Has F1 reached a new low?
Discussion
Is F1 actually any worse than previous years? Russia was watchable. Compared to other racing that weekend it was the worst. It cant always be the best. (rarely is though)
I think we tend to look back through rose tinted glasses. So many races and years were s
te too. Nothing new.
It's billed as the pinnacle of motorsport so that's what we expect so no wonder we always want more and are left disappointed.
WEC has been consistently far better. Long may it continue.
I think we tend to look back through rose tinted glasses. So many races and years were s
te too. Nothing new.It's billed as the pinnacle of motorsport so that's what we expect so no wonder we always want more and are left disappointed.
WEC has been consistently far better. Long may it continue.
This sums it all up.
Let's also be honest, quite a number complaining also HATE LH, because of their bullst reasons, I know afew myself, latest reasons being, "I hate his tatoos", why has he got blonde hair", bla bla.. (even I'll admit, the blonde hair is alittle to far...).
He's out partying with supermodels on the Friday night, has his private jet on standby, flies out to whatever part of the world the next race is on the Saturday morning, and leaves with the winners trophy on the Sunday, so it's making current f1 COMPLETY unwatchable for alot of people.
fking heck my life is boring. 
Let's also be honest, quite a number complaining also HATE LH, because of their bulls
t reasons, I know afew myself, latest reasons being, "I hate his tatoos", why has he got blonde hair", bla bla.. (even I'll admit, the blonde hair is alittle to far...). He's out partying with supermodels on the Friday night, has his private jet on standby, flies out to whatever part of the world the next race is on the Saturday morning, and leaves with the winners trophy on the Sunday, so it's making current f1 COMPLETY unwatchable for alot of people.
f
king heck my life is boring. longblackcoat said:
Apparently F1’s just not as good as it was. Then again, history improves the further away it gets – we typically regard Henry VIII as a roister-doisteringly good all-round chap, forgetting the vicious and paranoid tyrant he became.
In short, I think people are wearing rose-tinted racing goggles
I’ve heard the “F1’s rubbish these days, not like in the old days” comment pretty much every year for the last three decades. But it’s simply not true to say that there was a wonderful golden age when every race was full of wheel-banging action, at least not since I’ve been watching. I remember tedious races from the 90s and 00s, dreadful affairs where no-one could pass – the Monaco GP in 2003 had literally zero overtakes. We’ve had periods of domination by Ferrari, Williams, McLaren & Red Bull, so the current Mercedes position is hardly new. Tyres have been a problem since forever; the issues with Michelin at the US GP in 2005 were a stand-out low point, but I seem to recall a moustachioed Brit failing to win a world championship because of a tyre explosion. We’ve also had winners who’s been off into the distance before - Damon Hill managed to win by 2 full laps in the 1995 Australian GP.
Duff tracks? Sure, we’ve got some strange ones now, but remember Zolder, Phoenix, Caesar’s Palace, Aida/Tanaka? All unmitigatedly terrible.
On top of all of that, we’ve had many occasions where large teams have pulled out – BMW, Honda, Toyota are all recent, but over the years there have been many, many others. And we’ve also had the situation where Championship-winning teams have had to use a less-than-wonderful power unit; Williams parted company with Honda and had to go to Judd, of all people, in 1988ish, with predictably useless results.
One change I’ve noticed is quality. Drivers are genuinely better these days – there were some awesomely st pay drivers all the way up until a few years back – and cars are more reliable. Given the increase in skill level and the reduction in engine blow-ups, it means that there are far fewer retirements, thus the unpredictability is somewhat reduced. That said, we still have Pastor Maldonado, and both Grosjean and Hulkenberg managed to throw their cars off the track in Sochi without any apparent assistance, adding to the comedy. Teams take it more seriously these days, and you can’t just rock up with a chassis you bought from Lola, a DFV and a bunch of oily-handed spannermen; you have to be seriously well-funded. But that’s a function of success; the sport’s grown like Topsy, and the rewards have gone to the victors.
So I’d love to know when the so-called golden age of F1 actually took place. For me it’s as exciting as it’s ever been. We have a British World Champion who isn’t a corporate drone and who is thrashing his (very good) team-mate. Sure, it’d be closer with Vettel in the team, but nothing’s perfect in life.
It would be myopic in the extreme to claim that F1 is in rude health, and I struggle to understand how it can survive financially without major change, but for the last 20+ years it’s been a sport of haves and have-nots, of barely-solvent hopefuls, of pay-drivers and dodgy dealings, and despite that it’s managed to carry on. It’s going to change, and significantly, when the ringmaster retires (either gracefully, to his own timetable, or in a rather less planned way) which, if the laws of nature continue to function as one might expect. So we all know that within the next 5 years it’ll be very different.
For me it would be improved with one or two more manufacturers, with a genuine cost cap (say a maximum of £150m and 750 employees), and with the reintroduction of refuelling, but we’ll see what happens when Bernie goes. Bring Toto in as the boss – funny, trustworthy, plain-speaking and massively financially astute – and you’ve got someone who can take it on for a couple of decades. Add in less fragile tyres (with a choice of manufacturer), more in-season development, make it a free-to-air proposition to ensure it doesn’t become forgotten, and I’d say it’d be fine.
In short, I think people are wearing rose-tinted racing goggles
I’ve heard the “F1’s rubbish these days, not like in the old days” comment pretty much every year for the last three decades. But it’s simply not true to say that there was a wonderful golden age when every race was full of wheel-banging action, at least not since I’ve been watching. I remember tedious races from the 90s and 00s, dreadful affairs where no-one could pass – the Monaco GP in 2003 had literally zero overtakes. We’ve had periods of domination by Ferrari, Williams, McLaren & Red Bull, so the current Mercedes position is hardly new. Tyres have been a problem since forever; the issues with Michelin at the US GP in 2005 were a stand-out low point, but I seem to recall a moustachioed Brit failing to win a world championship because of a tyre explosion. We’ve also had winners who’s been off into the distance before - Damon Hill managed to win by 2 full laps in the 1995 Australian GP.
Duff tracks? Sure, we’ve got some strange ones now, but remember Zolder, Phoenix, Caesar’s Palace, Aida/Tanaka? All unmitigatedly terrible.
On top of all of that, we’ve had many occasions where large teams have pulled out – BMW, Honda, Toyota are all recent, but over the years there have been many, many others. And we’ve also had the situation where Championship-winning teams have had to use a less-than-wonderful power unit; Williams parted company with Honda and had to go to Judd, of all people, in 1988ish, with predictably useless results.
One change I’ve noticed is quality. Drivers are genuinely better these days – there were some awesomely s
t pay drivers all the way up until a few years back – and cars are more reliable. Given the increase in skill level and the reduction in engine blow-ups, it means that there are far fewer retirements, thus the unpredictability is somewhat reduced. That said, we still have Pastor Maldonado, and both Grosjean and Hulkenberg managed to throw their cars off the track in Sochi without any apparent assistance, adding to the comedy. Teams take it more seriously these days, and you can’t just rock up with a chassis you bought from Lola, a DFV and a bunch of oily-handed spannermen; you have to be seriously well-funded. But that’s a function of success; the sport’s grown like Topsy, and the rewards have gone to the victors.So I’d love to know when the so-called golden age of F1 actually took place. For me it’s as exciting as it’s ever been. We have a British World Champion who isn’t a corporate drone and who is thrashing his (very good) team-mate. Sure, it’d be closer with Vettel in the team, but nothing’s perfect in life.
It would be myopic in the extreme to claim that F1 is in rude health, and I struggle to understand how it can survive financially without major change, but for the last 20+ years it’s been a sport of haves and have-nots, of barely-solvent hopefuls, of pay-drivers and dodgy dealings, and despite that it’s managed to carry on. It’s going to change, and significantly, when the ringmaster retires (either gracefully, to his own timetable, or in a rather less planned way) which, if the laws of nature continue to function as one might expect. So we all know that within the next 5 years it’ll be very different.
For me it would be improved with one or two more manufacturers, with a genuine cost cap (say a maximum of £150m and 750 employees), and with the reintroduction of refuelling, but we’ll see what happens when Bernie goes. Bring Toto in as the boss – funny, trustworthy, plain-speaking and massively financially astute – and you’ve got someone who can take it on for a couple of decades. Add in less fragile tyres (with a choice of manufacturer), more in-season development, make it a free-to-air proposition to ensure it doesn’t become forgotten, and I’d say it’d be fine.
Edited by Leroy902 on Wednesday 14th October 07:51
Edited by Leroy902 on Wednesday 14th October 08:02
We've had some of the most exciting season over the last few years. The WDC has often run to the last race or two. It is not so long ago that the championship went down to the last race, the last lap and the last corner. There have been some dead years, but even with the domination of Vettel and Hamilton the support driver has added spice, one way or another.
Sunday's race had some fabulous overtakes, a mix of strategies and a riveting last few laps with a podium up for grabs. This has been typical of the season so far. Despite the winner being nothing more than a test of reliability for the most part, the other positions have, by and large, been hard fought.
There is nothing wrong with the racing. It could be better, but if taken over the season, there's a couple of videos to be made from it.
Management, as always in this sport, is the one concern. From letting off a team that tried to burn down the pits, via having a one car race, to blaming one team for two errant drivers. And financially chasing the quick return rather that building a fan base, opting for circuits in countries with money but no history and, apparently, no interest in the sport, and abandoning the countries and fans with history and commitment.
A German driver is second in the WDC against a dominant car but it seems we can't have a German GP. No France either.
And now they've messed it up, they are going to dump it.
Sunday's race had some fabulous overtakes, a mix of strategies and a riveting last few laps with a podium up for grabs. This has been typical of the season so far. Despite the winner being nothing more than a test of reliability for the most part, the other positions have, by and large, been hard fought.
There is nothing wrong with the racing. It could be better, but if taken over the season, there's a couple of videos to be made from it.
Management, as always in this sport, is the one concern. From letting off a team that tried to burn down the pits, via having a one car race, to blaming one team for two errant drivers. And financially chasing the quick return rather that building a fan base, opting for circuits in countries with money but no history and, apparently, no interest in the sport, and abandoning the countries and fans with history and commitment.
A German driver is second in the WDC against a dominant car but it seems we can't have a German GP. No France either.
And now they've messed it up, they are going to dump it.
For whatever the reasons are i find myself just not that interested in watching F1 anymore. Oddly, the biggest disappointment is that they don't sound other worldly anymore due to the engine regs. Don't care why they changed them, bring back 3.5 litre v10's and v12's.
As for the racing, it has been as many have pointed out fairly prosessional for many years with one team / driver or another dominating races and seasons, has it ever been about close racing? Compared with Moto GP, BTCC there is little to get excited about. Unless you are a girl and like seeing EJ and DC in there skin tight pants and enormous watches every race....
As for the racing, it has been as many have pointed out fairly prosessional for many years with one team / driver or another dominating races and seasons, has it ever been about close racing? Compared with Moto GP, BTCC there is little to get excited about. Unless you are a girl and like seeing EJ and DC in there skin tight pants and enormous watches every race....
Derek is correct. Most people here seem to not understand how F1 has been over the decades regarding on-track racing, technical aspects of the cars or dominance of certain teams at certain times. We've had all these situations at various times going back not only to the start of the World Championship in 1950, but to the dawn of Grand Prix racing in 1906.
What would people today say of the dominance of Mercedes and Auto Union in the late 1930s, or Alfa Romeo a few years earlier?
The main concern today is how the whole edifice is being run, how money is allocated, how circuit owners are sidelined in the decision making and how genuine enthusiasts and followers are being shafted.
If it continues like this, in a couple of years there may be no F1.
What would people today say of the dominance of Mercedes and Auto Union in the late 1930s, or Alfa Romeo a few years earlier?
The main concern today is how the whole edifice is being run, how money is allocated, how circuit owners are sidelined in the decision making and how genuine enthusiasts and followers are being shafted.
If it continues like this, in a couple of years there may be no F1.
longblackcoat said:
Apparently F1’s just not as good as it was. Then again, history improves the further away it gets – we typically regard Henry VIII as a roister-doisteringly good all-round chap, forgetting the vicious and paranoid tyrant he became.
In short, I think people are wearing rose-tinted racing goggles
I’ve heard the “F1’s rubbish these days, not like in the old days” comment pretty much every year for the last three decades. But it’s simply not true to say that there was a wonderful golden age when every race was full of wheel-banging action, at least not since I’ve been watching. I remember tedious races from the 90s and 00s, dreadful affairs where no-one could pass – the Monaco GP in 2003 had literally zero overtakes. We’ve had periods of domination by Ferrari, Williams, McLaren & Red Bull, so the current Mercedes position is hardly new. Tyres have been a problem since forever; the issues with Michelin at the US GP in 2005 were a stand-out low point, but I seem to recall a moustachioed Brit failing to win a world championship because of a tyre explosion. We’ve also had winners who’s been off into the distance before - Damon Hill managed to win by 2 full laps in the 1995 Australian GP.
Duff tracks? Sure, we’ve got some strange ones now, but remember Zolder, Phoenix, Caesar’s Palace, Aida/Tanaka? All unmitigatedly terrible.
On top of all of that, we’ve had many occasions where large teams have pulled out – BMW, Honda, Toyota are all recent, but over the years there have been many, many others. And we’ve also had the situation where Championship-winning teams have had to use a less-than-wonderful power unit; Williams parted company with Honda and had to go to Judd, of all people, in 1988ish, with predictably useless results.
One change I’ve noticed is quality. Drivers are genuinely better these days – there were some awesomely st pay drivers all the way up until a few years back – and cars are more reliable. Given the increase in skill level and the reduction in engine blow-ups, it means that there are far fewer retirements, thus the unpredictability is somewhat reduced. That said, we still have Pastor Maldonado, and both Grosjean and Hulkenberg managed to throw their cars off the track in Sochi without any apparent assistance, adding to the comedy. Teams take it more seriously these days, and you can’t just rock up with a chassis you bought from Lola, a DFV and a bunch of oily-handed spannermen; you have to be seriously well-funded. But that’s a function of success; the sport’s grown like Topsy, and the rewards have gone to the victors.
So I’d love to know when the so-called golden age of F1 actually took place. For me it’s as exciting as it’s ever been. We have a British World Champion who isn’t a corporate drone and who is thrashing his (very good) team-mate. Sure, it’d be closer with Vettel in the team, but nothing’s perfect in life.
It would be myopic in the extreme to claim that F1 is in rude health, and I struggle to understand how it can survive financially without major change, but for the last 20+ years it’s been a sport of haves and have-nots, of barely-solvent hopefuls, of pay-drivers and dodgy dealings, and despite that it’s managed to carry on. It’s going to change, and significantly, when the ringmaster retires (either gracefully, to his own timetable, or in a rather less planned way) which, if the laws of nature continue to function as one might expect. So we all know that within the next 5 years it’ll be very different.
For me it would be improved with one or two more manufacturers, with a genuine cost cap (say a maximum of £150m and 750 employees), and with the reintroduction of refuelling, but we’ll see what happens when Bernie goes. Bring Toto in as the boss – funny, trustworthy, plain-speaking and massively financially astute – and you’ve got someone who can take it on for a couple of decades. Add in less fragile tyres (with a choice of manufacturer), more in-season development, make it a free-to-air proposition to ensure it doesn’t become forgotten, and I’d say it’d be fine.
So so right! In short, I think people are wearing rose-tinted racing goggles
I’ve heard the “F1’s rubbish these days, not like in the old days” comment pretty much every year for the last three decades. But it’s simply not true to say that there was a wonderful golden age when every race was full of wheel-banging action, at least not since I’ve been watching. I remember tedious races from the 90s and 00s, dreadful affairs where no-one could pass – the Monaco GP in 2003 had literally zero overtakes. We’ve had periods of domination by Ferrari, Williams, McLaren & Red Bull, so the current Mercedes position is hardly new. Tyres have been a problem since forever; the issues with Michelin at the US GP in 2005 were a stand-out low point, but I seem to recall a moustachioed Brit failing to win a world championship because of a tyre explosion. We’ve also had winners who’s been off into the distance before - Damon Hill managed to win by 2 full laps in the 1995 Australian GP.
Duff tracks? Sure, we’ve got some strange ones now, but remember Zolder, Phoenix, Caesar’s Palace, Aida/Tanaka? All unmitigatedly terrible.
On top of all of that, we’ve had many occasions where large teams have pulled out – BMW, Honda, Toyota are all recent, but over the years there have been many, many others. And we’ve also had the situation where Championship-winning teams have had to use a less-than-wonderful power unit; Williams parted company with Honda and had to go to Judd, of all people, in 1988ish, with predictably useless results.
One change I’ve noticed is quality. Drivers are genuinely better these days – there were some awesomely s
t pay drivers all the way up until a few years back – and cars are more reliable. Given the increase in skill level and the reduction in engine blow-ups, it means that there are far fewer retirements, thus the unpredictability is somewhat reduced. That said, we still have Pastor Maldonado, and both Grosjean and Hulkenberg managed to throw their cars off the track in Sochi without any apparent assistance, adding to the comedy. Teams take it more seriously these days, and you can’t just rock up with a chassis you bought from Lola, a DFV and a bunch of oily-handed spannermen; you have to be seriously well-funded. But that’s a function of success; the sport’s grown like Topsy, and the rewards have gone to the victors.So I’d love to know when the so-called golden age of F1 actually took place. For me it’s as exciting as it’s ever been. We have a British World Champion who isn’t a corporate drone and who is thrashing his (very good) team-mate. Sure, it’d be closer with Vettel in the team, but nothing’s perfect in life.
It would be myopic in the extreme to claim that F1 is in rude health, and I struggle to understand how it can survive financially without major change, but for the last 20+ years it’s been a sport of haves and have-nots, of barely-solvent hopefuls, of pay-drivers and dodgy dealings, and despite that it’s managed to carry on. It’s going to change, and significantly, when the ringmaster retires (either gracefully, to his own timetable, or in a rather less planned way) which, if the laws of nature continue to function as one might expect. So we all know that within the next 5 years it’ll be very different.
For me it would be improved with one or two more manufacturers, with a genuine cost cap (say a maximum of £150m and 750 employees), and with the reintroduction of refuelling, but we’ll see what happens when Bernie goes. Bring Toto in as the boss – funny, trustworthy, plain-speaking and massively financially astute – and you’ve got someone who can take it on for a couple of decades. Add in less fragile tyres (with a choice of manufacturer), more in-season development, make it a free-to-air proposition to ensure it doesn’t become forgotten, and I’d say it’d be fine.
Today's racing is head and shoulders above the 'racing' i watched late 90's and early 00's. In fact, i completely lost interest in F1 from about 2003-2006 and barely watched a race. It was the buzz around Lewis joining in 07 that grabbed my interest and really got me back watching the races again. Since then, i've been a fan again!
Eric Mc said:
Derek is correct. Most people here seem to not understand how F1 has been over the decades regarding on-track racing, technical aspects of the cars or dominance of certain teams at certain times. We've had all these situations at various times going back not only to the start of the World Championship in 1950, but to the dawn of Grand Prix racing in 1906.
What would people today say of the dominance of Mercedes and Auto Union in the late 1930s, or Alfa Romeo a few years earlier?
The main concern today is how the whole edifice is being run, how money is allocated, how circuit owners are sidelined in the decision making and how genuine enthusiasts and followers are being shafted.
If it continues like this, in a couple of years there may be no F1.
It's not really a case of anyone being correct, if someone finds a race or a season interesting, that's entirely their own viewpoint. What would people today say of the dominance of Mercedes and Auto Union in the late 1930s, or Alfa Romeo a few years earlier?
The main concern today is how the whole edifice is being run, how money is allocated, how circuit owners are sidelined in the decision making and how genuine enthusiasts and followers are being shafted.
If it continues like this, in a couple of years there may be no F1.
The fact is viewing figures are dropping and loads of people on here like me, who have watched F1 for decades are saying this season in particular, is not interesting them.
Next season might be fantastic, the last few races of this season might even be fantastic.
It isn't about not understanding the technical aspects as you two rather patronisingly point out.
longblackcoat said:
make it a free-to-air proposition to ensure it doesn’t become forgotten, and I’d say it’d be fine.
This, (I watch on Sky and this even annoys me). The world is littered with sports that had TV coverage at their peak and then lost it and became forgotten. (or did they have their peak because they had prime time TV coverage).
Boxing, Wrestling, how many people watch these now - a few hundred K out of a country of 70 Million?
I would even count Cricket - yes there is an avid following but the majority never watch a test match now as it is exclusively on Sky. 1 hour of highlights doesn't cut it. How many people sit and watch a few hours of a test match - how many did when it was on the BBC or even on C4?
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/jul/12/...
I fear F1 is making the same mistakes as these and other sports. If you lose your free to air mass market, you lose the casual watcher and more importantly lose the people talking about your sport on a Monday morning.
One aspect of Sport is about the people gathering round the coffee machine on a Monday morning saying "did you see x?"
If the only people watching are the hardcore supporters on pay per stream then this won't happen and the sport will wither - The evidence for this is already there - It is no surprise that cars are struggling to get decent advertising.
Bob
REALIST123 said:
So, many think there's nothing wrong with F1 it's as good as or better than it's ever been?
So why is there so little interest? Even the threads on here struggle to get more than a few pages of comment.
Apparently It's because they fail to understand the technical aspects or appreciate the finer points of the still interesting races. So why is there so little interest? Even the threads on here struggle to get more than a few pages of comment.
el stovey said:
It's not really a case of anyone being correct, if someone finds a race or a season interesting, that's entirely their own viewpoint.
The fact is viewing figures are dropping and loads of people on here like me, who have watched F1 for decades are saying this season in particular, is not interesting them.
Next season might be fantastic, the last few races of this season might even be fantastic.
It isn't about not understanding the technical aspects as you two rather patronisingly point out.
I certainly wasn't trying to be patronising.The fact is viewing figures are dropping and loads of people on here like me, who have watched F1 for decades are saying this season in particular, is not interesting them.
Next season might be fantastic, the last few races of this season might even be fantastic.
It isn't about not understanding the technical aspects as you two rather patronisingly point out.
I do feel that the heart of the problems are the business related issues rather than technical ones.
Even the falling viewing figures are due to "business" decisions i.e the move to pay channels rather than free to air.
Entities usually start to fail because of poor decision making at the top.
suffolk009 said:
25% fewer viewers on sky. If you striaghtlined that statistic, then in three years time it will be cheaper for sky to forget about doing TV coverage and just send me and three other people to every race to watch in person.
I'll go. 
I hope SKY stick with it. I love all the practice sessions and other coverage. It wasn't that long ago BBC didn't even always show qualifying live.
el stovey said:
Eric Mc said:
Even the falling viewing figures are due to "business" decisions i.e the move to pay channels rather than free to air.
I agree Eric but apparently viewing figures on pay per view (SKY F1) are actually falling also. Could it be an age demographic thing. Maybe fast cars and do or die exploits on racing circuits are not what turn young lads (and lasses - of course) on anymore.
Back in the 1950s test pilots were more famous than footballers. In the 1960s, British racing drivers were household names - making regular appearances on TV outside of their motorsport involvement. Times change and what constitutes "our heroes" change.
I have a funny feeling it's an age thing - exacerbated by the sports owners being very, very unwilling to properly embrace new media.
Back in the 1950s test pilots were more famous than footballers. In the 1960s, British racing drivers were household names - making regular appearances on TV outside of their motorsport involvement. Times change and what constitutes "our heroes" change.
I have a funny feeling it's an age thing - exacerbated by the sports owners being very, very unwilling to properly embrace new media.
Eric Mc said:
Could it be an age demographic thing. Maybe fast cars and do or die exploits on racing circuits are not what turn young lads (and lasses - of course) on anymore.
Back in the 1950s test pilots were more famous than footballers. In the 1960s, British racing drivers were household names - making regular appearances on TV outside of their motorsport involvement. Times change and what constitutes "our heroes" change.
I have a funny feeling it's an age thing - exacerbated by the sports owners being very, very unwilling to properly embrace new media.
I think you'd find it hard to argue that Lewis isn't a household name. And Jenson, though perhaps not quite as well-known outside motorsport circles, would be recognisable to a very large proportion of the population.Back in the 1950s test pilots were more famous than footballers. In the 1960s, British racing drivers were household names - making regular appearances on TV outside of their motorsport involvement. Times change and what constitutes "our heroes" change.
I have a funny feeling it's an age thing - exacerbated by the sports owners being very, very unwilling to properly embrace new media.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff