ESPN

F1 always has been a technological proving ground. Until recently that is! Its a delicate balance between driver skill and technical prowess. I do believe, however, that F1 should be slightly more toward the engineering performance as apposed to driver skill. Most of the divers on the grid are some of the best drivers in the world and have earned their seats through merit and years of competing in single make series. If you want to see true driver skill then this is what the single make series are for. F1 is very much different! Its about building the fastest most technically advanced race car in the world. Now you do need the best drivers in the world to handle the most advanced cars in the world. But in my opinion that is the extent of a drivers role within F1. It is a platform for some of the most talented technical minds and teams of engineers to display their talent. Also I think that F1 has forgotten its purpose in recent years. F1 is the biggest and, until the last decade, most successful R&D laboratories in the world. The intense competition has over the years given birth to some truly innovative creations which have the potential to impact the life of the average person. Just look at the impact it has had on saving the lives of prematurely born children. www.ted.com This is in my opinion is the only justification for the otherwise grotesque costs of the F1 circus! The recent shift to turbo hybrid engines is absolutely the right direction for F1 to go in. The problem is just that the headless chickens... sorry the rule makers have put too much of a restriction on this amazing technology for any meaningful developments to come from it. The same can be said about Formula E. Missed opportunity! Single team dominance, expensive budgets are just the nature of the beast. If you want to see a battle of the drivers; then it is much cheaper to go and see a go-kart race.

I can't believe I'm quoting this guy but it's pretty much the smartest/funniest thing he ever said and it applies to testing: As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don’t know we don’t know.

@Laurence: I thnk he'd enjoy War and Peace too.

@Efranov, I am not doubting Honda's capabilities. Their last full season in F1 got them them overwhelming success (2009) not to mention their past successes with Mclaren. That said, all am doubting is their readiness to race with full Power come Melbourne.

@Phil: Not to mention the things we don't WANT to know.

@Siddhesh, no one thing can be too ready for anything, but honda has the experience to get their stuff working. i hope it is not a repeat of 2004 with BAR, infamously with Sato in Monaco and poor Fisico. They will fix it, and even using the racing as a test session is acceptable.

@Adam, My bad. I meant their last full season as a Engine Supplier, which would be the relevant context here.

Yeh but the brawn was essentially a Honda car. If they hadn't pulled out it would have been there title (possibly more easily as they would have had in season development that Brawn couldn't afford)

Hond / Mclaren has two very good drivers and a car that has been untested as of yet.

They're radiator / intercooler design is a game changer for the design of these cars and will prove itself in short order.