F1 has become farcical hasnt it
Discussion
I'm a Verstappen fan. I think his dad must be the proudest parent on the planet. Max makes F1 exciting to watch and yesterday I really wanted to see him finish with enough points to take second place in the championship.
Yet I was really happy with the race.
Pulling back 20s in 20 laps is proper racing.
The Lewis will-he won't-he made it properly exciting. The "Max will be out of tyres" "So will I" introduced proper jeopardy. Mercedes deserved that.
The contrast between France and the last few races is enormous. I've just been looking at ticket prices for Monza.
So I disagree with the premise of the rant, but can see the logic. I'll give it a 3/10.
Yet I was really happy with the race.
Pulling back 20s in 20 laps is proper racing.
The Lewis will-he won't-he made it properly exciting. The "Max will be out of tyres" "So will I" introduced proper jeopardy. Mercedes deserved that.
The contrast between France and the last few races is enormous. I've just been looking at ticket prices for Monza.
So I disagree with the premise of the rant, but can see the logic. I'll give it a 3/10.
bordseye said:
Sunday's race wasnt decided by who made the best car or who was the fastest driver but who managed the tyres best.
Managing tyres to suit a race strategy is part and parcel of racing.Pirelli has taken a critical battering in the last 7/8years. It was refreshing in its first year or so; F1 was boring because it was regarded as easy to drive flat out not having to manage their car.
I don't think the narrow gauge tyres are as bad as some make them out to be. The recent spate of great races have exemplified that you can push and attack on these tyres: Max's storming drive to win in Austria, Max and Charlie going at it hammer and tongs for 20 laps at Silverstone, Lewis's barnstorming final stint at Hungary.
Yes some teams will struggle more than others it happens in every race series which goes to show F1 isn't as homogeneous as its easy to think/appear.
bordseye said:
To enable overtaking there is the false arrangement of aero. Why dont they just tell the leading driver to slow so that the following driver gets to overtake - it would save on spoiler costs?
Arguably a necessary evil. How often over years and decades, even various categories have you heard of the dreaded dirty air? Grounds effect isn't a silver bullet. Even something as simple and agricultural as NASCAR suffers and has messed with its aero package in the past couple of years.bordseye said:
Then they make the competition unfair by allowing bottomless budgets for three teams and forcing others to scrabble for money.
Been like that for years with best teams getting best prize money; reigns and empires never last forever - we just don't know when.bordseye said:
Whereas F1 used to be about engineering and driver skill
RBR improved performance with new bargeboards likewise Williams; Max & Russel extracting more or less peak performance out their respective cars.bordseye said:
How long before we get pro / celeb racing in F1?
Can't see it happening, TBH.kambites said:
I think this season has, so far, been the most entertaining I can remember in the 20+ years I've been watching F1. 09 because of Brawn
10 because of the down to the last race and the intra-RB fights
16 because of the down to the last race and the intra-Mercedes fights
This year will probably give us better races (yay) but also still be dominant when the curtain falls for Lewis.
Just by reading here you can see why F1 works, for me sadly.
Two great races, one great one and everything is amazing. yet before that it was dire for a while.
Yet read here, some are switching off, some think it's the best it has ever been. I find that farcical.
All I want is drivers driving 100% all the time so their ability, endurance, fitness and skill are tested all race.
I do not feel that right now, I feel a GT3 or LMP2 driver in Blancpain or especially WEC type racing the world over works harder, WRC drivers work harder, Indy car drivers work harder as they are pushed in multiple types of racing, but the field quality is less.
Driver skill is less evident, it is clear who has it and who can show it, but the nose is just peering over the wall when in the past you could see the head too.
Two great races, one great one and everything is amazing. yet before that it was dire for a while.
Yet read here, some are switching off, some think it's the best it has ever been. I find that farcical.
All I want is drivers driving 100% all the time so their ability, endurance, fitness and skill are tested all race.
I do not feel that right now, I feel a GT3 or LMP2 driver in Blancpain or especially WEC type racing the world over works harder, WRC drivers work harder, Indy car drivers work harder as they are pushed in multiple types of racing, but the field quality is less.
Driver skill is less evident, it is clear who has it and who can show it, but the nose is just peering over the wall when in the past you could see the head too.
I thought Merc made a great call and great use of tyres to overcome a problem where the cars and drivers were too evenly matched. Brilliant.
IIRC, Schumacher/Ferrari once did a crazy four-stop strategy when he couldn't pass Alonso and, like Lewis this time, had to consistently hammer home blazing laps.
I like a good moan about the hybrid era, but it's hard to say that this year hasn't been entertaining. It's just a shame Ferrari haven't been able to maintain a challenge.
IIRC, Schumacher/Ferrari once did a crazy four-stop strategy when he couldn't pass Alonso and, like Lewis this time, had to consistently hammer home blazing laps.
I like a good moan about the hybrid era, but it's hard to say that this year hasn't been entertaining. It's just a shame Ferrari haven't been able to maintain a challenge.
What a load of b
ks.
All teams/drivers have the same to deal with, regardless if it's a tricky corner, a wet track or artificially flawed tyres. There is no difference in the challenge of the driver and teams ability to cope with any of these things.
The purpose of these GP's is to identify who copes best on the day. Job done, we have our answer. We also have 21 races per year which is more than enough to average out lucky or circumstantial wins and make damn sure the best competitors overall are identified.
If you don't trust the process, why even watch?
ks.All teams/drivers have the same to deal with, regardless if it's a tricky corner, a wet track or artificially flawed tyres. There is no difference in the challenge of the driver and teams ability to cope with any of these things.
The purpose of these GP's is to identify who copes best on the day. Job done, we have our answer. We also have 21 races per year which is more than enough to average out lucky or circumstantial wins and make damn sure the best competitors overall are identified.
If you don't trust the process, why even watch?
chunder27 said:
Just by reading here you can see why F1 works, for me sadly.
Two great races, one great one and everything is amazing. yet before that it was dire for a while.
Yet read here, some are switching off, some think it's the best it has ever been. I find that farcical.
All I want is drivers driving 100% all the time so their ability, endurance, fitness and skill are tested all race.
I do not feel that right now, I feel a GT3 or LMP2 driver in Blancpain or especially WEC type racing the world over works harder, WRC drivers work harder, Indy car drivers work harder as they are pushed in multiple types of racing, but the field quality is less.
Driver skill is less evident, it is clear who has it and who can show it, but the nose is just peering over the wall when in the past you could see the head too.
Why do you find this farcical? It goes to show how binary F1 is and as one of the world's top sports probably suffers most from rose tinted perspectives. Two great races, one great one and everything is amazing. yet before that it was dire for a while.
Yet read here, some are switching off, some think it's the best it has ever been. I find that farcical.
All I want is drivers driving 100% all the time so their ability, endurance, fitness and skill are tested all race.
I do not feel that right now, I feel a GT3 or LMP2 driver in Blancpain or especially WEC type racing the world over works harder, WRC drivers work harder, Indy car drivers work harder as they are pushed in multiple types of racing, but the field quality is less.
Driver skill is less evident, it is clear who has it and who can show it, but the nose is just peering over the wall when in the past you could see the head too.
F1 is generally boring to watch. There's more boring races than good ones so you treasure the best moments that occur.
What do you mean by driver skill? You do know that top level endurance race cars have driver aids and driver ratings platinum, gold, silver, bronze simply to distinguish experience/level/gentleman driver, etc. Even when WEC was once regarded as better than F1 a few years ago the P1 hybrids were having to lift & coast like their F1 counterparts.
The 2014 F1 cars weren't universally liked by the drivers even though they were spectacular to watch in an old-school way eg. Hamilton having to put opposite lock up Eau Rouge. The drivers wanted to bring back more downforce and be physically tested more so now, today, drivers have bulked up to deal with the increased G-loads.
Have you heard the recent Motorsport Magazine podcast with Sir Chris Hoy? He made an interesting point about physical side of the sport. It's not the physical man-handling a car side that's challenging its the mental concentration and having extra mental capacity to the extent the stress induced creates physical exertion.
To be honest, I've given up watch F1 and Moto GP.
I just don't find it as captivating as it once was.
I'm happy to concede that it might be me just growing old, but w watch some old 500cc racing on YT a few days ago and the racing seemed far more competitive and closer.
Racing today just seems to clinical.
I just don't find it as captivating as it once was.
I'm happy to concede that it might be me just growing old, but w watch some old 500cc racing on YT a few days ago and the racing seemed far more competitive and closer.
Racing today just seems to clinical.
Last year (I think) I wrote a long diatribe about how everyone has a major case of rose-tinted glasses about the so called hey day of F1 in the late 80's and early 90's and how it was some sort of amazing product that people lapped up. Believe me it wasn't.
Cars often finished double digit seconds behind each other. 1/3 of the field often retired with mechanical issues. It wasn't unheard of for only three or four cars to be on the lead lap.
Britain 1985. Mansell, Senna, Prost, Rosberg, Lauda. The times people rave about. Prost finished a lap ahead of second. A whole lap! If you don't think Alain was nursing his car like fking buggery for 3/4 of the race then you don't know F1 at all.
Brazil 1989. TWELVE cars retired and 6 were on the lead lap.
Brazil 1992 TWO cars finished on the lead lap. TWO!. The gap? 29.330 seconds. Enthralling I'm, sure you'll agree. SIXTEEN cars retired. That's more than finished the race!
1995 British GP. Five cars finished on the lead lap. The last points paying position, 6th, was a lap down! Farcical!
Lets jump ahead, 2005 British GP. . Cars were getting more reliable it's true, but the gulf in money was also taking it's toll. Nine cars finished on the lead lap.
This year's GP 13 cars finished on the lead lap. There were three retirements. The Hass's crashed into each other (
) and Giovanazzi spun and retired. Reliability is streets ahead of where it used to be compared to even ten years ago. F1 wasn't 'better' then. Some just wear pink glasses and only remember the brief on-track fights that were sporadic in the extreme.
F1 wasn't 'better' by any stretch of the imagination back then. It was utter st compared to now. Races were more a test of reliability than driver performance. Cars were constantly babied, tyres too. All this talk of 'they raced flat out back then!' is utter horse st. And why does Murray get a free pass for making mistakes (and he made several per race) but when Crofty mixes up a car where the driver is hardly even visible behind the Halo everyone wants to rip him to shreds?
Cars often finished double digit seconds behind each other. 1/3 of the field often retired with mechanical issues. It wasn't unheard of for only three or four cars to be on the lead lap.
Britain 1985. Mansell, Senna, Prost, Rosberg, Lauda. The times people rave about. Prost finished a lap ahead of second. A whole lap! If you don't think Alain was nursing his car like f
king buggery for 3/4 of the race then you don't know F1 at all. Brazil 1989. TWELVE cars retired and 6 were on the lead lap.
Brazil 1992 TWO cars finished on the lead lap. TWO!. The gap? 29.330 seconds. Enthralling I'm, sure you'll agree. SIXTEEN cars retired. That's more than finished the race!
1995 British GP. Five cars finished on the lead lap. The last points paying position, 6th, was a lap down! Farcical!
Lets jump ahead, 2005 British GP. . Cars were getting more reliable it's true, but the gulf in money was also taking it's toll. Nine cars finished on the lead lap.
This year's GP 13 cars finished on the lead lap. There were three retirements. The Hass's crashed into each other (
) and Giovanazzi spun and retired. Reliability is streets ahead of where it used to be compared to even ten years ago. F1 wasn't 'better' then. Some just wear pink glasses and only remember the brief on-track fights that were sporadic in the extreme.F1 wasn't 'better' by any stretch of the imagination back then. It was utter s
t compared to now. Races were more a test of reliability than driver performance. Cars were constantly babied, tyres too. All this talk of 'they raced flat out back then!' is utter horse st. And why does Murray get a free pass for making mistakes (and he made several per race) but when Crofty mixes up a car where the driver is hardly even visible behind the Halo everyone wants to rip him to shreds?Edited by MissChief on Friday 31st January 22:12
Surely this race wasnt about preserving tyres?
At least not for the winner, he pitted whilst his tyres were still fast for another set so he could go at the same speed till the end.
Conversely Verstappen was in a strategy that needed conservation and they didnt last.
Isn't it better that the guy that aims to go fast lap after lap wins compared to the guy going for an eco run?
People view F1 with rose tinted glasses, the racing back in the 90s and 2000s was rarely close at the front. Didnt McLaren lap the entire field on the opening race weekend one year?
At least not for the winner, he pitted whilst his tyres were still fast for another set so he could go at the same speed till the end.
Conversely Verstappen was in a strategy that needed conservation and they didnt last.
Isn't it better that the guy that aims to go fast lap after lap wins compared to the guy going for an eco run?
People view F1 with rose tinted glasses, the racing back in the 90s and 2000s was rarely close at the front. Didnt McLaren lap the entire field on the opening race weekend one year?
Drumroll said:
clearly the OP knows nothing about motorsport and it's history. Tyres have always played a part in motor racing. Go back to the beginning when mechanics used to ride in the cars, they nearly all carried 2 spare wheels. Even in series with a control tyre, some teams do better than others. In part it is tied up with how they manged the tyres often a combination of engineering (tracking, camber etc) and driving style.
Most of the responses have been reasonable arguments but this one is nonsense. I've been watching F1 since the tail end of Vanwall racing, right through the likes of BRM and Lotus up to the present day. Not to mention local club circuit racing. le Mans etc. How long have you been into F1?Current F1 is entirely false. In the early days, it was all about engineering and driver ability / courage. There was real innovation such as the move to rear engines, ground effect, and we even had a period of competition between teams with different sized engines. Tyres were free. Fuel stops allowed.
So what do we have now? A set of rules designed to be so tight that only those with a mega budget can engineer in a tiny advantage. The result is cars that cannot overtakes so we have false overtaking assistance with DRS. No competition between tyre companies and instead tyres engineered to fail safely after not much use.
How can this be the pinacle of motor sport
And dont get me started on le Mans and the farce of prototypes which arent remotely prototypes
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff