Is F1 too easy/safe?

[davidd]

Just following Lewis saying that the cars are now easy to drive and very young drivers are instantly up to speed. Also, Max in an interview last week saying that it doesn't really matter if he hits the barriers (or words to that effect, it was on the Chris Evans radio show).

I don't want to get back to drivers being killed and I love the technological progress but this all feels a little clinical., easy. No jeopardy.

[StevieBee]

It's all relative.

You only have to look at the physique of drivers today compared to say, the 80s, to see that a completely different type of strength is required to drive them. Imagine hauling a car through Eau Rouge at full tilt with no power steering!!

But the G-forces today are greater and the array of setting options available to driver requires a completely different set of skills to the past.

Safer - yes, undoubtedly. Safe? Never.

Max may be all gung-ho about sticking into the barrier but ask him the same question when he's planted it in at 200 mph or cart-wheeled down a straight having tagged a slow running car in front.

I do think drivers arrive in F1 too soon but that is less about their ability to drive an F1 car and more about devaluing the junior formulae and the fact that many drivers (such Max) do their growing up on the most public stage possible. How much better would he be had he had a year or two in F2?

[anonymous-user]

YES. The best sports require a real physical challlenge. Nobody seems to be recovering from exhaustion when they leap out of an F1 car. It's an XBox session. Even footballers are exhausted after 90mins.

YES. There is no jeorpardy in getting it wrong and hitting a barrier.
Drivers have no fear about making clumsy moves.

Ross Brawn needs to at least make the cars more physically challenging.

[anonymous-user]

StevieBee said:

or cart-wheeled down a straight having tagged a slow running car in front.

Webber did that.
Alonso did that.

Both walked away.

[sgtBerbatov]

I'd say it's gone too easy, I wouldn't say it's gotten too safe. I mean, the odd broken leg wouldn't hurt but no one wants repeats of 1994 for example.

I'd like to see power steering banned from the cars, and steering wheels more akin to those used by McLaren in 1998. I think the removal of those two things would increase the difficulty of driving the cars.

[StevieBee]

Bo_apex said:

StevieBee said:

or cart-wheeled down a straight having tagged a slow running car in front.

Webber did that.
Alonso did that.

Both walked away.

And both have a very different view to how safe the sport is compared to Max.

As I say, it's much safer than it was but will never be a 'safe' sport for as long as you have people driving exceptionally fast moving objects alongside others.

[Monkeylegend]

Qualifying is probably the most difficult time when they are all driving at maximum, but how can it not be easy when their race laps are something like 5/6 seconds slower as they were for most at Monaco.

It makes a mockery of what I am sure most would want F1 to be, a race against drivers, driving their cars to the max of theirs and the cars performance, with no team orders, instead of what we get now, controlled racing well within the performance window of both cars and drivers because of strategy and tyre management.

The only exciting bit is when Ferrari and occasionally Mercedes cock up their tyre changes and pit timings.

I haven't bothered to watch a single race for the first time this season, watching my grass grow is more exciting and less predictable.

I long for the day when it is flat out racing from start to finish, no holds barred, and not tyre management dependant. The trouble with that is that there would be an even bigger gulf between the top three teams and the rest, a bit like the premier league.

So in summary I would agree it is to safe and too easy, no need for all that crap I just posted

[anonymous-user]

Ch4 did a comparison of ayrton senna and LH quali laps round monaco on the sunday broadcast, what was apparent was how hard senna had to work to get the car round, and how less controlled it was, whereas LH looked like he was on a PS4

[Drumroll]

Bo_apex said:

YES. The best sports require a real physical challlenge. Nobody seems to be recovering from exhaustion when they leap out of an F1 car. It's an XBox session. Even footballers are exhausted after 90mins.

YES. There is no jeorpardy in getting it wrong and hitting a barrier.
Drivers have no fear about making clumsy moves.

Ross Brawn needs to at least make the cars more physically challenging.

Maybe the reason drivers aren't exhausted is they are a lot fitter, than they ever used to be.

A "clumsy" move could still end up killing a driver, there is only so much protection you can give to the human body.

[//j17]

I think the cars are about right, it's the circuits that are wrong.

Much as I dislike street circuits they do punish driver mistakes. Too many purpose built circuits now have run-off areas that don't really lose you any significant lap time and leaving the track isn't punished anything like enough. I like the 'magic cone' some circuits have added, forcing drivers who go off circuit to follow a clearly slower route to rejoin - the drivers can push as hard as they like but know the penalty for pushing too hard. I'd also like to see track limit sensors that automatically issue penalties if drivers leave the race track. Sure some people will say "It effects the race and X was only JUST 4 wheels over the white line". My response is "When was the last time you saw someone put 2, let alone 4 wheels over the while lines in Monacco...?".

[anonymous-user]

Bo_apex said:

YES. The best sports require a real physical challlenge. Nobody seems to be recovering from exhaustion when they leap out of an F1 car. It's an XBox session. Even footballers are exhausted after 90mins.

YES. There is no jeorpardy in getting it wrong and hitting a barrier.
Drivers have no fear about making clumsy moves.

Ross Brawn needs to at least make the cars more physically challenging.

From a G-force perspective, the cars achieve greater cornering G than any other era of F1. The perceived 'lack of effort' involved in driving them stems from the tyre and fuel management we so often see in races these days. I recall one race either at the start of 2018, or perhaps 2017, when Ferrari had Merc on the ropes and Hamilton was putting in 110% all race, which was clearly audible in the heavy breathing on team radio. It was the first time in the modern era where there's the equivalent of a Skype chat happening via radio, that it was clear it wasn't all plain sailing and a driver was on the limit for a duration longer than a single qualifying lap.

If they had the tyre to do it, and fuel usage & engine allocation wasn't an issue, they'd be forced to put in qualifying laps for 2 hours, and then you'll see 20 exhausted, heavily dehydrated drivers each weekend.

I agree regarding the actual safety - the cars are safer than previous decades, and technology such as HANS and crash helmets have come on leaps and bounds, but it's always assumed a fatality will result from a high speed accident, when a lot of the time, a 'relatively' low speed shunt with a sudden stop has as much chance of causing brain trauma, and no amount of safety kit on the car can stop a human brain getting rattled around and damaged.

The cars are quite safe, but a driver could still get killed in some circumstances. I wouldn't advocate implementing anything that made them more dangerous, just to appease some sort of gladiatorial desire onlookers might have.

[carinaman]

After the Max and Bottas incident in the pitlane?

[thegreenhell]

Whatever the reality of how easy the cars are to drive, or how safe the sport now is, the fact is that it looks too easy and too safe from the outside. It's lost a lot of the wow factor and jeopardy that used to exist in the sport.

[Eric Mc]

Drumroll said:

Maybe the reason drivers aren't exhausted is they are a lot fitter, than they ever used to be.

A "clumsy" move could still end up killing a driver, there is only so much protection you can give to the human body.

I would say that fitness levels have been fairly high going back at least 30 years.

Back in the 50s, 60s and 70s I would say, yes, drivers were not as fit as they became later. Although Stirling Moss always said that they were as fit as they needed to be given the types of cars and circuits they were racing on. He said they may not have worked out to build up their physique (as drivers have done since the mid to late 80s) but they did need more stamina in that the races were a MINIMUM of THREE hours over courses that needed massive concentration as one error could be fatal.

I can remember Nelson Piquet and Nigel Mansell collapsing after tough races through physical or heat exhaustion. That never happens now.

[anonymous-user]

NFC 85 Vette said:

From a G-force perspective, the cars achieve greater cornering G than any other era of F1. The perceived 'lack of effort' involved in driving them stems from the tyre and fuel management we so often see in races these days. I recall one race either at the start of 2018, or perhaps 2017, when Ferrari had Merc on the ropes and Hamilton was putting in 110% all race, which was clearly audible in the heavy breathing on team radio. It was the first time in the modern era where there's the equivalent of a Skype chat happening via radio, that it was clear it wasn't all plain sailing and a driver was on the limit for a duration longer than a single qualifying lap.

If they had the tyre to do it, and fuel usage & engine allocation wasn't an issue, they'd be forced to put in qualifying laps for 2 hours, and then you'll see 20 exhausted, heavily dehydrated drivers each weekend.

I agree regarding the actual safety - the cars are safer than previous decades, and technology such as HANS and crash helmets have come on leaps and bounds, but it's always assumed a fatality will result from a high speed accident, when a lot of the time, a 'relatively' low speed shunt with a sudden stop has as much chance of causing brain trauma, and no amount of safety kit on the car can stop a human brain getting rattled around and damaged.

The cars are quite safe, but a driver could still get killed in some circumstances. I wouldn't advocate implementing anything that made them more dangerous, just to appease some sort of gladiatorial desire onlookers might have.

I agree that G-Forces are higher although they now have neck rests and power steering. We can acheive similar G-Forces at Alton Towers but that doesn't make it a sporting achievement. Previously a Mike Tyson neck was required to last race distance.

Pirelli could easily produce a tyre that lasts, which would also provide F1 with better Green Credentials that it seems to desire !

The cars themselves are bulletproof now.

The tragedy of the Bianchi incident was Race Control allowing cars to circulate while a JCB can be hit.
Races should always be paused while trucks are exposed to cars.

There are far more dangerous mainstream sports. Rugby alone had 3 deaths in 5 months last year, in addition to hundreds of broken bones, concussion and torn ligaments.

I'm off to the TT tomorrow. Another level of racing altogether

[dgmx5]

carinaman said:

After the Max and Bottas incident in the pitlane?

Pretty horrendous and a 5 second time penalty was not sufficient.

Then in F2, several cars took to the pit lane at Sainte Devote on the 1st lap and got a 10 second time penalty. The cynical would observe that leapfrogging several cars into Turn 1 would be worth a 10 second penalty for track position.

Compare with the penalties in the Indy500 at the weekend; but also compare the four, extremely serious pit lane incidents including hitting one guy, amazingly not taking out another with a tyre that was bouncing across the pit lane and back again, and losing control and spinning the car under braking entering into the pit lane. It was carnage compared with F1.

But I do miss the gravel traps, which I was happy to see removed because run off areas are safer, because of the inherent jeopardy they bring such that small mistakes can mean the end of a race (Hakkinen at Monza the most notable) and ensure there is uncertainty even with the dominant display.

Edited by dgmx5 on Wednesday 29th May 11:48

[TheDeuce]

Bo_apex said:

I agree that G-Forces are higher although they now have neck rests and power steering. We can acheive similar G-Forces at Alton Towers but that doesn't make it a sporting achievement. Previously a Mike Tyson neck was required to last race distance.

The highest g-force on any coaster is about 6g and it's fleeting. Many people do struggle. F1 drives can spend 90 minutes being exposed to such force several times a minute. It's really quite a significant challenge and does require and immense level of strength and stamina.

It's a shame it's impossible for viewers to appreciate. It is a sporting achievement really, just a kind of invisible one.

[Eric Mc]

And that is the problem. No matter how incredible the drivers or cars may be - they don't LOOK incredible. And, at the end of the day, we are spectators wanting a spectacle (the two words are linked).

Knowing something is only part of the appreciation. For a spectator, SEEING the drama is what matters.

[TheDeuce]

Eric Mc said:

And that is the problem. No matter how incredible the drivers or cars may be - they don't LOOK incredible. And, at the end of the day, we are spectators wanting a spectacle (the two words are linked).

Knowing something is only part of the appreciation. For a spectator, SEEING the drama is what matters.

That's a very reasonable conclusion.

There is a conflict at play in F1, there always has been, but as the sport evolves, the conflict grows. It's a team sport, which includes development of each car. As the cars develop, to go faster (it's a race after all), inevitably engineers want the car to be smooth, composed, dependable. The older, more basic cars used to skip and shuffle through the corners, all very dramatic with a V10 lump slung out the back screaming away - but as race car, for the job of carrying the best team over the line first, today's cars/drivers are better - they are higher achievers in terms of pure sporting ability.

In a nutshell, decades of experience, development and technology have led to cars/drivers that can do the job better, more efficiently. That is a route that every F1 team since day one has sought - it's an end goal that has always been in place. Unfortunately, the better they get at it, the less of it we can appreciate and the lesser the overall spectacle.

I don't know if there is an answer - other than artificially forcing less advanced cars, which isn't very 'F1' really. Bringing back the g-meter could help. Perhaps also share brake/tyre temps (the teams may disagree..) and any other way to visually translate to the viewer what the car/driver are going through. The drivers heart rate..!?

It's a tough problem. I think probably the solution is to find new ways of translating the spectacle to the viewers. Maybe needs some radical and fresh thinking. The spectacle is still there, it's just hard to see..

[anonymous-user]

Bo_apex said:

I agree that G-Forces are higher although they now have neck rests and power steering. We can acheive similar G-Forces at Alton Towers but that doesn't make it a sporting achievement. Previously a Mike Tyson neck was required to last race distance.

Pirelli could easily produce a tyre that lasts, which would also provide F1 with better Green Credentials that it seems to desire !

The cars themselves are bulletproof now.

The tragedy of the Bianchi incident was Race Control allowing cars to circulate while a JCB can be hit.
Races should always be paused while trucks are exposed to cars.

There are far more dangerous mainstream sports. Rugby alone had 3 deaths in 5 months last year, in addition to hundreds of broken bones, concussion and torn ligaments.

I'm off to the TT tomorrow. Another level of racing altogether

We've become very indifferent about the physical endurance aspect of F1 - how that's meant to be better portrayed to viewers, who knows - the G-force meter on the TV graphics should explain some of it, but it's difficult to portray to spectators by other means. Short of getting rid of harnesses and have the drivers hold themselves in the car, there's no way of showing how physical driving an F1 car is, but that's a suicidal notion.

Quite what the cars should be for entertainment's sake vs what they're perceived to be as the technological pinnacle of racing, is another discussion, the two are branches of the same tree. The very quickest cars are the ones that get the job done with the least visible fuss, so they can often look a bit underwhelming to watch.

I think if viewers want to see something more dangerous involving cars, they ought to watch other motor sports - Fuel Funny Cars and Fuel Altereds are the answer perhaps. I had plenty of fires, burns and trips to the medical centre to satisfy the strange fascination some viewers have of seeing drivers getting damaged