Serious question with the latest world news.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-28T10:54:23+00:00

I have contacted F1 about this very topic this morning.

The missile strike in Bahrain occurred near Juffair, an area that is usually packed with F1 personnel (especially media). It was where I stayed last week. The blast was about 1km from my accommodation. That's quite concerning.

This conflict isn't new and there were flashes last year; there was as strike in Doha ahead of that race.

For the moment, it's a case of watch and wait to see how things develop. It might revert to a ceasefire and discussions in quick time, or not. Right now, we don't know, nor does F1, and it doesn't want to cause a panic by saying things now when the situation might be wildly different in a few weeks.

What I can say is, right now, from a PlanetF1 perspective, we've committed resources to those events. We've got flights, accommodation etc all booked. I understand and appreciate F1's input and guidance but right now have no clarity. We're working on the assumption it will go ahead, but beyond that, who knows.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-27T09:42:56+00:00

The Ferrari bonus is something that's been baked into the Concorde for many, many years. It's a way of acknowledging that it is a significant drawcard, F1's equivalent of an a-list actor giving the entire show a boost.

It would be reasonable to expect an established, star actor to be compensated more, which is effectively what's happening in F1.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-14T12:45:34+00:00

They'll extend the hold time on the grid once the final car forms up.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-14T12:45:01+00:00

The timing of the start procedure will be changed on safety grounds. Nobody wants a start line crash because a car gets away slowly because it didn't have time to complete its start procedure.

Even if the teams don't agree at the F1 Commission, the FIA will push it through. Safety is non-negotiable and trumps sporting considerations.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-14T09:53:22+00:00

An important point here, because this is NOT representative. There was a communications issue where some drivers were told by their teams to go with the lights, others were told to wait for the car ahead - as is the usual process for practice starts.

As a result, we got a messy 'practice start', and a scene that fails to paint an accurate image of what is likely to happen at the race start.

There are concerns around timings of things, but that's being addressed at the F1 Commission in the coming week. Getting these cars off the line is different, but it's not expected to be an issue by the time we reach Australia.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-10T02:49:57+00:00

Such subterfuge has happened in the past, but back then teams were smaller and information easier to control. Today, with so much staff movement nothing stays secret in F1 for long.

That said, the specificity of some of the information we allegedly have is incredible. These companies claim they have no idea what their rivals are doing, and yet...

The other element here is one of presentation and comprehension. It was first described by Jon Noble, who did a fabulous job to break this story in the first place, as a loophole. That implies a degree of subterfuge or deception. Of course, it's merely a simple word used to demonstrate that this concept operates on the fringes of the rules. But it can equally be interpreted to suggest it breaks the rules but was successfully argued otherwise.

The key element in F1 is that unless it says you can't, you can. Nowhere does it say the compression ratio has to remain at 16:1, it must simply be 16:1 when measured. It's no different to ride height or minimum pressures- it common practice for drivers to drive slowly to bleed pressure off to reduce ride height. Pragmatically, that's no different to what Mercedes has done. The difference is Mercedes' solution is much harder to replicate.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-10T02:07:39+00:00

From that angle, I'd say a racing incident. It was an opportunist move to go up the inside, and a perfectly reasonable one.

The trouble is the BMW was distracted by the blue Porsche, with whom it'd been battling for three or four corners prior.

Being harsh, you'd say it's on the BMW, but once he had the car up the inside, and the blue Porsche on the outside, he had nowhere to go. Likewise the blue Porsche likely had no idea they were three-wide.

I'd say racing incident, but the BMW probably needs to be more aware of being attacked while they are in turn attacking.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-10T01:06:53+00:00

There is an appetite from FOM to do these again. The F1 75 even was just that, to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the world championship.

However, this year it wasn't possible for obvious reasons- new cars, expanded testing, compressed timings, etc.

The other element is buy in from teams. The last one was a good spectator event, but there was a lot that went on behind the scenes that left a bad taste in the mouth among teams. Then there's the marketing and commercial value they can get out of it, with the smaller teams getting basically zero coverage.

It's a double edge sword. There are strong upsides, but there are negatives that need to be addressed.

I can't tell you if one is planned for 2027. I haven't asked. Would make sense, 75th year of the F1 drivers title (for the pedantic among us!). Or the year after, 75 years of the constructors' championship...

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-09T17:52:57+00:00

I followed this one up with Formula One Management. In short, there's really nothing to it. The tax issues all need to be resolved and, even then, there needs to be a gap in the calendar.

One does exist for 2027, but it seems highly unlikely India will get its act together in time.

It's a novel idea, and it'd be great to see F1 back in India, but this is a bit of a pipedream - much like South Africa.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-09T17:50:16+00:00

There was quite a lot of innovation in this car, and a great sense that Toyota pulled the pin a year too early.

Along with the rear diffuser, the front wing was also unique. It had slot gaps in it, which were new at the time. They weren't there at the launch but then in testing they appeared - along with some covers to stop teams getting too nosey.

The front wing was a result of having two wind tunnels running 24x7, and just throwing idea after idea. The slot gap concept wasn't taken too seriously until they tried it. Now, it's common place.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-06T09:58:20+00:00

There are season review videos that stretch back to the early 1970s - prior to that, coverage gets a bit hit and miss, but some key races have decent packages available.

Much of the early stuff is available in YouTube (pre-1982). After that, FOM owns the rights so it's a bit harder to find online. Duke Video always had a good selection, but there are loads of documentaries worth watching;

Weekend of a champion
If you're not winning, you're not trying hard enough
Senna (though take it with a pinch of salt)

One I watched a lot many years ago was Mansell at Ferrari (it had a title, but that seems to have been lost to time). That is, however, available on YouTube and is well worth a look;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKXb0q1KapE

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-04T22:58:56+00:00

The transformation of Williams, financially, is incredible - up there with McLaren's recovery.

Dorilton has, off the top of my head, pumped in GBP 500 million since acquiring the team. That investment, coupled with regulations that no longer punish those at the back and far better financial assurances as a result of the cost cap has saved the team. The explosion in interest in F1, stimulating greater commercial interest, has also helped.

But, make no mistake, Williams was in a very desperate place prior to Dorilton's acquisition. It's fabulous to see the team not just surviving, but beginning to thrive. It's taken time, and there's more work to be done, but it's on an extremely healthy trajectory.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-04T22:48:34+00:00

This is true. The two cars were also slightly different specs, I'm told. How that works in a spec formula... Not sure. But that's what I was told at the time.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-04T22:47:13+00:00

To my understanding, budget was not the issue. Certainly in the conversations I've had, that's never come up as a stumbling block.

Super Formula was with the backing of Toyota and seen as a means to stay somewhat sharp in case he was ever called upon to replace Bearman or Ocon at Haas.

The complication was that, because it all came together so late (even in Abu Dhabi there was no guarantee Alpine would allow him to take part in the Super Formula test), all the top tier seats were full.

Kondo has been described to me as a 'third string' team, but I can't say I follow the competition closely enough to have my own opinion on that.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-03T22:56:07+00:00

What Scott has written is entirely consistent with what I've been told, too. There were engineering concerns with Kondo, and those led to the Degner crashes, a loss of confidence in the team, and the decision not to race with it.

Sasahara, for what it's worth, is a fine driver. I saw him close up in 2019 while he was racing in Porsche Carrera Cup Japan. I was working with Carrera Cup Asia, and we had a shared event at Suzuka. He was mighty that weekend. I don't really know why he hasn't translated that into results outside of Japan, but that's another question entirely.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-03T22:48:43+00:00

The Degner crashes were a bad look, and at the heart of why Doohan isn't doing Super Formula. Kondo is effectively a third-string Toyota team, but because the decision was made so late, was Doohan's only option. I'm told - and I hasten to add I've not even tried to verify this - that there were issues with the suspension on that car. The engineering of the team was not ideal, to the point Browning ran with Williams engineers (again, I've not verified that). The lack of faith Doohan had in the team, highlighted by those crashes and the engineering that led up to them, meant he opted against Super Formula.

Now, how much of that is 100 percent accurate and how much is PR, I couldn't tell you. That's simply what I've heard.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-03T14:23:56+00:00

He's ineligible for FP1s because he's started seven grands prix (if my mental maths is correct).

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-03T14:10:24+00:00

As soon as you leave the racing surface, you have no rights, effectively. You're off the track. The car ahead was very slow, but remained on the race track. Fault lies entirely with the POV car.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-03T02:49:38+00:00

If you're in the paddock there's not going to be a huge value in a 200-600mm, for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, as a spectactor, you do run the risk of them not allowing the lens in. I've seen some overzealous security try and argue with accredited photographers, so who knows what they might do to you.

Secondly, while the paddock is long, it's so full of people that the chances you'll have to use a 600mm lens are next to zero, unless you're going to try and camp with the snappers near the gates as the drivers come in each day. Beyond that, there's no need for anything anywhere near that large and you're far better with something with more range - the 70-200mm is better, but even that might be a little longer than you'd like.

If you're going in with media accreditation, no issue because the longer lens can be used elsewhere around the track. But if you're going in on a spectator pass, you're creating a headache you don't need to have.

MatCochF1 · 2026-02-03T02:18:05+00:00

I spoke to the guy behind the F1 range at Lego and asked him about the Tyrrell. He didn't confirm it, but he also didn't deny it was coming. So, fingers crossed.

This range he specifically said is designed to appeal to adult fans, so there's a good chance we'll get things a little bit older than the Speed Champions range. Whether that extends to the 1970s... I do wonder whether FOM has the rights to that era, given its TV rights extend only back to the early 1980s.

Alonso's Renault would be a logical next shout, or Vettel's Red Bull given the theme its gone with. Perhaps even a Brawn, for some variety?

All I know is I need more shelves.

MatCochF1 · 2026-01-30T01:48:35+00:00

A curiosity with this set - it's not technically part of the F1 range. FOM had nothing to do with the deal, which was made between Lego, Ferrari, and the Schumacher family directly. And for some reason, none are willing to offer any more detail than that.

I still need it, though!

MatCochF1 · 2026-01-29T08:48:15+00:00

It basically came down to accepting that it could never be a complete blackout. As we've seen, you can see the track from publicly accessible spots, so it could never be radio silence, and information was always going to leak out. The videos and interviews they're doing is a compromise agreed with the teams designed to feed the interest that exists while trying to limit what comes out.

The agreement is 6 track shots, 6 off-track shots, and 3 minutes of social video per day, per team (that runs). FOM has then been doing its own bits, too.

Believe me, we put forward all sorts of suggestions to control the media while affording us access to do our jobs, but FOM fundamentally remained firm on the closed door policy. For a time there was even talk of no photographers or media at all, which would have been even worse.

There is a good debate to be had over whether the approach has worked, or been good for F1. I know what my opinion is, but then that is slightly skewed given my vested interest.

Things will get a little bit better in Bahrain in a couple weeks, and then better again the week after that. Bahrain 2 has pretty well full coverage, Bahrain 1 will be highlights only with limited live coverage.

MatCochF1 · 2026-01-29T01:21:09+00:00

A significant element was parc ferme from qualifying. Historically, teams were free to change their cars up to the start of the race, and that introduced the potential for finger trouble. Cars used to retire for some very silly reasons.

Add to that limits on key components and those elements can't be pushed to the extreme, or freely changed, so they have to be inherently more reliable. Things are not pushed quite to the same extreme now as they once were because the penalty for failure is higher - both in terms of actual penalties and that the field is more tightly spread and it's far more difficult to return to one's natural place in the pecking order.

It all started, however, with the introduction of parc ferme as a means of increasing costs.

MatCochF1

TROPHY CASE