Is Formula one going to survive?

redrover

Rookie
I have read the ratings are at an all time low everywhere but Britian and even in Britian they are lower than many recent years. You would think with Hamilton winning they would be higher in Britian but I guess he is such an insufferable d0uche, even British people know he isnt that good and is only winning because of the car, and the sport itself has gotten so boring, even that isnt enough. NOBODY in Asia or North America watches anymore, not that hardly ever did, especialy in NA. Will Formula One go under like Champ car did soon?

Personally I wouldnt care either way. I used to be a fan, but it is currently at its worst state ever. Weak field, too car dominated, no real racing anymore with the stupid rules and engine policies, and only 1 or 2 teams per year who stand any chance.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
It will probably go from strength to strength under Liberty Media. The official streaming platform will take off bigtime over the next few years. The field is strong but loses one of its best assets for next season onwards in Alonso, who was being wasted in a bad McLaren car. For weak field look at the mid '90s-early '00s. Agree that Formula 1 is too car dominated, with 3 absurd periods of dominance this century so far from Ferrari, Red Bull and then Mercedes but the WDC was won this year in the 2nd best car. How though is only 1 or 2 teams being in with a chance any different to most of the last 40 or so years though? It's usually the case. Recent seasons with 3+ contenders were 2010 and 2012, though there was still a clear best car in the Red Bull and Alonso was somewhat unlucky to not pip Vettel in either season despite having a vastly inferior car and Hamilton was unlucky in 2012 for reliability to ruin his race in 3 race-winning positions toward the end of the season otherwise he might have won that year.

The racing must improve, and this is the plan starting with new wings which will reduce the negative effect on downforce from the aero-wash and wake, and 2021 will see entirely new concepts which aim to have cars only losing ~20% of downforce while following other cars rather than ~50%. This should improve wheel-to-wheel racing and overtaking without having to rely on the gimmick of DRS.

Watch out for the next couple of years because I think Max with Red Bull and Honda will challenge Hamilton and Vettel, and that Leclerc will prove strong enough to be the equal of Vettel before too long = 4 potential winners.
 
Last edited:

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
I hope it's superseded by the Formula E electric cars. Went to the F1 race in Montreal years ago, the noise was painful even with earplugs. Should be interesting when the cars are nearly silent.
 

Mike Bulgakov

G.O.A.T.
I absolutely don't see the allure of the sport. Auto racing on television is incredibly dull, and it is loud and annoying in person. I've been to the Monaco Grand Prix, and just wanted to get out of there and go to the beach.

Watching 405 traffic go by from a freeway overpass is more interesting.
 
The falling ratings could be due to it moving from the BBC to Channel 4 in recent years-C4 ratings are usually pretty low for most shoes, I believe they will only be showing one live race next year as Sky (who even less people watch as it is pay television) who they have a joint deal with did some kind of deal with Ecclestone to get all the other races live. It might be due to it being pretty boring-I don't follow it any longer but it seems Hamilton wins it every season pretty much.
 

Peters

Professional
I have read the ratings are at an all time low everywhere but Britian and even in Britian they are lower than many recent years.
The ratings are lower in the UK because the races are now mostly behind a pay wall.

You would think with Hamilton winning they would be higher in Britian but I guess he is such an insufferable d0uche, even British people know he isnt that good and is only winning because of the car, and the sport itself has gotten so boring, even that isnt enough.
He's actually very popular, regardless of your personal opinion of him. And if you think 'he isn't that good' then I'd question your knowledge of F1 and your interpretation of driver performance.
 

redrover

Rookie
The ratings are lower in the UK because the races are now mostly behind a pay wall.


He's actually very popular, regardless of your personal opinion of him. And if you think 'he isn't that good' then I'd question your knowledge of F1 and your interpretation of driver performance.
He wins only because of a car. Kind of similar to Vettel and Schumacher in that sense but to a WAY luckier and higher degree than both, as Vettel only had the fastest car 3 or 4 years of his career, Schumacher only 5 years of his whole career max, while Hamilton has been in the fastest car 8 or 9 years of his career, and the 2nd fastest all others. Hamilton is basically the only driver in history who had the fastest or 2nd fastest car every single year of his career (most years the fastest). So no he isnt that good. He is pretty good, but that is it. Second rate drivers like Button and Rosburg were roughly his equal in the same car, and all his other teammates (apart from one year of Alonso were he was harassed by the team to ridiculous degrees and still tied in points, so that one doesnt even count) are complete crap and much worse than even Button and Rosburg.

And he isnt that popular, he is mocked by fans in Brazil and Spain, amongst other places, has been booed in other countries. The only place he is fairly liked (sort of) is Britian, and as already noted even the ratings in Britian are lower than before so he isnt even exactly beloved there. Someone like David Coulthard who never won a drivers title and wasnt that successful overall was even far more popular in Britian.
 
Last edited:

redrover

Rookie
It will probably go from strength to strength under Liberty Media. The official streaming platform will take off bigtime over the next few years. The field is strong but loses one of its best assets for next season onwards in Alonso, who was being wasted in a bad McLaren car. For weak field look at the mid '90s-early '00s. Agree that Formula 1 is too car dominated, with 3 absurd periods of dominance this century so far from Ferrari, Red Bull and then Mercedes but the WDC was won this year in the 2nd best car. How though is only 1 or 2 teams being in with a chance any different to most of the last 40 or so years though? It's usually the case. Recent seasons with 3+ contenders were 2010 and 2012, though there was still a clear best car in the Red Bull and Alonso was somewhat unlucky to not pip Vettel in either season despite having a vastly inferior car and Hamilton was unlucky in 2012 for reliability to ruin his race in 3 race-winning positions toward the end of the season otherwise he might have won that year.

The racing must improve, and this is the plan starting with new wings which will reduce the negative effect on downforce from the aero-wash and wake, and 2021 will see entirely new concepts which aim to have cars only losing ~20% of downforce while following other cars rather than ~50%. This should improve wheel-to-wheel racing and overtaking without having to rely on the gimmick of DRS.

Watch out for the next couple of years because I think Max with Red Bull and Honda will challenge Hamilton and Vettel, and that Leclerc will prove strong enough to be the equal of Vettel before too long = 4 potential winners.
That is a good assessment and hopefully you are right. It would take all that happening for me to even be interested in watching Formula One again, and probably for it to even survive. All the ridiculous rule changes and overemphasize on the cars and fuel loads have ruined the sport completely.
 

redrover

Rookie
F! is going to Vietnam, so it's global power is clear even if America can barely afford an event anymore.
haha that is freaking hilarious. The sport would probably be dead in North America, particularly the U.S, now regardless, but that race where they boycotted and refused to start was the certain the U.S Grand Prix would go under sooner rather than later.
 

QuentinFederer

Professional
I used to be a huge F1 fan but I’ve not been watching it that closely since they brought in the V6 engines. It’s just formula Mercedes these days. Hamilton isn’t particularly popular here in the UK. There are some fans of his, but mostly we realise that he’s only winning because of his car and a team mate who isn’t allowed to race him. The TV coverage here is her horrendous. They act like Hamilton is the only driver to have ever won anything and constantly downplay his car advantage.

It’s a shame that the best driver on the grid, Fernando Alonso, has been frozen out of the competition. Both Hamilton and Vettel have a veto in their contract against him joining their teams.

Pay drivers are another issue these days, more so than ever before. Lance Stroll is undoubtedly the slowest driver on the grid, but his billionaire father has purchased a team for him. Robert Kubica, arguably the best in the sport before his 2011 rallying crash, has been attempting a comeback yet thus far has been unsuccessful as most teams want at least $10m from a driver.

I don’t think F1 can survive. The quality of the racing has never been lower. There has never been such financial and performance disparity between teams. We have had Mercedes drivers win the last 5 titles. All hollow victories. The circuits F1 races at these days are getting worse. It’s no longer a sport.
 

redrover

Rookie
Both Hamilton and Vettel have a veto in their contract against him joining their teams.
ROTFL is that actually true!?!? What total chicken sh1ts. Hamilton it is 0 surprise to me or most people to learn something like that, he has always by a whinish wimp, p-ssy, total nancy boy, and scared of real competition, but I thought Vettel was better than that.

Kubica's accident was so sad, and further led to the deterioration of an already declining sport. He was going to be one of the big stars moving forward I think.
 

QuentinFederer

Professional
ROTFL is that actually true!?!? What total chicken sh1ts. Hamilton it is 0 surprise to me or most people to learn something like that, he has always by a whinish wimp, p-ssy, total nancy boy, and scared of real competition, but I thought Vettel was better than that.

Kubica's accident was so sad, and further led to the deteriation of an already declining sport. He was going to be one of the big stars moving forward I think.
It’s true, they won’t race against Alonso. I’ve never rated Vettel or Hamilton. I mean sure, they’re both very fast drivers, but 4 and 5 titles seems to greatly exaggerate their abilities. They’re both top 20 all time drivers, but neither are anywhere near being the GOAT.

Vettel has always been a choker and Hamilton too makes big errors under pressure. Vettel luckily got away with his chokes at red bull but at Ferrari where he doesn’t have the fastest car they are much more costly. Same with Hamilton, at McLaren when the competition was closer his mistakes were very costly but at Mercedes even a terrible race will still result in at least a top 6, if not podium finish.

There’s still hope that Kubica will return in 2019 but it’s out of his hands. Williams will put Ocon in their 2nd seat as long as Mercedes can find them a new title sponsor. If Mercedes can’t do that then the highest bidder will get the car. Kubica has managed to find approximately $10m from Poland’s largest oil company.
 

redrover

Rookie
It’s true, they won’t race against Alonso. I’ve never rated Vettel or Hamilton. I mean sure, they’re both very fast drivers, but 4 and 5 titles seems to greatly exaggerate their abilities. They’re both top 20 all time drivers, but neither are anywhere near being the GOAT.

Vettel has always been a choker and Hamilton too makes big errors under pressure. Vettel luckily got away with his chokes at red bull but at Ferrari where he doesn’t have the fastest car they are much more costly. Same with Hamilton, at McLaren when the competition was closer his mistakes were very costly but at Mercedes even a terrible race will still result in at least a top 6, if not podium finish.

There’s still hope that Kubica will return in 2019 but it’s out of his hands. Williams will put Ocon in their 2nd seat as long as Mercedes can find them a new title sponsor. If Mercedes can’t do that then the highest bidder will get the car. Kubica has managed to find approximately $10m from Poland’s largest oil company.
I agree on your assessment of both Vettel and Hamilton. Vettel is a bit better than Hamilton, has won only 1 less F1 title despite being on average in a slower car more of his career (the only time he wasnt is the 3 years straight he was in Red Bull and they were the fastest), but I wouldnt rate him that highly either. For me Vettel is top 20 all time, Hamilton top 30 at best. Alonso is a far better driver than both of them.

And it is ridiculous that a dying sport would even try to disallow Kubica, who would be the kind of heroic comeback story the sport needs to drum up some sort of interest again, to reenter the sport. It shows how screwed up a lot of the people on top, and how oblivious they are the total disinterest their once marquee sport is now getting, you would think a F1 race going to Vietnam would be enough, but I guess some people have no brains.
 
Used to love playing this on the Spectrum in the 1980's-30 seconds-minute long pit stops with one engineer having to change all four tyres & doing repairs.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
ROTFL is that actually true!?!? What total chicken sh1ts. Hamilton it is 0 surprise to me or most people to learn something like that, he has always by a whinish wimp, p-ssy, total nancy boy, and scared of real competition, but I thought Vettel was better than that.

Kubica's accident was so sad, and further led to the deterioration of an already declining sport. He was going to be one of the big stars moving forward I think.

It's likely not true, no. I'd say it's outright misinformation. It's been pretty much agreed now by the paddock, pundit and vast majority of fans that Vettel definitely has no real veto power. Hamilton is less questioned because it's far more readily assumed that he doesn't have veto power.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
I used to be a huge F1 fan but I’ve not been watching it that closely since they brought in the V6 engines. It’s just formula Mercedes these days. Hamilton isn’t particularly popular here in the UK. There are some fans of his, but mostly we realise that he’s only winning because of his car and a team mate who isn’t allowed to race him. The TV coverage here is her horrendous. They act like Hamilton is the only driver to have ever won anything and constantly downplay his car advantage.

It’s a shame that the best driver on the grid, Fernando Alonso, has been frozen out of the competition. Both Hamilton and Vettel have a veto in their contract against him joining their teams.

Pay drivers are another issue these days, more so than ever before. Lance Stroll is undoubtedly the slowest driver on the grid, but his billionaire father has purchased a team for him. Robert Kubica, arguably the best in the sport before his 2011 rallying crash, has been attempting a comeback yet thus far has been unsuccessful as most teams want at least $10m from a driver.

I don’t think F1 can survive. The quality of the racing has never been lower. There has never been such financial and performance disparity between teams. We have had Mercedes drivers win the last 5 titles. All hollow victories. The circuits F1 races at these days are getting worse. It’s no longer a sport.

Some of these statements are just outright bizarre. Firstly, the season has generally seen excellent races and has been more well received by fans than many more recent seasons in F1, due to the closeness of qualifying and exciting races of which there have been numerous, with China and USA being obvious examples. Secondly, the performance disparity between teams used to be greater in the 1980s and 1990s (since when have you watched or researched F1 per chance?). Thirdly claims of veto are hearsay at best and likely false. Fourthly, pay drivers isn't some new fad in F1. Fifth, Ferrari could have won the last 4 titles (meaning the last 2 years WDC and WCC) but messed it up. They actually had the better car in 2018 and many feel they also had the better car in 2017. Vettel crashing out of a race from the lead while on course for an easy 25 points (did you know about that out of curiosity) is the tip of the iceberg for why Ferrari will probably lose both Championships this year. Lastly, I think most would agree that Bottas has taken on the "wingman" role as 2018 has progressed, helping his much better team-mate, Hamilton, who by the reckoning of most is at his peak and just produced his most faultless season so far in his career.

The final confusing point is the contention that it's no longer a sport, and so my question to you is: when was it a sport then? What is it that doesn't make it a sport now and does make it a sport another time? Do you realise, for example, that the sort of teamwork used by Mercedes this year pales in comparison to the servitude Michael Schumacher enjoyed in the shape of Herbert, Irvine, Barrichello not just through his entire Ferrari career, but even during his Benetton days? It's also unusual for Mercedes, who in the 4 previous years ran a "two number one driver" policy. How about the Red Bull days of dominance where Vettel earned clear favour over Webber, though still not remotely in the league of Schumacher's built in advantages. How far do we have to go back? To the days of Senna and Prost? Yet it's no different to Hamilton-Rosberg in that in their time together they were in a crushingly dominant car only competing against each other for the Championship. So perhaps you're thinking earlier '80s or even the '70s? It can't be the '90s with the absurd Williams dominance, where only the brilliance of a Schumacher could produce a foil to the genius of Adrian Newey.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
ROTFL is that actually true!?!? What total chicken sh1ts. Hamilton it is 0 surprise to me or most people to learn something like that, he has always by a whinish wimp, p-ssy, total nancy boy, and scared of real competition, but I thought Vettel was better than that.

Kubica's accident was so sad, and further led to the deterioration of an already declining sport. He was going to be one of the big stars moving forward I think.
Ultimately, Hamilton has faced Alonso (and beat him in his rookie season and Alonso is the one who ran away with his tail caught between his legs), Button and Rosberg, who are three very strong drivers. He moved to Mercedes from McLaren after easily outperforming Button in their final season together, but not being aptly rewarded because he had 3 mechanical DNFs in the last 5 or so races from race winning positions, otherwise he might have won the WDC. At Mercedes, after winning the title in a monster battle with Hamilton, Rosberg got up and retired in the middle of his prime.

It's Vettel who gets questioned about his true ability given the relative strength of his teammates. He beat an ageing Webber and Kimi, Kimi who had been trounced much more severely by Alonso in 2014 before Vettel joined him in 2015, and who had also been beaten by Massa, of all drivers, previously in a Championship contending year (2008). When Ricciardo joined Red Bull in 2014, who is considered the best teammate to have gone up against Vettel, he trounced him... crushed Vettel, and after that single year Vettel promptly got up and left for Ferrari. He'll have Leclerc to deal with next year and what if the same happens again. Will Vettel just hop along and get out ASAP? Will he have a choice? Ferrari might drop in anyway were Leclerc to have his beating in their first season together. It would be similar to Hamilton coming in to immediately beat Alonso, but many feel Leclerc has that sort of talent and ability.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
I used to be a huge F1 fan but I’ve not been watching it that closely since they brought in the V6 engines. It’s just formula Mercedes these days. Hamilton isn’t particularly popular here in the UK. There are some fans of his, but mostly we realise that he’s only winning because of his car and a team mate who isn’t allowed to race him. The TV coverage here is her horrendous. They act like Hamilton is the only driver to have ever won anything and constantly downplay his car advantage.

It’s a shame that the best driver on the grid, Fernando Alonso, has been frozen out of the competition. Both Hamilton and Vettel have a veto in their contract against him joining their teams.

Pay drivers are another issue these days, more so than ever before. Lance Stroll is undoubtedly the slowest driver on the grid, but his billionaire father has purchased a team for him. Robert Kubica, arguably the best in the sport before his 2011 rallying crash, has been attempting a comeback yet thus far has been unsuccessful as most teams want at least $10m from a driver.

I don’t think F1 can survive. The quality of the racing has never been lower. There has never been such financial and performance disparity between teams. We have had Mercedes drivers win the last 5 titles. All hollow victories. The circuits F1 races at these days are getting worse. It’s no longer a sport.
If Stroll is the slowest (and I don't rate Stroll much also) then what is Sirotkin? And Hartley?

As usual in F1 there is some questionable talent in the lower rungs. But to exclaim with certainty that Stroll undoubtedly the slowest on the grid seems ignorant based on data.


I agree on your assessment of both Vettel and Hamilton. Vettel is a bit better than Hamilton, has won only 1 less F1 title despite being on average in a slower car more of his career (the only time he wasnt is the 3 years straight he was in Red Bull and they were the fastest), but I wouldnt rate him that highly either. For me Vettel is top 20 all time, Hamilton top 30 at best. Alonso is a far better driver than both of them.

And it is ridiculous that a dying sport would even try to disallow Kubica, who would be the kind of heroic comeback story the sport needs to drum up some sort of interest again, to reenter the sport. It shows how screwed up a lot of the people on top, and how oblivious they are the total disinterest their once marquee sport is now getting, you would think a F1 race going to Vietnam would be enough, but I guess some people have no brains.
It's always going to be a feisty debate between fans as to who is better out of Vettel and Hamilton, but Vettel has done himself no favours in recent years. He was outperformed by Hamilton in 2017 and utterly thrashed by him in 2018. It's amazing how many points Vettel gave up in 2018 through pure driver error and impetuousness alone. It's been a poor year by his standards. The last two years has seen both up against each other in equal machinery, where most feel Merc had the 2017 edge and Ferrari the 2018 edge, but Hamilton has walked away with both titles without it even going down to the last race. So I'd say Vettel's argument is currently rather weak and that's the general feeling at the moment from, surprisingly, both fanbases. Vettel is getting crucified by the Italian press also for his performance against Hamilton.

It's possible that Alonso is better than both, but ultimately he go beaten by Hamilton in Ham's rookie season and he's never gone up against Vettel in the same car. But he DID come very close to pipping Vettel for the 2010 and 2012 titles in far inferior machinery which suggests a sort of outclassing similar to the one's Hamilton has given Vettel in 2017 and 2018. (Though 2010 is an odd season to judge. Hamilton was probably the best driver that season but wasn;t faultless, Alonso was peculiarly error prone and Vettel just wasn't that good yet and won by virtue of having by far the best car. 2012 is more indicative of Alonso's outclassing of Vettel. It's arguably the finest season of this decade produced by any driver. I'd say only Hamilton's 2018 stacks up to Alonso's 2012. Vettel's 2013 could be considered but the problem is that there's no benchmark against another competitive team to judge him in that year).

So I'd say (personally of course) it goes something like Alo=Ham > Vet > Button = Kimi = Rosberg and the like >> the rest of the era.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
He wins only because of a car. Kind of similar to Vettel and Schumacher in that sense but to a WAY luckier and higher degree than both, as Vettel only had the fastest car 3 or 4 years of his career, Schumacher only 5 years of his whole career max, while Hamilton has been in the fastest car 8 or 9 years of his career, and the 2nd fastest all others. Hamilton is basically the only driver in history who had the fastest or 2nd fastest car every single year of his career (most years the fastest). So no he isnt that good. He is pretty good, but that is it. Second rate drivers like Button and Rosburg were roughly his equal in the same car, and all his other teammates (apart from one year of Alonso were he was harassed by the team to ridiculous degrees and still tied in points, so that one doesnt even count) are complete crap and much worse than even Button and Rosburg.

And he isnt that popular, he is mocked by fans in Brazil and Spain, amongst other places, has been booed in other countries. The only place he is fairly liked (sort of) is Britian, and as already noted even the ratings in Britian are lower than before so he isnt even exactly beloved there. Someone like David Coulthard who never won a drivers title and wasnt that successful overall was even far more popular in Britian.

I can't find it right now but on an F1 forum they tried to show how many times these drivers were in a car that could have won the WDC and Schumacher of course headed the list. Hamilton and Prost were a couple behind Vettel a couple further behind, hence 7 vs 5 vs 4 makes sense per their opportunity. Schumacher has been in many fastest or second fastest cars, the most of all F1 drivers in history. Overall I'd say he's also quite lucky. Firstly, I want to make it clear that I think Schumacher was an incredible racer and talent and possibly the greatest, so now that's out of the way I'll explain why. (1) he inherited a vacuum after the loss of Senna, Mansell and Prost to the sport. (2) He received the most blatant help from teammates of any driver in the history of F1 where perhaps only Fangio is comparable; just look at what the likes of Herbert reveals in the recent official F1 Podcast or the numerous revealing chats with Eddie Irvine available on youtube for firsthand evidence, although watching the races is enough. (3) He was allowed unlimited testing, unlike his teammates, in his Ferrari cars (and various machinations of so called Ferrari International Assistance - I won't vouch for its credibility).

The notion that Hamilton had generally crap teammates would be literally ridiculed on any F1 forum. It's Vettel who is questioned for the strength of teammates with many unsure on how to rank him until they see him against another definitively strong opponent who is in their prime. Leclerc will be in his 2nd year next year, hardly prime yet. If he even equals Vettel there will be trouble.

Hamilton is really fortunate to have had such competitive cars throughout most of his career, though he's backed it up with results and quality. It's why Alonso is utterly convinced that Hamilton is superior to Vettel. Nonetheless it's thought by many (I dare say most) that in 2008 Ferrari had the fastest car and the same can be said for 2018, meaning Hamilton has probably won 2 of his titles whilst not having the best machinery. On the flipside he's also lost two titles whilst having the best machinery (2007 rookie season and 2016 vs Rosberg). He's had a car that could win the title in the following seasons: 2007, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014-2018 for 9. Schumacher in the following seasons: 1994, 1995, 1997-2004, 2006 for 11. So both had had great opportunity, and different perks. Schumacher has made more of his opportunity with 7 from 11. Hamilton is at 5 for 9. IIRC Schumacher won ~56 or 57% of races during the more dominant 2000-2004 period with Ferrari and Hamilton ~50% during an equivalent period with Mercedes, but Hamilton's and Mercedes' period of having a hugely competitive car may last for longer. Will be interesting to see.

**
To add:

Vettel: 2009-2013, 2017, 2018 for 7, winning 4.
 
Last edited:

Rafaisdabest

Hall of Fame
I never watch F1 hardly since Webber left and Ricciardo came in, not that I don't like him or anything it's because he never wins or even gets a podium hardly, red bull**** made him second driver and he had 15 DNF races or something this year and now he is going to a **** team, next season and he will probably never win, I only liked watching when the Aussies were doing well now it's just Hamilton and Bottas or Vettle and Kimi and Verstappen it's soo predicable, I was really hoping Dan would go to Ferrari..
he has the potential to do well there and he is a well known and a very liked driver, so I don't understand why they didn't jump at him but anyways that's my rant over with...
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
I never watch F1 hardly since Webber left and Ricciardo came in, not that I don't like him or anything it's because he never wins or even gets a podium hardly, red bull**** made him second driver and he had 15 DNF races or something this year and now he is going to a **** team, next season and he will probably never win, I only liked watching when the Aussies were doing well now it's just Hamilton and Bottas or Vettle and Kimi and Verstappen it's soo predicable, I was really hoping Dan would go to Ferrari..
he has the potential to do well there and he is a well known and a very liked driver, so I don't understand why they didn't jump at him but anyways that's my rant over with...
Probably because Ricc wanted at least around about £20 million per year, which Renault gave him.
 

Azure

G.O.A.T.
Make racers more relevant than the cars. As long as it was 50:50 it was entertaining. I admit I have not watched much of the sport the last few seasons but the main reason i stopped watching was also because of superior cars benefitting certain racers.
 

redrover

Rookie
Make racers more relevant than the cars. As long as it was 50:50 it was entertaining. I admit I have not watched much of the sport the last few seasons but the main reason i stopped watching was also because of superior cars benefitting certain racers.
Yes people like Hamilton and Vettell are already superior drivers to most on the grid even before given the advantages. To give them way faster cars and crap teammates (particularly Hamilton's usual array) to boot, just makes the sport a totally uncompetitive joke. Add the silly racing and fuel rules, and the horrible tracks they run on now and it no wonder the sport is near dead.
 

Azure

G.O.A.T.
Yes people like Hamilton and Vettell are already superior drivers to most on the grid even before given the advantages. To give them way faster cars and crap teammates (particularly Hamilton's usual array) to boot, just makes the sport a totally uncompetitive joke. Add the silly racing and fuel rules, and the horrible tracks they run on now and it no wonder the sport is near dead.
There's a lot that can be done to make it more entertaining. For starters there is no reason to have the guys starting on pole positions to predictably win the race. This will happen automatically if the best cars are out at the front. Overtaking has become rare as well. They must bring in some element of uniformity in the cars. Let the real deal be the work done at the pitstops - to really differentiate in technology.

I like the idea of electric cars too. Wonder how that will change the sport.
 

redrover

Rookie
There's a lot that can be done to make it more entertaining. For starters there is no reason to have the guys starting on pole positions to predictably win the race. This will happen automatically if the best cars are out at the front. Overtaking has become rare as well. They must bring in some element of uniformity in the cars. Let the real deal be the work done at the pitstops - to really differentiate in technology.

I like the idea of electric cars too. Wonder how that will change the sport.
I cant believe Ecclestone thought his revised changes 5 or 6 years ago would make the sport better. What a joke.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
There's a lot that can be done to make it more entertaining. For starters there is no reason to have the guys starting on pole positions to predictably win the race. This will happen automatically if the best cars are out at the front. Overtaking has become rare as well. They must bring in some element of uniformity in the cars. Let the real deal be the work done at the pitstops - to really differentiate in technology.

I like the idea of electric cars too. Wonder how that will change the sport.
That's in the works for 2019 with wings and in 2021 with further elements and possibly parts of the power unit. I'm not sure about pitstop work getting the job done and what you mean by this. It's already used in strategy as a powerful weapon for undercuts and overcuts but if it was focused there it would take away from on-track overtakes. It would be better if strategies were more variable and borderline so that different teams had to use different tyres and come in a different number of times to the pits - perhaps this is also part of what you meant? Most of us fans of F1 have complained about lack of strategic variety in the last 2 seasons and how the tyres are too durable. That's what made the US GP so exciting, because it was a very strategic and tactical affair unlike most races of the last 2 years and nobody exactly knew how the tyres would respond on that race weekend, with soft compounds chosen.

Ovetaking from 2017-2018 has dipped substantially due to the new car design. For some years before that, from the introduction of DRS (drag reduction system in case you don't know) overtaking was too copious, almost like it was too easy. I think right now the amount of overtaking is about right, but the nature of it is unsatisfactory. I want to see more sustained wheel-to-wheel racing where racecraft wins the day and not a more powerful engine and the gimmick of DRS. Nonetheless I have to ask what you are comparing the F1 you stopped watching, or the F1 of today, to? Because if it's a period between 1995-2008 or so, that was the period with the least overtaking.
 

Azure

G.O.A.T.
That's in the works for 2019 with wings and in 2021 with further elements and possibly parts of the power unit. I'm not sure about pitstop work getting the job done and what you mean by this. It's already used in strategy as a powerful weapon for undercuts and overcuts but if it was focused there it would take away from on-track overtakes. It would be better if strategies were more variable and borderline so that different teams had to use different tyres and come in a different number of times to the pits - perhaps this is also part of what you meant? Most of us fans of F1 have complained about lack of strategic variety in the last 2 seasons and how the tyres are too durable. That's what made the US GP so exciting, because it was a very strategic and tactical affair unlike most races of the last 2 years and nobody exactly knew how the tyres would respond on that race weekend, with soft compounds chosen.

Ovetaking from 2017-2018 has dipped substantially due to the new car design. For some years before that, from the introduction of DRS (drag reduction system in case you don't know) overtaking was too copious, almost like it was too easy. I think right now the amount of overtaking is about right, but the nature of it is unsatisfactory. I want to see more sustained wheel-to-wheel racing where racecraft wins the day and not a more powerful engine and the gimmick of DRS. Nonetheless I have to ask what you are comparing the F1 you stopped watching, or the F1 of today, to? Because if it's a period between 1995-2008 or so, that was the period with the least overtaking.
My last dedicated season of full F1 watching was 2010 so you have to take whatever I say here with some leniency to my unreliable memory of the sport. F1 was not my first love like tennis, where regardless of a couple of bad seasons I would still watch the sport.

I meant indeed that depending on how the tie ups between the tyre and car companies are, there would be a lot more drama at the pit stops. This would mean that the reliance on the car alone as the only factor in deciding the outcome would significantly go down. It has to be a lot more complex than that.

When I used to watch it dedicatedly, the Malaysian GP was heavily criticised for reasons we all know but to me it was a very challenging and interesting circuit. The tracks were not top notch but that added to the drama. Not sure if I am making sense. An analogy would be playing in windy conditions in tennis. How the players deal with the wind is a significant indicator of the quality of the players.
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
Can someone breakdown for a novice the difference/reason why they prefer formula 1 to stock car racing (or vice versa)?
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
My last dedicated season of full F1 watching was 2010 so you have to take whatever I say here with some leniency to my unreliable memory of the sport. F1 was not my first love like tennis, where regardless of a couple of bad seasons I would still watch the sport.

I meant indeed that depending on how the tie ups between the tyre and car companies are, there would be a lot more drama at the pit stops. This would mean that the reliance on the car alone as the only factor in deciding the outcome would significantly go down. It has to be a lot more complex than that.

When I used to watch it dedicatedly, the Malaysian GP was heavily criticised for reasons we all know but to me it was a very challenging and interesting circuit. The tracks were not top notch but that added to the drama. Not sure if I am making sense. An analogy would be playing in windy conditions in tennis. How the players deal with the wind is a significant indicator of the quality of the players.
Yes there needs to be enough variety between circuits which emphasise different strengths and weaknesses of different cars. That does exist to a good degree though, I'd say, so the key is more in those tyre choices and pit strategies, and it's in, as you stated, finding ways to equalise and normalise the cars (but without stripping it of its essence... it's not a spec series). I hope the vision set out by Liberty Media and Ross Brawn comes to pass. If they make good on their promises it will improve the racing hugely. The idea of reverse grids and points for qualifying has been proposed to mix up the grids, as well as specific sprint races, but I doubt these will be introduced any time soon. Something I've suggested is to only have 2 practice sessions so teams are less certain of tyre behaviour and strategy going into races and have less time to find the right car setup, but this would never fly as the third session is still a money maker.
Can someone breakdown for a novice the difference/reason why they prefer formula 1 to stock car racing (or vice versa)?
I only really bother with F1. It's the pinnacle of technology in motorsport and many argue the pinnacle of motorsport period. Also I find the variance in track layouts interesting. Not mad keen on ovals and just going around in a circle. Whilst there are many motor sports and talent is spread between them, I'd argue that a lot of the very best drivers end up in Formula 1. An obvious current exception to me would be Marc Marquez, who might be the best racer in the world.

So for me..

- averse to ovals of NASCAR
- best talent in F1
- best technology in F1


Would be curious to hear alternative views from a lover of NASCAR.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
My last dedicated season of full F1 watching was 2010 so you have to take whatever I say here with some leniency to my unreliable memory of the sport. F1 was not my first love like tennis, where regardless of a couple of bad seasons I would still watch the sport.

I meant indeed that depending on how the tie ups between the tyre and car companies are, there would be a lot more drama at the pit stops. This would mean that the reliance on the car alone as the only factor in deciding the outcome would significantly go down. It has to be a lot more complex than that.

When I used to watch it dedicatedly, the Malaysian GP was heavily criticised for reasons we all know but to me it was a very challenging and interesting circuit. The tracks were not top notch but that added to the drama. Not sure if I am making sense. An analogy would be playing in windy conditions in tennis. How the players deal with the wind is a significant indicator of the quality of the players.

The years from 2005-2010 were very unpredictable. Alonso and Renault came along and spoiled the Ferrari party (2006 was amazing) and then McLaren and Ferrari duked it out for 2 years before Brawn came along and stunned EVERYONE in Button's Championship year, with the period culminating in Vettel winning his first title in the last race with 4 potential winners(!) of the Championship (Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, Webber IIRC). 2000-2004 was Ferrari dominance and Schumacher brilliance.
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
Yes there needs to be enough variety between circuits which emphasise different strengths and weaknesses of different cars. That does exist to a good degree though, I'd say, so the key is more in those tyre choices and pit strategies, and it's in, as you stated, finding ways to equalise and normalise the cars (but without stripping it of its essence... it's not a spec series). I hope the vision set out by Liberty Media and Ross Brawn comes to pass. If they make good on their promises it will improve the racing hugely. The idea of reverse grids and points for qualifying has been proposed to mix up the grids, as well as specific sprint races, but I doubt these will be introduced any time soon. Something I've suggested is to only have 2 practice sessions so teams are less certain of tyre behaviour and strategy going into races and have less time to find the right car setup, but this would never fly as the third session is still a money maker.


I only really bother with F1. It's the pinnacle of technology in motorsport and many argue the pinnacle of motorsport period. Also I find the variance in track layouts interesting. Not mad keen on ovals and just going around in a circle. Whilst there are many motor sports and talent is spread between them, I'd argue that a lot of the very best drivers end up in Formula 1. An obvious current exception to me would be Marc Marquez, who might be the best racer in the world.

So for me..

- averse to ovals of NASCAR
- best talent in F1
- best technology in F1


Would be curious to hear alternative views from a lover of NASCAR.
Thanks. I've never really been into either. Growing up, I loved racing videogames though. I think formula 1 would appeal to me more as it does seem more the pinnacle as you say. The 1 thing that is a turn off is I prefer stock cars (not the bland nascar ones), but in general I prefer the idea of actual cars racing. The f1 cars look whacko to me.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
Thanks. I've never really been into either. Growing up, I loved racing videogames though. I think formula 1 would appeal to me more as it does seem more the pinnacle as you say. The 1 thing that is a turn off is I prefer stock cars (not the bland nascar ones), but in general I prefer the idea of actual cars racing. The f1 cars look whacko to me.

Ye I loved a bunch of racing games. The Gran Turismo and Forza series, Need for Speed, some F1 games. F1 is an extremely technical sport which is something that might appeal to you. It's disgustingly detailed for the person who really wants to delve into it. The F1technical forum is way way over my head. It's the most absurd sports forum I've ever seen.
 

Azure

G.O.A.T.
Ye I loved a bunch of racing games. The Gran Turismo and Forza series, Need for Speed, some F1 games. F1 is an extremely technical sport which is something that might appeal to you. It's disgustingly detailed for the person who really wants to delve into it. The F1technical forum is way way over my head. It's the most absurd sports forum I've ever seen.
Yep the aerodynamics of the car! There's so much fluid dynamics there and then there's the automotive side - engine, tyres etc etc

I had read recently about a very interesting piece.

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/formula-one-pit-stop-crews-7936481.amp
 
D

Deleted member 716271

Guest
Ye I loved a bunch of racing games. The Gran Turismo and Forza series, Need for Speed, some F1 games. F1 is an extremely technical sport which is something that might appeal to you. It's disgustingly detailed for the person who really wants to delve into it. The F1technical forum is way way over my head. It's the most absurd sports forum I've ever seen.
I played gran turismo a lot for ps1. My absolute favorite was an insane arcade style cult classic called "Rage Racer" though.

Looking into f1 now...
 

Azure

G.O.A.T.
The years from 2005-2010 were very unpredictable. Alonso and Renault came along and spoiled the Ferrari party (2006 was amazing) and then McLaren and Ferrari duked it out for 2 years before Brawn came along and stunned EVERYONE in Button's Championship year, with the period culminating in Vettel winning his first title in the last race with 4 potential winners(!) of the Championship (Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, Webber IIRC). 2000-2004 was Ferrari dominance and Schumacher brilliance.
I loved it then. Alonso's entry was almost fairy tale like.

Do you watch MotoGP as well?
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
I loved it then. Alonso's entry was almost fairy tale like.

Do you watch MotoGP as well?
Yep, but I'd say only about half the races, whereas I'll miss F1 races rarely. I watch too many sports as it is though - really reduced my tennis viewing over the last couple of years though.. 2017-2018.

I already think Marc Marquez is better than Valentino Rossi ever was. Marquez will have Lorenzo as his teammate for 2019-2020. That's like pairing Hamilton with Vettel, so it may move up in the pecking order.
 

MasterZeb

Hall of Fame
Can someone breakdown for a novice the difference/reason why they prefer formula 1 to stock car racing (or vice versa)?
It’s far more technical, both from the racing stand point, aswell the engineering stand point. The physics involved in developing the car is what really hooked me on. From the racing stand point, circuits with corners make are far more exciting than NASCAR imo.
 

-NN-

G.O.A.T.
Yep the aerodynamics of the car! There's so much fluid dynamics there and then there's the automotive side - engine, tyres etc etc

I had read recently about a very interesting piece.

https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/formula-one-pit-stop-crews-7936481.amp

Yep the aerodynamic grip, mechanical grip, PU components, engine mappings, concepts such as aero-wash, downforce, drag and further.

Chain Bear is a must for any F1 fan.





"Chain bear did it again. He picks a topic you think you know, makes you realize you actually know nothing about it, tells you what you need to do and says bye."
 

Azure

G.O.A.T.
Yep, but I'd say only about half the races, whereas I'll miss F1 races rarely. I watch too many sports as it is though - really reduced my tennis viewing over the last couple of years though.. 2017-2018.

I already think Marc Marquez is better than Valentino Rossi ever was. Marquez will have Lorenzo as his teammate for 2019-2020. That's like pairing Hamilton with Vettel, so it may move up in the pecking order.
I never got latched on to MotoGP but I think if I start watching it for a couple of seasons I will really like it. It's just that I feel there's more engineering in F1...
 
Top