Zandvoort to replace Barcleona in 2020?
Discussion
Deesee said:
Track won’t make the grade without changes.. so changes will happen..
DRS is the cheapest solution to overtaking.. I’d you can think of anything better value send Ross an email.
It really isn't complicated- massively trim the aero . But -OMG that'd reduce the advertising and that would never do . ...DRS is the cheapest solution to overtaking.. I’d you can think of anything better value send Ross an email.
DRS is like giving a boxer a set of knuckle dusters to use every third round ,and makes as little sense
coppice said:
Deesee said:
Track won’t make the grade without changes.. so changes will happen..
DRS is the cheapest solution to overtaking.. I’d you can think of anything better value send Ross an email.
It really isn't complicated- massively trim the aero . But -OMG that'd reduce the advertising and that would never do . ...DRS is the cheapest solution to overtaking.. I’d you can think of anything better value send Ross an email.
DRS is like giving a boxer a set of knuckle dusters to use every third round ,and makes as little sense
Drs is a 40k solution to a 50mill problem.
This is an aero formula at present.
Yes- and that is sort of the whole bloody problem isn't it? Add the bill for grotesquely complex engines - sorry 'power units' - to the going rate for a team of elite aerodynamic engineers and you have the reasons why only ten teams compete, nobody overtakes much (except via the DRS joker card) and yet it costs half a billion quid a year for top teams like Mercedes
coppice said:
Yes- and that is sort of the whole bloody problem isn't it? Add the bill for grotesquely complex engines - sorry 'power units' - to the going rate for a team of elite aerodynamic engineers and you have the reasons why only ten teams compete, nobody overtakes much (except via the DRS joker card) and yet it costs half a billion quid a year for top teams like Mercedes
Exactly right.Cheaper to run V8's and more exciting.
Independent teams could afford to compete.
Edited by sparta6 on Thursday 16th May 09:44
Actually , the real question is why invent a wheel that nobody remotely cares about or even likes except its creators and that costs grotesque amounts of money? And after all that brouhaha our marvellous F1 uses engines developing less power than smaller turbo engines did 30 odd years ago. They are more economical ? Deep joy , that improves the racing no end . They are more reliable ? Yes , tediously so - the odd engine grenading itself was a far better leveller than DRS . And the current crop sound crap.
Actually , I admire the technology , but it belongs at Le Mans.
F1 is about drivers in fast and scary cars , not a competition between f
king pitstop algorithms . Don't believe me - ask who won Le Mans in 1966 and the answer is Ford , not Chris Amon and Bruce McLaren . But who won the F1 championship in 1976? James Hunt.Constructors in same year ? Err ..McLaren ? Nope , Ferrari - but I had to check.
Actually , I admire the technology , but it belongs at Le Mans.
F1 is about drivers in fast and scary cars , not a competition between f
king pitstop algorithms . Don't believe me - ask who won Le Mans in 1966 and the answer is Ford , not Chris Amon and Bruce McLaren . But who won the F1 championship in 1976? James Hunt.Constructors in same year ? Err ..McLaren ? Nope , Ferrari - but I had to check. coppice said:
Actually , the real question is why invent a wheel that nobody remotely cares about or even likes except its creators and that costs grotesque amounts of money? And after all that brouhaha our marvellous F1 uses engines developing less power than smaller turbo engines did 30 odd years ago. They are more economical ? Deep joy , that improves the racing no end . They are more reliable ? Yes , tediously so - the odd engine grenading itself was a far better leveller than DRS . And the current crop sound crap.
Actually , I admire the technology , but it belongs at Le Mans.
F1 is about drivers in fast and scary cars , not a competition between fking pitstop algorithms . Don't believe me - ask who won Le Mans in 1966 and the answer is Ford , not Chris Amon and Bruce McLaren . But who won the F1 championship in 1976? James Hunt.Constructors in same year ? Err ..McLaren ? Nope , Ferrari - but I had to check.
Agree but we're not in charge unfortunately. All this 'relevance to road cars and tech filter down to road cars and relevance to daily motoring/cars, etc' is all BS. We want V12 engines that sound like thunder, big wings, big tyres and no stupid penalties for making any mistake - they're racing FFS, not doing their driving test.'Actually , I admire the technology , but it belongs at Le Mans.
F1 is about drivers in fast and scary cars , not a competition between f
king pitstop algorithms . Don't believe me - ask who won Le Mans in 1966 and the answer is Ford , not Chris Amon and Bruce McLaren . But who won the F1 championship in 1976? James Hunt.Constructors in same year ? Err ..McLaren ? Nope , Ferrari - but I had to check. 1.6 hybrid engines FFS...!
F1 needs to be seen at the edge - i.e. just about to end in disaster. That's what keeps us on the edge of our seats. That's what makes us admire the participants.
At the moment, to me, it has all the excitement of reconciling a bank account (and believe me, I know how exciting that can be). It's all too restrained and constrained - at every level.
At the moment, to me, it has all the excitement of reconciling a bank account (and believe me, I know how exciting that can be). It's all too restrained and constrained - at every level.
coppice said:
Actually , the real question is why invent a wheel that nobody remotely cares about or even likes except its creators and that costs grotesque amounts of money? And after all that brouhaha our marvellous F1 uses engines developing less power than smaller turbo engines did 30 odd years ago. They are more economical ? Deep joy , that improves the racing no end . They are more reliable ? Yes , tediously so - the odd engine grenading itself was a far better leveller than DRS . And the current crop sound crap.
Actually , I admire the technology , but it belongs at Le Mans.
F1 is about drivers in fast and scary cars , not a competition between fking pitstop algorithms . Don't believe me - ask who won Le Mans in 1966 and the answer is Ford , not Chris Amon and Bruce McLaren . But who won the F1 championship in 1976? James Hunt.Constructors in same year ? Err ..McLaren ? Nope , Ferrari - but I had to check.
But the formulas and racing series that do it your way don't have anywhere near the popularity or audience that F1 does. I fully expected the pay wall to change things causing audiences (and therefore sponsors) to fall off a cliff but they haven't. Actually , I admire the technology , but it belongs at Le Mans.
F1 is about drivers in fast and scary cars , not a competition between f
king pitstop algorithms . Don't believe me - ask who won Le Mans in 1966 and the answer is Ford , not Chris Amon and Bruce McLaren . But who won the F1 championship in 1976? James Hunt.Constructors in same year ? Err ..McLaren ? Nope , Ferrari - but I had to check. coppice said:
I am not talking about other formulae but F1 . In any case If some fans and /or manufacturers don't like it they can fk off back to the respective holes they climbed out of in the first place.
How do they pay to produce this less popular F1, that you want, if all the audience are watching something else? k off back to the respective holes they climbed out of in the first place. Graveworm said:
But the formulas and racing series that do it your way don't have anywhere near the popularity or audience that F1 does. I fully expected the pay wall to change things causing audiences (and therefore sponsors) to fall off a cliff but they haven't.
F1 is popular because it is F1, because of all those things it was, all the mystique, the bravado, the V12 and noise and thunder. That is what made F1 what it is today, and it would still be just as popular, if not more so, if it had all those elements. F1 didn't evolve into its current state because it's what anyone wanted to see. Nobody voted for this. No fans asked to ban V12s, make the cars so aero dependent that the only way they can pass each other is with an artificial aid, or penalise the drivers if their car suffered any engine or gearbox failures beyond an arbitrary limit. In fact, if F1 was still all that, and someone came along and started a brand new series with hybrids, DRS and multiple penalties for all sorts of crap, it would be as popular as.. Formula E.thegreenhell said:
F1 is popular because it is F1, because of all those things it was, all the mystique, the bravado, the V12 and noise and thunder. That is what made F1 what it is today, and it would still be just as popular, if not more so, if it had all those elements. F1 didn't evolve into its current state because it's what anyone wanted to see. Nobody voted for this. No fans asked to ban V12s, make the cars so aero dependent that the only way they can pass each other is with an artificial aid, or penalise the drivers if their car suffered any engine or gearbox failures beyond an arbitrary limit. In fact, if F1 was still all that, and someone came along and started a brand new series with hybrids, DRS and multiple penalties for all sorts of crap, it would be as popular as.. Formula E.
I miss everything you do. I am the fans they have. The ones who were and will continue to be in decline. The fans they need, want something different. https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.strong-...
Edited by Graveworm on Friday 17th May 17:06
Graveworm said:
How do they pay to produce this less popular F1, that you want, if all the audience are watching something else?
Well , for a start , it ain't going to cost half a billion quid per team . And that is a good thing. F1 teams spend every penny of what they can get , whether they need to spend it or not., . That's why front wings cost $ 100k a pop and why , presumably having pissed nearly every other cent up the wall already , BAR decided it had a pressing need to have carbon fibre bog seats in their reassuringly expensive motor home .
thegreenhell said:
F1 is popular because it is F1, because of all those things it was, all the mystique, the bravado, the V12 and noise and thunder. That is what made F1 what it is today, and it would still be just as popular, if not more so, if it had all those elements. F1 didn't evolve into its current state because it's what anyone wanted to see. Nobody voted for this. No fans asked to ban V12s, make the cars so aero dependent that the only way they can pass each other is with an artificial aid, or penalise the drivers if their car suffered any engine or gearbox failures beyond an arbitrary limit. In fact, if F1 was still all that, and someone came along and started a brand new series with hybrids, DRS and multiple penalties for all sorts of crap, it would be as popular as.. Formula E.
TV ratings have been dropping off a cliff since the Merc dominant 1.6 leaf blowers and token system.Probably not a coincidence
sparta6 said:
TV ratings have been dropping off a cliff since the Merc dominant 1.6 leaf blowers and token system.
Probably not a coincidence
Only in the UK and other new 'paywall' territories.Probably not a coincidence
I'd say the sports popularity is on the increase overall. Liberty are getting a lot right. In terms of making it popular, the sport itself could use a few serious tweaks I admit.
Vaud said:
Is there a clear reason why they picked Zandvoort rather than Assen?
History, ownership and sponsorship. History: F1 track from 1952 - 1985.
The Zandvoort track is owned by prince Bernhard van Oranje-Nassau, member of the royal family. He's backed by sponsors like Heineken, PON (owned by ex-F1 driver Ben Pon, billionaire and importer of VW/Porsche/Audi/Caterpillar/Bugatti/Continental for the NL) and the Jumbo supermarket chain (owned by the Van Eerd family. Frits van Eerd, the current CEO and billionaire, is also a collector of Minardi F1 cars and has driven LeMans twice in his own LMP2 car).
Assen is more seen and used as a motorcylce track. even though it's more modern, has a better infrastructure, higher capacity, etc.etc.
The only reason it is there is Max, he is also sponsored by Jumbo, funny that.
I think Liberty are doing a good job, paywall was not their choice, and to be honest if people are dumb enough to pay for it, you can't blame SKY for offering it, as in their eyes and Liberty's eyes the price they ask is huge, and all SKY need to do is cover that, by asking ever fewer people more and more money,m as they do with all their sport.
If it works it will go like football, numerous companies asking ever more money for the same sport, to follow it all you need both BT and SKY, and perhaps soon Amazon aswell.
Governing bodies and rights holders made this decision, but, It is fans who have done this and made it common, don't pay for it and it stops tomorrow.
You only have yourselves to blame.
I think Liberty are doing a good job, paywall was not their choice, and to be honest if people are dumb enough to pay for it, you can't blame SKY for offering it, as in their eyes and Liberty's eyes the price they ask is huge, and all SKY need to do is cover that, by asking ever fewer people more and more money,m as they do with all their sport.
If it works it will go like football, numerous companies asking ever more money for the same sport, to follow it all you need both BT and SKY, and perhaps soon Amazon aswell.
Governing bodies and rights holders made this decision, but, It is fans who have done this and made it common, don't pay for it and it stops tomorrow.
You only have yourselves to blame.
chunder27 said:
The only reason it is there is Max, he is also sponsored by Jumbo, funny that.
I think Liberty are doing a good job, paywall was not their choice, and to be honest if people are dumb enough to pay for it, you can't blame SKY for offering it, as in their eyes and Liberty's eyes the price they ask is huge, and all SKY need to do is cover that, by asking ever fewer people more and more money,m as they do with all their sport.
If it works it will go like football, numerous companies asking ever more money for the same sport, to follow it all you need both BT and SKY, and perhaps soon Amazon aswell.
Governing bodies and rights holders made this decision, but, It is fans who have done this and made it common, don't pay for it and it stops tomorrow.
You only have yourselves to blame.
Why deprive ourselves of watching the sport, when it's expected that in the future the situation will resolve itself in any case? Liberty want to sell access to view directly to viewers via their F1TV service, and they would already be offering that for a very reasonable price in the UK if it were not for the Sky deal.I think Liberty are doing a good job, paywall was not their choice, and to be honest if people are dumb enough to pay for it, you can't blame SKY for offering it, as in their eyes and Liberty's eyes the price they ask is huge, and all SKY need to do is cover that, by asking ever fewer people more and more money,m as they do with all their sport.
If it works it will go like football, numerous companies asking ever more money for the same sport, to follow it all you need both BT and SKY, and perhaps soon Amazon aswell.
Governing bodies and rights holders made this decision, but, It is fans who have done this and made it common, don't pay for it and it stops tomorrow.
You only have yourselves to blame.
I also would expect Liberty to wish a return of every second race on FTA at that point too, as that is the best way to get people to pay for the other 50% - without hiding the entire sport behind a paywall as sky have done.
I don't like sky/Murdoch. I wish it were different. But I pay (via nowTV) as there is no other alternative, taking into account that F1 is more of a positive factor in my life than Sky/Murdoch/money is a negative one.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff