The F1 Free Practice Conundrum: Is Three Hours Still Necessary?

Formula 1, a sport perpetually seeking optimization and spectacle, often finds itself questioning its long-standing traditions. The latest to come under scrutiny? The venerable three hours of unrestricted free practice sessions held on Fridays of a Grand Prix weekend. While purists might lament any alteration, the prevailing sentiment within the paddock and among decision-makers suggests that this era of extensive track running might be drawing to a close. This debate isn’t merely academic; it has profound implications for team strategies, driver preparation, and the overall competitive balance of the sport.

The recent Australian Grand Prix weekend at Albert Park perfectly encapsulated the arguments for reconsidering the current practice format. Despite two distinct practice sessions, teams and drivers emerged from Friday with more questions than answers. A tumultuous mix of a ‘green’ track lacking rubber, persistent GPS glitches disrupting ideal running, multiple red flag interruptions, and unpredictable rainfall conspired to create an environment where meaningful data collection was severely hampered. This left teams unusually uncertain about their true performance potential heading into the critical qualifying and race days, highlighting the very issues that proponents of reduced practice often cite.

Red Bull’s Unmistakable Pace Amidst Challenges

One undeniable conclusion from Friday’s sessions at Albert Park, however, was the formidable pace of Red Bull Racing. Max Verstappen, the reigning world champion, confidently asserted his dominance by setting the fastest time of the day. His impressive lap of 1’18.790, achieved on soft compound tyres during the first practice session, remained unchallenged throughout the rain-affected second session. Fernando Alonso came closest to matching this blistering pace, registering a time just a tenth of a second slower in FP2, notably on the theoretically slower medium compound tyres, which only served to underscore Red Bull’s raw speed advantage.

The Albert Park circuit, renowned for being one of the fastest on the Formula 1 calendar, demands a precise balance between front tyre load through its sweeping corners and strong traction out of its few slower sections. This characteristic plays directly into the strengths of the RB19, Red Bull’s dominant challenger. Indeed, both Verstappen and his teammate Sergio Perez consistently topped the speed traps throughout the day, recording speeds up to 6 km/h faster than Lewis Hamilton’s Mercedes and nearly 10 km/h quicker than Alonso’s Aston Martin, a clear indicator of their superior aerodynamic efficiency and power delivery.

Despite his blistering pace, Verstappen’s performance was not entirely without incident. He appeared less comfortable in the car than at any other point in the nascent season, even experiencing a spin at the exit of turn four late in the opening practice hour. The championship leader candidly admitted that he found it challenging to bring his tyres into their optimal operating window due to the unusually cooler conditions. “It was quite tough to switch the tyres on,” Verstappen explained, “so that was difficult when you want to push immediately. There were also quite a few interruptions with the red flags, so we never really got into a rhythm. It was difficult to tell how the car felt as we never got a window where I thought we were on top of the tyres.” This insight suggests that while the raw pace is there, the RB19 might still have a narrow operating window, especially in changeable conditions.

Assessing Sergio Perez’s comparative performance proved even more difficult due to the disrupted sessions. In the initial practice, Perez primarily focused on running the medium tyres. In the mere 15 minutes of uninterrupted running before heavy rainfall brought the second session to a premature end, he struggled to complete a clean lap, frequently encountering traffic. He humorously described the traffic situation as “a bit mental,” adding, “It felt like a lot of people still had issues with their GPS data… I think tomorrow there’s more or less plenty to do – too much to do in FP3. So I think we’re going to be somehow going a bit blind into the race, which should be interesting.” This collective sentiment underscores the chaotic nature of the day and the limited understanding teams had of their true competitive standing.

The Pursuit of Red Bull: A Glimpse at the Contenders

As has become the familiar narrative of the 2023 season, Fernando Alonso and Aston Martin once again emerged as the closest challengers to the dominant Red Bulls on the Friday timesheets. However, with the absence of meaningful long-run data to provide a direct comparison, even contrasting Alonso’s fastest lap with Verstappen’s overall best offered limited insight into their true race pace. Verstappen’s quickest lap was set on soft tyres, while Alonso’s best in FP2 utilized mediums, further complicating direct comparisons. Intriguingly, Verstappen held a significant advantage of up to six-tenths of a second over Alonso through the first two sectors during his benchmark lap, yet he inexplicably lost almost all of this gain in the final sector, despite not encountering any traffic.

Alonso, like many other drivers, dedicated a substantial portion of the first practice session to evaluating various upgrade components rather than fine-tuning his car’s setup specifically for the Albert Park circuit. This strategic decision meant that he concluded Friday’s running with little clearer understanding of how his Aston Martin might truly stack up against the Red Bulls. “We concentrated on some test items that we wanted to tick the box,” Alonso explained. “And then in FP2, it was just a 20-minute session only. So still some jobs to do tomorrow, especially on the tyres into the race, some long runs or something that we were obviously missing today. But so far I think the car seems to behave well.” His comments highlight the trade-offs teams face between immediate performance optimization and long-term development, particularly when practice time is disrupted.

Ferrari, after a challenging start to their 2023 campaign, did not necessarily command headlines with their Friday performance, but there was a palpable sense of optimism within the team. Charles Leclerc expressed considerable satisfaction, stating that his SF23 felt notably better than it had during the opening two rounds of the season. “It’s probably our most positive FP2 of the season,” he remarked. “Which doesn’t mean much, but at least it’s a Friday that finishes on a positive note.” This cautiously optimistic assessment suggests that Ferrari might be beginning to unravel the complexities of their car, finding a more comfortable operating window.

Despite Leclerc’s satisfaction, his teammate Carlos Sainz Jnr maintained a more measured and realistic expectation regarding Ferrari’s prospects of truly challenging Red Bull, Aston Martin, and Mercedes for the remainder of the weekend. “I think it’s fair to assume that in quali we will play with them,” was Sainz’s assessment, implying that one-lap pace might be competitive. However, he quickly added, “But then in the race we should assume also that we should be one step behind like we were in Jeddah.” This candid outlook underscores Ferrari’s ongoing struggle to translate strong qualifying performances into consistent race pace, a critical area they need to address.

Mercedes drivers Lewis Hamilton and George Russell also maintained a pragmatic perspective on their team’s chances, acknowledging the limited representative running that prevented direct comparisons with their key rivals. Hamilton offered a frank assessment: “We won’t be competing against the Red Bulls. I think we’ve got pace to be around fifth area – the same as the last race.” Russell concurred, providing a more detailed projection: “I’d say that’s a fair assessment. I think if we really pull everything together, the third row – probably between P5 and P8 – I think is where we’re looking at the moment.” Their collective statements paint a picture of a team still grappling with their car’s true potential, aiming for solid points finishes rather than outright victory.

Tricky Tarmac, Tight Traffic, and Tyre Strategy

Become a RaceFans supporter andgo ad-free

As anticipated, the semi-permanent Albert Park street circuit presented an extremely ‘green’ surface when drivers first took to the track. The track, initially lacking significant rubber, offered low grip levels. Even the presence of support series like Formula 2 and FIA F3 over the weekend is unlikely to deposit substantially more rubber on the public roads that form the circuit, especially after the cleansing effects of Thursday and Friday’s rainfall. This ever-evolving track condition adds another layer of complexity for teams trying to optimize their setups.

Looking ahead to qualifying, with forecasts predicting cooler temperatures and a continued slight risk of rain, two critical factors are poised to define the all-important hour-long session: traffic management and tyre temperature optimization. Drivers already reported significant challenges in navigating the narrow confines of Albert Park without impeding their rivals. However, George Russell offered an interesting perspective on why a spoiled lap due to traffic might not be as detrimental here as at other venues, attributing it to the unique asphalt – or ‘bitumen’, to use the local Australian term – used on the roads.

“I don’t know if the fans watching know too much about it,” Russell commented, “but the difference in Tarmacs from the different races we go to has a real substantial effect on the car and the feeling. Saudi and Melbourne have a similar Tarmac, so you can really push the tyres hard. And you’re seeing you’re able to do one, two, three laps on the soft tyre – which is unique in a way.” This crucial insight suggests that teams might have more flexibility with tyre preparation and multiple flying laps during qualifying, potentially reducing the single-lap pressure often seen elsewhere.

This ability to push the soft tyres for multiple consecutive laps could even play a significant strategic role during the main race. Last year, the C5 soft tyre was largely overlooked for race stints. However, with the slightly harder C4 compound nominated as the softest option for this weekend, it may prove to be a far more viable and durable race tyre, opening up new strategic possibilities for teams. The combination of track characteristics, weather uncertainty, and tyre compounds ensures that Saturday’s qualifying session and Sunday’s race will be far from straightforward.

The Future of F1 Practice: An Evolving Landscape

As Formula 1 progresses into an increasingly busy global calendar, the debate surrounding the optimal format and duration of free practice sessions intensifies. The initial question remains: does F1 truly need three hours of unrestricted practice? Friday’s events at Albert Park, characterized by limited meaningful data and pervasive uncertainty, served as a potent case study. Teams were left with more unanswered questions than usual after two hours of running, underscoring the potential inefficiencies and frustrations inherent in the current structure when conditions are not ideal.

Before teams commit to their final qualifying setups, they are typically afforded a crucial hour of final preparation in FP3. This session often reveals far more about the true pecking order and potential strategies than the previous day’s disrupted running. The core question for Formula 1’s stakeholders is whether they wish to continue heading into more Saturdays with this level of uncertainty surrounding the comparative strengths of the ten competing teams. If the goal is to enhance unpredictability and strategic complexity, then the current practice format, particularly when disrupted, certainly achieves that.

However, if the aim is to maximize efficiency, reduce team workload, and potentially free up calendar space, then re-evaluating the three hours of practice becomes imperative. Various proposals have been floated, from reducing Friday’s sessions to just one extended period, to integrating more sprint race weekends that inherently condense the practice schedule. Each option presents its own set of advantages and disadvantages, impacting everything from engineering development to fan engagement.

Cutting down the current three hours of practice could be a double-edged sword. On one hand, it forces teams to be more adaptable and efficient, potentially leveling the playing field as larger teams might lose a slight advantage in data gathering and setup fine-tuning. On the other hand, it could lead to less optimized cars, more mistakes, and potentially less spectacular racing, as drivers and teams struggle to find the absolute limit without ample preparation. It also impacts junior driver opportunities, as Friday FP1 sessions are often used for rookie appearances.

Ultimately, the discussion revolves around finding the right balance between tradition, sporting spectacle, and operational efficiency. The unpredictability generated by a chaotic practice day, such as the one witnessed in Melbourne, can be thrilling for spectators. However, for the teams investing hundreds of millions, a more streamlined and reliable preparation schedule might be preferable. Formula 1’s leaders must weigh these factors carefully as they consider the future format of a Grand Prix weekend.

Become a RaceFans supporter andgo ad-free

First and Second Practice Times: Australian Grand Prix 2023

Position	Number	Driver	Team	FP1 time	FP2 time	Gap	Laps
1	1	Max Verstappen	Red Bull	1’18.790	1’19.502		29
2	14	Fernando Alonso	Aston Martin-Mercedes	1’19.317	1’18.887	0.097	36
3	44	Lewis Hamilton	Mercedes	1’19.223	1’20.323	0.433	37
4	11	Sergio Perez	Red Bull	1’19.293	1’20.083	0.503	34
5	16	Charles Leclerc	Ferrari	1’19.378	1’19.332	0.542	26
6	55	Carlos Sainz Jnr	Ferrari	1’19.505	1’19.695	0.715	32
7	4	Lando Norris	McLaren-Mercedes	1’19.536	1’20.176	0.746	36
8	10	Pierre Gasly	Alpine-Renault	1’19.646	1’20.206	0.856	34
9	63	George Russell	Mercedes	1’19.699	1’19.672	0.882	43
10	31	Esteban Ocon	Alpine-Renault	1’20.175	1’19.725	0.935	32
11	18	Lance Stroll	Aston Martin-Mercedes	1’19.766	1’20.579	0.976	34
12	23	Alexander Albon	Williams-Mercedes	1’19.766	1’21.182	0.976	39
13	81	Oscar Piastri	McLaren-Mercedes	1’19.777	1’20.380	0.987	46
14	27	Nico Hulkenberg	Haas-Ferrari	1’19.806	1’20.194	1.016	38
15	21	Nyck de Vries	AlphaTauri-Red Bull	1’19.933	1’20.600	1.143	33
16	2	Logan Sargeant	Williams-Mercedes	1’20.074	No time	1.284	21
17	22	Yuki Tsunoda	AlphaTauri-Red Bull	1’20.399	1’20.220	1.430	32
18	77	Valtteri Bottas	Alfa Romeo-Ferrari	1’20.419	1’20.312	1.522	43
19	24	Zhou Guanyu	Alfa Romeo-Ferrari	1’20.569	1’20.470	1.680	44
20	20	Kevin Magnussen	Haas-Ferrari	1’21.147	1’21.266	2.357	35

Teams’ Progress vs 2022

Related Articles: 2023 Australian Grand Prix

• Australian GP to forbid fans from entering track at end of this year’s race
• I only missed one chance to score points this year – Albon
• Formula 1’s stewards should listen to drivers less, not more
• Mercedes unsure whether gains seen in Melbourne were ‘track-specific’
• Why Ferrari saw a ‘real step forward in pure performance’ in point-less Australian GP

Browse all 2023 Australian Grand Prix articles