Should future seasons remain as busy as this year?
Discussion
Should the sport carry on with twin races at some circuits and triple headers? Is F1 'better' when it's compressed as it is this season?
Back in March when the curtain came down, we didn't know if we should expect any F1 this year at all. Quite ironically it not only returned soon enough, but has also proven that the teams can cope with the sort of punishing schedule that for years was said to be impractical. And it's been great having a race almost every weekend since.
I have no doubt that Liberty will be taking note of how tightly an F1 season can be packed. Also no doubt considering how popular certain guest circuits this year might be and whether they can return to the regular calendar. The calendar this season is simply more exciting than previously. It's weird, but good weird. We have three separate circuits in Italy! Weird, yes - but not a bad thing imo.
Question is... If we had, say, 22 races a year - would it be better to compress the season and fit most of them in to half of the year? Leaving the fly-aways either end of the calendar? Is weekly F1 better?
Back in March when the curtain came down, we didn't know if we should expect any F1 this year at all. Quite ironically it not only returned soon enough, but has also proven that the teams can cope with the sort of punishing schedule that for years was said to be impractical. And it's been great having a race almost every weekend since.
I have no doubt that Liberty will be taking note of how tightly an F1 season can be packed. Also no doubt considering how popular certain guest circuits this year might be and whether they can return to the regular calendar. The calendar this season is simply more exciting than previously. It's weird, but good weird. We have three separate circuits in Italy! Weird, yes - but not a bad thing imo.
Question is... If we had, say, 22 races a year - would it be better to compress the season and fit most of them in to half of the year? Leaving the fly-aways either end of the calendar? Is weekly F1 better?
DanielSan said:
It's better for everyone who isn't involved in the actual work side of things that's about it. The mechanics/engineers are going to be utterly ruined by this calendar at the end of the year. Staff in pretty much all motorsport are running under silly tight schedules at the moment,
The show should be what it needs to be to work best for the fans - and as a successful business of course. If there is an appetite for a more frantic season, it should be delivered.That might sound harsh for guys behind the scenes.. but I work with people in comparable tech and engineer jobs that spend months hopping around the globe for touring rock concerts, circus's, TV shows and so on. They'll work 16 hour days during setup and generally 12 hour days in between. In the end there's no other way so they see it as normal.
It would be a new 'normal' in F1 as there is traditionally time to travel home between most races... But clearly in other industries it can and does work.
Munter said:
If you can have something anytime, it loses its "sparkle".
This year it's unusual and therefore interesting in its own right.
Space them out, and we can look forward with anticipation to the next event.
I hear you - is there not also a benefit to the triple headers in terms of engagement though? If it's on most, not half of the Sundays during the season I think many newer viewers would become fully engaged faster.This year it's unusual and therefore interesting in its own right.
Space them out, and we can look forward with anticipation to the next event.
That's not to say that there can't be the odd multi week break. The two week breaks during triple headers this season are a reasonable length of time to get people home and rested and also build anticipation for the next rounds.
TheDeuce said:
DanielSan said:
It's better for everyone who isn't involved in the actual work side of things that's about it. The mechanics/engineers are going to be utterly ruined by this calendar at the end of the year. Staff in pretty much all motorsport are running under silly tight schedules at the moment,
The show should be what it needs to be to work best for the fans - and as a successful business of course. If there is an appetite for a more frantic season, it should be delivered.That might sound harsh for guys behind the scenes.. but I work with people in comparable tech and engineer jobs that spend months hopping around the globe for touring rock concerts, circus's, TV shows and so on. They'll work 16 hour days during setup and generally 12 hour days in between. In the end there's no other way so they see it as normal.
It would be a new 'normal' in F1 as there is traditionally time to travel home between most races... But clearly in other industries it can and does work.
It’s not just about being “nice”. Here is a list of benefits:
1. Being able to see your family is part of the “package”. Less home time may be the difference between the top people working in F1 or not. I’m not saying that alone will stop people wanting to work in F1, and yes there will be always someone else waiting to take their place, but it will likely dilute the talent pool.
2. Happy people are more motivated. The results are better.
3. Exhaustion leads to mistakes. This might just mean reduced performance, but in a sport like F1 that can lead to injury or at worse, death.
4. The teams have a moral duty to look after their manpower.
Edited by Nampahc Niloc on Friday 28th August 08:19
An important issue is to determine the point where the average viewer gets race fatigue.
A GP is supposed to be something very special. If they happen week-in and week-out they will inevitably lose their special status and become ordinary.
Perhaps the new regulations will bring about more variety in results, but watching Lewis / Mercedes win 30-times, rather than only 21, will not hold a world-wide audience for very long.
More races is only about improving income and not necessarily about improving the show.
A GP is supposed to be something very special. If they happen week-in and week-out they will inevitably lose their special status and become ordinary.
Perhaps the new regulations will bring about more variety in results, but watching Lewis / Mercedes win 30-times, rather than only 21, will not hold a world-wide audience for very long.
More races is only about improving income and not necessarily about improving the show.
rdjohn said:
An important issue is to determine the point where the average viewer gets race fatigue.
A GP is supposed to be something very special. If they happen week-in and week-out they will inevitably lose their special status and become ordinary.
Perhaps the new regulations will bring about more variety in results, but watching Lewis / Mercedes win 30-times, rather than only 21, will not hold a world-wide audience for very long.
More races is only about improving income and not necessarily about improving the show.
Hence this thread - what IS the best balance?A GP is supposed to be something very special. If they happen week-in and week-out they will inevitably lose their special status and become ordinary.
Perhaps the new regulations will bring about more variety in results, but watching Lewis / Mercedes win 30-times, rather than only 21, will not hold a world-wide audience for very long.
More races is only about improving income and not necessarily about improving the show.
I'd be happy for the intended 22 race calendar, but also happy to see triple headers to remain. Then with weeks off and the fly aways towards the end and the summer break we should get something in the order of 30-35 weeks worth of F1 entertainment still. The nice thing about the triple headers is that the events of the previous GP are still very fresh in peoples minds and stories develop across the sets of races - I suppose it appeals on the same level as binge watching a drama series on Netflix - as a loose analogy.
As for the endless Mercedes winning... What can I say? F1 has more than one area where it could be made more exciting. The Mercedes dominance will remain an issue for some viewers regardless of how often F1 is 'on'.
The best balance for whom?
The commercial rights owner are big in the entertainment business. F1 is just one income source, but it is dissimilar to say NBA league, soccer, or other PPV models that work well in the USA. I feel certain that they do want a genuine circus that turns up somewhere in the world every week, but with their global audience paying them $10 to watch the event unfold over the weekend. They have a monopoly, so I bet they see no value in FP on Fridays - it’s a cost for them.
From my perspective I see their audience split into 3-general types.
- Those of us who tend to watch most of the coverage over the weekend, participate in forums and read specialist media articles.
- A much larger group who watch the race highlights and maybe read the odd article in their daily journal.
- And then a very large group who might watch their national event and the last races if the championships are going to the wire.
My guess is that Liberty hopes to convert the 1st and 2nd groups to PPV and that more races increases revenue for them. But against that there will be even greater dumbing down of the show - more Croft and less Nico, Jensen, if you like.
And for me, therein lies the biggest problem. F1 is a highly technical sport employing, in the main, the most gifted drivers. Within 10 teams there are currently 4-divisions, but the battles within the lower teams is never played-out as well as it has been portrayed in the Netflix series. So in this context, even more of the same has little interest for me. 16-20 races per year is good.
I normally watch about 14-hours of TV each week, on a GP weekend, I can easily add another 7-hours. Ever more GPs is much more likely to cause me to watch less. Those out of my time zone are likely to be the ones that are dropped.
The commercial rights owner are big in the entertainment business. F1 is just one income source, but it is dissimilar to say NBA league, soccer, or other PPV models that work well in the USA. I feel certain that they do want a genuine circus that turns up somewhere in the world every week, but with their global audience paying them $10 to watch the event unfold over the weekend. They have a monopoly, so I bet they see no value in FP on Fridays - it’s a cost for them.
From my perspective I see their audience split into 3-general types.
- Those of us who tend to watch most of the coverage over the weekend, participate in forums and read specialist media articles.
- A much larger group who watch the race highlights and maybe read the odd article in their daily journal.
- And then a very large group who might watch their national event and the last races if the championships are going to the wire.
My guess is that Liberty hopes to convert the 1st and 2nd groups to PPV and that more races increases revenue for them. But against that there will be even greater dumbing down of the show - more Croft and less Nico, Jensen, if you like.
And for me, therein lies the biggest problem. F1 is a highly technical sport employing, in the main, the most gifted drivers. Within 10 teams there are currently 4-divisions, but the battles within the lower teams is never played-out as well as it has been portrayed in the Netflix series. So in this context, even more of the same has little interest for me. 16-20 races per year is good.
I normally watch about 14-hours of TV each week, on a GP weekend, I can easily add another 7-hours. Ever more GPs is much more likely to cause me to watch less. Those out of my time zone are likely to be the ones that are dropped.
The current compressed schedule is both enforced by and enabled by the current unusual situation. The teams are travelling light, relatively, with fewer personnel, fewer trucks and no travelling team motorhomes. This makes it easier for them pack up , travel and set up again at the next race. The lack of fans and sponsors at the track makes their life easier too, with easy access to the track, and fewer commitments during the weekend. This all makes it a lot easier for them to have so many back-to-back races.
I also agree with the comments about too many races reducing their specialness. If there are too many races then I'll just start missing some of them. I don't always have time to watch a race every weekend, especially in the summer when there's lots of other stuff to do. If there's just one race every two or three weeks, as it's been historically, then it's easier to plan viewing for. And if I start missing some races, will I then care as much about the other ones, with missing pieces of the story? It's a slippery slope.
I also agree with the comments about too many races reducing their specialness. If there are too many races then I'll just start missing some of them. I don't always have time to watch a race every weekend, especially in the summer when there's lots of other stuff to do. If there's just one race every two or three weeks, as it's been historically, then it's easier to plan viewing for. And if I start missing some races, will I then care as much about the other ones, with missing pieces of the story? It's a slippery slope.
Pericoloso said:
I am sure residents of Northamptonshire with no F1 interest would lap up 2 or 3 weekends in a row with gridlocked A43 when 100000 spectators are allowed back.
This is the nub. It's entirely possible to run a GP every weekend when the net number of people in and out amount to a few hundred. When you have to accommodate 150,000 plus, that's an entirely different matter.
StevieBee said:
Pericoloso said:
I am sure residents of Northamptonshire with no F1 interest would lap up 2 or 3 weekends in a row with gridlocked A43 when 100000 spectators are allowed back.
This is the nub. It's entirely possible to run a GP every weekend when the net number of people in and out amount to a few hundred. When you have to accommodate 150,000 plus, that's an entirely different matter.
And as with F1 teams proving they can manage repeat triple headers... If the local infrastructure can handle one Silverstone per year, it can handle two. I'm sure there is a significant if hard to measure local value to such an event - over and above the traffic jams etc. At most for any one venue it would mean causing 'chaos' (daily mail speak) twice a year as opposed to once a year.
Having mentioned the Silverstone traffic chaos , it's nothing compared to Mugello.
I have been there twice for Moto GPs , traffic at chucking out time is stationary , literally for hours .
Last year I waited from about 3pm in the field car park until 7pm before venturing out into the traffic ,which was still queuing and they had also introduced a set route to the motorway , much improved over my other visit in 2016.
Much Italian arm waving occurs in frustration.
They will not be wanting extra weekends of that.
I have been there twice for Moto GPs , traffic at chucking out time is stationary , literally for hours .
Last year I waited from about 3pm in the field car park until 7pm before venturing out into the traffic ,which was still queuing and they had also introduced a set route to the motorway , much improved over my other visit in 2016.
Much Italian arm waving occurs in frustration.
They will not be wanting extra weekends of that.
Pericoloso said:
Having mentioned the Silverstone traffic chaos , it's nothing compared to Mugello.
I have been there twice for Moto GPs , traffic at chucking out time is stationary , literally for hours .
Last year I waited from about 3pm in the field car park until 7pm before venturing out into the traffic ,which was still queuing and they had also introduced a set route to the motorway , much improved over my other visit in 2016.
Much Italian arm waving occurs in frustration.
They will not be wanting extra weekends of that.
All comes down to overall economic reasoning. If the region benefits overall, permission will follow for the event.I have been there twice for Moto GPs , traffic at chucking out time is stationary , literally for hours .
Last year I waited from about 3pm in the field car park until 7pm before venturing out into the traffic ,which was still queuing and they had also introduced a set route to the motorway , much improved over my other visit in 2016.
Much Italian arm waving occurs in frustration.
They will not be wanting extra weekends of that.
The fact it's allowed once a year suggests it's considered worth it - no matter how much it might upset the locals.
Don't forget that the circuits aren't paying for these fanless races this year. Silverstone usually struggles to break even on the GP. They won't want to be paying for a second GP at the same rate, especially as you'd never get the same number of fans at a second race a week later, not at Silverstone ticket prices.
thegreenhell said:
Don't forget that the circuits aren't paying for these fanless races this year. Silverstone usually struggles to break even on the GP. They won't want to be paying for a second GP at the same rate, especially as you'd never get the same number of fans at a second race a week later, not at Silverstone ticket prices.
Don't forget it was ultimately worth Liberty paying the circuits as the TV rights still justified the cost. I accept they won't be able to charge the usual hosting fees for double use of circuits - even with fans back in force at some point... But there is no reason that those fees can't be re-negotiated and it's pretty clear that the actual circuit hire costs even without ticket sales are worth the TV spectacle.They could for example agree a zero basic hosting fee and then take a % of ticket sales etc - it could become a mutually rewarding relationship that can scale up/down in terms of cost to support whatever volume of people wish to spectate.
thegreenhell said:
Don't forget that the circuits aren't paying for these fanless races this year. Silverstone usually struggles to break even on the GP. They won't want to be paying for a second GP at the same rate, especially as you'd never get the same number of fans at a second race a week later, not at Silverstone ticket prices.
They’ve already said they can’t afford to do another race without fans. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/formula-1/2020/08/09/s...
thegreenhell said:
The current compressed schedule is both enforced by and enabled by the current unusual situation. The teams are travelling light, relatively, with fewer personnel, fewer trucks and no travelling team motorhomes. This makes it easier for them pack up , travel and set up again at the next race. The lack of fans and sponsors at the track makes their life easier too, with easy access to the track, and fewer commitments during the weekend. This all makes it a lot easier for them to have so many back-to-back races.
I also agree with the comments about too many races reducing their specialness. If there are too many races then I'll just start missing some of them. I don't always have time to watch a race every weekend, especially in the summer when there's lots of other stuff to do. If there's just one race every two or three weeks, as it's been historically, then it's easier to plan viewing for. And if I start missing some races, will I then care as much about the other ones, with missing pieces of the story? It's a slippery slope.
Yes, they’ve done everything this year with a focus purely on getting enough races away so that everyone gets paid. I also agree with the comments about too many races reducing their specialness. If there are too many races then I'll just start missing some of them. I don't always have time to watch a race every weekend, especially in the summer when there's lots of other stuff to do. If there's just one race every two or three weeks, as it's been historically, then it's easier to plan viewing for. And if I start missing some races, will I then care as much about the other ones, with missing pieces of the story? It's a slippery slope.
Liberty are still going to book a big loss this year, although not as much as if there had been a half-hearted attempt. The teams would have all been bankrupt in that scenario too.
Almost none of the above is replicable to a ‘normal’ season.
The big remaining question now, is how close to ‘normal’ is next year going to be?
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff