Australia: post-race analysis

Qualifying summary:

No bets on this, due to the timezone difference and the added difficulty of assessing a brand new season. It was interesting for several reasons. The tyres held on longer than expected, Heidfeld failed spectacularly with 18^th and a Q1 exit whereas his supposedly inferior team mate got an excellent 6^th, and the KERS failed for Schumacher (costing him a Q3 place), Hamilton and Vettel*. The latter two slaughtered the rest of the field, and Vettel was tremendously impressive, effectively a second ahead of Webber.

The qualifying session was also notable for the very good improvement for McLaren, and the lacklustre performance by Ferrari and Mercedes. Toro Rosso did well, and Sauber will be thrilled with Kobayashi’s 9^th. Hard to assess the Williams as Barrichello uncharacteristically slid off and ended Q2 in a gravel trap which put him 17^th.

*Later information indicates Red Bull simply aren’t bothering with KERS.

Race summary:

Well, the tip for Hamilton to win at 5.8 didn’t come off. Hamilton was clearly better than everyone save Vettel, but the Wunderkind was in a class of his own. The McLaren driver impressed hugely by doing so well with a broken floor, but frankly Vettel had the entire weekend sewn up. He dominated qualifying, he was never in danger of losing the race and these are ominous signs for the rest of the field. Nor can his success be ascribed solely to the ingenuity of Adrian Newey, Red Bull designer, as he also wiped the floor with his Australian counterpart.

On bets considered but not tipped, Schumacher for top 6 and Button for a podium would’ve proved losers (due to an accident and a deserved drive-through respectively), the 10.5 for Petrov to get a podium would’ve won. Irritating, as always, but it is at least a sign that my eye is in, which is nice.

The start saw some interesting things. It cannot be definitively stated that this represents each team/driver’s true starting form as it’s just one race, but useful pointers may’ve been seen. Schumacher and Petrov started brilliantly, as did both Red Bull drivers. Surprisingly, the McLarens had poor starts, as did (I think) the Ferraris.

Petrov did staggeringly well to get a deserved podium. If I’d believed in him more I would’ve tipped the 10.5 I considered, and that was clearly an error of judgement on my part. Meanwhile, Quick Nick qualified a pathetic 18^th and achieved a paltry 14^th in the race.

As for Alonso, he ended the race as he ended 2010: behind Petrov. A good solid 4^th, nothing spectacular, aided by his team mate getting out of the way and Button getting a drive-through. Ferrari are the third-placed team right now (or possibly fourth, after Petrov’s Renault).

Webber finished 5^th, 38 seconds down the road from his team mate. Button recovered well from his drive-through to nab 6^th, with an excellent 7^th for Mexican superstar Sergio Perez who stopped but once. His team mate, the popular Kobayashi, got overtaken quite often but managed to finish 8^th. A lacklustre Massa came in 9^th with Buemi 10^th.

Tyre degradation was substantially more than last year but not farcically high. As a result we got some interesting strategic divergence, from Perez’s 1 stop to the 3 stops of Alonso and Webber and the 2 stops of Petrov. It may be worth keeping an eye on Perez’s odds, because if he can put in 1 or 2 fewer stops per race than his competitors then he is likely to climb the standings from the grid to the result (he went from 13^th to 7^th today).

We cannot assess Mercedes. Both drivers were victims of other people crashing into them. Williams likewise failed to finish, although that is better than HRT, who failed to start.

It is worth saying that reliability generally was excellent. Most retirements seemed to be due to accidental damage. It’s disappointing to get my tip wrong, but it is nice to get the season underway and we now have some concrete information.

Musings:

Betting earlier affords better prices but higher risk. Scott P cunningly backed McLaren for the win at 6/1, pre-qualifying, with Coral. After qualifying, the odds were halved (with Betfair). Occasionally last year (usually with tiny stakes) I bet on winning teams pre-practice, but I usually prefer to have more information available before betting, at the cost of shorter odds.

I’ve found it a bit weird only writing one article this weekend. Less work though. Do people prefer this, with tips offered on the main site and a review on pb2, or think the old three articles per weekend system was better?

Already Vettel is evens for the title and Red Bull are shorter than that for the Constructor’s. We’re 1 race into a probably 19 race season, so I think this may be a little bit of an over-reaction. That said, Vettel absolutely slaughtered his opposition today. The question is, will he be able to repeat that on a circuit with many straights and slow corners?

The next race is in a fortnight’s time, in Malaysia. The qualifying and race start at 9am. It’ll be a bit earlier than I’d like, but I’ll try to offer qualifying as well as race tips.

Morris Dancer

Pre-season betting thoughts

Given the longer than expected wait, I’m going to fill the Bahrain-sized gap with a shorter post about betting, given the rule changes.

It’ll be mostly conjecture, of course, but that’s always the case pre-season.

There are 19 races (possibly 20, if Bahrain returns). If Korea is dry throughout, we’ll effectively have two new tracks in Korea and India (which is reportedly ahead of schedule). I’d guess that India should be good for McLaren, as it’s got quite a lot of long straights, which may also serve the increase the distortion between practice and qualifying times and race pace.

Qualifying may see the market for getting into Q3 becoming more interesting. If Red Bull, Ferrari, McLaren, Mercedes, Renault, Williams and Toro Rosso are all capable of it, it may become an opportune (or very difficult) market. [It’s worth pointing out that the previously poor Mercedes seems a bit racier since it had some upgrades fitted].

Pole will be the same as last year, because the adjustable rear wing can be used in qualifying and practice, so the P3 simulation runs should provide a good guide. (NB the last 3 races in Australia, our first destination, have had pole-sitters who did not top the timesheets much at all in practice).

The races will see many changes. The 107% rule means that, occasionally, a slow team will end up not even starting. KERS means that the teams with the best system (and best engine) may regularly gain a place or two at the start. The adjustable rear wing should, slightly, aid overtaking, and its highly regulated use in the race and free use in practice and qualifying will create a gap between practice and qualifying pace and race pace.

Perhaps the biggest change is that the tyres, now Pirelli, will no longer be made with the resilience of granite, but of crumbly cheese. An average of two pit stops was expected per race, rather than the standard (dry) one from Bridgestone. However, in a preview of the season the eminently sensible Martin Brundle reckoned three to four pit stops per race would be likely. This is deliberately to try and create more Montreal type racing. I have mixed views, as I found Montreal very exciting and had my worst result of the season there. Extra pit stops create more opportunity for cock-up, whether a poor pit stop or getting back out into traffic.

This also puts a premium on tyre management, and Button has reported he loves the new tyres. So, perhaps he’ll do well. (Then again, I thought that last year).

(For more info on tyres falling to pieces, check out this link: http://pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=43040).

Reliability will matter a lot, obviously, and in new and exciting ways. When it was last used, the KERS system occasionally broke, which then requires the car to carry quite a lot of weight for no advantage at all.

I’d expect the above changes to make the pole-sitter less likely to win, compared to last year. Extra pit stops adds possibility of misfortune, KERS adds opportunity for being passed at the line and the adjustable rear wing makes being passed later on more likely too.

If Ferrari and Red Bull are top dogs, initially at least, then the advantage ought to lie with the team most reliable. On recent history, that would probably be Ferrari. However, the cars are new, so we’ll have to wait and see whether the Red Bull (and especially Vettel) trend of being fast but fragile continues.

Unhelpfully, those pesky colonials have P3 at 3am and qualifying starts at 6am. I’ll make a decision nearer the time, but my inclination is to sit qualifying out rather than either get up at an ungodly hour or miss out on the usually helpful (although not at Australia, see above) P3 qualifying simulation.

The first race of the season (unless the hated dictator Julia Al-Gillard is toppled, of course) will be on the 27^th of March, starting at 7am UK time. Hurrah!

Morris Dancer

Testing and adjustable rear wing

There is a question mark over the adjustable rear wing. It’s been introduced to help effect overtaking, and there are three levels of success that might be achieved (or, to be more exact, one level of success and two levels of failure). If it does not work, then it will have failed. But, if it works too well and actually hands an advantage to the chap behind, then that’s artificial, unfair and a bit rubbish. The happy medium is that it aids overtaking and gets rid of the dirty air problem without making second place the position of choice for the penultimate lap. We’ll have to wait and see whether it’s brilliant, useless or worse than useless.

The distortion effect (due to it being available throughout a lap for practice and qualifying but only on one straight when a second or less behind someone in the race) will vary from circuit to circuit. More long straights will maximise the difference, obviously, and I think this may lead to Mercedes-powered vehicles (McLaren, Mercedes etc) being underestimated for the race following qualifying (at some circuits).

So, to testing!

Renault had a nifty idea. They’ve rejigged their exhaust system to increase downforce, basically. It seems to work nicely.

“BBC Sport's Andrew Benson: "In answer to 'anon' below, it's fair to say the Pirellis have proved in Valencia to go off very quickly - particularly the rears. But the company has been asked to provide less durable tyres than Bridgestone tended to make, because there's a belief that tyres that go off quickly make better racing - just look at the Canadian Grand Prix in 2010. The tyres have been developed since the post-season test in Abu Dhabi, and there is a media briefing on Thursday at which more will become clear about Pirelli's plans."”

That was from the live text from the first test, day two.

After the first test Schumacher said that the new tyres were like driving on ice, whereas Button really liked them. Kubica also indicated that they degraded rapidly, and Barrichello expressed some concerns about the increasing number of buttons on the steering wheel increasing the driver’s workload. It’s very difficult to read much into testing, but Button’s best time was 0.8s faster than Hamilton’s in test 1. That could be down to anything, but if it’s repeated at other tests it may indicate that Button’s chances are better this year than last.

Between tests 1 and 2 there was some very sad news. Robert Kubica, Renault’s lead driver and one of the most talented chaps on the circuit, was involved in a crash whilst rallying. He was trapped for over an hour, during which his hand was partially severed. Whether he’ll ever return is unknown (edit: he should be able to return, and is trying to come back this year), and even in a good scenario, rehab could take a year. I really hope he can return, as he is a very fast driver and has the skill (if not the car) to take a world title someday.

On the driver front, it creates a huge problem for Renault. The only chaps equal to Kubica are probably Vettel, Alonso and Hamilton, and they’re not up for grabs. The team has indicated that it’s considering Bruno Senna (reserve driver), Nick Heidfeld and Vitantonio Liuzzi for the seat. I’d go for Heidfeld if Kubica’s out for one year and Liuzzi if he is not going to return. Of course, the team may not have that information when they make their choice.

During the second test, Vettel said (in a Q&A with the official F1 website) this:

“When the tyres go off, it’s not as easy to use as when the tyres are fresh, but you get used to it. KERS is not so easy to use, but again it’s a case of getting used to it - its practice in the end.”

That’s quite interesting, and may suggest that, as well as the obvious reasons relating to tyre degradation, changing tyres might have the additional advantage of improving speed by making the adjustable rear wing more effective.

Alonso, interestingly, believes the adjustable rear wing will only be of benefit if the car being pursued is substantially slower than its pursuer:

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/89479

Schumacher raised doubts about the Mercedes pace in the second test. Ultimate pace seems fine, as he posted a very good fastest lap indeed, but the consensus appears to be that Red Bull and Ferrari are the quickest right now.

Immediately after the test, this interesting piece was posted on the official F1 website (http://www.formula1.com/news/headlines/2011/2/11745.html):

“From what we learned from those so far, we believe that we’re still on course to see two pit stops per race, which obviously might be one stop on some circuits and three stops on others, depending on the individual cars and track characteristics,” explained Pirelli’s motorsport director Paul Hembery.

Between tests 2 and 3, something interesting and disturbing emerged. The fourth test was shifted to Bahrain, from 3-6 March, with Bahrain also hosting the first Grand Prix from 11-13 March. The ‘problem’ is that recently the Arabs have decided that toppling dictatorships is tremendous fun, and Bahrain has been seeing its share of angry protestors and trigger-happy security forces.

Hopefully, the two sides can negotiate and peacefully reach a settlement, and the race (admittedly a minor point in the grand scheme of things) can go ahead. If there is trouble, it may jeopardise both the first race and the 4^th test (I’d guess they’ll have a back-up track lined up for the testing).

Update, 17^th February: now the streets of Bahrain are quiet, armoured vehicles are patrolling and the government’s had a crackdown. A GP2 race has had qualifying shifted to the morning of race day. Unsure if that’ll happen with F1.

The first day of the third test saw the first wet running with the new tyres, due to heavy rainfall the night before. There was also some wet running on day three.

We also learnt, from the excellent Ted Kravitz, that the Red Bull loves the adjustable rear wing:

“Red Bull and Ferrari have topped the timesheets so far, and from watching the cars on track, look the class of the field. The Red Bull RB7 is using its moveable rear wing in places no other car can, for example in the middle of the fast corner heading onto the main straight.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/9402470.stm

The 20^th saw Ecclestone finally (not) make a decision regarding whether there ought to be a race in Bahrain. He’s ducked it, and said it’s up to the crown prince. So, the crown prince either takes a tremendous risk by letting go of the race, knowing it may never come back after £1bn of spending, or he takes a tremendous risk, knowing that any main or splinter opposition group could disrupt the race or even pose a threat to the safety of those involved.

I’m unimpressed with this, frankly. Ecclestone’s right to say that the crown prince knows the security situation far better than he does, but it’s Bernie who runs the show. The crown prince is not the king of F1. He ought to be asked for advice, and then Ecclestone should make the decision.

Update, 20^th: Ecclestone has stated that if Bahrain is cancelled in March it could occur later in the year. This may be the best option.

On the 21^st we finally got the not entirely unexpected news that the Bahrain test is cancelled and the race itself has been postponed to an unspecified date. The first race of the season will be at Australia on the 27^th of March.

Given the lengthier than planned wait, I might write yet another pre-season article.

Anyway, here are my general impressions, based on the BBC live text of the various sessions:

Red Bull and Ferrari are both looking competitive in terms of pace, but the prancing horse has the edge when it comes to reliability. Indeed, most cars look a bit suspect in this area.

McLaren and Mercedes both look off the pace, though with the testing variations the times themselves can be highly misleading.

Toro Rosso and Renault look like they may punch above their weight in 2011. However, Sauber looked the same pre-2010, and it was a dog in the first part of the season.

Bahrain is a Ferraritastic circuit, so McLaren and Mercedes will not exactly be in tears about getting extra testing time and delaying a race where they may not get the top spots.

Looking through the calendar, the only other real potential flashpoint is Abu Dhabi, but that’s in November and I’d expect any disturbance to either be done and dusted or not happen at all by then.

My earlier vague witterings about Mercedes and Schumacher/Rosberg now look a shade silly. Still, I did state expressly that they weren’t tips and that I’m not betting pre-season. As of now, Vettel and Alonso look like the chaps with the best prospects, but the season is longer than ever and will be tricky to predict.

A reminder, to me as much as anyone reading this, that whilst practice is valid as a guide for qualifying, neither practice nor qualifying will give us a true picture of race pace. This will make predicting races somewhere between tremendous fun and infuriating, especially as they’ll now average 2 pit stops per track.

Morris Dancer

Sorry for problems on the main site

We've had severe technical problems over the past couple of days and I am unable to access the admin area of the site.

This means no new posts from me and we cannot free up comments in the moderation queue.

If this continues then we will switch temporarily to this site - Politicalbetting Channel 2.

Pre-season rule changes and driver lineups

I wrote this over a prolonged period, adding little snippets as they arose, so it’ll probably be a bit long and jittery.

There are a number of technical changes for the 2011 season, the details of which are linked to here - http://www.formula1.com/news/features/2010/11/11579.html

The short version is this:

No more F-ducts or double diffusers

Bridgestone replaced by Pirelli as sole tyre manufacturer

Adjustable rear wings intended to aid overtaking (detail here): http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/9313790.stm)

KERS returns

107% rule returns

I very much welcome the return of KERS. The sexy power boost button mixes up starts and restarts from the safety car, and, I think we can all agree, a big button that makes your car go faster is quite brilliant.

Just after the end of the 2010 season Eddie Jordan asserted that Mercedes had a better system ready than Renault, but we’ll have to wait and see.

It is reckoned that the Pirellis will possibly degrade faster (a damned good thing) and aid certain drivers. Schumacher and Massa did well in the preliminary tests in Abu Dhabi, for example. Faster degradation would mean fewer predictable one stop strategies and more Montreal style madness.

The adjustable rear wing really should make overtaking easier. However, it is important to know that whilst it can be used at any time during practice/qualifying it cannot be so freely used during the race. Specifically, it cannot be used on laps 1 or 2, or the first two laps after a safety car restart [when all the cars will be bunched up]. It can only be used on a specific straight, when within 1 second of the car ahead. So, it will not affect the Lap 1 Leader market. In addition, this means that the practice and qualifying times will probably (sometimes) be slightly misleading when it comes to race pace. It is effectively a straight line speed boost, so the distortion will be small or non-existent at a track with a single straight and tons of corners and maximised at tracks with multiple long straights.

The FIA has also decided, in its infinite wisdom, to drop the unenforceable [if Ferrari do it] team orders rule. In other words, they are now permitted. To help out other F1 fans, I’ve compiled a brief list of translations of phrases used this season and what they will be next season.

“Fernando is faster than you” = “Felipe, baby, get out of the way”

“Enter fuel management mode” = “Don’t even think about passing your team mate”

“Jenson, fuel is critical” = “Oi! Knock it off!”

Another interesting fact is that all four top teams (Red Bull, McLaren, Ferrari and Mercedes) have not changed their drivers. Mercedes will be most interesting to watch, as it’s unclear whether the car will be competitive enough, whether Rosberg has the cutting edge of a champion and whether Schumacher can enjoy a better season than his somewhat lacklustre 2010 return (although he did improve markedly towards the end).

Renault/Lotus [see below] has retained the stellar Kubica, and the gold-plated Petrov.

Speaking of teams, F1 appears to have ended the realm of madness. Next season will see Lotus competing in black and gold colours, and Lotus competing in black and gold colours. No typo. We will have two Lotus teams. (Lotuses? Loti?). One will be the present Lotus team (named Team Lotus) led by Tony Fernandes. The other will be backed by Group Lotus and parent firm Proton, and be called Lotus Renault. The reasons are complicated, legalistic and a bit petty, and the result will make commentating fun. Bear this in mind if you plan on betting for or against a Lotus team.

Update: Tony Fernandes has decided that Team Lotus will not race in black and gold to prevent confusion.

Regarding new drivers, Pastor Maldonado of Venezuela takes Hulkenberg’s Williams seat. Bit of a shame, as I thought Hulkenberg did well, but Maldonado brings Venezuelan cash, apparently. The banzai superstar Kobayashi is joined at Sauber by Sergio Perez Mendoza of Mexico, who will have to work hard to hold his own against the entertaining Japanese driver.

Virgin has signed up Belgian Jerome D'Ambrosio to partner Timo Glock. This matters because if he can drum up greater Belgian support for the sport then it may help Spa, one of the finest of all circuits, stay on the calendar. There’s a real risk that it might end up going when a number of new races are added (there’s a 20 race limit to the season, and with the addition of India this year it’s already been reached. With Russia, the US and perhaps other countries joining some circuits must be ditched soon).

Toro Rosso have left their lineup of Buemi and Alguersuari unchanged.

With a quartet of drivers vying for Force India seats, there has been a prolonged wait to find out who gets the green light. Sutil was likely to retain his seat, and Liuzzi lose his (despite having a contract for this year). Possible replacements include the British Di Resta and Hulkenberg.

Update: It’s now been confirmed that Sutil and Di Resta will race for the team next year, with Hulkenberg as reserve.

There has also been a significant change in the BBC F1 commentary box. Legard has been axed as lead commentator and replaced with Brundle, whose former role of second commentator/race analyst has been assumed by Coulthard. This has surprised many who expected any potential new combination to feature one ex-driver (probably Brundle) and a BBC journalist. How this fares we’ll have to wait and see, but I trust we’ll see fewer inexplicable errors and strange moments of excitement as well as better commentary chemistry. However, many wanted James Allen out, and then found they disliked Legard, so it may simply be that everyone suffers by comparison with Murray Walker.

The first race (sadly the woeful Bahrain) will be difficult to predict. Testing provides only the haziest of pictures due to the wildly differing fuel loads, and it will only become clear how the rule changes work in race conditions in race conditions.

One, slight, advantage to visiting Bahrain first is that it’s difficult to overtake at the circuit, so if the adjustable rear wing and KERS work well we may see this reflected on race day. There’s no point introducing overtaking aids if they only work in places like Spa and Interlagos.

A reminder that, initially at least, I’m going to offer tips on the main site, and write just a post-race analysis after each race, including how the tips (hedged and unhedged) played out.

Anyway, this post will hopefully take care of updates regarding teams/driver/rule changes, and all the housekeeping, as it were, should be done now. I’ll write a season preview after testing and before Bahrain, and then the season begins.

The testing schedule is as follows:

Valencia : 1 to 3 February
Jerez: 10 to 13 February
Jerez: 17 to 20 February
Barcelona: 25 to 28 February

So the next article will be up after the 28^th of February and before the 11^th of March, when P1 of Bahrain begins.

Morris Dancer

MBE asks: Was it English votes for English fees?

MPs regional breakdown	Aye votes	No votes	Abstentions	Total
England	311	209	8	528
Northern Ireland	0	12	6	18
Scotland	6	51	2	59
Wales	8	32	0	40
ALL MPs	325	304	16	645

A guest slot on the big vote and the West Lothian Question

Linlithgow and East Falkirk includes much of the late, lamented constituency of West Lothian. Last week its Labour MP, Michael Connarty, was one of 51 Scottish representatives to vote against Higher Education funding reforms, even though only English universities were directly affected.

Of course, his constituents would pay more to study in England, and, indirectly, spending changes south of the border affect Scottish funding. Rather than unravel how “English Votes for English Laws” could be defined, lets examine its Commons arithmetic at the tuition fees vote.

English MPs were 311-209 in favour of the measures with 8 absent or abstaining, a hefty majority of 102. Yet the overall margin of victory was slashed to 21 by MPs from Scotland (majority of 45 against), Wales (24) and Northern Ireland (12).

It may seem strange to grandstand over a vote with no direct impact in your seat, but Lib Dem rebellion was strongest in Wales with all 3 MPs voting no; their Scottish MPs voted 5-4 (2 abs) while surprisingly their English colleagues were most loyal at 23-14 (6 abs).

This suggests local circumstances, and the leftward political centre of gravity in the Celtic nations, were factors in the Lib Dem rebellion’s size and shape: more so than their English MPs’ calculated aversion to cutting subsidies for their own constituents.

Total discipline from Labour, SNP and Plaid, and cross-party consensus in Northern Ireland, accentuated the Anglo-Celtic gulf. In contrast, all eight Tory rebels – 6 noes, 2 abstentions – hold English seats, although so do all bar nine Tory MPs!

The West Lothian Question also worked against the Conservatives in 2004, when Labour’s plan for “top-up” fees in England scraped through by five votes. English MPs disapproved, but 46 loyal Scottish Labour MPs, with less to lose, proved crucial.

England’s MPs are now distributed 296/188/43 plus one Green, Speaker, three Deputy Speakers and a vacancy. The Coalition’s theoretical majority there is 150, while the Tories alone have an outright majority of 64. Some form of EV4EL may tempt Cameron, particularly if the Lib Dems look unreliable. But if even the difficult fees vote could be steered through, does he really need it? And with its potential to reduce their leverage, should the Lib Dems be wary?

Numerical notes: tellers are included with voters, but the Speaker and his deputies excluded from consideration. With one by-election due, this restricts England to 528 potential votes from 533 seats. No allowance was made for the alleged “vote swap” of two English Lib Dems absent in Cancun. NI includes five abstentionist Sinn Fein MPs.

My Burning Ears

2011 - the visions of antifrank

It's that time of year where we look back over the last year and pretend that we knew what was going to happen all along. All the political journalists are no doubt preparing their predictions for the year ahead, so I thought I would get in first.

So, where to start? I'm a firm believer in making predictions based on things we already know. So what do we already know?

1) The public don't like what the Government is doing

Government approval is negative and has been for some time. Minus 7 is typical.

2) The public are cooling on David Cameron

His approval ratings are now barely positive. He is, however, the leader with the best approval ratings.

3) But his party is doing fine

The Conservatives' ratings are at worst barely lower than their last election result and at best significantly better. After they have spent 7 months introducing cuts, I expect that they are fairly content with that tally for now.

4) And Conservatives love David Cameron

Ignore all the rightwing headbangers' mutterings: while David Cameron is getting 95% satisfaction ratings from intending Tory voters, he is in a very strong position.

5) Labour supporters are really unhappy with Nick Clegg.

Upwards of 70% of Labour supporters in YouGov surveys rate Nick Clegg as performing his job very badly. This analysis is not shared by Conservative or Lib Dem voters, both of whom broadly approve of him.

6) The Lib Dems have lost half or more of their support

Whether or not you believe the YouGov ratings that are now regularly dipping into single figures, the other pollsters are also finding a lot fewer Lib Dems than voted for that party in May.

7) Those (few) Lib Dems that remain are reasonably happy with the government, the Lib Dems and Nick Clegg

The remaining Lib Dem voters are supportive in large but not amazing numbers of all three

8) Meanwhile, Ed Miliband is making a very hesitant start

Only 27% of YouGov poll respondents were prepared to say that he was up to the job. 19% of stated Labour supporters said that he wasn't up to the job. His leadership ratings are now firmly negative, as the don't knows are breaking towards don't like.

9) But despite this, Labour is doing fine

Labour is in the lead with every single pollster at present

10) And there is a succession of bad news ahead for the Government

a. VAT is rising
b. The tax take will rise further in the new financial year
c. The impact of the cuts will become visible

11) But the economic outlook is currently better than most of us would have predicted at the general election

a. Economic growth has far exceeded expectations in the last two quarters and there are indications from both manufacturing and construction that these areas are growing strongly
b. Though the possible impact of continuing Eurozone turmoil is hard to assess

12) And the public have numerous opportunities to express their views

With a by-election pending in Oldham East & Saddleworth, a referendum on AV, elections in Scotland and Wales and local elections throughout Britain, a large section of the public will get chance to pass judgement on current events

augur antifrank's predictions

With these trends, what can we expect in the year ahead? Well, the public are in a surly mood. No politician in the main three parties is meeting with consensus approval.

1. Labour will prosper in the polls

In the short term, this trend will help Labour. When the public is in a hostile mood, the lightning will be directed at the parties in power. As the cuts bite deeper and taxes rise, Labour should rise in the polls. Even if the economy continues to grow, the public will feel poorer. Ed Miliband will have to work quite hard to mess this up.

Labour can hope to win something close to an absolute majority in both Scotland and Wales with good campaigns. If they don't win an absolute majority in Scotland but are the largest party (which has to be the single most likely outcome at present), will they seek to govern with a minority or will they seek to form a coalition? My guess is that they will seek to govern as a minority, though they would be wiser to form a coalition with the Lib Dems.

2. The Greens may well become more influential

But unless Ed Miliband can turn around initial public perceptions of him, it's likely that other parties also will benefit. The Greens seem to have a major opportunity: leftwingers in particular seem to feel let down by all their regular choices. If they positioned themselves wisely, the Greens could scoop up a lot of left of centre voters who don't yet feel that the Labour party that has yet found a new direction. To date, the Greens have decided against compromising with the electorate. Do they have the vision to see their opportunity?

3. UKIP should resurface

There is also an opportunity on the right. The Conservatives have got the sound money right wing vote locked up. Can UKIP exploit the cuts to its own advantage? They would need to take a populist rightwing approach, but such approaches have worked well in quite a few European countries (Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Hungary, for example) and UKIP could do much worse than look to continental Europe for inspiration. What they really need is an impeccable rightwing campaign that needs government spending. The armed forces, perhaps?

4. The Lib Dems will continue to flounder

The Lib Dems are having to participate in all kinds of nasty cuts with the Tories. This is a new and very painful experience for Lib Dems, who largely came into politics to do nice things (the Tories on the other hand have strong stomachs for such matters and it probably helps them keep their own voters happy).

Such policies will not help the Lib Dems to attract voters back in the short term, at least in national opinion polls. Expect to see the Lib Dems retreat into hyper-localism. This may prove more effective than the major two parties expect in the local elections, but is unlikely to help them much in Scotland or Wales, in both of which they can expect to be spanked. On the other hand, they might just take Oldham East & Saddleworth if they can harness the tactical Tory vote.

5. The Tories will stay in touch with Labour

Tory supporters like the cuts, at least the principle of them. The Tory poll ratings have slid gently but consistently through the last few months and will probably continue to do so while the cuts continue to bite. But I doubt the slide will accelerate and in Scotland the Tories might even get an increase in support in May. In the local elections, the Conservatives will lose a lot of seats, but perhaps not as many as might be expected, given how badly placed Labour are in so many parts of southern England.

6. The AV referendum will be lost

The election will take place after two weeks of Royal wedding mania and no one cares about electoral reform. The referendum will be seen to be about Nick Clegg. If Ed Miliband campaigns hard for AV also, it might also come to be seen to be a referendum about him. At the moment, neither are voter magnets.

7. Fewer than half of my predictions will come true.

Ronseal.

antifrank