MorrisF1

The bet was green, huzzah! 2.5 are not the longest odds in the world, but I'll never complain about a winning bet. I am mildly peeved with myself that I didn't tip Vettel to be best of the (non-Mercedes) rest at 5.5 pre-qualifying, but of 2 bets, 2 were positive (admittedly, one only a smidgen), which is quite pleasing. Perez had a DNS (did not start) due to some sort of software issue, it seems. That's very unfortunate for the Mexican, but he's not the first and probably won't be the last to have this sort of technical problem. Off the line, Rosberg had a pretty good start, Hamilton retained the lead and Vettel, although not getting too bad a start, ended up being squeezed out by Ricciardo. Vergne had a shocker and got passed by perhaps 10 cars or more. Early on Hamilton started to build a substantial lead with little effort, but Rosberg was dogged by the Red Bulls. Although he managed to retain and then, somewhat, establish a gap he was never quite out of sight. V

Well, that was a bit frustrating. Vettel came within 0.055s and, I think, could have taken pole (he would've been the last man and Rosberg, just ahead, improved by a tenth) but buggered up the timing and didn't get what should've been his last lap. The hedge was matched but to such an extent the green result was only a few pence. Of the other bets I contemplated, Hulkenberg did reach Q3 and Vettel was top 3, but neither Ferrari got a top 3 place, so it's all swings and roundabouts. The bets mooted but neither tipped nor declined (as they're race bets) were a mixed bag. I think Mercedes are nailed on, now, to top score. There's an off-chance Ferrari or Red Bull could spoil the party, but it would probably take crazy conditions or a Mercedes failing. Qualifying was delayed by nearly an hour because of torrential rain. When it got going Q1 was largely predictable, with the pointless teams continuing to fail to reach Q2. Maldonado joined them, as did Sutil. Q2 was s

Between races I put a little on Williams for the Constructors at 34. I think this is too long and will shorten to layable odds for an all-green result. McLaren was also too long at 12.5 or so. Ferrari and Red Bull were both too short, Ferrari especially (they were about 8.6 and 5.6 respectively). The Prancing Horse has a great driver pairing but a car that simply isn't up to scratch on pace, Raikkonen seems to be struggling and it may well be thirstier than other cars. It was also suggested on the Sky F1 site that Hamilton might end up with a penalty for his reliability failure in Australia. That would be utterly ludicrous, as he likely lost 25 (and probably at least 18) points from the incident itself. From a purely betting perspective it would, however, be handy for my Rosberg bet. On Monday Dietrich Mateschitz (Red Bull owner) warned that Red Bull could leave the sport if it were run in a way he disliked (NB he also owns Toro Rosso). This came as Red Bull awaits (on

Apologies for the absence of a pre-race piece and the delay to this. My computer was taken away at short notice and has only just been returned. The odds on Williams to top score (Ladbrokes) were up to 7.5, from 5.5, after the first two practice sessions. I’ve laid Bottas and Massa at 50 and 36 respectively for the title, having earlier backed them at 65 and 40. I had intended to hold on until the third or fourth race then lay, but I suspect Williams will underperform compared to my previous expectations. So, I'm ahead if Rosberg or either Williams wins and flat if anyone else does. Although Williams were unlucky with Massa's retirement, Bottas made a driver error so his finishing point cannot be considered unfortunate. However, I am fairly sure that even had Massa not been taken out early on he would not have scored enough points for Williams to top score. To tie, he would have had to finish ahead of Button, and to win outright, he would have had to finish ahea

After a rather exciting set of winter tests, the first race weekend is upon us. Will Red Bull really be rubbish? Have Williams made the greatest comeback since the Second Punic War? Will anybody manage to finish the first race? It’s worth mentioning every team will have worked on their cars extensively since the last test, whether that’s trying to extract performance or enhance reliability. So, even if we had a clear picture of how things stood at the end of the third test, things are a bit different from then. A week or so before the race I read on Twitter that the chief of an electronics firm warned that it was possible every car could fail to finish Australia. I doubt that will happen, but reliability is a massive concern for the race. In a BBC preview video Allan McNish reckoned the Ferrari engine was a bit too thirsty. If he’s right, that’ll be another setback for the Prancing Horse. Before practice started I tipped and backed Williams to be the highest scoring

Bit of a whopper of an article, but it didn’t make sense to write two for the Bahrain tests, as they were so close together. Many of the rule changes are helpfully outlined here: http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/22058/9077826/gearing-up-for-2014-the-rule-changes-uncovered-and-explained-part-one This is one more reason why reliability is to critical. Losing a whole power unit (exceeding the 5 per season limit) means starting the next race from the pit lane. Losing a component, such as the turbo, means a 10 place grid penalty. On day one of the first test in Bahrain it appeared the Renault/Red Bull woe might continue. However, both Red Bull and Toro Rosso got in good running on the second day. Any remaining issues seem more to do with the car rather than the power unit. It’s been suggested the Renault requires significantly more cooling than rival engines, but apparently there are upsides. If the horsepower rumours were true (Mercedes being mighty and Ferrari better