How F1 cars left Mugello with its own Eau Rouge paradox

Ever since Formula 1 drivers were left thrilled by the driving challenge of Mugello back in 2012 when the last group test was held, those involved in the championship have long wondered just what a grand prix would be like there.

Mark Webber famously tweeted at the time: "Did 10 dry laps today around Mugello, which is the same thing as doing 1000 laps around Abu Dhabi track in terms of satisfaction."

Now, thanks to the unique circumstances that the world has faced because of the coronavirus pandemic, we have the answer as to what an F1 event would be like. And the answer is: pretty sensational.

The grins from drivers each time they stepped out of their cockpits last weekend; the brilliance of watching modern F1 cars through the high speed section that includes Arrabbiata 1 and 2, and a fair degree of jeopardy and chaos in the race, has left everyone (apart from F1's bean-counters) hoping that Mugello does not just become a one-hit wonder.

In fact, there is another quite important reason as to why F1 really should try to get itself back to Mugello in the future - and that is because the current cars were perhaps little bit too good for it.

PLUS: The other factor that helped to make an exciting Tuscan GP

By far the most talked-about section of the track was the run down the hill though Casanova and the left hander at Savelli, then through those two dazzling right handers, Arrabbiata 1 and Arrabbiata 2.

Standing track side there, on the bank that stood on the outside and looking up the hill, the place has a similar vibe to the Esses at Suzuka. As the cars blast in to view, the speed, forces, the swift change of direction, the sparks, floor rubbing, bouncing over the bumps (and kerbs sometimes) spectacle is something truly magical to behold.

Equally from the cockpit, the drivers too were left raving by a series of corners that left them thrilled and breathless - and served as a reminder of exactly why they wanted to be F1 drivers in the first place.

And yet there was one vital aspect missing from the Arrabbiata corners in particular. That the two corners were easy flat meant that, for all the fun and thrills for drivers and onlookers, it wasn't actually a place that separated the men from the boys.

Being 100% throttle meant that being quicker or slower through there was simply a consequence of car performance rather than driver talent, which isn't something that we want to see in an ideal world.

"It's a very ballsy circuit, it's challenging and you do need a bit of courage through there. I would say the first sector is probably the trickiest"Daniel Ricciardo

The best and most spectacular corners should be the places where the superstars can make a difference. Iconic corners need to be almost flat - and only the best of the best dare to do it with no lift from their right foot.

For Pierre Gasly, the flat-out nature of Arrabbiata reminded him of what F1 encounters with the Eau Rouge paradox, where the most spectacular and iconic corner that everyone raves about, and believes is a display of a driver's greatness, isn't actually a test of talent because it is easy flat. When you dig deep into the detail, it is more often the boring slow chicanes that separate the best from the good.

"I must say in terms of pleasure, it's incredible because to imagine to go flat through through these [Arrabbiata] corners clearly makes you realise the downforce and makes you feel the potential of this F1 car," he said. "So driving wise, yeah, it's unbelievable.

"In terms of driving skills, it's a bit similar to Eau Rouge. It's flat and whatever car you've got, I think you don't really make a difference as a driver. It's more in the chicanes, sort of the medium to high speed corners, where as a driver, you feel like you have a big impact in these places."

It was a view that Daniel Ricciardo agreed with, as he suggested F1's 2020 cars were simply 'too good' for the Arrabbiata sequence.

"There is enough downforce on the cars to kind of get through those, not effortlessly as it's certainly harder than maybe Turn 3 in Barcelona, but I think everyone's got a skill set to do it.

"So it's probably not enough to separate [drivers]. I think six and seven is a bit more but it's a hard one. I think the cars are probably too good, even if you are having a little lift to maybe make a massive difference in there.

PLUS: Five tech talking points from Mugello

"Nonetheless, it's still a very ballsy circuit, it's challenging and you do need a bit of courage through there. But yeah, I would say the first sector is probably the trickiest."

While the Arrabbiata challenge could perhaps have been greater if F1's current cars just weren't so damn good, there were other bigger positives to take out of the Mugello race too. Chiefly, not having acres of asphalt run off areas - with gravel traps the norm at Mugello - had actually proven not to be a bad thing.

For perhaps the first time this year, there hadn't been endless warnings beforehand from the FIA about track limits policing nor the deletion of lap after lap in practice and qualifying. Instead, the track limit was, as it should be, the track. Anyone who ventured beyond that was punished.

Sebastian Vettel spoke for many drivers when he said that the risk-reward nature of having track limits effectively policed by gravel rather than stewards was much more enticing.

"I think as a driver you prefer the fact that if you go off, it gets penalised," he said. "I think it makes things a lot more straightforward. But I think you have to balance also the gravel against the asphalt in terms of if things go wrong. Obviously I don't know, there were a couple of incidents in the weekend, and you know, if you get it wrong, the gravel doesn't really slow down the car.

"Maybe we can have, I don't know, an intermediate solution where you have a gravel strip initially, and therefore there is no point to go wide. And after that, have asphalt for the benefit of having less run off, bring the spectators closer to the track, and make it safer for us as the cars slow down if you lose control or whatever. It's not an easy one, but for sure with all the asphalt around in some tracks, it does take away the character and make it a bit too easy to do mistakes."

Of much more interest for F1 though was seeing how fears of a Mugello borefest because of a lack of overtaking opportunities did not play out - and in fact the track proved to be a great one for racing.

There were otherpositives to take out of the Mugello race too. Chiefly, not having acres of asphalt run off areas - with gravel traps the norm at Mugello - had proven not to be a bad thing

The cambered nature of the corners - especially Turn 1 - allowed drivers to take different lines and muscle their way around the outside for position. Plus, the combination of left-right flicks allowed drivers to stick their noses in and attack over a sequence of turns.

Sure, cambered corners are not best for drainage reasons - as the water tends to roll down on to the racing line - but perhaps it could be time for a rethink at future F1 venues about whether more thought should be given to going the Mugello route.

As Vettel said: "Absolutely. I think as a driver, you like cambered corners and you hate off-camber. This track wasn't designed by Tilke, so there is not so much off-camber here.

"Normally the design reason for the off-camber is the water drainage, but I think there are other solutions, and therefore I will always favour corners that have camber, because they will lead to more grip. It makes it more exciting."

And it's that excitement factor that will be the biggest take out from everyone of the weekend.

Thrilling for drivers, thrilling for fans trackside and thrilling to watch on TV - what wasn't there to love about F1's visit to Mugello? And the prospect of seeing Arrabbiata with F1's 2022 cars could well be something else...