Official 2019 Chinese Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***
Discussion
kambites said:
Paul_M3 said:
Evangelion said:
Now there's no point, because I not only know how each race will end, I also know how each season will end.
You must be making thousands of pounds off the bookmakers then? Eric Mc said:
Do you adopt that attitude if you are served a bad meal in a restaurant?
I would speak it the restaurant directly or never go back. I wouldn't go on TripAdvisor and interject into every thread relating to that restaurant with stories of how bad an meal I had.
Mainly I would try not to whine like a child.
Vaud said:
Evangelion said:
Pre stupid wings and pre stupid adverts, when taking part was more important than winning, and people raced for the love of it, rather than because they got paid huge sums by the sponsors.
(Someone once said to me, " It doesn't matter what you're talking about, the second the money men move in, that's when it's ruined forever.")
Were those also eras where lots of people died, many races were decided on mechanical reliability and there were massive, massive gaps in performance from the front to the rear? And lots of effective "pay drivers" because they had the cash to buy a car/fund a team?(Someone once said to me, " It doesn't matter what you're talking about, the second the money men move in, that's when it's ruined forever.")
There was some good racing, but I do worry that we sometimes have rose tinted glasses for some eras of the sport.
It's not the winning, it's the taking part? Mike Hawthorn who was a man's man and the machinations of Enzo Ferrari who liked to keep his drivers on their toes who arguably had a hand in the fate of their teammates/drivers.
F1's political problems goes back to Enzo Ferrari having a dig at the British independent teams as garagiste; the FISA-FOCA war pitted manufacturers (FISA) vs. the independents (FOCA); today we have the manufacturers dominating the sport at the expense of independents.
FOCA was formed in the early 1960s because they wanted more money from the organisers/promoters.
I recently re-read Jackie Stewart's autobiography and was reminded that he was the first superstar driver, the Lewis Hamilton of his day. He raced in North America primarily for the money because the prize money was better (definitely not the case with Jim Clark who dabbled with NASCAR)whilst hangin out with the likes of Hollywood royalty Roman Polanski and not to mention living in Switzerland for tax purposes (personally I don't have a big problem with this as sportspeople have short careers cf. James Hunt's financial demise).
Deesee said:
That's brilliant!entropy said:
I recently re-read Jackie Stewart's autobiography and was reminded that he was the first superstar driver, the Lewis Hamilton of his day. He raced in North America primarily for the money because the prize money was better (definitely not the case with Jim Clark who dabbled with NASCAR)whilst hangin out with the likes of Hollywood royalty Roman Polanski and not to mention living in Switzerland for tax purposes (personally I don't have a big problem with this as sportspeople have short careers cf. James Hunt's financial demise).
I'm not sure Stewart was the first.When Moss was in his prime, everyone knew about him. When he won the Millie Miglia it was in the main pages of the newspapers. My father brought me a selection of them. When he had his crash it was on the TV news and on the front page of a number of dailies. Clark was voted sports personality of the year and came second once. Hill came second. These were big names.
It was Moss who ensured that sports car racing was at least the equal to F1 when he was driving. Everyone followed Le Mans, even my aunt Ada, who regarded Moss as that nice man.
Stewart was different in some ways. He latched on to the youth movement that was then a few years old. He might have been the first to earn a few bob at it, although I heard him suggest he was hard done by.
I suppose it depends on your definition of superstar but I reckon Moss had a bigger fanbase than Stewart.
Vaud said:
Deesee said:
That's brilliant!Derek Smith said:
I'm not sure Stewart was the first.
When Moss was in his prime, everyone knew about him. When he won the Millie Miglia it was in the main pages of the newspapers. My father brought me a selection of them. When he had his crash it was on the TV news and on the front page of a number of dailies. Clark was voted sports personality of the year and came second once. Hill came second. These were big names.
It was Moss who ensured that sports car racing was at least the equal to F1 when he was driving. Everyone followed Le Mans, even my aunt Ada, who regarded Moss as that nice man.
Stewart was different in some ways. He latched on to the youth movement that was then a few years old. He might have been the first to earn a few bob at it, although I heard him suggest he was hard done by.
I suppose it depends on your definition of superstar but I reckon Moss had a bigger fanbase than Stewart.
I'm not sure the cult of sports personality really existed in the 50's. Possibly for footballers, but not racing drivers. The sport was glamorous and the drivers enjoyed attention, especially from the fairer sex, but nothing like the later decades.When Moss was in his prime, everyone knew about him. When he won the Millie Miglia it was in the main pages of the newspapers. My father brought me a selection of them. When he had his crash it was on the TV news and on the front page of a number of dailies. Clark was voted sports personality of the year and came second once. Hill came second. These were big names.
It was Moss who ensured that sports car racing was at least the equal to F1 when he was driving. Everyone followed Le Mans, even my aunt Ada, who regarded Moss as that nice man.
Stewart was different in some ways. He latched on to the youth movement that was then a few years old. He might have been the first to earn a few bob at it, although I heard him suggest he was hard done by.
I suppose it depends on your definition of superstar but I reckon Moss had a bigger fanbase than Stewart.
Moss didn't make sports car racing the equal of F1, the car manufacturers gave it that status. He was perhaps the most career focused of his time, but the money came later.
Derek Smith said:
entropy said:
I recently re-read Jackie Stewart's autobiography and was reminded that he was the first superstar driver, the Lewis Hamilton of his day. He raced in North America primarily for the money because the prize money was better (definitely not the case with Jim Clark who dabbled with NASCAR)whilst hangin out with the likes of Hollywood royalty Roman Polanski and not to mention living in Switzerland for tax purposes (personally I don't have a big problem with this as sportspeople have short careers cf. James Hunt's financial demise).
I'm not sure Stewart was the first.When Moss was in his prime, everyone knew about him. When he won the Millie Miglia it was in the main pages of the newspapers. My father brought me a selection of them. When he had his crash it was on the TV news and on the front page of a number of dailies. Clark was voted sports personality of the year and came second once. Hill came second. These were big names.
It was Moss who ensured that sports car racing was at least the equal to F1 when he was driving. Everyone followed Le Mans, even my aunt Ada, who regarded Moss as that nice man.
Stewart was different in some ways. He latched on to the youth movement that was then a few years old. He might have been the first to earn a few bob at it, although I heard him suggest he was hard done by.
I suppose it depends on your definition of superstar but I reckon Moss had a bigger fanbase than Stewart.
Vaud said:
Were those also eras where lots of people died, many races were decided on mechanical reliability and there were massive, massive gaps in performance from the front to the rear? And lots of effective "pay drivers" because they had the cash to buy a car/fund a team?
There was some good racing, but I do worry that we sometimes have rose tinted glasses for some eras of the sport.
I wonder how the future will view the current hybrid era with those rose-tinted glasses?There was some good racing, but I do worry that we sometimes have rose tinted glasses for some eras of the sport.
thegreenhell said:
I wonder how the future will view the current hybrid era with those rose-tinted glasses?
I will remember Mercedes dominance, the utter failures in first test in 2014 and the odd good race. Along with the collapse of McLaren and Williams. Oh, and the mystery that is Alonso.
I take it he was in a number of garages over the weekend, no doubt to hide his Ferrari bias thegreenhell said:
I wonder how the future will view the current hybrid era with those rose-tinted glasses?
I've loved some of the racing over the last few years. I think there have been far duller eras in F1 than the present. And despite the Merc dominance we have had some close title fights too. Lots of boring races of course but interspersed with some absolute crackers. It has always been so in my own experience (93ish onward) or actually you might say on track action has probably been far better in recent years at least in terms of cars being able to pass each other on track. Yes, a bit contrived with DRS but still overtaking. There are certain things I'd like to see change but I think my rose tinted specs tend to blend all the best bits from recent years into one package that never truly existed at the same time. I don't remember ever being on the edge of my seat for race after race. It just doesn't happen. It's a highly technological sport that has as much unpredictability ironed out of it as possible by very clever engineers and technology.
I do worry a bit about the general following of F1 though, in the UK at least. It's a bit concerning just how niche it is becoming. It's really quite rare that I speak to anyone in real life now who is a F1 fan. Even among petrolheads, it's quite unusual. I'm working in an office at present that does a lot of R&D for the automotive industry, some of it feeding into motorsport inc. F1. The place is full of very geeky petrolheads and yet probably 10% if that watch F1. I would have had them down as prime audience.
I've seen that shift happen really quickly over the last 10 years or so. Not sure it's even just the whole Sky thing but it has put a bit of a barrier in place to restoring that interest.
Anyway, these doom and gloom posts come about every single time we have a poor race. Soon forgotten when we have a classic. And like most sports you have to have a bit of tedium to make the exciting stuff special.
Edited by Gad-Westy on Monday 15th April 18:06
Gad-Westy said:
I've loved some of the racing over the last few years. I think there have been far duller eras in F1 than the present. And despite the Merc dominance we have had some close title fights too. Lots of boring races of course but interspersed with some absolute crackers. It has always been so in my own experience (93ish onward) or actually you might say on track action has probably been far better in recent years at least in terms of cars being able to pass each other on track. Yes, a bit contrived with DRS but still overtaking.
There are certain things I'd like to see change but I think my rose tinted specs tend to blend all the best bits from recent years into one package that never truly existed at the same time. I don't remember ever being on the edge of my seat for race after race. It just doesn't happen. It's a highly technological sport that has as much unpredictability ironed out of it as possible by very clever engineers and technology.
I do worry a bit about the general following of F1 though, in the UK at least. It's a bit concerning just how niche it is becoming. It's really quite rare that I speak to anyone in real life now who is a F1 fan. Even among petrolheads, it's quite unusual. I'm working in an office at present that does a lot of R&D for the automotive industry, some of it feeding into motorsport inc. F1. The place is full of very geeky petrolheads and yet probably 10% if that watch F1. I would have had them down as prime audience.
I've seen that shift happen really quickly over the last 10 years or so. Not sure it's even just the whole Sky thing but it has put a bit of a barrier in place to restoring that interest.
Anyway, these doom and gloom posts come about every single time we have a poor race. Soon forgotten when we have a classic. And like most sports you have to have a bit of tedium to make the exciting stuff special.
Interesting !There are certain things I'd like to see change but I think my rose tinted specs tend to blend all the best bits from recent years into one package that never truly existed at the same time. I don't remember ever being on the edge of my seat for race after race. It just doesn't happen. It's a highly technological sport that has as much unpredictability ironed out of it as possible by very clever engineers and technology.
I do worry a bit about the general following of F1 though, in the UK at least. It's a bit concerning just how niche it is becoming. It's really quite rare that I speak to anyone in real life now who is a F1 fan. Even among petrolheads, it's quite unusual. I'm working in an office at present that does a lot of R&D for the automotive industry, some of it feeding into motorsport inc. F1. The place is full of very geeky petrolheads and yet probably 10% if that watch F1. I would have had them down as prime audience.
I've seen that shift happen really quickly over the last 10 years or so. Not sure it's even just the whole Sky thing but it has put a bit of a barrier in place to restoring that interest.
Anyway, these doom and gloom posts come about every single time we have a poor race. Soon forgotten when we have a classic. And like most sports you have to have a bit of tedium to make the exciting stuff special.
Edited by Gad-Westy on Monday 15th April 18:06
There was a correlation between F1 / street cars, and a layman's understanding of what constitutes a V12, V10 or V8.
Common reference points were ripe for interesting discussion.
Lift up the bonnet of most hybrid street cars and it's a sea of tupperware lids. What is it ? Where is it ?
Always people going on about when F1 was better, back in the day...
If you follow the sport in any detail you soon realise that all these 'silly rules' they impose over the years simply become part of the sport - and part of winning becomes navigating the rules as efficiently as possible. That's not an issue though as it's a team sport, and a big part of winning should be the team at large mailing the strategy and finding small obscure advantages despite the ever tightening rules and regs.
Otherwise, it would just be about which driver can go fastest - and F1 hasn't been about that for the vast majority of its life. If you want that kind of racing, other series are far better at it. F1 is a team sport.
If you follow the sport in any detail you soon realise that all these 'silly rules' they impose over the years simply become part of the sport - and part of winning becomes navigating the rules as efficiently as possible. That's not an issue though as it's a team sport, and a big part of winning should be the team at large mailing the strategy and finding small obscure advantages despite the ever tightening rules and regs.
Otherwise, it would just be about which driver can go fastest - and F1 hasn't been about that for the vast majority of its life. If you want that kind of racing, other series are far better at it. F1 is a team sport.
There is serious consideration under way that not only are Merc the best run/managed team in f1 (and possibly all time F1), but they may well be the best run sports team of all time.
They seem to have set a bar so high, let’s hope the others can follow the discipline and continual improvement shown, step up & give these guys a run for their money.
They seem to have set a bar so high, let’s hope the others can follow the discipline and continual improvement shown, step up & give these guys a run for their money.
Deesee said:
There is serious consideration under way that not only are Merc the best run/managed team in f1 (and possibly all time F1), but they may well be the best run sports team of all time.
They seem to have set a bar so high, let’s hope the others can follow the discipline and continual improvement shown, step up & give these guys a run for their money.
An example of their confidence in their own abilities - the double stack pit stop yesterday.They seem to have set a bar so high, let’s hope the others can follow the discipline and continual improvement shown, step up & give these guys a run for their money.
https://twitter.com/F1/status/1117357178791321601?...
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff