unlucky number thirteen spot which will become occupied by the lowest scorers. This may not necessarily result in being the weakest overall team if certain teams skip races, but from a statistical frame of mind encompasses an element of more accomplishment and for those able to deter themselves from the bottom position.

Although I think that the new scoring system in reflection appears absurd, it now offers the possibility of those in able positions to take advantages from other peoples misfortunes.

This is after all what motor racing can be about.

No-one can really become a Champion unless they are willing to take the spoils of the unlucky turns of events that creep upon their rivals.

Unless their name is Jenson Button of course !

Nelson Piquet Jr. has finally turned his back on an F1 career after failing to get a drive for 2010 and will now compete in NASCAR.

The Brazilian was dropped by Renault after a string of poor performances in 2009, and subsequently told the world how he was ordered by his team to deliberately crash at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix.

Despite agreeing immunity from any sporting sanction, Piquet Jr. has unsuccessfully attempted to get back into Formula One despite a number of teams still looking for drivers for 2010.

Among those reported to be interested was new Spanish team Campos Meta who have already signed Bruno Senna, with Bernie Ecclestone suggesting that Piquet Jr. could drive for them.

In December, a Spanish website reported that Piquet Jr. would partner Senna, which subsequently turned out to be a hoax on Spain's equivalent of April Fool's Day.

After testing a Truck Series truck back in October, Piquet Jr. said his future was in NASCAR, but was still hopeful of a return to F1.

He will now drive for an as yet unnamed team.

Piquet said, “After my first 18 months in F1 did not go as planned, I have decided to focus on something different and have chosen to take a route in America.

“NASCAR is hugely challenging, and nobody has ever come in as an outsider before and gone on to win it. It will be the ultimate challenge. I have always been open to new challenges, and I will be putting everything into this.”

Nicely spun by all accounts.

Not reported by many agencies, he also said, "I have found a good group of people that are really willing to help me in my career and I am grateful that they are there for me.

"I think it will be a positive environment and a good life experience. I am sure this year is going to be fantastic and I am very excited at the prospect of my future. I will miss Europe and all the friends I have there, but I will always have my successes there to be proud of."

For his actions, he doesn't deserve to go anywhere near an F1 car again, unless it's at a museum, and while he might be able to forget about what he did at the Singapore Grand Prix, he'll always be known as the man who deliberately crashed an F1 car, because he was told to, then sold his former team out to the FIA.

Nice legacy, Nelson. Enjoy yourself in America.

Flavio Briatore today won his appeal against a lifetime ban from motor racing imposed by the FIA.

The former Renault boss was originally banned by the FIA following his involvement in the Crashgate scandal at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, when Nelson Piquet, Jr., revealed everything after being dropped by Renault during the 2009 season.

Briatore is now free to return to Formula One, or any other FIA sanctioned sport, and, with a number of new teams entering F1, he could be a major asset thanks to his experience, personal wealth, and ability to attract huge sponsors.

He will also be able to continue in his role as co-owner and chairman of Queen's Park Rangers Football Club.

The lifetime ban from F1 and other forms of motorsport would have meant him failing the Football League's Fit and Proper Person's Test, which stipulates no person banned by another sport's governing body can hold office at an English football club.

As well as his reprieve, the Tribunal de Grande Instance in Paris awarded Briatore £13,500 in compensation, much less than the £900,000 he had originally demanded, but he's not exactly short of money. The court ruling that the sanction was illegal is the best thing for Briatore.

The FIA will likely launch an appeal against the court's decision.

Renault's engineering chief Pat Symmonds, originally banned for five years, also won his appeal today.

It's unclear whether either will return to F1 immediately; however, Briatore will not return to Renault, who have appointed former A1GP Team France boss Eric Boullier as their team principal.

For Briatore, it's a very important win in a long-running personal battle with former FIA boss Max Mosley, but will further action be as strong now that former Ferrari boss Jean Todt is in charge?

Somehow, I feel this saga might just rumble on into the 2010 season as well.

After a disastrous season at the departing BMW team Robert Kubica seemingly took the safe choice by accepting a seat at the Renault team. Such a decision was somewhat surprising in the wake of Renault’s race fixing fiasco and former champion Fernando Alonso’s exit, but it gave an opportunity for Kubica to remain in the sport in a team sometimes proven capable of improving a career.

Yet the decision seemed doomed from the start as at first Renault announced they were not sure of their inclusion in the 2010 season which has now been followed by the emerging news that they are to be taken over by Luxembourg investment company Genii Capital.

Robert’s response to this revelation revealed his uncertainty of his position and caused him to question his role at the team. He was left to contemplate whether the grass would indeed be greener on another side.

Due to the new found unpredictability of performance with teams it has become harder to distinguish what the right career move will be for Kubica. If he were to receive an offer from a more admirable team then it may become an option too tempting to resist.

With reference to his new ‘team’, their execution of the 2009 season faced difficulties in keeping up with the front runners.

Were it not for Alonso’s masterful out performance of the car they would probably have been left at the back of the pack, ruing the mistakes made with the poor development in the pre-season. Where other teams succeeded in working around the budget gap and producing a peak performance, Renault seemed to fail and were justly punished as a result.

With Kubica in a similar situation may or may not be able to exude the same amount of out-performance to the extent Alonso portrayed, but he is none the less a driver capable of producing a good level of quality.

This view of the Pole has sadly lost some of its credibility in a season where Nick Heidfeld began to regain some of the equal status that had once befallen himself and Kubica. Cracks had begun to show.

Was he just a driver who excelled in a beauty of a car, yet failed in a car that was far from being a stallion?

Jenson Button is a prime example of a driver who encompasses the ability to perform when his car can perform but to fade when it does not. Robert sadly seemed to portray himself in a similar light this year.

So what Robert has to ask himself is whether he believes that the ‘Renault’ team can propel him back into the spotlight that he so amazingly took in the 2008 season. His spectacular showing of pace and consistency gifted him a surprise championship lead in a car that was not the best, but good enough to succeed.

His story was inspirational to watch and left us yearning for more from the Pole, but as of yet we have yet to see a follow up.

You can’t help but wonder that if he is given anything other than a lacklustre piece of machinery to contend with that he will just fall into oblivion and never fulfil the expectations and triumphs that we expected.

This was a driver after all who came back after a horrific accident in Montreal, and returned stronger and more able than ever, resulting in his unaccredited status of driver of the season in 2008.

So what really are his other options if he were to choose to ditch the team that appears to offer him no reliability in their actions?

Firstly there is the seat at Mercedes Grand Prix still up for grabs.

Most are dismissive of Kubica’s or anyone else’s opportunities at grabbing this seat as Michael Schumacher is expected to make the long awaited return back to the track and partner Nico Rosberg.

Such an idea however is not without flaws as although Michael is arguably the best driver ever to grace an F1 track, he is out of practice, and lets face it, not getting any younger.

Mercedes might do themselves favours if they would take a chance on a talented youngster as opposed to taking a risk on a proven but reforming champion.

Kubica’s other option appears to be the seat at Sauber, which ironically is where his career was left in jeopardy under the guise of BMW.

Their acquisition by former owner Peter Sauber however could leave the door open for Kubica to return to a team he knows well, and one that he has adapted to despite their last season of disappointment.

Of course there are many other drives still available but none of which will be suited to his status. Could you really see him taking a drive at Toro Rosso, or beginning late talks with one of the newer teams, Campos Racing or the US F1 team?

The choices are therefore limited to the Polish racer, although not completely cut off to him, so he has at this moment in time options to go elsewhere.  

He is not expected to lose a drive whatever happens; just a down turn in his career may be exposed if he ends up with the wrong car beneath him.

What is clear from a watching spectator is that he may indeed benefit from a further season away from the front of the pack. After such a dramatic fall from grace that was increasingly painful to observe for such a deserving driver, he may profit from a season of re-emergence at a team where the stakes are not too high.

If he can prove in a smaller and less expectant team that he has the ability to outperform even the weaker cars then he will again become a highly sought after driver. Maybe then the likes of Mclaren and Ferrari will consider him a more worthy option considering that this is obviously not their opinion now.

After once being touted as a future champion in waiting, Kubica could re-establish this connection to the audience if he can portray the abilities that we know he possesses. Renault may be able to offer him this chance of progression in his career, but they need to realise that their own squabbles can affect a driver’s journey and not just their own. Their selfish attitude in claiming a driver and then putting his future at risk is not what we expect of a Formula 1 team.

The truth of the matter is that a driver of Robert Kubica’s calibre needs a consistent team and not one that will become a vision of unwarranted change.

If Robert says he wants out then you would think that few would judge his decision, but only wonder what the alternative will be.

If Formula 1 loses such a talent with the outcome of the teams and Kubica’s own decision then this will be an overwhelming tragedy that would echo Raikkonen’s departure from the sport.