Sportsman: F1 - Predicting the Unpredictable

The season started today, but I refer to it starting tomorrow as practice doesn't determine anything other than what state your car is in.

The last few years have hardly spun any surprises. Mercedes and Lotus improved slightly, McLaren and Williams had a shocker last year, but apart from that it was a pretty standard year. Red Bulls at the front, Marussias and Caterhams at the back. Straight forward.

BUT F1 giant (metaphorically speaking of course) 'Lil Bernie Ecclestone threw a curveball into this year's rules and regulations. Here are some:

• Drivers have permanent numbers for commercial reasons.
• There is a fuel limit of 100kg, down from 150kg
• The 2.4L V8's have been replaced with 1.6L turbo engines.
• The "ugly" noses are now only 15cm long.
• And finally, the last race is, bizarrely, worth double points.

This has made the title race more open than it has been in years - probably since Keke Rosberg (father of current driver, Nico) won the 1982 Championship. Of course, this is a good thing for F1, if we forget about the ludicrous double points race at Abu Dhabi. If you are not a Red Bull fan like myself, you can get bored of seeing the greatest domination of the sport since Michael Schumacher's 5 in a row in the earlier 2000s. 

Anyway, how did pre-season testing look? Williams looked like a different team who could really push for race wins, Mercedes looked almost unstoppable and Lotus looked shaky. But what was worst of all?

The reliability issues with the Red Bull.

Vettel didn't get a time in the third test, despite the fairly promising look of the car. I say "fairly" because it still looked competitive, but no longer with that blistering pace of the past three years. They needed a miracle after being one of the worst teams in testing.

They didn't quite get that miracle in the first two practices, but they done all right. Both Ricciardo and Vettel finished inside the top eight in the first practice and top six in the second. Caterham had a miserable time over the two practices as they failed to set any times. Maldonado of Lotus was the same, with team mate Romain Grosjean only finishing 18 out of 22 in Practice 2. Marussia seem to be sitting in the same position as last year, but they may be a bit closer than before.

Moving up the field, middle-of-the-grid cars Force India, Toro Rosso and Sauber failed to make any impact with 10th being the highest any of the three cars placed in practices. Then the two most improved teams: McLaren and especially, Williams. As I have said before, both teams had an awful 2013, but McLaren were consistent, with both of their cars finishing inside the top ten on both occasions. Williams were blazing in Practice 1 finishing third and fourth. Their second practice wasn't as strong as they finished 8th and 12th, but the car could easily do what Lotus did last year. 

I've already mentioned Red Bull in the elite cars, so let's talk about Ferrari and Mercedes. First, Ferrari enjoyed Practice 1 when Alonso came out top of the pile, but Raikonnen was a disappointment in ninth. Practice 2 was encouraging as they finished third and seventh respectively. Mercedes were looked a little shaky in first practice as Rosberg was sixth and Hamilton failed to put down a time, but in Practice 2 they hammered the opposition finishing in a one-two, led by Hamilton.

From what we've seen in practice, not a lot will change over a season, but this season that could well happen. The likes of Red Bull, Sauber and Lotus last year were hugely impressive in the second half of the season and with double points in the last race, this could benefit slow starters who upgrade their car well. For a good bit of fun, I will predict the Drivers' Championship as well as the Constructors:

Constructors

1 Mercedes

2 Red Bull

3 Ferrari

4 Williams

5 McLaren

6 Sauber

7 Force India

8 Toro Rosso

9 Lotus

10 Marussia

11 Caterham

Why Mercedes? They are strong already, Hamilton and Rosberg have worked together already and are both experienced. Vettel and Ricciardo however, have not. We are still to see if Ricciardo can get the most out of the car due to his lack of experience in a faster car. Ferrari seem to have the same speed as Red Bull, but I doubt they will be able to develop their car as well as RB, plus Alonso and Raikkonen may be a bad pairing. It could easily go well, but if they are sniffing around at the title it may get heated.

Williams I feel will just squeeze McLaren, but that's the romantic in me talking. The other big surprise there is Lotus in ninth. I feel that they're already in a bad financial position and this won't be a good year from them after some poor testing and practices. I mean, if they have a stroke of luck they could go as high as sixth, but I don't think that they can do any better than that.

Drivers

1 Vettel

2 Hamilton

3 Alonso

4 Raikkonen

5 Rosberg

6 Ricciardo

7 Massa

8 Button 

9 Magnussen

10 Bottas

11 Hulkenberg

12 Perez

13 Sutil

14 Grosjean

15 Vergne

16 Gutierrez

17 Kvyat

18 Maldonado

19 Bianchi

20 Kobayashi

21 Chilton

22 Ericsson 

Right start at the bottom. Chilton and Ericsson are very young, I think that Kobayashi - a risk taker - will beat the two of them. Bianchi will finish ahead as he is a quality driver who deserves recognition. Maldonado is an all-talk driver who won't make an impact, only backed by money. I think Kvyat will struggle with his team mate Vergne not being far away as he really lacks that X Factor in a driver. Gutierrez looks like he may struggle again with the current car, which doesn't seem to be doing much. Grosjean is a brilliant driver - as we saw in the second half of 2013 - but a limited car may well set him back. Sutil will finish behind the Force Indias, who should stay ahead because of two quality drivers - especially Hulkenberg who may struggle to catch the Williams and McLarens in his average car.

Into the top ten. Bottas is a decent driver with a good car this year, but I think he'll struggle with the quality of the other drivers, including Magnussen who may or may not have a good car this year. The Dane is driven, but may be limited by his car, only to be beaten by Button due to his experience and ability in a McLaren. Massa looks like a born-again driver after his last few races and if the Williams is quick, he will be too.  

Ricciardo may struggle to get into the top five and who can blame him? Four of my predicted top five are world champions with the exception being Nico Rosberg who I think will also be outdone by the four world champions. Then come the Ferrari pair. Alonso will beat Raikkonen just because Fernando is the best driver in the field, plus Kimi can be a little inconsistent. Top two - Hamilton will be defeated by Vettel for many reasons: Vettel is a better driver who can battle through a field (as seen a few times last year); Vettel seems more driven towards a title without taking anything away from Hamilton; and Red Bull's car will be the best in the second half. Last year, Mercedes looked the strongest and we all seen how that ended up. 

Overall, this is going to be an exciting year and I can bet that of my predictions I guess eight drivers positions and four constructors positions correctly because it is just that unpredictable.

Here's to another year of great Formula One. Lights out.

The Great Scam - Saint Valentine's Day

So we are only three days away from one of the most overrated days of the year.

Ok, that may be a biased point of view seeing how I will spend this Valentine's Day completely single, only cuddling my border collie. However, I feel like I do have a point.

If I am correct, St Valentine's Day originated from Christian saints named (obviously) after St Valentine which was a major Christian event until 1969. The idea of romance and sending cards didn't come around until the 1800s. Even then, it was a nice gesture which could lead to a relationship.

Then things turned sour.

Since the 1950s Valentine's Day has been materialistic. To make money, companies started flogging chocolates and jewellery as a way of making profits. That may not seem so bad, but it really can - ironically - ruin relationships. I can remember I was 12 and an admirer sent me a card and some sweets. I didn't fancy her, but I was a little grateful. However, I later complained at the fact that they weren't very nice and it was a bit cheap. That's what Valentine's Day turns people into - ungrateful swines who think that everything is about presents.

Personally, I think that Valentine's Day would be better off if they completely stripped it back to nothing special and no brilliant presents. You shouldn't rely on a day of the year to get your loved one something nice because it takes away the spontaneity of gifts and leaves you expecting something. See that way you want an iPhone for Christmas and you get a Nokia brick and you're disappointed? Yeah, well Valentine's Day is the new Christmas.

To sum up my feelings about Valentine's Day, without sounding cheesy, you should show your love for your partner every day of the week. You should be spontaneous whenever you want to be. Love is about the unexpected, not the planned. So whether you are sitting eating ice cream greeting at The Notebook; having a one nighter; or spending it with loved ones, don't forget that Valentine's Day is just another day - as we singles put it.

Do you disagree with my look on Valentine's Day? What's your opinion? Let me know by leaving a comment.

For updates, follow: @mickyhaitch

What Music Culture?: 12 Things I Learned From the Grammys

So this year social media really got me into the Grammys, arguably the biggest music awards ceremony in the world. I noticed that it is such a grand ceremony, with a lot of big shots. However, there were 13 (unlucky for some) things that I did learn from the Grammys:

1. Jay Z Wants to Kill Jamie Foxx

Right, maybe a bit hyperbolic. Anyway to sum it up, Foxx told Hova that his wife Beyonce was hot. Joke or not, Jay Z decided to just grab his wife whilst delivering a bit of a death stare to the actor.

2. Lorde is Really Cool 

When she went up to receive one of her awards she just seemed so laid back and down to earth. Humble as pie. She almost seemed like she didn't care so much about winning. Good to see good music win, but will she go down the Adele route and just become boring? Only time will tell. Hopefully not.

3. Daft Punk Are Heroes

Why? Because they turned up to a swanky awards' ceremony in a suit - with their trademark helmets. They also refused to talk as Pharrell and Nile Rodgers both spoke on behalf in what was a piece of comedy from the robots who obviously took inspiration from The Stig.

4. Kendrick Lamar was on Fire

The Compton rapper collaborated with Imagine Dragons as they mixed tracks. The performance started off quite wonky, but Lamar tagged in and performed a great version of his song "m.A.A.d City", leaving the rock band looking minuscule in compare.

5. Imagine Dragons were Awful

I do like Imagine Dragons, they are a fun, decent band who have been unnecessarily over-hyped. No wonder they failed to live up to my expectations after being told they were "great" live. This could have been an off night, but it was not the night that you want to mess things up. The band's instrument playing was actually good, but the singer managed to murder his own song. As I said above, Kendrick absolutely outshone the band.

6. Same Love is Just Beautiful

When Thrift Shop came out, I was already categorising Macklemore and Ryan Lewis under the "funny one hit wonders" alongside LMFAO and (although I don't find it funny now) The Crazy Frog. Yet who really thought that The Heist would have such a great song on it? It pretty much summed up and justified in three and a half minutes that you should be able to marry whoever you want. The Grammys went OTT with the couples marrying, but still, Macklemore is one of the unlikely heroes of 2013.

7. Daft Punk Doing Get Lucky Was Sweeeeettt

Stevie Wonder joined the supergroup that is Daft Punk featuring Nile Rodgers and Pharrell Williams. Wonder, sadly seems to have lost his vocals with age, but everyone pitched in for a really cool song. Right at the end Daft Punk appeared from behind a window as well to everyone's delight.

8. Taylor Swift Won't Want to R-(wait for it Taylor) emember Her Early Celebrations

You've got to feel for the girl. Her album "Red" was up for best album which lost out to Daft Punk's "Random Access Memories". However, Swift reacted after only hearing the "r". To her embarrassment she then realised that she hadn't won, but she was gracious in defeat. It is a funny video though, I recommend watching it.

9. Queens of the Stone Age Really Did Rock

Josh Homme and co ended the Grammys along with Lindsey Buckingham (formerly of Fleetwood Mac) and Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails. There was a lot of controversy as the performance was cut for adverts, but it was really good. QOTSA were nobodies in the UK just a few years ago, but now they have added to their already huge fanbase in the US. My God Is the Sun was pretty special.

10. Pharrell is (un)officially the Greatest Dresser of the 21st Century

He is a fucking mannequin! You put something on him and it suits him. In the Blurred Lines video he wears a silver shell suit, how did he pull that off? If I done that, someone would assume I was quite rough. Long shirts with denim shorts and a bow tie in his Happy video, which also featured a slightly ugly shirt that he manages to pull off again? He pulls off leather, suede, braces and even hats. His Grammys hat looked almost ridiculous like a Canadian mountie, but you couldn't help but think that he looked quite cool. Also, it would be nice to see N.E.R.D. back Mr Williams.

11. Madonna looked like Calvin Candie

You know the guy in Django Unchained? The guy that owns Candyland? Leonardo Di Caprio plays him? Yeah, well Madonna was the spitting image of him when she appeared in Macklemore's performance of Same Love. She looked like the Tarantino villain crossed with an amateur cowboy, a bit inappropriate to dress like a character who opressed many people when the song is trying to stop that. Kudos.

12. The Grammys Are Awful 

Sorry if I have offended anyone with this, but they are. Much like the Brits, they have lost that fun that they used to have. The jokes are safe and unfunny, it's too professional; and you have the likes of Kendrick Lamar - who grew up in one of the most dangerous areas in America - suiting up, not putting a foot out of line or being outrageous. I find it hard to believe that Kendrick would usually act so professional, so why should he have to? The sad thing is, we no longer get moments such as Jarvis Cocker mooning at the Brits when Michael Jackson performed the pretentious Earth Song. No longer are the days where all the artists get absolutely smashed. So sadly I will have to finish on a sad note, but yes, awards ceremonies are destined to head in the same direction as the Grammys: a party as fun as being a prisoner-of-war - because ultimately, the Grammys are like that, minus the brutality and physical punishment.

Don't agree with me? Drop me a comment and express your opinion.

For more updates, follow me on Twitter: @mickyhaitch

What Music Culture?: 2014 Festivals - The Year of the Comebacks?

I have been to only one festival in my whole 18 and a half years on this planet.

It was The Wickerman Festival in Scotland, it was a bit strange. The reason why? There were many. For a start, it was in 2009 when I was 13, a time where my favourite bands where Elliot Minor and The Wombats - I am currently cringing at the keyboard. When I was 13 my music taste was all right, but wasn't very broad compared to now. So, going to an obscure festival with bands that were only appealing to folkies (folk music lovers) and hipsters, I was a little bored. Idlewild played and I'm pretty sure Human League did as well, but at that point I had no clue about that 80's band. The other main reason was I was with my mum and my siblings. There were students taking legal highs and everyone seemed wild - except from me. My mum didn't make it look cool, but nonetheless I'm happy that I at least got to go.

Now, in the year 2014, I am a musicaholic addicted to do musicahol, or else as it's better known, music. I have already bought tickets for two festivals this year: T in the Park in Kinross and Leeds Festival in well, Leeds. Leeds was always on my mind, but the early announcements of Blink 182, Disclosure and Jake Bugg sealed it for me. I promised myself that I would go to TITP this year and when Arctic Monkeys were made headliners, I jumped at the chance.

Once you have bought tickets to festivals there is one big question - Who's going to play? There are around another four months of anticipation and my question to myself was, is this the year of nostalgia? The Stone Roses and Blur started off reunions in 2012, but 2014 is looking brilliant. Outkast have been confirmed for Coachella which got everyone going. Then, Foo Fighters reunited after a very brief hiatus, which surely means that they will play festivals this summer. The Strokes - although not broke up - have all went their own ways and our now due to play The Governor's Ball sparking rumours that they could tour festivals. Blur could make another comeback as Damon Albarn is swinging around and they have stated that it isn't completely off the cards. Also one to be excited for is Kasabian who look set to release a new album this year and will surely play a least one festival. Oh, we almost forgot about Prince and Fleetwood Mac.

Then you have two bands who everyone really wants to reunite: Oasis and The Libertines. Noel Gallagher seems to be flying high with his High Flying Birds, but Liam seems desperate to get his Beady Eye nightmare over with. The whole "I fucking hate him" and "he's dead to me" patter between the brothers seem to be almost fake now because of how much I've heard about it. The other band, sadly seem to be a million miles away from a reunion. Carl Barat and Pete Doherty had a relationship like JD and Turk from Scrubs, but Doherty's drug use has damaged their friendship. Doherty has already been deemed unreliable in his band Babyshambles, but in the words of that little shit Justin Bieber or that country lass Taylor Swift, "never say never". The London quartet did reunite in 2010 for Leeds, who says that they don't get back together? That seems like a long shot.

Anyway, I think there may be more comebacks than usual this year. I will finish on my predictions for T in the Park, Reading and Leeds and Glastonbury.

T:  Arctic Monkeys, Biffy Clyro, Kasabian
R&L: Blink 182, Foo Fighters, The Strokes
Glasto: Arcade Fire, Prince, Foo Fighters (if not Fleetwood Mac)

Of them, I predict about four of them will be right (three have already been announced). Anyway, peace out.

21st Century Britain: A Nation Hungry For Answers

Many families across the UK will have finished their Christmas shopping this week, spending big bucks for no reason (I still find it hard to believe that because Jesus was born, I deserve £300 worth of stuff). However, there will also be families who haven't got their Christmas presents yet.

These people aren't usually leaving it until the last minute, they simply don't have money to buy gifts because surviving is more important. This has led many skint citizens of Britain visiting foodbanks this Christmas to get through the turbulent times of the Winter season.

Yesterday, there was a debate in Parliament about food banks and poverty in the UK in which Labour's appeal to reduce dependency on food banks was defeated by 43 votes. From watching it and reading multiple articles, I realised I am not the only one who is absolutely appalled by this.

Lets think from a non-biased point of view here. Who can honestly say that they think that human beings should have to use food banks? It's demeaning, it's embarrassing, it lowers your reputation and destroys your dignity.

Now, back to politics. According to shadow environment secretary Maria Eagle, 500,000 people in the UK - a third of them being children - have relied on food banks in the past eight months. That is almost 1% of the population. If you live in a town of 40,000 people, around 300-350 people will have relied on one. Put this into figures for London, a city of 8.1m and you have over 80,000 people relying on food banks. Sickening figures.

Yet with these sickening figures, you have greedy politicians. Iain Duncan Smith is shown above giggling during the debate and when called upon to answer questions, he moved the responsibility to his deputy Esther McVey, before leaving early. McVey's speech has been called one of the most disgusting and Labour's Gerald Kaufman described it as the "nastiest" speech he had heard in his 43 years as an MP.

Although most Tories sniggered and snorted at the thought of an alternative, credit has to be given to Conservative MP Laura Sandys who said "Food banks are not the answer. They must be seen as a transitional support mechanism for families in stress at particular moments." Perhaps there is a trace of humanity in the party after all.

What would my solution be? To first of all create jobs so that we don't have a problem with income; then offer support to families who are struggling at this time of year; and finally, to grab energy companies by the balls to make the winter season easier to survive in. Last year my house suffered from no heat for three months and no one done anything useful about it. Kettle baths and extra blankets weren't a fun experience. So I can imagine how people who can't afford to turn their heating on must feel. The only reason I feel that I can live with the heating on is because Scotland isn't as badly hit as the rest of the UK. 

So, if you have time, go down to your local food bank, help out. Volunteer or deliver goods. If you are reading this and think all hope is lost, don't think like that. It can hardly get worse than it already is.

It's Not All Bad...:Holidays Being Well Spent

Since I decided to get a 30 day free trial with LoveFilm yesterday, I've been cramming every minute I have watching films from the "To Do List". I've watched sci-fi action film Looper and comedy 30 Minutes or Less. Looper was brilliant, fun and a good take on a dystopian world. 30 Minutes or Less was less impressive and although some scenes were hilarious, there were some that were quite cheesy. However, I have watched a film (twice now today) which has to go down as one of my favourite films and probably my favourite coming-of-age film. I'm talking about The Perks of Being a Wallflower.

This film is evidence that life is worth living. It's basically a film about misfit freshman Charlie who befriends a boy called Patrick in his craftshop class and his step sister Sam. He is accepted into their social circle and faces many problems along the way, including his never-ending love battle as he loves his best friend, Sam. The film deals with many issues which could possibly fling a film for being such huge issues to tackle in a film, yet it's perfect. The music in the film is incredible, with the main characters growing up in the early 90's (as they don't even mention Nirvana) listening to The Smiths and Nick Drake. Of course, there is also the "Tunnel Song" which they later figure out is David Bowie's "Heroes". Music brings Sam and Charlie closer together, which is such a huge factor. 

Then there are more important issues: without giving much away the film deals with mental trauma, sex abuse, sexuality problems, suicide, death of a lost one, bullying, loneliness, drugs and love. Yet, with all these things happening, the honesty of this film works. There's no far fetched scenes and others make you smile uncontrollably. 

This film is for losers. If you have ever felt like you are on the outside looking in, feeling like you don't belong, feeling depressed - get this film. Before watching this, I was pretty much in a downer for two days, just feeling shitty about life in general. Then I watched this and it gave me hope. It made me feel like I wasn't the only one who sometimes felt left out. 

However, the pinnacle of this film is the quotes. They are life quotes. My favourite being "But even if we don't have the power to choose where we come from, we can still choose where we go from there."

So, today I will go to bed knowing that my life feels that much better from watching a film. The film ends on a beautiful quote which will stick in my mind for the rest of my life.

"We are infinite".

What Music Culture?: Are the Newgen a good gen?

"Remember when rock was popular and actually good?"
"Who do we have nowadays that are anything near as good as The Rolling Stones and The Beatles?"
"Music is dead."

All three of these statements have their faults: they are the words of the ignorant. The kind of people that wish that they grew up in 1960s.

Except there are no iPods, the internet is the webbing in swimming shorts and you wouldn't be able to read this blog - you lucky bastards. Adding to that is the lack of civil rights back then. Oh, so you are gay and you want to live in the 60s just to grow up listening to the Stones? You are an ethnic minority likely to grow up in a world of hate and segregation, but you want to be part of Beatlemania?

Grow up guys. The 21st century isn't all bad.

So getting back to my main point, the opening statements are complete bull and I'll tell you why.

Tackling the first sentence, yes rock music was popular and was incredible back in the day, however, why is this statement wrong? It may not be a popular genre - in terms of charts - however, the quality has not dropped.

You still have so many artists who are fantastic, yet they are ignored by many; thrown onto the scrapheap because they simply can't make a living. Take London band Tribes who recently split. Fair enough, their second album was disappointing, but their debut was a great listen, yet, only two people I know, know of the band. First lesson is to give all sorts of music a chance before labelling it "crap". Arguably, the best music you hear these days involves a little searching.

The second sentence, how can we compare The Rolling Stones and The Beatles to say, Arctic Monkeys or Muse? It's ridiculous.

The Rolling Stones and The Beatles were pioneers. They were the first to do something very obvious and since the 2000s I can only think of one genre of music that has emerged as new and that is dubstep. Everyone always thinks first is best, but sometimes the progress of music is better. I honestly think that The Clash were a million times better than The Sex Pistols, yet the Pistols were the first to really popularise punk music. Arctic Monkeys and Muse have both pushed the barriers moving into hip-hop and dubstep-influenced rock.

In saying that, Kanye West has the potential (if not already is) the greatest hip-hop artist of all time. Before I get smacked in the face with Biggie Smalls' lyrics or threatened with a Tupac chorus, think about it. Did Biggie or Tupac completely change hip-hop multiple times the way Yeezy is today?

Of course not.

Artists such as Frank Ocean, Drake, Chance the Rapper and The Weeknd all owe so much to Kanye due to his change in hip-hop in his album "808's and Heartbreaks". This popularised slow hip-hop and has only grown since Ocean's debut "channel ORANGE". Recently West has also been the first to mix heavy electro beats and tribal music into his album "Yeezus" which is a confusing album, yet it's a work of art.

So again, don't think that everything is rubbish just because it is modern. Music is ever-growing and we have to give everyone a chance.

And finally "Music Is Dead". No it is not.

People became very familiar with this phrase from the day that crap music dominated the charts (see 80s onwards). However, is it really?

You would have to be an idiot to say yes.

Although, the critically acclaimed are usually kept underground and anonymous to most, doesn't mean that you can't still see them live; buy their albums; or sing their songs. Only when these artists no longer exist, will there be an argument that music is dead. The newgen are hugely exciting.

In the past few years we have had many bands and artists breaking through: Miles Kane, Haim, Peace, Palma Violets, Django Django, The Vaccines, Two Door Cinema Club, Merchandise, Earl Sweatshirt, Parquet Courts, Swim Deep, Chvrches, Iceage, Disclosure, Jagwar Ma, Drenge, Chance the Rapper, Kendrick Lamar, ASAP Rocky, Radkey, Baby Strange, The Orwells, King Krule, Lorde, Jake Bugg, Spector...to name a few.

He have already seen the likes of Haim, Lorde and The Vaccines becoming big on the radio and around the UK and the other bands mentioned have great potential. I would say that music is, if anything, stronger these days because you can find it anywhere and you can become noticed easy. So, yes I would say that the newgen are indeed, a good gen. There's nothing better than finding as many influences in music as you can, and these new kids can use that to their advantage.

Have I missed any new bands/artists that you feel have done well in the last few years? Do you agree with me on the three statements? Leave a comment and tell me your thoughts.