Overtakes shot up because of DRS, which was introduced because reliability had gone up so massively that races had become too predictable. Before DRS, the 2000-2010 decade was ending up producing "Monacos" on most weekends.

Pre-2000, reliability was more on par to what we saw this weekend (45% of cars not finishing), which made it much more exciting on average.

Early/mid 2000s were still pretty unreliable; it was only with the introduction of parc fermé and the car not being allowed to be touched between qualifying and the race that we started seeing the vast majority of cars finishing. It was definitely processional, but that wasn't really down to the reliability.

It's not just about overtaking through - previously, strategy relating to fuel and tyre changes was a big part of a race, now this strategic element is all but gone.

Tyre changes are still absolutely critical. Case in point: yesterday Albon's last stint on softs would have likely pipped an otherwise-dominant Mercedes to P2 and possibly even P1, had Hamilton not "touched" him out of contention.

I personally didn't like fuel changes, probably because I started watching F1 before they were introduced and it made me mad that a less efficient, less-reliable engine could now win over more solid ones. They are also spectacularly dangerous for drivers and crew - as Jos Verstappen can attest.

Refuelling actually hinders the importance of team strategies as once the car is fuelled, there's a fixed point at which a pitstop has to happen by. Without that, and with the degradation of tyres offering a similar performance hindrance as higher fuel levels, there's far more freedom in strategy, with similar consequences for the wrong call costing a race (or the right one sealing it).

Here's a current strategist's thoughts on it: https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/go6c9m/im_an_f1_e... (TL;DR fuel restricted racing is more deterministic)