IT’S A potentially nightmare scenario for a Formula One driver. The five start lights have faded away, he has released the clutch, followed by the inevitable slingshot, catapulting forward with 800hp accelerating a mere 680kg of car, including driver and fuel.

There is no visual sensation of speed because everybody else is accelerating too, and he is just looking at rear wings darting about, searching for a gap. Then suddenly one wing isn’t moving – a bogged-down or stalled car. The driver is living on his reactions.

For the past few years this scenario has been largely missing from F1, as the starts were controlled by computer software. As part of a raft of regulation changes for this year, this core skill has been put back in the hands of the driver. Skill is rewarded, mistakes are punished. Excellent.

The drivers all have the same reaction time, and how relatively well they used to charge towards turn one was largely outside their control; it was a software engineers’ race. Now, once more, driver focus at the start is also about what is happening inside his own cockpit.

For optimum acceleration you need an initial wheelspin of 5%-10%, and the fastest way to get away from the lights in an F1 car is the “grandma leaving Tesco” method: calmly, with very low revs. But it’s perilous because this technique hugely increases the chances of stalling the engine or triggering the car’s antistall device. Too much throttle simply lights up the rear tyres.

It’s an inexact science and there is invariably a fudge factor regarding track temperature, fuel load and the cleanliness or inclination of the track. The FIA has to second-guess what teams might do to get around the intent of the manual start systems. It has stipulated that if a team uses a different engine map at the start, with a lower power setting that makes it more driveable, for example, that map is locked for 90 seconds and therefore the first lap will be pretty much ruined.

Other new regulations such as a four-race requirement for the gearbox also make sense and it’s good that F1 is getting away from its disposable culture. The devil of some of the regulation is in the detail, though, and the teams now have to nominate which gear ratios they are going to use by Friday evening. Combined with the 19,000rpm limit for the engines, this means teams will not be able to react to any changes in wind speed. At somewhere like Monza, a sudden tailwind on Saturday or Sunday is going to see cars hitting their rev-limiters part-way down the straights. The motors don’t like that. The weather forecasters become ever more critical.

One change I’m disappointed with is the abolition of the spare car. Imagine if McLaren discover a big fuel leak on Lewis Hamilton’s car late on Sunday morning at the British Grand Prix after it’s been released from parc ferme. In this scenario, he would not be taking part in his home race.

The intention of the rule is to reduce trackside personnel and freight costs. But if they want to do that, what about abolishing all the tungsten ballast? Each team carries up to 200kg to place in the most advantageous position while bringing its cars up to the regulation minimum weight. If a minimum chassis weight or lower overall minimum weight was stipulated, the ballast wouldn’t be needed. How many fans know or care how much ballast the cars are carrying?

The “show” is sacrosanct and the fans want to see the drivers.

A big first-lap shunt would see only a handful of cars make the restart with no spare cars.

Melbourne historically is not a good indicator of absolute form. It’s an unusual track, bumpy under braking, with several similar corners that suit some cars but not others. Even so, many teams performed differently from what had been expected. BMW Sauber clearly made a big step forward with their initially recalcitrant car. Honda found a last-gasp second per lap in their final private test and smiles finally returned to some faces there. Toyota, too, looked strong in qualifying. This bodes well for a better season.

Ferrari were widely expected to dominate all but McLaren. However, unreliability, overconfidence and a car that looked a handful at times left them only fourth and 15th on the grid. Renault failed to shine and Fernando Alonso’s 11th on the grid was his worst for two years. Nelson Piquet Jr struggled all round in the second Renault.

Seeing Hamilton, the spectacular BMW Sauber driver Robert Kubica and McLaren’s Heikki Kovalainen in the qualifying press conference had the feel of a changing of the guard. The McLaren team’s driver pairing can muster only 49 years and 34 GPs between them. Williams’s pairing of sons of former drivers, Nico Rosberg and Kazuki Nakajima, have a combined age of 45 years. And Torro Rosso’s Sebastian Vettel is driving with speed and maturity beyond his 20 years. The kids don’t need the electronic support, it seems.

McLaren must have been relieved and delighted with their first and third on the grid. They have generated and taken significant pain these past nine months, and this was an impressive response. Although I still feel their £50m fine was draconian, the FIA was clearly fulfilling its role as the regulator.

Meanwhile the McLaren team and bosses have somehow weathered the storm and built a great car with two on-form drivers.

This season could be closer than we dared hope, and the mid-pack scrap will be even mightier than we expected.