How useless is F1 nowadays???
14 November 2010, 07:08 PM
#34
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Newmarket
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F1 serves as a "spectacle" with plenty of sound, colour, "exotic" locations, pretty girls.
It serves as a showcase of technological advances.
It serves as a "race" by the Oxford English Dictionary definition: a competition between runners, horses, vehicles, etc. to see which is the fastest in covering a set course…
What it doesn't provide regularly enough, is excitement. Today was a case in point.
14 November 2010, 07:27 PM
#35
Scooby Regular
ALL the new circuits are awful for racing. Yes, they may have very plush and spectacular paddocks, pits and executive ******** tickling suites, but the tracks remove all potential for thrilling and dynamic racing. The races worth watching are always on the older tracks, Brazil, Spa, Monza etc. Even Canada which is a street circuit really is a stunning track for racers. Maybe they should elect Nankang as the tyre supplier for next year, anyone who can control a car at speed on those would be worthy of the F1 crown 
14 November 2010, 07:37 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dull White BMW
Posts: 5,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I appreciate that the cars are exquisitely engineered to an atmospheric standard.
However, close, seat of the pants racing where there is the potential for the lead to change at least once is what most people, me included, want to see.
Today's race should have been much better but I accept that the bland circuit was to blame.
Steve
However, close, seat of the pants racing where there is the potential for the lead to change at least once is what most people, me included, want to see.
Today's race should have been much better but I accept that the bland circuit was to blame.
Steve
14 November 2010, 07:39 PM
#37
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Moved to the Darkside
Posts: 5,034
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your contribution was so much better
It was in humour if you quoted it properly, I take it you watched the race today?
You'd have a heart attack if you read some of the contributions on the muslim based threads
It was in humour if you quoted it properly, I take it you watched the race today?
You'd have a heart attack if you read some of the contributions on the muslim based threads
14 November 2010, 07:45 PM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here, There, Everywhere
Posts: 10,619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go back to straight forward wings, and re-introduce active suspension, and watch the specticle improve dramatically.
Go back past the last 10 years. The battles between Senna / Prost / Mansell etc. When cars could follow each other closely. You saw overtaking, and wheel to wheel action.
F1 is ruined by the aero packages. They introduces slick tyres back to halp the situation. It did. Now they can get to within 1 second of the car in front, rather than 2 seconds.
.Conclusion.
Tracks are fine.
Cars are cr4p.
14 November 2010, 07:53 PM
#39
as above, go to yas marina and watch some of the other racing classes go at it, lots and lots of overtaking.
The F1 cars themselves are what make it impossible to overtake, cant get close enough because you lose all downforce.
They need to bring back ground effect aero.
The F1 cars themselves are what make it impossible to overtake, cant get close enough because you lose all downforce.
They need to bring back ground effect aero.
14 November 2010, 07:55 PM
#41
Scooby Regular
For me, give them crap tyres so going fast is a true test of ability. Bring back fuelling to add some mystery and strategy back. Introduce sprinklers so every race has a wet phase. And plough some of the bi££ion$ into changing the bland new tracks to get some racing.
14 November 2010, 08:31 PM
#42
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: My turbo blows, air lots of it!!
Posts: 9,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
14 November 2010, 08:51 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: My turbo blows, air lots of it!!
Posts: 9,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats maybe youre conclusion, but it does not mean your are right.
Thats right, go back ten years before these new tracks came on the go and it was alot better I agree, I blame the new tracks more than the cars TBH, look at older tracks like Spa, Interlagos etc they all tend to follow the natural curvature of the area wilh hills blind corners etc, these new tracks are as flat as posh spices ****
All of these new tracks are designed by the same bloke, Herman Tilke. All of these new tracks are basically crap when it comes to overtaking, why is it that some tracks the cars can overtake at yet others they cant despite them having the same aero package?
Thats right, go back ten years before these new tracks came on the go and it was alot better I agree, I blame the new tracks more than the cars TBH, look at older tracks like Spa, Interlagos etc they all tend to follow the natural curvature of the area wilh hills blind corners etc, these new tracks are as flat as posh spices ****
All of these new tracks are designed by the same bloke, Herman Tilke. All of these new tracks are basically crap when it comes to overtaking, why is it that some tracks the cars can overtake at yet others they cant despite them having the same aero package?
14 November 2010, 09:23 PM
#44
Scooby Regular
You need to force the cars to slow to a point where the aerodynamics don't affect the following car. Factor in the angle of attack and wind direction, and some slow speed corners are more suited to a challenge. You need a sequence of bends laid out so different lines can be used to good effect. All tracks need a mix of a bit of straight for some slip-streaming, some big braking zones for the game of chicken, and complex sequences to challenge the cars dynamics and drivers ability.
What was that BS I heard today about the tunnel at Abu being a clever solution to the awkward positioning of the pit-lane
It was a brand new circuit with an unlimited pot of cash for its creation. The only complexity in its design is there by choice. I'd wager that the tunnel was added as a gimmick to give the track some unique identity. They could easily have designed the track without it.
Agree with the above about following the lie of the land. The best corners on the best circuits in the world involve peaks, crests and dips within the corners. Look at Eau Rouge (Spa), The Corkscrew (Laguna Seca), Interlagos, or even the diminutive Cadwell Park circuit (I know, not all GP tracks), but all brilliant due to not being flat.
What was that BS I heard today about the tunnel at Abu being a clever solution to the awkward positioning of the pit-lane
It was a brand new circuit with an unlimited pot of cash for its creation. The only complexity in its design is there by choice. I'd wager that the tunnel was added as a gimmick to give the track some unique identity. They could easily have designed the track without it.Agree with the above about following the lie of the land. The best corners on the best circuits in the world involve peaks, crests and dips within the corners. Look at Eau Rouge (Spa), The Corkscrew (Laguna Seca), Interlagos, or even the diminutive Cadwell Park circuit (I know, not all GP tracks), but all brilliant due to not being flat.
14 November 2010, 09:38 PM
#46
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The other issue is as always the amount of aero on the cars. The FIA insist on reducing wing sizes, banning diffusers etc. and the engineers just find another way to replace the aero effect. A far better solution would be to stick a sensor on the car with a data logger and stipulate that no car may produce more than 1G (say) of downforce max. End of aero generated grip advantages.
How hard can it be?
14 November 2010, 09:43 PM
#48
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: My turbo blows, air lots of it!!
Posts: 9,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
14 November 2010, 09:44 PM
#49
Scooby Regular
engineers just find another way to replace the aero effect. A far better solution would be to stick a sensor on the car with a data logger and stipulate that no car may produce more than 1G (say) of downforce max. End of aero generated grip advantages. How hard can it be?
How hard can it be?
14 November 2010, 10:05 PM
#51
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With a max figure that they would all achieve easily, they would focus more on how to upset the air behind the car, which I am sure they already do. It's the way it has, is and will always be. The designers job is to maximise potential within any stipulated rule, so whatever you enforce they will find something new or something else to give them the edge.
They would have to find ways to incorporate more mechanical grip and the drivers can have far more input as to how well mechanical grip workls i.e. those with true talent will shine more than thsoe without whereas aero generally just works as long as a driver can make the car go fast enough for it to work (unlike Richard Hammond in the Reanault on Top Gear
)
14 November 2010, 11:02 PM
#53
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think a post like that shows how little you understand about that style of racing. It is a competition between cars built to the highest of standards of performance and handling. That very fact is why it is so difficult to overtake, the drivers are of a very high ability and the problems associated with all that as well the aerodynamic reasons make overtaking a difficult and risky business.
That is why the teams' strategy is so important and the whole business is a team effort including the driver, his own mechanic, those who run the team and those working in the background.
The make up and style of car and its handlng as well as the particular circuit and weather conditions dictate how a team has to run its cars.
There are far fewer accidents these days which to my mind is a good thing. We lost too many people in the earlier days of F1 and crashes should not be a requirement of the Sport anyway. If you want to see that you can always go to a stock car race or even watch the touring cars!
All tracks have their own design parameters and that means of course that some have more overtaking possibilities than others. it also means that the teams have to work out the required strategy. That is all part of the basic interest of modern F1.
The best advice of course is that if that does not suit you, then the answer is pretty well self evident.
I thought that today's race was fascinating to watch, there were many possible ways it could have gone, and I found it to be a very enjoyable spectacle. Roll on F1 2011 I say!
Les
That is why the teams' strategy is so important and the whole business is a team effort including the driver, his own mechanic, those who run the team and those working in the background.
The make up and style of car and its handlng as well as the particular circuit and weather conditions dictate how a team has to run its cars.
There are far fewer accidents these days which to my mind is a good thing. We lost too many people in the earlier days of F1 and crashes should not be a requirement of the Sport anyway. If you want to see that you can always go to a stock car race or even watch the touring cars!
All tracks have their own design parameters and that means of course that some have more overtaking possibilities than others. it also means that the teams have to work out the required strategy. That is all part of the basic interest of modern F1.
The best advice of course is that if that does not suit you, then the answer is pretty well self evident.
I thought that today's race was fascinating to watch, there were many possible ways it could have gone, and I found it to be a very enjoyable spectacle. Roll on F1 2011 I say!
Les
All this does not however change the fact that F1 is an incredibly tedious viewing spectacle. As someone who certainly watched the turbo 1500's in the 80's surely you can see this, as all the racing back then was good viewing, and put those cars on the Abu Dhabi track and they would still be entertaining. As Stilover has said the main reason for the current tedium is the aerodynamics, and although these current cars may have some 'Stuff' readers sat on their sofas creaming their pants over the technology, for excitement you need to look elsewhere. I stopped watching regularly sometime before Schumacher retired and today was the first race I've watched all the way since. Surely you lot must have something more productive to do than this?
I prefer the bikes but even that has gone downhill because of the technology as well. I can appreciate that 2-strokes have little relevance today as they won't sell bikes in the showroom (doesn't seem to matter with F1 though as they are totally irrelevant to anything other than the championship). So when the 990's came in I could see why even though the 500's were way more entertaining and really did sort out the men from the boys. The 990's were however still sliding about a bit and tyre wear made for some entertainment after half-distance. But then along came traction control and also 800cc engines and it's now verging on tedious too (not f1 tedious thankfully). It's fairly telling now that there are never any 'hero' rides now where someone like Rossi say qualifies badly, starts at the back, and wins the race.
2012 sees a return to the 990's so hopefully things will improve (outlaw the traction control please).
F1 will never improve until major restrictions are placed on aerodynamics. And why not, as the aerodynamics in this instance have absolutely no relevance to road car sales.
Kevin
15 November 2010, 12:46 AM
#56
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
F1 is a bore, if you can see past the marketing hype and BS there isn't much worth watching.
I'm really sick of seeing the likes of Button, Lewis whoring themselves to advertise watches etc. It seems every airport I go to has big pictures of them everywhere.
I really associate F1 with that nouveux riche consumerists ethos...vulgarity etc it seems so well made for places like Dubai.
I'm really sick of seeing the likes of Button, Lewis whoring themselves to advertise watches etc. It seems every airport I go to has big pictures of them everywhere.
I really associate F1 with that nouveux riche consumerists ethos...vulgarity etc it seems so well made for places like Dubai.
15 November 2010, 01:06 AM
#58
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: My turbo blows, air lots of it!!
Posts: 9,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All this does not however change the fact that F1 is an incredibly tedious viewing spectacle. As someone who certainly watched the turbo 1500's in the 80's surely you can see this, as all the racing back then was good viewing, and put those cars on the Abu Dhabi track and they would still be entertaining. As Stilover has said the main reason for the current tedium is the aerodynamics, and although these current cars may have some 'Stuff' readers sat on their sofas creaming their pants over the technology, for excitement you need to look elsewhere. I stopped watching regularly sometime before Schumacher retired and today was the first race I've watched all the way since. Surely you lot must have something more productive to do than this?
I prefer the bikes but even that has gone downhill because of the technology as well. I can appreciate that 2-strokes have little relevance today as they won't sell bikes in the showroom (doesn't seem to matter with F1 though as they are totally irrelevant to anything other than the championship). So when the 990's came in I could see why even though the 500's were way more entertaining and really did sort out the men from the boys. The 990's were however still sliding about a bit and tyre wear made for some entertainment after half-distance. But then along came traction control and also 800cc engines and it's now verging on tedious too (not f1 tedious thankfully). It's fairly telling now that there are never any 'hero' rides now where someone like Rossi say qualifies badly, starts at the back, and wins the race.
2012 sees a return to the 990's so hopefully things will improve (outlaw the traction control please).
F1 will never improve until major restrictions are placed on aerodynamics. And why not, as the aerodynamics in this instance have absolutely no relevance to road car sales.
Kevin
I prefer the bikes but even that has gone downhill because of the technology as well. I can appreciate that 2-strokes have little relevance today as they won't sell bikes in the showroom (doesn't seem to matter with F1 though as they are totally irrelevant to anything other than the championship). So when the 990's came in I could see why even though the 500's were way more entertaining and really did sort out the men from the boys. The 990's were however still sliding about a bit and tyre wear made for some entertainment after half-distance. But then along came traction control and also 800cc engines and it's now verging on tedious too (not f1 tedious thankfully). It's fairly telling now that there are never any 'hero' rides now where someone like Rossi say qualifies badly, starts at the back, and wins the race.
2012 sees a return to the 990's so hopefully things will improve (outlaw the traction control please).
F1 will never improve until major restrictions are placed on aerodynamics. And why not, as the aerodynamics in this instance have absolutely no relevance to road car sales.
Kevin
However the season has been a cracker four drivers going into the last race of the season with it potential of winning it isnt really boring TBH.
Watching F1 through the Schuey era really was bloody tedius, one driver and one team winning everything is'nt exactly a great spectacle its self is it?
15 November 2010, 01:46 AM
#59
Scooby Regular
When the Williams was the best car on the grid and Schuey had to use all his skill to beat it was a golden era. Once he and Ross Brawn moulded Ferrari into shape no-one could touch them. He could have so easily won 10 championships or more if it weren't bad luck (broken legs) or his own arrogant stupidity at times (Hill/Villeneuve crashes).
15 November 2010, 07:36 AM
#60
