Is the safety car start, the beginning of the end?
Discussion
Z3MCJez said:
That same race director who's being sued for not realising that the helicopter couldn't fly at Suzuka. People in powerful positions aren't always right.
Jez
That's a very "small man syndrome" way of looking at things.Jez
The truth is that nobody is always right - that's a grown-up view of the world.
However, the guy with loads of experience, information and advice is generally in the best position to make good decisions. Therefore, I would back him to be right more often than not.
Eric Mc said:
C70R said:
"The whole circus" is showing no signs of "disappearing" any time soon. More people are watching F1 globally than ever before!
This growth comes in spite of attempts by the "it was better in my day" crowd to drag it back to the stone age.
(Please don't attempt to refute this by pulling up articles about declining viewing figures in the UK. It's moving in the opposite direction to almost every other global market, and is not caused by lack of interest, but by a move to a subscription-only broadcaster in 2016.)
I think you will find that this is not true. The growing markets actually aren't growing at all. And, some of the "new " markets have already given up. Adding new countries to attempt to increase TV viewing figures is not sustainable.This growth comes in spite of attempts by the "it was better in my day" crowd to drag it back to the stone age.
(Please don't attempt to refute this by pulling up articles about declining viewing figures in the UK. It's moving in the opposite direction to almost every other global market, and is not caused by lack of interest, but by a move to a subscription-only broadcaster in 2016.)
In fact, I was shocked to see massive gaps in the grandstands at Monaco during qualifying. This was MONACO - the jewel in the F1 crown - and it wasn't full, I couldn't believe it.
If you really think F1 is in good hands and set for a glowing future, I think you will find that is not where it's heading at the moment.
However, please do correct me where I'm wrong - more people are watching and enjoying F1 now than have ever done in the past. That, unless I'm mistaken, proves that F1 (while having a number of failings, like anything) is getting plenty right.
Anyway, this is getting us nowhere. Your view on what F1 should be is tainted by when you started watching it. Rest assured, it's NEVER going back to that format.
Moaning on the internet about it achieves nothing more than making you look like you harbour some kind of grudge against things you like progressing and evolving. It does you no favours.
C70R said:
However, please do correct me where I'm wrong - more people are watching and enjoying F1 now than have ever done in the past. That, unless I'm mistaken, proves that F1 (while having a number of failings, like anything) is getting plenty right.
You do come out with some tosh, more people are watching F1, The big bang theory, CSI whatever etc etc because of the developments in communications, TV delivery and the internet, this has nothing to do with the success of formula 1, maybe I should have asked if you work for a marketing company.It is equally true that more people are turning off and not watching Formula! than ever before.
C70R said:
However, please do correct me where I'm wrong - more people are watching and enjoying F1 now than have ever done in the past. That, unless I'm mistaken, proves that F1 (while having a number of failings, like anything) is getting plenty right.
I'm sure, in fact certain, that the viewing figures that have been published in the run up to the selling-off of the rights are spot on. No, I really, really do.Yes, I do.
However, viewing figures only prove (!) how many people are watching. It does not suggest that F1 is getting things 'right' unless, of course, viewing figures, and not entertainment, is the target.
With new circuits being opened in populous places like China, conclusions from simple increases in the stats are, to say the least, suspect as a measure of success.
I'm not suggesting that F1 is not exciting. I'd love an argument about whether it is getting 'plenty' right.
Derek/Adrian - If F1 was getting so much wrong (as your moans and groans suggest), surely its appeal would be limited/marginal the 'new' markets it ventures into.
Take Formula E as an example. There's a motorsport with plenty of money/names behind it, making inroads in some of the biggest 'new' economies in the world (races in China, Brazil, Mexico). Yet the viewing figures are (and remain) exceptionally poor.
Likewise WEC (China, Mexico) and WTCC (China, Russia).
By contrast to these three examples, F1 is a success in almost all new markets that it enters, and continues to grow/maintain viewing in many of its traditional, core markets. As such, it's really hard to see sense in an argument that suggests that F1 is failing its fans.
Yes, I can see that it might be alienating people who want to spend a wet Sunday in an uncovered grandstand at Donnington Park drinking Bovril; but that's what 40 years of progress does for you.
Complaining about progress, when the sport is enjoying so much success and garnering so much new support as a result, is both selfish and unproductive.
Take Formula E as an example. There's a motorsport with plenty of money/names behind it, making inroads in some of the biggest 'new' economies in the world (races in China, Brazil, Mexico). Yet the viewing figures are (and remain) exceptionally poor.
Likewise WEC (China, Mexico) and WTCC (China, Russia).
By contrast to these three examples, F1 is a success in almost all new markets that it enters, and continues to grow/maintain viewing in many of its traditional, core markets. As such, it's really hard to see sense in an argument that suggests that F1 is failing its fans.
Yes, I can see that it might be alienating people who want to spend a wet Sunday in an uncovered grandstand at Donnington Park drinking Bovril; but that's what 40 years of progress does for you.
Complaining about progress, when the sport is enjoying so much success and garnering so much new support as a result, is both selfish and unproductive.
janesmith1950 said:
C'mon darling, for how many years has F1 been active vs. FE?
Do we want to play silly semantics games on the internet like spotty children or can we agree as adults that watching a race start and run behind a road car is less exciting than watching them launch as normal?
Nobody is disagreeing with your point in bold, sweetheart. If you'd bothered to read any of the thread, that would have been fairly obvious.Do we want to play silly semantics games on the internet like spotty children or can we agree as adults that watching a race start and run behind a road car is less exciting than watching them launch as normal?
(Presume you're ignoring how long WEC and WTCC have been active, right?)
C70R said:
Z3MCJez said:
That same race director who's being sued for not realising that the helicopter couldn't fly at Suzuka. People in powerful positions aren't always right.
Jez
That's a very "small man syndrome" way of looking at things.Jez
The truth is that nobody is always right - that's a grown-up view of the world.
However, the guy with loads of experience, information and advice is generally in the best position to make good decisions. Therefore, I would back him to be right more often than not.
I accept that individuals make mistakes. It's why we consult on bug decisions in my line of work. Because 2 heads are better than one. Unless you need a decision *RIGHT NOW* Red Bull.
But just because you'd back him to be right more often than not (as would I as most decisions are easy) then I would contend that he might have made the wrong decision this time. Magnussen thought so. And he had to drive in it.
Jez
C70R said:
Derek/Adrian - If F1 was getting so much wrong (as your moans and groans suggest), surely its appeal would be limited/marginal the 'new' markets it ventures into.
Take Formula E as an example. There's a motorsport with plenty of money/names behind it, making inroads in some of the biggest 'new' economies in the world (races in China, Brazil, Mexico). Yet the viewing figures are (and remain) exceptionally poor.
Likewise WEC (China, Mexico) and WTCC (China, Russia).
By contrast to these three examples, F1 is a success in almost all new markets that it enters, and continues to grow/maintain viewing in many of its traditional, core markets. As such, it's really hard to see sense in an argument that suggests that F1 is failing its fans.
Yes, I can see that it might be alienating people who want to spend a wet Sunday in an uncovered grandstand at Donnington Park drinking Bovril; but that's what 40 years of progress does for you.
Complaining about progress, when the sport is enjoying so much success and garnering so much new support as a result, is both selfish and unproductive.
F1 is a marketing vehicle, first and foremost. Everything else is secondary, or perhaps not even worth considering. F1 is an opportunity for companies to market their goods. Take Formula E as an example. There's a motorsport with plenty of money/names behind it, making inroads in some of the biggest 'new' economies in the world (races in China, Brazil, Mexico). Yet the viewing figures are (and remain) exceptionally poor.
Likewise WEC (China, Mexico) and WTCC (China, Russia).
By contrast to these three examples, F1 is a success in almost all new markets that it enters, and continues to grow/maintain viewing in many of its traditional, core markets. As such, it's really hard to see sense in an argument that suggests that F1 is failing its fans.
Yes, I can see that it might be alienating people who want to spend a wet Sunday in an uncovered grandstand at Donnington Park drinking Bovril; but that's what 40 years of progress does for you.
Complaining about progress, when the sport is enjoying so much success and garnering so much new support as a result, is both selfish and unproductive.
In a nutshell, F1 is image. Include it on, for instance, an advert for a watch and some of the image is transposed, despite the thing only telling the time. This has given it power and authority.
If you were trying to market goods from your country and wanted to be a player in the world, what better way than to hold a GP. Just come out of a period when the country was a dictatorship? What better way to show how far you have come than by having the great and the good come to your GP circuit, and sit with an ex stasi enforcer?
So F1 is all about image.
Also for a country that, perhaps, is new to entertainment on TV, a motor race is something of a change. Although there are many TV channels in China, the content is controlled, especially as far as foreign programmes are concerned. Of course they are going to watch the races.
Those in control of F1 are also in control of many circuits. This is changing quite a lot I'm told but I remember 10 years ago a LMES race on a British circuit not being advertised at all, the stands not being open, and pressure being put on the organisers to stop the race 2/3rds of the way through. I don't suppose I can say why on here, but the team managers I spoke with had no doubt.
WEC is exciting, fun to watch and the cars going into a corner at vastly different speeds has to be seen live to be appreciated. It is more exciting than F1 but it hasn't got the marketing backing.
As for maintaining its core support in its historical base, Europe, I'm not sure that is true. Support in Spain fell away last season. Not only that, the sport is not attracting younger supporters. In effect, it is dying in Europe. Sit in the stands and it is as if there is a grey fog below you.
Will China continue with its current level of support for F1? Last season many of the camera angles at the circuit did not show the stands. I wondered why.
This comes at a time when the racing has been exciting as it has ever been. We've had a number of seasons where the final race has decided the championship. In fact in 2008 it was decided at the last race, on the last lap at the last corner.
You have a bit of a jibe against those who would stand in the rain to watch a GP. These are the nerds, the real enthusiasts, who kept the sport alive throughout the 70s and 80s and even the 90s. These are the ones falling away. Is the racing any better now?
You suggest that F1 is a success in all new markets. How do you measure this success? By numbers? By thrills? By excitement? By money? Guess which one the owners of F1 measure it by.
I'm one of the nerds who would, a few years ago, stand at Club in the rain, with my view of much of the circuit blocked by other fans, and drink hot coffee from one of my flasks. I am one of the nerds who will sit through two hours of a race around roads that are too narrow and see just one overtake and still say it was an exciting race.
Eric Mc said:
Vaud said:
Eric Mc said:
As I mentioned earlier, those who think those six or so laps behind the "Safety Car" were anything to do with safety are completely deluded as to how modern F1 works.
I don't mind a differing of opinion, but I object to an inference of delusion when you are as much an armchair expert as many on this thread.I thought that 3 sighting laps might have been better, but I do not believe the actual number ruined an otherwise excellent race. I think that starting at Silverstone in similar conditions behind a SC would be a wrong call, but perhaps 3 sighting laps under VSC would still be a good idea.
If it was Indy racing, they would not even go out, so F1 putting on a show judged it about right. IMHO.
I am still unsure what Eric thinks the PRIME reason was, but I am pretty sure it was not just a birthday treat for Mylander.
Mr_Thyroid said:
I've heard it argued that Palmer would've had warmer tyres and would've been less likely to crash under a normal start.
Do you honestly think his tyres would have been significantly warmer after one slow lap and a period standing still on a damp grid?Do you honestly think the potential for a first-corner crash would have been less if the pack had only had one lap?
Derek Smith said:
F1 is a marketing vehicle, first and foremost. Everything else is secondary, or perhaps not even worth considering. F1 is an opportunity for companies to market their goods.
In a nutshell, F1 is image. Include it on, for instance, an advert for a watch and some of the image is transposed, despite the thing only telling the time. This has given it power and authority.
If you were trying to market goods from your country and wanted to be a player in the world, what better way than to hold a GP. Just come out of a period when the country was a dictatorship? What better way to show how far you have come than by having the great and the good come to your GP circuit, and sit with an ex stasi enforcer?
So F1 is all about image.
Also for a country that, perhaps, is new to entertainment on TV, a motor race is something of a change. Although there are many TV channels in China, the content is controlled, especially as far as foreign programmes are concerned. Of course they are going to watch the races.
Those in control of F1 are also in control of many circuits. This is changing quite a lot I'm told but I remember 10 years ago a LMES race on a British circuit not being advertised at all, the stands not being open, and pressure being put on the organisers to stop the race 2/3rds of the way through. I don't suppose I can say why on here, but the team managers I spoke with had no doubt.
WEC is exciting, fun to watch and the cars going into a corner at vastly different speeds has to be seen live to be appreciated. It is more exciting than F1 but it hasn't got the marketing backing.
As for maintaining its core support in its historical base, Europe, I'm not sure that is true. Support in Spain fell away last season. Not only that, the sport is not attracting younger supporters. In effect, it is dying in Europe. Sit in the stands and it is as if there is a grey fog below you.
Will China continue with its current level of support for F1? Last season many of the camera angles at the circuit did not show the stands. I wondered why.
This comes at a time when the racing has been exciting as it has ever been. We've had a number of seasons where the final race has decided the championship. In fact in 2008 it was decided at the last race, on the last lap at the last corner.
You have a bit of a jibe against those who would stand in the rain to watch a GP. These are the nerds, the real enthusiasts, who kept the sport alive throughout the 70s and 80s and even the 90s. These are the ones falling away. Is the racing any better now?
You suggest that F1 is a success in all new markets. How do you measure this success? By numbers? By thrills? By excitement? By money? Guess which one the owners of F1 measure it by.
I'm one of the nerds who would, a few years ago, stand at Club in the rain, with my view of much of the circuit blocked by other fans, and drink hot coffee from one of my flasks. I am one of the nerds who will sit through two hours of a race around roads that are too narrow and see just one overtake and still say it was an exciting race.
All of that is lovely, and very admirable. You're absolutely right that the 'Bovril' crowd were the ones who kept the sport going in the past. But that's exactly what it is; the past.In a nutshell, F1 is image. Include it on, for instance, an advert for a watch and some of the image is transposed, despite the thing only telling the time. This has given it power and authority.
If you were trying to market goods from your country and wanted to be a player in the world, what better way than to hold a GP. Just come out of a period when the country was a dictatorship? What better way to show how far you have come than by having the great and the good come to your GP circuit, and sit with an ex stasi enforcer?
So F1 is all about image.
Also for a country that, perhaps, is new to entertainment on TV, a motor race is something of a change. Although there are many TV channels in China, the content is controlled, especially as far as foreign programmes are concerned. Of course they are going to watch the races.
Those in control of F1 are also in control of many circuits. This is changing quite a lot I'm told but I remember 10 years ago a LMES race on a British circuit not being advertised at all, the stands not being open, and pressure being put on the organisers to stop the race 2/3rds of the way through. I don't suppose I can say why on here, but the team managers I spoke with had no doubt.
WEC is exciting, fun to watch and the cars going into a corner at vastly different speeds has to be seen live to be appreciated. It is more exciting than F1 but it hasn't got the marketing backing.
As for maintaining its core support in its historical base, Europe, I'm not sure that is true. Support in Spain fell away last season. Not only that, the sport is not attracting younger supporters. In effect, it is dying in Europe. Sit in the stands and it is as if there is a grey fog below you.
Will China continue with its current level of support for F1? Last season many of the camera angles at the circuit did not show the stands. I wondered why.
This comes at a time when the racing has been exciting as it has ever been. We've had a number of seasons where the final race has decided the championship. In fact in 2008 it was decided at the last race, on the last lap at the last corner.
You have a bit of a jibe against those who would stand in the rain to watch a GP. These are the nerds, the real enthusiasts, who kept the sport alive throughout the 70s and 80s and even the 90s. These are the ones falling away. Is the racing any better now?
You suggest that F1 is a success in all new markets. How do you measure this success? By numbers? By thrills? By excitement? By money? Guess which one the owners of F1 measure it by.
I'm one of the nerds who would, a few years ago, stand at Club in the rain, with my view of much of the circuit blocked by other fans, and drink hot coffee from one of my flasks. I am one of the nerds who will sit through two hours of a race around roads that are too narrow and see just one overtake and still say it was an exciting race.
F1 is an excellent commercial vehicle, and as the pinnacle of international motorsport it will continue to be so. Even "ruined" starts like the one at Monaco still produce excellent, exciting races; so it's hard to say that they are having an adverse effect on the sport.
It's lovely that you want F1 to be the way it used to be, but that's not how life works. And that's certainly not the way that commercial enterprises work. Your complaints are beginning to sound like sour grapes - like you begrudge people wanting to make F1 into a commercial endeavour.
Ultimately, it has succeeded in new markets in a way that other formulae (and sports) have failed. Yes, advertising/marketing and profile will have contributed to this. But, boring sports simply don't succeed, even with significant backing.
C70R said:
All of that is lovely, and very admirable. You're absolutely right that the 'Bovril' crowd were the ones who kept the sport going in the past. But that's exactly what it is; the past.
F1 is an excellent commercial vehicle, and as the pinnacle of international motorsport it will continue to be so. Even "ruined" starts like the one at Monaco still produce excellent, exciting races; so it's hard to say that they are having an adverse effect on the sport.
It's lovely that you want F1 to be the way it used to be, but that's not how life works. And that's certainly not the way that commercial enterprises work. Your complaints are beginning to sound like sour grapes - like you begrudge people wanting to make F1 into a commercial endeavour.
Ultimately, it has succeeded in new markets in a way that other formulae (and sports) have failed. Yes, advertising/marketing and profile will have contributed to this. But, boring sports simply don't succeed, even with significant backing.
I don't begrudge anyone turning F1 into a commercial endeavour. In fact it has been that way since Players came in, and probably before. The classic Hesketh cartoon of the grid explained everything, even then. I begrudge the money leaving the sport, but that's another argument.F1 is an excellent commercial vehicle, and as the pinnacle of international motorsport it will continue to be so. Even "ruined" starts like the one at Monaco still produce excellent, exciting races; so it's hard to say that they are having an adverse effect on the sport.
It's lovely that you want F1 to be the way it used to be, but that's not how life works. And that's certainly not the way that commercial enterprises work. Your complaints are beginning to sound like sour grapes - like you begrudge people wanting to make F1 into a commercial endeavour.
Ultimately, it has succeeded in new markets in a way that other formulae (and sports) have failed. Yes, advertising/marketing and profile will have contributed to this. But, boring sports simply don't succeed, even with significant backing.
You suggest that Monaco was an excellent exciting race. Compared to what? Other formulae? I'm not so sure. But let's look at it on its merits.
There was only one overtake that I can remember (ignoring LH's pass of NR). In fact, the race amounted to a pit stop.
I don't want F1 to be 'the way it used to be' in anything other than excitement and accessibility. I mentioned standing in the rain merely as a rebuttal of a previous poster's point. I would have loved to have been able to be in a stand, but I didn't have the money, at least not to waste. But I still enjoyed it.
F1 is ephemeral. It is not at the top by right and it is possible it will implode. Certainly the sell off is critical. If the financial structure, controlled by one person with limited desire for anything other than money, is less than robust - which no one knows about so can't say - then the edifice falls. At the moment there is little overview. I doubt this with continue to the same extent following the sale. Will the new guys sit with despots? There are other methods of management that might not continue.
What if Red Bull takes over? Will that ensure its continuity?
Some manufacturers support alternatives to F1. Closed wheel racing used to be the leader. There is no reason why it could not get back to that slot.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff