With the F1 world now returned from Bahrain, the sport is assessing the fallout of one of the most controversial grands prix in history.

The drivers were conspicuously quiet over the saga in the island Kingdom, but – with no contract tying him down – former Force India driver Adrian Sutil admitted he was glad he was not there.

“In a situation like that, it is probably better not to go,” the German said on Sky Deutschland.

“On the one hand, the decision was made (to go to Bahrain), on the other hand, it’s very difficult when there are so many problems in a country.”

Red Bull reserve driver Sebastien Buemi, who has family living in Bahrain, does not agree at all.

“I arrived on Monday and I had no problem — maybe there were a few more police than two years ago, but nothing happened to me,” the Swiss insisted on Austrian Servus TV.

Force India and Sauber, however, witnessed Molotov cocktail attacks on their treks to and from the circuit.

And Caterham team spokesman Tom Webb told the Sun that there was “one minor incident when one of our (hire) vans slowed down in traffic and its occupants saw a local youth on the side of the main road brandishing a bottle with a rag stuffed in its neck”.

World champion and race winner Sebastian Vettel also admitted the feeling was tense in the paddock throughout the weekend.

“It was not easy for anyone,” the Red Bull driver admitted, according to SID news agency, “but I’m glad that nothing happened to any of us (in F1).”

And the Telegraph quotes Vettel adding: “Hopefully, we come back in the future when everything’s a little bit safer.”

Reuters reports that Vodafone, the main sponsor of the half Bahrain-owned McLaren team, sent no staff to the country and expressed concerns to the British outfit.

But Jim Wright, an F1 sponsorship expert, told the Guardian that he thinks while the sport’s image took a beating last weekend, sponsors will be happy.

“Most teams handled a difficult decision very well,” he said. “On that basis I think a lot of people would be pleased with that and happy to get involved with them.”

The television audience was also unaffected – even boosted – with the BBC reporting more viewers for Bahrain than Australia and Malaysia, and Germany revealing similarly strong figures.

Still, there remains criticism.

“Now is an opportunity to reflect,” former F1 driver Alex Zanardi told Tuttosport, “and make sure that major sporting events are assigned only to governments that deserve the honour of hosting them.

“Ecclestone is brilliant and has made formula one what it is, but he can’t administer races at any cost and above all else,” insisted the Italian.

Due to security fears, Force India sat out a practice session on Friday so that staff could return to their hotels in daylight.

F1 chief executive Bernie Ecclestone was reportedly enraged, and according to rumours got his revenge by instructing Formula One Management’s television cameras to ignore the Silverstone based team’s cars in qualifying.

“There was a bit of fuss about what we did,” deputy team principal Bob Fernley is quoted by Spain’s AS newspaper, “and it was not easy, but I think it turned out to be the right response.

“We had a lot of pressure, our attitude was not well received,” he confirmed, “but I think that we had a duty of care to our employees, and to do the right thing by the team.”

The calamitous Bahrain grand prix saga has not jeopardised the island Kingdom’s future on the F1 calendar.

That is the strident claim of Bernie Ecclestone, after the F1 chief executive and FIA president Jean Todt displayed rare unity as they insisted the country’s civil and political problems would not affect the grand prix.

But amid the bubbling Bahrain saga, Ecclestone had suggested that Bahrain might face trouble when it comes to negotiating a new contract, with the existing agreement only set to extend for three more years.

However, when asked by Reuters if F1 is going to keep returning to Bahrain despite this year’s troubles, Ecclestone insisted on Sunday before leaving the Persian Gulf: “Absolutely. Forever. No problem.”

Like Todt, he even played down the damage done to F1′s reputation this weekend.

“I think it’s good because people talk about things, you know. You know what they say — there is no such thing as bad publicity,” said Ecclestone.

In truth, reputation damage has undoubtedly been done. But Roger Benoit, the veteran correspondent for the Swiss newspaper Blick, admitted he is dismayed with how politics interfered with sport so strikingly this weekend.

“On all continents, somewhere, all hell is breaking loose. And as a formula one reporter, you’re flying around this globe two or three times a year,” he wrote.

“We go to countries that are politically explosive. Where human rights are violated, where poverty reigns.

“But we hardly talk about it — not in China, India, Korea, Malaysia, Singapore or Brazil. In 2014, we’re going to Russia.

“Years ago, our circus happily danced around in apartheid South Africa, and the military dictatorship of Argentina.

“Formula one is pure entertainment. Detached from the problems of the world. But here, in Bahrain, every reporter entered the political field, whether he liked to or not,” wrote Benoit.

So that is why Ecclestone is unapologetic, after championing the Bahrain grand prix.

“Because, basically, the problems they have in Bahrain have nothing to do with F1,” the 81-year-old told El Pais newspaper.

“The relevant agencies gave the nod as far as security was concerned, and I think it is clear that they were not wrong.”

He also sees no problem with F1 being used as a political tool.

“Governments want to have an F1 race for the same reason as they want the Olympics. We come to agreements with the promoters and, if that’s good for the country, fine,” said Ecclestone.

Force India deputy boss Bob Fernley has dismissed reports the Silverstone based team could pull out of the controversial Bahrain grand prix.

Two members of the team were allowed to return to Europe this week following a Molotov cocktail attack en route from the Sakhir circuit to the hotel.

There were high-level meetings involving Force India on Thursday, sparking speculation the entire team could follow its frightened members back to the UK.

But Fernley, admitting that security has been ramped up after the incident, is quoted by Express newspaper: “We are definitely taking part, that is decided.”

Bahrain’s information affairs authority also released a statement featuring quotes by Bernie Ecclestone.

“I have no knowledge of any teams planning to withdraw from the race and we are all looking forward to racing in Bahrain,” the F1 chief executive said.

According to Telegraph correspondent Tom Cary, however, another incident like the one involving Force India this week could force F1 to change its decision to go ahead with the race.

“If that happened again and someone was injured then that’s the nightmare scenario for organisers as it might push the teams over the edge,” he said.

Many drivers, like Kimi Raikkonen, have said the situation is normal this weekend in Bahrain, but Cary does not agree.

“Normally there would be PR events in town, you know, ‘meet the fans’ and that sort of thing but certainly as far as I’m aware there aren’t any of those happening,” he said.

World champion Sebastian Vettel said he will be happy when track action begins on Friday.

“I think it’s not a big problem,” the German said when asked about the security situation this weekend, “and I’m happy once we start testing tomorrow because then we worry about the stuff that really matters — tyre temperatures, cars.”

Earlier, Vitaly Petrov’s manager indicated the Russian would only travel to Bahrain if F1 could guarantee his safety.

“If it was dangerous they wouldn’t let us in,” the Caterham driver told The National in Bahrain.

“If they make sure nothing gets thrown onto that track to hurt us, then we’ll be fine. We are here; if it happens, it happens,” added Petrov.

In fact, almost everyone in Bahrain has been reluctant to comment in detail, but there is an obvious feeling of unease.

Peter Sauber told Blick newspaper: “I feel like a guest, and so it is not polite to criticise your host.”

But 1996 world champion Damon Hill allowed himself some criticism of F1, including the sport’s most powerful figures, Bernie Ecclestone and Jean Todt.

He pointed out that FIA president Todt has said “next to nothing” about the Bahrain saga.

“This I find baffling,” Hill wrote in the Guardian. “Surely it is possible to condemn acts of inhumanity without taking a side?”

As for F1 chief executive Ecclestone, who has consistently trivialised the Bahrain issue, Hill noted that “few” in the paddock “dare to publicly disagree” with the imperious 81-year-old.

“Perhaps we should (criticise him), instead of just muttering under our breath, scared of losing our passes,” said Hill.

Hermann Tilke, the German architect who designed the Sakhir circuit, sees the entire saga as a storm in a teacup.

“It is safe in Bahrain,” Tilke, whose company has an office there, told the Kolner Express newspaper. “I’ve never heard about any problems from our people.

“Of course there is some unrest, but it is protests, not civil war. As Bernie Ecclestone has said, we do sports, not politics,” he insisted.

“And if they demonstrate peacefully now, the media will report on it, so both sides benefit.”

A support-race team and a respected journalist have become the next to pull out of this weekend’s highly controversial Bahrain grand prix.

The Porsche Supercup team MRS said its decision to skip the support race in the divided island Kingdom is the “first time in our history that we have had to cancel”.

“In the end we have the responsibility for our employees,” said team boss Karsten Molitor, citing security concerns.

Another withdrawal – joining the sacked Williams catering staff member, and the TV broadcasters Sky Deutschland, Fuji TV and MTV3 Finland – is the respected correspondent for O Estado de S.Paulo newspaper, Livio Oricchio.

“I have decided in agreement with Estado to not go,” he said. “We had the tickets for the entire season, except for Bahrain and the United States, because there was a doubt they would be run.

“Like many journalists, I will not be at Sakhir,” Oricchio admitted.

“I always believed that the race would not take place, and I’m still not 100 per cent sure that something will not happen that will lead the FIA or FOM to cancel.”

Indeed, following the sport’s decision to push ahead, the pressure on formula one to cancel at the eleventh hour has only intensified.

Nabeel Rajab, the leader of the government opposition group Bahrain Centre for Human Rights, admitted that the next protests – ‘three days of rage’, to coincide with the race’s three-day calendar – are aimed specifically at F1.

“We’re protesting to show anger at formula one for conducting the race here,” he is quoted by the BBC.

And the wife of a well-known jailed Bahraini activist who is on a long hunger strike, added: “I am not angry with the government… what makes me angry is people like Ecclestone who decide to come to Bahrain because he thinks everyone is happy.”

Italy’s La Stampa reports that F1 personnel have been advised to stay away from restaurants and shops, while “girlfriends and wives stay at home”.

That’s not entirely true, as Felipe Massa touched down at the airport on Thursday with his wife and baby son.

And Giedo van der Garde, the reserve driver for Caterham, said he has found Bahrain peaceful since his arrival on Wednesday.

“I’ve not been here long,” he is quoted by Auto Hebdo, “but everything seems quiet. Obviously, there’s a heavy police presence,” the Dutchman continued.

“But I haven’t seen any trouble or anything. Let’s hope it stays like that.”

Marco Canseco, the correspondent for the Spanish sports daily Marca, said he witnessed a “minor altercation” in the capital Manama on Wednesday.

“Then all the teams and everybody were able to get to the track for work without a hitch, the same on return,” he revealed.

Many are protesting the race going ahead on moral grounds, others due to security fears, whilst others fear for F1′s image.

“The ongoing debate about Bahrain is the only damage to the high gloss of the exciting 2012 season so far,” agreed Austria’s Kleine Zeitung newspaper.

A major golf tournament is set to go ahead in Bahrain.

The BBC is reporting on Wednesday that “a number” of formula one teams now fully expect next weekend’s Bahrain grand prix to be called off – with the final decision to be made this weekend in China – due to the security risk.

If that happens – despite Bahrain’s contract to 2016 – it could be the end of the grand prix forever, with rules stating that a cancellation for two years running will result in exclusion from the calendar.

It is interesting, therefore, that organisers of the inaugural Bahrain Invitational – a Pro-Celeb-Am golf competition – are reporting that the two-day event is definitely going ahead this weekend.

“We are looking forward to welcoming all the participants and safety around the event is assured,” said a spokesman.

Sir Jackie Stewart, a triple world champion in F1, backed the continuation of sports in Bahrain, admitting that if the grand prix is cancelled again “they may never get it back”.

“If this race is cancelled then I think it is a very backward position to have in sport,” he told the Herald Scotland.

“Sport is a positive force, it brings people together.”

F1 team bosses turned out in force as officials insisted next month’s Bahrain grand prix is definitely on.

The sport’s chief executive Bernie Ecclestone joined Sir Frank Williams, Martin Whitmarsh, Christian Horner, Mercedes’ Nick Fry and Pirelli’s Paul Hembery at a media lunch in London.

“Talk about heavy support,” wrote Reuters correspondent Alan Baldwin on Twitter.

The self-described ‘PR offensive’ to promote the forthcoming Bahrain grand prix followed reports earlier this week that said the FIA had decided to cancel the race due to ongoing unrest in the island Kingdom.

“It’s all nonsense. We’ll be there as long as they want us,” said Ecclestone.

“Seriously, the press should just be quiet and deal with the facts rather than make up stories.”

If it was up to the drivers, though, they might give it a miss. Timo Glock is a brave lone voice: “Why should we expose ourselves to unnecessary risk?” he asked rhetorically.

“If it was up to me, we wouldn’t go there,” he told Germany’s Auto Motor und Sport.

Bahrain circuit boss Sheikh Salman bin Isa Al-Khalifa, however, dismissed the risk of violence.

“These incidents can happen anywhere,” he told AP news agency. “It’s not going to stop our grand prix.”

Ecclestone added: “I don’t need any personal security, but whatever’s necessary will be looked after.”

According to a poll in popular British magazine F1 Racing, 60,000 of the 100,000 F1 fans polled internationally said it is “not right” for the race to go ahead.

Looking forward to the event, however, is the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights.

Nabeel Rajab, the president, is quoted by the Telegraph: “(F1) is helping dictators and we are going to protest.

“We are going to use the opportunities that a lot of journalists are there and we are going to protest everywhere.”

The FIA has dismissed the latest rumours about next month’s Bahrain grand prix.

Some publications this week said F1′s governing body was in the process of drafting a statement announcing that the Sakhir race has been cancelled due to security concerns.

But the FIA’s director of communications Norman Howell angrily denied those reports.

At the same time, Sheikh Abdullah bin Isa al-Khalifa, Bahrain’s motor racing federation chief and also an FIA world council member, admitted he could not guarantee the safety of F1′s travelling personnel next month.

“There are no guarantees in this world,” he is quoted by PA Sport, after admitting “disturbances” in Bahrain are still taking place.

“You could be (in danger) anywhere, even Silverstone.

“All I can guarantee you is you will be as safe as at any other grand prix.”

Asked if there will be extra security measures in place, Khalifa answered: “No, absolutely not. It will be life as normal.

“We’ve never had any violence towards foreigners simply because they are foreigners or in F1.”

F1 industry monitor Formula Money has found that the Bahrain grand prix is more commercially successful for teams and trackside advertisers even than Monaco, Spa and Monza.

The publication also said that if the 2012 race is cancelled, “the teams could lose $44.7m of prize money”.

 Organisers of the Bahrain grand prix have admitted disappointment with being bumped from the head of the 2012 calendar.
Following the cancellation of its 2011 race and test over the civil unrest early last year, Bahrain was provisionally scheduled to return to F1 by opening this season’s championship.

However, when the calendar was ultimately published, Bahrain was given a late April date, making it the fourth round after Australia, Malaysia and China.

Reports at the time said Bernie Ecclestone had “responded to teams’ fears over the uncertain political landscape” in the island Kingdom.

So as tickets go on sale this week, the Sakhir circuit’s chief executive admitted he is disappointed Melbourne will be kicking off the sport in less than a month’s time.

“I think formula one should start the world championship in a timezone that makes sense,” said Sheikh Salman bin Isa Al Khalifa.

“We have a lot of support in Europe for our grand prix and to start in Australia, where it is 2am or 3am in Europe, that to me doesn’t make sense,” he is quoted by The National newspaper.

In addition to not being the season opener, Bahrain is also the second leg in a logistically-difficult ‘back to back’ pairing with China.

“Hosting the first race, you benefit obviously by people talking about you in the lead up to the start of the season,” continued Al Khalifa.

“Now we are going to be after China so our event will come into play only after the third round. For us, it is important to host the race and we plan to make it a success,” he added.

The slogan for Bahrain’s 2012 return to F1 is ‘Unified, One nation in celebration”.

On the continuing security fears in Bahrain, Al Khalifa insisted: “I don’t see an issue.

“Obviously, there are always concerns and the authorities are aware of that, but my main concern is that everybody is secure in and around the circuit and I am confident we can provide that.”

Lewis Hamilton looks set to be recalled as a witness as the Adrian Sutil assault saga rolls on.
German Sutil, and his father Jorge, described former close friend and 2008 world champion Hamilton as a “coward” and “pathetic” after the McLaren driver did not appear at the recent hearings in Munich.

But with the former Force India driver – and Munich prosecutors – now filing appeals against the judge’s verdict, Hamilton’s personal testimony might be regarded as crucial.

Hamilton is clearly visible in the video footage of the incident with Eric Lux in a Shanghai nightclub last April, but Sutil’s manager Manfred Zimmermann claims the judge neglected the gravity of the security camera evidence.

“Not asking one of the witnesses to court and other important circumstances have not been considered as well,” Zimmermann charged.

London newspaper the Daily Telegraph claims Hamilton “is happy to testify provided the date does not clash with prior commitments”.

 Attacked by armed bandits outside the circuit a year ago, Jenson Button on Thursday had trouble gaining entry to Interlagos.
Express newspaper reports that even Bruno Senna, whose famous uncle Ayrton was revered by Brazilians, couldn’t penetrate the tighter security in 2011.

“We were saying ‘We’ve got the FIA press conference, will you be paying our fine?’” Button told reporters on Thursday.

Security is always a point of interest in Sao Paulo, with Germany’s Bild newspaper amused to reveal the armoured Mercedes with bulletproof tyres used this weekend by Michael Schumacher.

And Thursday’s usual autograph session was called off.

Police escorts have been made available to all the drivers, but Mark Webber told the Associated Press: “I’m still driving to the track on my own. No changes for me.”

And world champion Sebastian Vettel insisted: “This is my sixth time here and nothing has ever happened to me.”

Two days have passed after the contested races in Valencia and Fernando Alonso’s mood has been heated then cooled. In his blog on the official Ferrari site now he regrets his remarks, which he angrily criticized immediately after the race the stewards and the FIA accused of manipulation. Meanwhile, he sees what happened now with a clear head.

“We had the date on which the safety car came out, a special pitch. Only a few seconds earlier or later and the race would have been very different for us,” recalls Alonso. to ruminate about what has happened then bring, not much, “but I’m much calmer now than immediately after the race.”
“It certainly was not the Sunday, we were expecting us,” he explains. “The safety car is on for us came out worst possible time and ruined our race completely. On Sunday evening I was very angry is about all that has happened. But the anger is now transformed into positive energy that drives me the desire, I fight back, .

“At the time I reacted emotionally and in such a situation is all too quick to propose a sound and says things can be misinterpreted and may give cause to suspicion – something that was not my intention at all,” admits the Ferrari Star one. “I understand of course that the race has a difficult job and that they must make decisions that are not easy.”

was “What I wanted a driver who respects the rules as we were at a disadvantage in this situation, unfortunately, more than those who have broken, even if they were given a penalty,” continued Alonso. He refers here not to a specific driver (Lewis Hamilton, editor’s note), says the Spaniard, “This is a basic thing and I think we should talk about it calmly, to ensure that such something does not happen again. ”

He was delighted that the FIA also reacted promptly and an extraordinary meeting of the sporting working group meet as Alonso added: “I am confident even sure that all the contentious issues can be addressed in detail here.”
For Alonso, the subject is checked to a large extent. Its concentration is now the next race at Silverstone. “There we will try to get all the energy accumulated in our car and us to repeat what was denied us in Valencia, for any reason whatsoever. Even though we know Silverstone is theoretically not a route that our car is. ”

Even if the result of Valencia was not what Ferrari had hoped for, “it has left no irreparable damage,” Alonso continued. “It is true that our backlog is at the top now grown to 29 points, but we have not even reached the mid-season. We lack only a little more than a victory, is therefore still open to everything.”
We have been able to catch up with the updates for Spain on the top teams, he stressed: “I am glad, I’m well aware that we have to enter in the development of the F10 on the gas. Because we need a car, we at the Pole and we can fight as soon as possible before our rivals brings. If we now lie 29 points behind the leader, it means that we need to bring in the next ten races at least 30 points more than the leader. ”

was one of the main points of the race from Sunday, however, that Mark Webber his serious accident, “the fear was spectacular and scary”, has survived virtually unscathed, says Alonso: “This shows once again that the work initiated by the FIA at the Security is absolutely essential and that in this field of sport should never be complacent. “

After two double victories in a row, the McLaren duo Lewis Hamilton, Jenson Button tip lies in the Formula 1 World Championship, but Sebastian Vettel wants a new car in Valencia back to the place in the sun. “We can be back in front after the next Grand Prix,” said Vettel’s team boss Christian Horner before the Grand Prix of Europe. The bulls want to “keep up with the new R-bay system and without problems in reliability even local hero Fernando Alonso at bay.

The confidence in the camp of Red Bull is based on several pillars. On the one copied from the “inventor” McLaren F-shaft system, which is not satisfactory after a test in the free practice in Istanbul for the first time in the race and used in the simulation is to represent a time savings of three tenths per lap. “We hope an ordinary leap forward,” Horner said in the journal ‘Speedweek’.
was distributed to the other, the team hopes that repeat the transmission problems of Montréal and the defect is not the devil, who followed the team and especially since the start of the season Vettel. “Yes, we had defects, but every mistake only once. We are all the quirks to the bottom left. It’s just incredible bad luck, which happens especially in Sebastian this year, everything,” said Horner.

At the very least, the Heppenheim, which is before the ninth of 19 World Championship races in the championship behind Hamilton (109 pixels), Button (106), Webber (103) and Alonso (94) with 90 points in fifth for Valencia to be transmission probably can not change. The new device has “lost a bit of oil,” Horner gives as reason that Vettel was in the final stage in Canada are clearly lying in fourth place from the gas, “he can use it again in Valencia. Team-mate Webber, who lost by Vettel finished fifth behind the championship leader, had lost in Montréal by an unscheduled gearbox change shortly before the race five starting slots.

The Aussie, who recently was quickly four times in a row in qualifying wants to beat Vettel in Valencia again. “That he can create. For if he was behind it, it’s because of a defect, as in Turkey, due to a driving error like in Montreal or he was beaten only a tenth of a second,” said Horner.

imagine Despite the current benefit, the McLaren drivers not in security: “It’s a surprise that the Red Bulls are not in leadership. They were at every race so fast, but we have more made of it,” said defending champion button that as Webber and Hamilton this year has already celebrated two victories. Hamilton also sees its first championship lead since winning the title in November 2008 “not granted” on.
The Mercedes team with Nico Rosberg and world champion Michael Schumacher, who is the first time since 2004 on an unfamiliar route hopes in Valencia placements at less concerned with the tires and thus better. Meanwhile, Alonso is Ferrari’s home race at a comprehensive revised version of the B-F10 available, which also has an R-bay system and has taken some of the bonds in the aerodynamics of Red Bull. With the new car he was allowed to drive even at short film, Alonso will now shine on home soil – and to inspire both the Spanish and the Italian fans.

“The Italian mentality, and the Spanish are similar, and the habits of life. We both also have the same passion for the race,” Alonso describes in the ‘Sport Bild’, why he feels so comfortable at Ferrari. “We might have to say: There are two grown together, which somehow belong together forever. I have the impression that the people enjoy this combination in the world. Especially in Spain and Italy, the mood is downright enthusiastic about it. It makes me proud.”

Michael Schumacher knows the situation in which he finds himself currently at Mercedes, well. He has done construction work at Benetton, he has been fighting with Ferrari in the championship point. With Mercedes, he wants to do it now as well. In Montreal Schumacher sat with reporters and talked about the development process at Mercedes, the current situation, his chances in the title fight, the goal of being able to go on their own at the head and his life as a Formula 1-returnees.

Q: Michael, what expectations you had for yourself when you start in the season?
Michael Schumacher: “The championship is my goal and my focus. But there comes a point where you realize that his package is the way it is. And you have to go through from there a certain program and a certain process. And we make. ”

“The year is still long. I personally do not think that I am really in a position to much to talk about the title. It is more about building and therefore to organize things for what happened, from next year. But you never know. It’s still a long year and there are still have many points. ”

Q: You had two fourth places so far. A podium the next step is for you? ”
Schumacher: “I wonder if I’ll get another podium or not changes to my stats at all. The fact is: I want to see that we can go on their own to this position. And now we are not able to do so. I have found in the get Turkey by Sebastian Vettel’s failure given a place. from team perspective, we are currently third parties must and we work really. We do this so that we drive on their own to the podium and race win. That’s what we want and what we create can. But it takes time. ”

Question: “You are now ahead of Ferrari. Is that the F-shaft?”
Schumacher: “It certainly contributes a part in this. But we were in Turkey in any case an aerodynamic upgrade. So it is a natural process that we go through. In Turkey it has taken us ahead of Ferrari. But that does not mean that that’s the case here. We have seen how a team was in front and then back – it’s sometimes a bit difficult to understand, and strangely, why is the case. We hope that we stay at the front end and so far could we always get the most from the package. Nico Rosberg did a fantastic job, as he has brought the podium. ”

Q: You have spoken of the construction process. You have participated in at Ferrari, Benetton’s there. Are you still very satisfying to get into a team to work with him and build it up? ”
Schumacher: “That is one reason why I’m here. Driving is one thing. But a close cooperation, a good understanding and a good atmosphere in the team are very satisfying.”

Q: You work with a German team. Does it even matter that it is a team of your own home? ”
MS: Sure. If you look at how I started: Mercedes has supported me on the way to F1. Yes, it all fits together very well. ”

Q: You said that it is for you here on personal performance went well except in China. Would you say that Turkey was your best race this year? ”
MS: No, I have in Turkey, I drove the car to go home. I could make to the front at all, because they were too fast for us. I have only kept the place and am so driven, that nothing happened to the rear .

Q: What was your best race then? ”
RS: There was no ‘best race’ for me. Sometimes you have these very special race and moments in which everything fits together perfectly. And so far we have not yet. ”

Question: “Are you missing this?”
Schumacher: “I know I’ll get there. This is one reason why I do this – to get to this point. But for that it needs certain ingredients, and we are looking together yet.”

Q: What is in your life the biggest difference between now and then, when you left the sport? ”
Schumacher: “Maybe I enjoy it much more now because I take only the important things seriously.”

Q: Is it so lucky – there have less stress? ”
Schumacher: “I am extremely pleased with my life with my family, with the excitement that I have. I have absolutely no reason to complain. I feel really relaxed.”

Question: “Stress is one of the ingredients that make you faster, hungrier?”
MS: No. I do not stress! ”

Q: Are you faster because you are relaxed? ”
Schumacher: “I do not think I’m faster. I enjoy it more simply.”

Q: You’re already driving in Le Mans, as you would like to start again? ”
Schumacher: “It was beautiful, as I drove, it was great fun. But security aspect worries me. After so many years, in Formula 1 is not much that would challenge one. But the security question me like this kept away. ”

Q: Is there anything away from the Formula 1, which you would like to do, what would be a real challenge? ”
Schumacher: “I want much, but I am very satisfied with my life.”

Question: “Would you not like to fly once in orbit or something?”
MS: No, that does not attract me. ”

Question: “What a challenge you would you then search for Formula 1?”
MS: I do a lot of things that are fun. But nothing, what should I speak now, because I’m still busy with this and focus on the what I want now are doing. There is no place to think about what I want to do it. “

“I like it when the walls are close to the track and if you can not afford any mistakes, because that is challenging and makes driving more fun,” said Kubica. “Even in the Macau Formula 3 I especially liked or in Formula 1 Monaco. The only street circuit, which I do not like is Singapore. Why am I not there, the track may, but I can not say for sure.”

The discussion is now about to go in the direction the formula 1, for among the fans, the discontent with Bernie Ecclestone’s house and court architect Hermann Tilke increasing. The German has built in recent years superb facilities such as Shanghai, Abu Dhabi, but is criticized for its routes have no character. Many fans believe that the idea of safety is partly already taken too seriously.

But: “That just is not that,” said Kubica. “I’m a fan of street circuits, but also a fan of security, because I had here a serious accident. It depends on the balance between risk and safety. The formula one has become, thanks to the FIA and thanks to the team much more secure. If I would indeed like this happens an accident ten years ago, today I would not be sitting here, maybe more. ”

In discussion forums time and again the argument that run-off should not be paved, as this driving mistake will be punished only lightly. We used to cut the chicane in from Montreal, was quick views of the front wing off, now it is hardly out of the wind shadow of the man in front. But the tarmac run-off areas have their advantages.
Rosberg against gravel beds

“In turn eight in Istanbul, many people took off,” says Nico Rosberg. ‘If there is a gravel and would have had to close the track standing wall, there would have been serious accidents. The risk is mainly that the car in the gravel into place and somersaults. That would be dangerous, so I think it is a good development, in such a tarmac run-off to have curves. ”

Felipe Massa puts it even more plainly: “Turn Eight in Monaco would not be very nice,” the Ferrari driver. The drivers love the one hand the great challenges such as Spa-Francorchamps Suzuka or most are, but at the same time conscious of the fact that the formula is an extremely dangerous and the security therefore must not be left out of sight. Lewis Hamilton is among those who see the rather loose.

“My intention is only to the asphalt between the white lines,” the McLaren star. “The FIA makes this line around a great job in terms of security, so we need to focus not. The most important thing is how cool the track – and that is between the white lines.” Hamilton also insists that it is “a fine line” between safety and danger aspect.

One question almost every investor asks at some point is whether it is possible to achieve above market returns by selecting a diversified group of stocks according to some formula, rather than having to evaluate each stock from every angle.

There are obvious advantages to such a formulaic approach. For the individual, the amount of time and effort spent caring for his investments would be reduced, leaving more time for him to spend on more enjoyable and fulfilling tasks. For the institution, large sums of money could be deployed without having to rely upon the investing acumen of a single talented stock picker. Many of the proposed systems also offer the advantage of matching the inflow of investable funds with investment opportunities. An investor who follows no formula, and evaluates each stock from every angle, may often find himself holding cash. Historically, this has been a problem for some excellent stock pickers. So, there are real advantages to favoring a formulaic approach to investing if such an approach would yield returns similar to the returns a complete stock by stock analysis would yield.

Many investment writers have proposed at least one such formulaic approach during their lifetime. The most promising formulaic approaches have been articulated by three men: Benjamin Graham, David Dreman, and Joel Greenblatt. As each of these approaches appeals to logic and common sense, they are not unique to these three men. But, these are the three names with which these approaches are usually most closely associated; so, there is little need to draw upon sources beyond theirs.

Benjamin Graham wrote three books of consequence: “Security Analysis”, “The Intelligent Investor”, and “The Interpretation of Financial Statements”. Within each book, he hints at various workable approaches both in stocks and bonds; however, he is most explicit in his best known work, “The Intelligent Investor”. There, Graham discusses the purchase of shares for less than two – thirds of their net current asset value. The belief that this method would yield above market returns is supported on both empirical and logical grounds.

In fact, it currently enjoys far too much support to be practicable. Public companies rarely trade below their net current asset values. This is unlikely to change in the future. Buyout firms, unconventional money managers, and vulture investors now check such excessive bouts of public pessimism by taking large or controlling stakes in troubled companies. As a result, the investing public is less likely to indulge its pessimism as feverishly as it once did; for, many cheap stocks now have the silver lining of being takeover targets. As Graham’s net current asset value method is neither workable at present, nor is likely to prove workable in the future, we must set it aside.

David Dreman is known as a contrarian investor. In his case, it is an appropriate label, because of his keen interest in behavioral finance. However, in most cases the line separating the value investor from the contrarian investor is fuzzy at best. Dreman’s contrarian investing strategies are derived from three measures: price to earnings, price to cash flow, and price to book value. Of these measures, the price to earnings ratio is by far the most conspicuous. It is quoted nearly everywhere the share price is quoted. When inverted, the price to earnings ratio becomes the earnings yield. To put this another way, a stock’s earnings yield is “e” over “p”. Dreman describes the strategy of buying stocks trading at low prices relative to their earnings as the low P/E approach; but, he could have just as easily called it the high earnings yield approach.

Whatever you call it, this approach has proved effective in the past. A diversified group of low P/E stocks has usually outperformed both a diversified group of high P/E stocks and the market as a whole.

This fact suggests that investors have a very hard time quantifying the future prospects of most public companies. While they may be able to make correct qualitative comparisons between businesses, they have trouble assigning a price to these qualitative differences. This does not come as a surprise to anyone with much knowledge of human judgment (and misjudgment). I am sure there is some technical term for this deficiency, but I know it only as “checklist syndrome”. Within any mental model, one must both describe the variables and assign weights to these variables. Humans tend to have little difficulty describing the variables – that is, creating the checklist. However, they rarely have any clue as to the weight that ought to be given to each variable.

This is why you will sometimes hear analysts say something like: the factor that tipped the balance in favor of online sales this holiday season was high gas prices (yes, this is an actual paraphrase; but, I won’t attribute it, because publicly attaching such an inane argument to anyone’s name is just cruel). It is true that avoiding paying high prices at the pump is a possible motivating factor in a shopper’s decision to make online Christmas purchases. However, it is an immaterial factor. It is a mere pebble on the scales. This is the same kind of thinking that places far too much value on a stock’s future earnings growth and far too little value on a stock’s current earnings.

The other two contrarian methods: the low price to cash flow approach and the low price to book value approach work for the same reasons. They exploit the natural human tendency to see a false equality in the factors, and to run down a checklist. For instance, a stock that has a triple digit price to cash flow ratio, but is in all other respects an extraordinary business, will be judged favorably by a checklist approach. However, if great weight is assigned to present cash flows relative to the stock price, the stock will be judged unfavorably. This also illustrates the second strength of the three contrarian methods.

They heavily weight the known factors. Of course, they do not heavily weight all known factors. They only consider three easily quantifiable known factors. An excellent brand, a growing industry, a superb management team, etc. may also be known factors. However, they are not precisely quantifiable. I would argue that while these factors may not be quantifiable they are calculable; that is to say, while no exact value may be assigned to them, they are useful data that ought to be considered when evaluating an investment.

There is the possibility of a middle ground here. These three contrarian methods may be used as a screen. Then, the investor may apply his own active judgment to winnow the qualifying stocks down to a final portfolio. Personally, I do not believe this is an acceptable compromise. These three methods do not adequately model the diversity of great investments. Therefore, they must either exclude some of the best stocks or include too many of the worst stocks. It is wise to place great weight upon each of these measures; however, it is foolish disqualify any stock because of a single criterion (which is exactly what such a screen does).

Finally, there is Joel Greenblatt’s “magic formula”. This is the most interesting formulaic approach to investing, both because it does not subject stocks to any true/false tests and because it is a composite of the two most important readily quantifiable measures a stock has: earnings yield and return on capital. As you will recall, earnings yield is simply the inverse of the P/E ratio; so, a stock with a high earnings yield is simply a low P/E stock. Return on capital may be thought of as the number of pennies earned for each dollar invested in the business. The exact formula that Greenblatt uses is described in “The Little Book That Beats the Market”. However, the formula used is rather unimportant. Over large groups of stocks (which is what Greenblatt suggests the magic formula be used on) any differences between the various return on capital formulae will not have much affect on the performance of the portfolios constructed.

Greenblatt claims his magic formula may be used in two different ways: as an automated portfolio generation tool or as a screen. For an investor like you (that is, one with sufficient curiosity and commitment to frequent a site such as this) the latter use is the more appropriate one. The magic formula will serve you well as a screen. I would argue, however, that you needn’t limit yourself to stocks screened by the magic formula, if you have full confidence in your judgment regarding some other stock.

These four formulaic approaches (the three from Dreman and the one from Greenblatt) will likely yield returns greater than or equal to the returns you would obtain from an index fund. Therefore, you would do better to invest in your own basket of qualifying stocks than in the prefabricated market basket. If you want to be a passive investor, or believe yourself incapable of being an active investor, these formulaic approaches are your best bet.

In fact, if I were approached by an institution making long – term investments and using only a very small percentage of the fund for operating expenses, I would recommend an automated process derived from these four approaches. I would also recommend that 100% of the fund’s investable assets be put into equities, but that is a discussion for another day (in fact, it’s a discussion for Tuesday; my next podcast is devoted to the dangers of diversification). If, however, you believe you have what it takes to be an active investor, and that is truly what you wish to be, then, I would suggest you do not use these approaches for anything more than helping you generate some useful ideas.

If you choose this path, you need to be clear about what being an active investor entails. Read this next part very carefully (it is correct even though it may not appear to be): I have never found a screen that generates more than one buy order per hundred stocks returned. Even after I have narrowed the list of possible stocks down by a cursory review of the industry and the business itself, I have never found a method that can consistently generate more than one buy order per twenty – five annual reports read.

Here, I am citing my best past experiences. In my experience, most screens result in less than one buy order per three hundred stocks returned, and I usually read more like fifty to a hundred annual reports per buy order at a minimum. You may choose to invest in far more stocks than I do. Perhaps instead of limiting yourself to your five to twelve best ideas as I do, you might want to put money into your best twenty – five to thirty ideas. Do the math, and you’ll see that is still quite a bit of homework.

That’s why remaining a passive investor is the best bet for most people. The time and effort demanded of the active investor is simply too taxing. They have more important, more enjoyable things to do. If that’s true for you, the four formulaic approaches outlined above should guide you to above market returns.