F1 is boring me to death!!!!

Sorry for the Rant.

RANT ON:
F1 this year is barely more exciting to watch then baseball, golf and paint drying. I am sorry to say but I just suffered through another F1 race with one pass for the lead. This pass only occurred because Shuey was not on the pole. Thank God for the commercial skip features! The track is hard to pass on anyway. I can appreciate the great technology of the Ferrari and great talent of MS, but it is a bit like watching me play Tiger Woods in Golf. Note that I have only played a full round twice in my life.

Then you get to watch MS run Montoya off the road when they were side by side. Not sure I agree with this rule of the inside guy has right of way. If you look at the exact situation in NASCAR for example MS would have to have given room for Montoya to stay beside him. I think this would help promote passing.

I do not think F1 cares about the excitement for the fans. Why do they not design tracks and rules that promote passing and competition. I know they can design turns with variable banking such that cars could run "side by side" and have the same lap times. This would promote passing. Also if two cars are side by side they must give room to each other at the apex and track out points. In the case of the MS vs. Montoya pass MS would have been penalized for a stop and go. This would promote passing of near equal cars.

This still would not "fix" the Ferrari and MS dominance, but could help the back markers. When you consider the attendance at the Imola race at 80,000 is about what NASCAR gets at a Busch series event in a small town like Bristol for example; go figure.

In comparison for example, the typical NASCAR fan travels ~380 miles to attend the events at Charlotte with ~200,000 fans. They expect on any given Sunday "their man" might win. Even if he is Dick Trickle. I would bet the average fan would not drive ~380 miles and pay $65 per ticket if they were fairly sure Jeff Gordon were going to win every race by 20 seconds. I understand that F1 is the best racing on the planet, but I am not sure F1 has the right balance between technology showcase and sporting competition.
RANT OFF:

I feel better now!
 

Ron Earp

Admin
Completely agree. I just tried to watch a little myself and cannot get into it at all. To me that racing is so unaccessable that it doesn't lead itself to new watchers or participation from fans. I don't like NASCAR, but they sure know how to get their fans involved. I've tinkered with watching F1 on and off for over 10 years but the last few have been difficult.
 

Dave Bilyk

Dave Bilyk
Supporter
I've always been a F1 fan, but I think you are right on. These days I generally fall asleep somewhere before half race /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif Is that my age? Maybe partly, but unfortunately the undoubted skill and effort and bravery these guys put into their driving, is not really reflected in the spectacle, at least on TV.
F1 has always been a 'clique' sport, like an acquired taste I feel, you really need to be involved in some way to enjoy it. In days gone buy it used to excite me, and after reading your post I think I understand one of the things which is missing these days, and made it so exciting for me before. Historically, F1 has often only been exciting when it involves a confrontation between two drivers, otherwise it can become lacking. Unfortunately this is the way it is because of the reluctance of F1 to change with the times and make it a competition between ALL teams and drivers like many other motorsport series which organise it that way.
Now for more than several years, there hasnt been the confrontation between two people of similar ability to make it exciting. Confrontations which made it exciting in the past, for example Mansell and Piquet, Senna and Prost, we could have seen Senna v Schumacher if Senna had not been so tragically lost.
Unless they change F1 in a way that evens up the competition and excites the fans, it will always go through lean years until someone comes along to challenge the 'master', and I for one, will only watch it when I don't have anything better to do, although I am still in awe and admiration of the technology and the participants. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
regards
Dave
 
Hi All,

Agreed, Gary.

As one of the older guys who remembers the 1960's era of Grand Prix racing with great affection I agree with the above views - boring. I watched the start and parts of today's Grand Prix and felt that working in my study had more appeal. Also scary how many of my friends and business associates feel the same - guys who were passionate about the sport in years gone by. Like the sparkle gone out of a marriage of long standing!

In an earlier posting I mentioned the South African bike Grand Prix last Sunday. Now that was something with riders in all three classes - the 125, 250 and 500, fighting it out on the ragged edge to the bitter end. Magic stuff!

I've just finished reading a book 'The Piranha Club' by Timothy Collings. It's a story of the world of Formula One and all the politics involved. It tells of a new world of Formula One that began in the 1990s. You don't wanna know!

I preferred McLaren's Ron Dennis, as a race mechanic many years ago, in oil stained overalls in a photo with Jochen Rindt. Now those were the good old days!

Hope Bernie and Max have the answer For Formula One Viagra!

We live in hope!
Andre 40
 
I think things would be a lot more interesting if MS and or Ferrari were not involved because they are so far ahead. The battle for second on back is quite interesting. I mean BAR on the pole??? That was great! There are several of the other drivers that would make great people to battle it out for domination if MS was not there,etc. He is pretty incredible and when combined with the current Ferrari team the are really in a different league. I have enjoyed the F1 races that I have attended. The cars are so incredible. At Indy you can watch them go from 200 MPH to ~~50 MPH in something like 50 yards coming in to turn one. Heck they do a 1 g stop by just letting off the gas (drag is that high).
 
Well, I still like it, if not for the technical aspects alone. Clearly, Bernie and Max cannot find a way to spice things up. Everything they try ends up not working. I think we can all agree the engineers are far more intelligent than the promoters. The most simple solution would seem to be limiting downforce. This then allows more drafting and hopefully outbraking.

Last year I arrived at Indy too late, but not this year. Three-day ticket holders get to walk the pits Thursday morning, should be fantastic.

As for NASCAR, they have done a greta job of marketing to the fans. And I respect the fans in their wonderful support of the sponsors. But I hate the way NASCAR contrives the results with their myrid rules on restrictor plates et al. At least in F1 they allow the cars to race and not keep changing the rules. Can you imagine if they kept changing the rules to stop Ferrari from winning? (Wait, isn't that what they have been doing?!) What is wrong MS and Ferrari winning? When did it become bad taste for a team to win a bunch of races? ISn't that what they are supposed to do? And isn't McLaren and Williams and all the rest who are really to blame? With their budgets, why can they not catch Ferrari? Instead of scolding Ferrari for winning, we should be chastising the others for being off pace.

Now I feel better.
 
Well, I think it F1 is going to get worse before it gets better. Case in point: the proposed rules changes. Quoting from this article on speedtv.com:

[ QUOTE ]
2008 rule changes proposed by FIA:

Technical:
• 2.4-literV8 engines, with a maximum of four valves per cylinder
• Engines must last two race weekends
• Specified components to made from “spec” materials
• Standard ECUs
• Manual gearboxes and clutches
• Ban on electronically controlled differentials
• Ban on power steering
• Standard braking systems
• Tire widths reduced front and rear
• Aero package to reduce grip, straightline and cornering speeds

Sporting:
• No spare cars allowed during race weekends
• Cars to remain in parc ferme throughout event
• A single tire supplier, producing to FIA “spec”
• Drastic reduction in testing based on mileage
• Two identical sets of tires for qual and race
• New qualifying system
• No tire changes during the race

General:
• No restrictions on sale or loan of chassis between teams
• Twelve team entries to be accepted every year


[/ QUOTE ]

So, yeah, there seems to be an emphasis on taking driver aids away which should make for better driver-vs-driver racing, but it seems like the proposed rules are taking the pinacle of motorsports technology and turning it into a spec race.
 
I know. All of the teams are trying it is just Ferrari has really got it figured out. They have tried the downforce limits in the past which of course led to the "flat bottom cars." But as can be seen there are other ways to make downforce. The amazing thing is that The Ferrari budget is on the order of half of the NASA Langley Research Center budget (not all of NASA, but where I work). We employ ~4000 full time people and run a huge amount of test facilities including at one time 44 wind tunnels (now probably ~20). Ferrari has their own new wind tunnel for the past couple of years and I understand they run it 24/7. That is amazing. It is not just the cost of running the tunnel. It is the cost of having "stuff" to test. My god the tought of all of the different models and data that running at that pace would generate and be focused on one car. Wow!

Who knows what the answer would be to make F1 more fun for the fans. NASCARs formula has been moving to makeing the cars more "spec" thus there is less freedom for the rich teams to find that extra edge, etc. It does make for more winners, more lead changes and closer finishes. But the extreme (which I do not like) is the restrictor plate tracks. My saying is that any time you can do an entire hot lap and not let off the gas pedal and not use the brake is not really racing. He with the extra 2 HP and 0.0001 less drag coeficient wins! I think they should make them run the road course at Daytona and get rid of the restrictor plates.

Anyway I do honestly like most any kind of racing. It is all interesting in its own way.

Concerning the technology. I just purchased and am reading an excellent book called "Ferrari Formula 1" by Peter Wright. It is a very in depth look at the 2000 Ferrari F1 car.
 

Ian Anderson

Lifetime Supporter
Come on Give Ferrari and MS a break! At the moment thay are the best package and the rest will catch up and overtake in the development race.Remember when MS moved to Ferrari - they were not the winning team then but they have come good.In the past years there have been times when Mclaren, Williams and others have been dominant -= at the moment it is Ferrari.

That said don't take anything away from MS and his skills. I remember a few years back around New Year a Karting competition (commentry said all karts were set up by one team and identical) was put together in Paris where the "up and coming" karters were present and an invitational sent out to the other motorsport forms. MS and Irvine turned up from FI, A couple of F3 drivers and also some rally stars.
Final race and MS drew last spot on the grid. 2 laps in and he was 3rd. Another 2 laps and he was ahead of everyone - trying to lap the field! He was smooth and efficient in that machine and made the rest look sad!

Yes he could overtake and ther were no wings and aerodynamic aids on the cars that spoil the overtaking chances - perhaps these could be changed slightly to make F! mor of a show but even then I think the Ferrari MS package will be out front. (IMHO)

Ian
 
The best racing I ever watched was the Can Am series and of course The Trans Am wars with the Mustangs, Cameros and Javelins. Indy lost me when they went to the Turbos and the cars sounded like my wifes burned out Hair dryer. The F1 cars make an annoying buzz. To me part of the racing thing is the sound of a good running engine. I guess that is why I have become a fan of Vintage Racing. Hooray!, for Elkhart Lake and Monteray.

Vic
 
I have heard an interesting stereotype of sorts and want to see what you guys think. It goes like this. USA motorsports fans enjoy close competition in racing. F1 fans (non-USA) enjoy the technology and dominance more then close competition. When I say USA fans I mean all forms of motorsport (NASCAR, NHRA, CART, IRL, etc.) In general does this seem true?
 
There are two types of motorsport. There are technology based (where the primary goal is to win by a combination of engineering and driver excellence) and parity based (where the primary goal is to minimize the engineering factor and maximize the driver input). Whereas in the past, almost all motorsport was technology based, today there are few pure technology based competitions. (F1 and LeMans series maybe). However, if we were to continue to cut the leading F1 cars off at the knees until everyone was even, we would simply end up with another parity-based formula. As a car enthusiast first, I would find that very disturbing. I would like to think that there is at least one race somewhere where the car is still the main focus.

Having said that, the unfortunate situation today is that technology has got to the point where you can build anything to almost any spec that you desire. Unless you put some sort lid on it, using 1950’s rules for example, a theoretical F1 car could probably be built to travel at 600km/h and create G forces of more than 10 Gs (figures I plucked out of the air, but not inconceivable).

My solution? Make a simple change in the F1 philosophy. F1 of cars today are little more than ground-bound air craft and have very little relevance to road going cars. So pick out all the aspects of the cars that detract them from road going cars, and BAN them. NO wings! NO components that will only last for 2 hours, NO slicks! etc etc And if someone comes up with an alternative, ban it too. That would improve the unpredictability by scrambling all the currently fine-tuned technology (for a while) and bring F1 back to real racing cars - as a development bed for road cars. A bit radical, but then isn’t that what F1 is supposed to be?

That was my rant /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Hi All
I have been a F1 fan for over 35 years either at the circuit or on the TV. I have developed a new system for watching on the TV. I make sure I wash my clothes beforehand, then when the Grand Prix is on, I do the ironing. I find this doubles the excitement.

Regards

Dave Tickle
 
But seriously though Folks, one main reason for the current less than interesting situation is that the Ferraris have demonstrated phenomenal reliability over the past 4 years. In most races they both finish, even 1st and 2nd. There was one race about 18 months ago when the main talking point at the end was that MS had retired and was not on the podium -- the first time for a record number of races.
From a purist point of view, F1 is supposed to about who can produce the best car. The rules never considered how to make close racing. Until recent years that is, when Bernie Ecclestone realised the enormous TV potential. Since then rules have been adjusted to try to close things up. But it isn't easy.
Also, it has to be said that many circuits almost prohibit overtaking due to their shape and maybe the narrowness of the track.
For the best excitement though, you have be there! Maybe I won't get to Silverstone this year, but hope to be at the Shanghai GP!

Dave Tickle
 
[ QUOTE ]
From a purist point of view, F1 is supposed to about who can produce the best car.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have hit the nail right on the head Dave.

When people recall F1 highlights of the past, it is rarely about the detail of an individual race. It is almost always about a car's development, or a driver's championships.

The introduction of a new technology and how that created a manufacturer's period of dominance will be remembered long after a series of overtaking manouvers has been forgoten.

F1 is a soap opera, not a series /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 

Howard Jones

Supporter
OK Having read all the above I come away wondering who would win the most races if the cars were not allowed any areo aids, 6 inch wide tires, and 1.5 litre NA 4 bangers. On second thought I guess I really don't wonder. All the teams would spend the same money they are now and the best engineering talent and drivers would still win. More than likely going away.

Put them all in 20 million dollar F Fords and MS and the red cars would still be winning races.

I like NASCAR because I can drink a couple of beers before the first pit stop take a 2 hour nap during the middle 300 miles and wake up rested for the last lap drafting finish.

Oh and by the way I went to the CART race at long beach a couple of weeks ago. This will be the last season for CART. The fight is over the IRL won. SHIT!
 
The well-funded designers and engineers are too good to try and successfully hold them back with one common rules package. I think they need to start adding weight to successful cars until they fall back, then remove some, etc. It's the only way to prevent a string of crushing performances by an exceptional design.

Wouldn't a close Ferrari victory carrying 50 extra pounds be an impressive achievement? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
All the other teams are just gonna have to suck it up and find the combo to win like Ferrari did. I'm not a Ferrari fan but they do their homework. If the other teams want to win then they better start covert ops to find out what Ferrari is doing.. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Hersh /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Hersh

I get the impression there are enough Ferrari fans in Europe
that F1 would still survive if Ferarri never lost again.

But that would never happen in the US because we Yanks
believe in competition...even if it means changing the rules
regularly to achieve what is affectionately called "parity".
(See NASCAR/IRL/NFL/NHRA/etc etc etc)

MikeD
 
Back
Top