F1 a joke!

[MiniMan64]

I'm afraid the only difference between F1 then and the F1 now is the development of aero downforce on the cars. You want to turn back the clock and get cars racing that close again I'm afraid you're going to have to set some pretty strict design rules for the cars, set some limits and artificially fix the racing.

Which is precisely what you say don't want.

[Fonz]

I thought that the teams ran with less fuel than they needed to run the full race at maximum attack so that the car made a better start off the grid. Therefor the drivers and teams are balancing performance at the beginning of the race against performance at other points.

Also when the drivers are being told to lift and coast they are still pushing the car to the limits through the corner. It’ll on the verge of spinning at some point otherwise they’ll have to accelerate more when they come out and burn more fuel there.

I do agree with people though, F1 is not what it was.

[custardtart]

I went to the race and it was st. Shame really as Melbourne is a cool place, the GP is only minutes walk to the CBD yet no delays getting in or out and a vibe more akin to FOS than silverdtone - deserves a better main event.

Cars sounded like a bag of nails, people were cringing every time Button went past because he was soooo sloooow and his car sounded like a washing machine about to implode.

On the plus side Arnie was good value!

[PiB]

But this is Formula 1.

Be patient. Despite being poorly run as I see it - it's still a very high form of engineering.

If I had the skills . . . . I would prefer not to be involved.

[andyps]

Darranu said:

Yeh totally agree but in the last couple of years it's became a lot more prevalent especially with the introduction of fuel consumption graphics within the race program.
It just seem's they've tried to make it more appealing to the engine manufacturers to showcase how things can transfer to their road cars but with it going just a tad to far.

In the very brief moment I turned the race on today I caught the part where Nico was catching Lewis only to be told by his engineer to back off and save fuel for a push towards the end of the race.
It seems like we're getting robbed of some real entertainment just because the drivers can only drive at 9/10's due to fuel constraints.

We might be being robbed of some excitement, but if Nico had to save fuel do you think Lewis was going as quick as he might have been able to all race? Last year he typically used less fuel than Nico when they were running really close all race. Even without a limit on use during the race that could mean he would not need as much to run the race distance and therefore could start with a slightly lighter car and get away such that Nico wouldn't manage to even try and catch him. The engineer today was probably just hoping Lewis had already used a little more fuel.

Worth remembering that there were many races last year where there were no restrictions on the cars as the amount allowed was more than they needed to run the whole race flat out so it isn't a major issue for them.

And as has already been mentioned, in years gone by, particularly the previous turbo era, cars ran out of fuel towards the end of the race due to the amount they were allowed for the race. Had the accurate telemetry been available then the drivers would have been told to slow down to get to the end just as they are now - they often were, just via pit boards rather than radio messages broadcast by FOM. It's all part of knowing the limitations and working within them - to finish first, first you have to finish and that means having fuel and tyres left at the end.

[Norfolkit]

As a lifelong F1 fan (and I'm 61 so I've seen a few races) I really cannot remember a poorer race than that one (although [with the exception of last year] Bahrain has tried quite hard). The only consolation is that Australia is often not representative of the rest of the season (first race glitches and a unique circuit layout). I suspect things will improve but they really do need to after that. Even Brundle could only give it 5/10 and I think that was generous (very generous actually).

[BlimeyCharlie]

Hardly any testing down to cost saving, but the sport flies around the world every 2 weeks and half the cars don't run or work when they get there?
Rules not even fans understand?
Saving fuel?
Cars that sound rubbish?
Electric cars?
No access to fans to see the cars or drivers?

Deary me.

[longshot]

You miserable lot.
Have you not noticed the pretty sparks that come from the plank now.

[Cobnapint]

There are way too many variables in F1 now, enough to say that the drivers championship doesn't necessarily mean the best driver won.

It's whoever gets to control the best package - tyres, chassis, aero, team in the garage, engine - that is usually the winner. And they spend much of the day before, trying to find out which best package will be given a headstart over everybody else's. Call that 'racing'?

[s3fella]

Compare Hamilton's pole time of what 1.26.3 his fastest lap. And his qually lap is on race tyres.

Tells you all you need to know about modern f1. It's all fuel and tyre management now and whilst it's always been a factor, it's never been quite like this. All very odd

[leglessAlex]

Cobnapint said:

There are way too many variables in F1 now, enough to say that the drivers championship doesn't necessarily mean the best driver won.

It's whoever gets to control the best package - tyres, chassis, aero, team in the garage, engine - that is usually the winner. And they spend much of the day before, trying to find out which best package will be given a headstart over everybody else's. Call that 'racing'?

But hasn't that always been the case? There can't have been many years where a car that obviously wasn't the best won and I doubt there's ever been a year where a total dog of a car won the WDC even if an absolute genius was driving it.

[slipstream 1985]

leglessAlex said:

Cobnapint said:

There are way too many variables in F1 now, enough to say that the drivers championship doesn't necessarily mean the best driver won.

It's whoever gets to control the best package - tyres, chassis, aero, team in the garage, engine - that is usually the winner. And they spend much of the day before, trying to find out which best package will be given a headstart over everybody else's. Call that 'racing'?

But hasn't that always been the case? There can't have been many years where a car that obviously wasn't the best won and I doubt there's ever been a year where a total dog of a car won the WDC even if an absolute genius was driving it.

alonso slower renault against the faster but less reliable ferrari.

[anonymous-user]

custardtart said:

I went to the race and it was st. Shame really as Melbourne is a cool place, the GP is only minutes walk to the CBD yet no delays getting in or out and a vibe more akin to FOS than silverdtone - deserves a better main event.

Cars sounded like a bag of nails, people were cringing every time Button went past because he was soooo sloooow and his car sounded like a washing machine about to implode.

On the plus side Arnie was good value!

I live a 20 minute walk away from the track and I 100% agree with this.

I last went to a Grand Prix in 93 and I could not believe how quiet the cars were. Button's car did indeed sound horrible, and I kept hoping the engine would explode to put the poor thing out of its misery. I would not like to be the Honda employee having to explain how they managed to spend so much money to come dead last.

The whole weekend (especially the Sauber and Manor situation) was a joke from start to finish.

[Redlake27]

s3fella said:

Compare Hamilton's pole time of what 1.26.3 his fastest lap. And his qually lap is on race tyres.

Tells you all you need to know about modern f1. It's all fuel and tyre management now and whilst it's always been a factor, it's never been quite like this. All very odd

Exactly.

The tyre management is a big issue. The cars look slow, as if they are being driven at eight tenths.

I was watching the 2007 Indy GP on Sky Classic over the winter - it was the height of the Alonso/Hamilton McLaren feud. The race was strung out and as dull as Melbourne, but the cars looked like they were being driven at 10/10ths for every metre of the circuit.

Now, the fastest race lap is often 4 seconds slower than pole. The cars are operating way below their potential. One of the reasons that rookies look so impressive is that most top ten junior formula drivers are able to drive in that kind of window. Only the elite few can do an on the edge lap, every lap.

Solution: a tyre war. It doesn't have to be an arms race like it was in 1997/8 or 2005/6 - that is unsustainable. But well policed rules on the number of specifications, just like they have in LMP2.

[BritishRacinGrin]

Am I the only one in here who understands that a car on low fuel with brand new tyres and a full tank of electricity is going to turn in a faster lap than a car on low fuel with 10+ lap old tyres at the end of a long race?

[Redlake27]

BritishRacinGrin said:

Am I the only one in here who understands that a car on low fuel with brand new tyres and a full tank of electricity is going to turn in a faster lap than a car on low fuel with 10+ lap old tyres at the end of a long race?

No, but 4-5 seconds is a huge difference. After 10 laps of tyre wear, 1 or 2 seconds may be understandable, but not such a huge gap.

The gap we have between qualifying and the race times is similar to 1986, when we had qualifying tyres and engines and then turned it back to sub 1000bhp with tyres that could do 200 miles..... Then I could understand the 4 second difference, but there's less of an excuse now.

[Sir Snaz]

As a 'punter', who has loved watching F1 since the late 70s/early 80s ..... heres my take on why F1 has become so st in the last 10 years

1. Too many rules and regs (a bit like the rest of the modern world - damn the internet information age!!)
2. Drivers are now devoid of personality (or maybe their PR machines homogenise them too much)
3. The sport is too safe, millionaire out for a sunday drive vs millionaire risking it all to win? - I know which I would rather watch
4. its just not sexy anymore ......scars are sexy, silly sleeve tattoos and massive gold chains are not.

Im aware that the above makes me sound like a bit of a prole, but now that we have to pay for our F1 entertainment...... I am sure I am not the only one who thinks this way....

[NewMetalSystem]

Excessive fuel-saving, 4 engines per season, etc., are bad for the sport and they're just hiding the bigger problem. If the teams were given a more equitable distribution of the commercial rights then there wouldn't be such a high demand for lowering costs.

All these cost-saving measures are just a way for those in charge to justify retaining such a disproportionate share of the revenue.

[MikeyC]

FIAsco at it again, trying their best to ruin a good series !

anyone remember the sports cars of the 90s with their daft idea of using F1 engines for LeMans ?

the numbers are dwindling, and others are clearly struggling ...

[simonpeter]

Spot on about an equitable distribution of money. Yesterday we had the worst grid turnout since 1963, no I was too young to remember that one. The technology of our latest formula has taken an already engineer focused formula and driven it away from any specialist F1 team. Mercedes and Ferrari at the front is what we can expect. Look at Red Bull and McLaren?
Listening to Lewis describe his driving technique " adjusting the brake balance to compensate for the harvesting, using the harvested energy, managing the fuel coasting. " Wow how exciting that must be for bean counters.