Canadian Grand Prix 2015 - Sunday Race Thread

I agree not to change technology but to open up limits that are holding back Honda ferrari and renault from advancing each race. These stuck pu's and limits on updates are horrible. I don't mind mgp predictable winning, what I don't like is knowing smart people cant fix old mistakes cause of rules limiting updates. That to me is so un f1. Ask teams to spend millions, but at the same time not allow them to fix design issues when identified.

Canada was further proof that you have 1 chance to get it right, from Nov to Feb.. after that, you are forced to live by the design decisions of the off season.

This, pretty much. 

 

Horrible season so far and it's not just because of Hamilton dominating everything. The racing is extremely dull and Canada usually produces some good racing. 

 

2017 rule changes can't come quickly enough. 

 

Another race where Mercedes turn down the engine and coast to a 40 second lead over second best another Mercedes powered car. Bring on 2017 till then I am finished unless I here of some close racing. See you all in 2017.  

 
Highlight of the race!

Better acceleration than a Honda engine.

This, pretty much. 
 
Horrible season so far and it's not just because of Hamilton dominating everything. The racing is extremely dull and Canada usually produces some good racing. 
 
2017 rule changes can't come quickly enough.

There was some good racing today. The whines over Hamilton winning seem to have clouded that.

What are the 2017 rule changes, and how will they help Renault and Honda over Mercedes and Ferrari?

PS- given up supporting Nico?

Seems like the same thing every two weeks. I enjoyed Monaco, and today's race as well. If you don't like the sport, watch something else. Your absence will probably do more to change the status quo than whining about it here.

Canada was further proof that you have 1 chance to get it right, from Nov to Feb.. after that, you are forced to live by the design decisions of the off season.

Sorry for the OT but you know your sig is wrong, don't you?

Sad, sad race. Everybody can see it and hear it, this conservation bullshit has been killing F1 since last year and before. Sadly, another reset is badly needed. Not that I have great hope in that anyway, but at least there's a slight probability that things will change for the better, especially after reaching such a low low. 

I went to the race today. I decided to do general admission for the first time since these races are so boring to watch now.
The engine noise IS a big deal. After the lights go off at the start until the cars reach the hairpin, which is where I was, all you hear is nothing as if the announcers had coordinated a minute of silence in memory of someone.
The cars are really fast . Vettel and Massa were very racey. That was about it.

Wow, when I used to go, you could hear them even off the island, let alone it was very loud anywhere on it.

Is the difference from past eras not more that we didn't hear about all that as opposed to it not happening?

Fuel saving in the past for strategy is one thing.. Fuel saving now cause of regs is a matter all together different. If a driver was trying to get an advantage by preventing a stop etc or short fill on a stop. all the best to him.

A driver because of rules having to lift and save fuel cause of the fia mandating only x litres is bullshit.

Edited by Paco, 08 June 2015 - 01:05.

Fun race, not super exciting race, but it had some drama. I'm amazed with how many posters on Autosport didn't watch f1 before 2004.

A driver because of rules having to lift and save fuel cause of the fia mandating only x litres is bullshit.

I believe the 100ltr total capacity limit wasn't something that the FIA came up with on there own, Pretty sure it was something that came from discussions with the engine suppliers as they wanted to really push fuel efficiency.

 

I also believe that some of the engine suppliers that were a part of the discussions were pushing for the limit to be lower.

Edited by GTRacer, 08 June 2015 - 01:54.

Canada produces dull races all the time in dry weather. In fact almost all tracks do in the dry.

 

If you are following F1 and havent figured this out yet, you are simply out of sync.

 

LOL. 

 

2012 had plenty of exciting races, most of them in the dry (Valencia, anyone?)

I believe the 100ltr total capacity limit wasn't something that the FIA came up with on there own, Pretty sure it was something that came from discussions with the engine suppliers as they wanted to really push fuel efficiency.
 
I also believe that some of the engine suppliers that were a part of the discussions were pushing for the limit to be lower.

I also seem to recall that the teams try to put less than the maximum in to try and gain an advantage. The teams will always try to gain an advantage by pushing the regs.
Teams also gamble on a safety car allowing them to save fuel which in Canada is normally a pretty safe bet.
The reason the drivers were so marginal on fuel today is that that there was no safety car.

LOL. 

 

2012 had plenty of exciting races, most of them in the dry (Valencia, anyone?)

 

The car performance has spread out a lot since then.

The car performance has spread out a lot since then.

 

Doesn't matter - the real problem is there's a massive lack of variety in terms of strategies. The tyres are rock solid and there's nothing more of a turn-off than 90% of the field going for the same strategy: a one-stopper. That's why the field spreads out. 

Doesn't matter - the real problem is there's a massive lack of variety in terms of strategies. The tyres are rock solid and there's nothing more of a turn-off than 90% of the field going for the same strategy: a one-stopper. That's why the field spreads out. 

 

Its hard for there to be actual racing when on a normal day the Mercedes beat Ferrari by 20-30 seconds and the Ferrari beat Williams by 20 seconds and Williams beat Red Bull by 20 seconds or whatever.

This gotta be the worst ever Canadian GP. So boring. Besides one pr two proper passes, the race was a total bore. The only highlight was Massa's pass on Marcus Ericsson, and then Vettel's fightback. 

 

The whole race, was about driver coaching, and lift and coasting. It's bloody horrible. Lift and coast lift, lift and coast..50 metres, 50 metres..amazing how F1 was in the 90s and look at this crap we have today. 

 

We were screwed by the Merc by not letting them race between themselves. It's clear they are still suffering from the Spa syndrome. The only way Rosberg can win on weekend if he secures pole. If not, he will always be coached to save fuel, save his brakes..

 

It's been two years now, with total Merc domination, right from the free practice till the sunday race. It's by default they are going to finish 1-2, unless they stage dramas like Monaco, just to show fans that they can 'miscalculate' too. 

 

I think this whole hybrid bullcrap, tyre formula, engine freeze and all is really taking it's toll on F1. You know F1 is in trouble when at Canada, nothing happens. Same thing as other weekends. 

Mercedes - contrived results barring a major mistake by someone

McLaren Honda - incompetence

Ferrari - for Enzo it was all about the engine and now even that is 2nd rate

Lotus and Williams - racers

Red Bull - going through the motions

Everyone else - embarrassed

FIA - impotent

Ecclestone - lost the thread (and interest)

F1 - 90% pit wall management (strategy, tires, fuel, brakes, speed, driver instruction, driver motivation) and 10% driver freedom

Media - hype (trying in vain to make their bread and butter interesting) rather than candor

 

The days of flat out Grand Prix racing among leading teams seem to be over.  

 

Its hard for there to be actual racing when on a normal day the Mercedes beat Ferrari by 20-30 seconds and the Ferrari beat Williams by 20 seconds and Williams beat Red Bull by 20 seconds or whatever.

 

Changing the tyres to softer compounds or simply softening them to allow for different strategies is a quicker solution for better racing and more action rather than waiting for a team to one day catch up to Mercedes. 

 

Like I said, the problem isn't Mercedes dominating, the problem is there's no racing, it's always the same strategies and it's downright boring because there's no literally no tyre degradation. 

Softer tyres won't help. They are fundamentally flawed whereby you simply cannot push them. All this 'we made a product at the FIAs wishes' baloney. Could they have really not made a tyre that rewards drivers who push, but still degrades at an honest rate?

Fuel saving has always been a part of F1. The difference nowadays is that the teams have much better data to manage this - and the communication is on this is open to the fans.

I am sure Senna fans would have loved a better fuel management in 1991. And for those loving cars run out of fuel- try to get hold of a rerun of San Marino GP 1985.

Changing the tyres to softer compounds or simply softening them to allow for different strategies is a quicker solution for better racing and more action rather than waiting for a team to one day catch up to Mercedes. 
 
Like I said, the problem isn't Mercedes dominating, the problem is there's no racing, it's always the same strategies and it's downright boring because there's no literally no tyre degradation.

Fans complained about the 'cheese'/ 'show' tyres. Pirelli got a chunk of bad press. Pirelli changed in reaction to that. The cars couldn't race, had to maintain a gap, had one shot to attack as going offline ruined the tyres. I half agree with you (I think the main problem of similar strategies is forcing the teams to run two compounds- they all have the same computers to calculate best strategy....) but this again proves JV correct- listening to the fans is dangerous. That how we ended up with the likes of DRS, show tyres to rock hard tyres....

  Sure.  From two weeks ago in Monaco leading by almost 20 seconds.    Anytime Hamilton can build a gap he does it.  It's amazing how people try to spin a slim margin into some form of

domination over Rosberg.   

 

Tsk, tsk, Riverside. I am the guy who wrote to the Hamiltonites: 'Get a room, will ya?' You are barking up the wrong tree...

 

Formula 1 ‏@F1  1m1 minute ago

Kimi Raikkonen posts the fastest lap (1:16.987) at the #CanadianGP for the 4th time in his career

 

And not a single **** was given...

Fans complained about the 'cheese'/ 'show' tyres. Pirelli got a chunk of bad press. Pirelli changed in reaction to that. The cars couldn't race, had to maintain a gap, had one shot to attack as going offline ruined the tyres. I half agree with you (I think the main problem of similar strategies is forcing the teams to run two compounds- they all have the same computers to calculate best strategy....) but this again proves JV correct- listening to the fans is dangerous. That how we ended up with the likes of DRS, show tyres to rock hard tyres....

 

To be honest, show tyres were still better than what we have now. At least then you had some diversity in the results and the championship wasn't boring. In the end, it was still down to the best team that could manage the tyres better on every circuit so I don't see what the whole fuss was about in the first place. Let's be honest, now it's complete **** with all these predictable one-stoppers and rock hard Pirellis. I'd rather take a 2012 season ten times than the current one. 

 

Tyres are supposed to degrade, they're supposed to be managed, that's how it's always been. And they took that away. 

Regarding the show tyres, I thought they changed them because they kept exploding?

Fuel saving has always been a part of F1. The difference nowadays is that the teams have much better data to manage this - and the communication is on this is open to the fans.

I am sure Senna fans would have loved a better fuel management in 1991. And for those loving cars run out of fuel- try to get hold of a rerun of San Marino GP 1985.

From 1997-2006 show me quotes from drivers bitching about the tires that they cant push to the maximum?Yes michelins had graining problems but for a few laps and it was an excellent tire which could be pushed punished and abused. Did you watch the 1998 Hungarian grand prix where Michael did 18 qualifying laps? Please take off your rose tinted glasses. Viewing figures are declining everyone is not happy with the situation like Alonso said the grandstands show how boring the sport has become.

 

People used to save fuel in the past so they can stretch their stint to put in the fast laps when the car in front pitted..Now if the driver does not save fuel from the first lap he will not even finish the race.

Edited by MJ999, 08 June 2015 - 08:12.

The racing is different from the past, which doesn't automatically make it bad...

 

In my opinion it is far more a team sport than just man and machine...

 

It is also turning into a more endurance than flat out racing... (Different people like different things...?)

Softer tyres won't help. They are fundamentally flawed whereby you simply cannot push them. All this 'we made a product at the FIAs wishes' baloney. Could they have really not made a tyre that rewards drivers who push, but still degrades at an honest rate?

Nope, they can't.

Can they not just insist that all cars are fully fueled up to 100 litres at the start? If teams want to carry some round unused to the finish by excessive lift and coast, well that's their choice.

 

It would cost next to diddly squat to implement.

 

MB are in danger of shooting themselves in the foot with over stage-management of their drivers to create artificial situations. Why simultaneously tell  LH he is low on fuel when he is in the better position on fuel and warn Nico about his brakes? The world can hear that you don't want them racing!

 

People have paid good money to see F1 racing - not some demonstration laps of cars being driven at 90%

 

Sean

Why not ban fuel saving radio messages? It must be possible for the drivers to see their own fuel consumption on the dash, so let them work it out for themselves.

Why not ban fuel saving radio messages? It must be possible for the drivers to see their own fuel consumption on the dash, so let them work it out for themselves.

 

Even that would be not too much a strain on the drivers. All you do is add a figure to the dashboard that indicates how much laps in fuel you have for the rest of the race. The drivers dials the stuff up or down, respective of the -lap or +lap. The 'problem' with this race was that there was no pace-car, and Christian Horner indicated (at the Beeb) that had thrown their calculations out of the windows... So even with self-management the lifting and coasting this particular Grand Prix would have stayed the same...

 

(Except of course we would not be bitching and moaning about it, because we would not know during the race. All you would see is cars putting less good laps... and hear the cause later. Would be quite a relieve, by the way. Sometimes F1 fans really suffer from 'too much information'.)

I went to the race today. I decided to do general admission for the first time since these races are so boring to watch now.
The engine noise IS a big deal. After the lights go off at the start until the cars reach the hairpin, which is where I was, all you hear is nothing as if the announcers had coordinated a minute of silence in memory of someone.
The cars are really fast . Vettel and Massa were very racey. That was about it.

 

Yeah I went to the last race (Monaco) - first race I've been to since the new engine regs came in - and I was really disappointed. I haven't been a big critic of the lack of noise, but the whole weekend just felt a bit flat with these new cars. Too quiet, too much fuel and tyre conservation going on. There's a real lack of violence about the cars these days, the GP2 cars seemed more spectacular. Also the lack of Kangaroo TV sucked. If Bernie expects us to rely on a mobile app at the track to know what's going on, he needs to sort out the fact that mobile coverage always crashes at these events. 

Why not ban fuel saving radio messages? It must be possible for the drivers to see their own fuel consumption on the dash, so let them work it out for themselves.

 

I fail to see how it makes racing any better. So some drivers will push too much and run of fuel, whle other will conserve more that necessary and be at disadvantage - but how does it improve things in any way?

I fail to see how it makes racing any better. So some drivers will push too much and run of fuel, whle other will conserve more that necessary and be at disadvantage - but how does it improve things in any way?

 

You don't see the excitement in that, really ? 

LOL. 

 

2012 had plenty of exciting races, most of them in the dry (Valencia, anyone?)

 

Valencia, exciting? What have you been smoking? I'm so glad Valencia is gone.

 

 

You don't see the excitement in that, really ? 

Edited by J0rd4n, 08 June 2015 - 11:33.

 

Valencia, exciting? What have you been smoking?

 

 

 

Honestly I don't see the excitement in someone running out of fuel. Reliability issues don't make exciting racing...

 

 

 

Reliability issues always were part of the excitement in the past, even last year the excitement came from Mercedes having troubles with their car. Today it's much harder for smaller teams to gain points, when in the past they had a shot for good points or even a podium when everything went crazy. Possible retirements always added something to the suspense, for everybody, will my driver go the line or will the engine of the opponent go kaput. A lot of people said it's unfair, but in reality who did not crazy when the leading driver had to park sideways to hand over a win to your favorite driver. Expect really hard braking moments like Hakkinen in 2001 or Lewis in Monaco this year. As someone said you need that suspense moment. And I don't think it's unfair if the driver can control their fuel, it would be far from random.  

 

 

Just wont happen. They don't enforce the driver coaching rules now, and all it takes is a code to get around it, if they did. 

 

The only way to make the racing more exciting is to let the field close up. And the only way that's gonna happen is with more technical freedom around the current regulations and stability with the current regulations.

 

All in all I think people are judging this season far too early. Lauda made a comment after the race saying Vettel's pace was a match for Mercedes and he's glad he started from the back. Had Vettel started 3rd this race could have been a very different story. Merc will trip up again at some point and Ferrari will be there to make it exciting and pick up the pieces.

Edited by J0rd4n, 08 June 2015 - 11:49.

Just wont happen. They don't enforce the driver coaching rules now, and all it takes is a code to get around it, if they did. 

 

The only way to make the racing more exciting is to let the field close up. And the only way that's gonna happen is with more technical freedom around the current regulations and stability with the current regulations.

 

Technical freedom means Mercedes will be able to wring even more advantage from the regs than they already do...

Technical freedom means Mercedes will be able to wring even more advantage from the regs than they already do...

 

No. There are much finer margins for Mercedes to improve on, compared to teams like Honda and Renault. It's known as the development curve. The teams will catch up.

 

I'm also not talking specifically about engines, if you open up the aero regulations, I'm sure teams like Red Bull could produce something spectacular. They seem the most innovative in that area.

Edited by J0rd4n, 08 June 2015 - 11:56.

Fuel saving in the past for strategy is one thing.. Fuel saving now cause of regs is a matter all together different. If a driver was trying to get an advantage by preventing a stop etc or short fill on a stop. all the best to him.

A driver because of rules having to lift and save fuel cause of the fia mandating only x litres is bullshit.

 

"At many races, particularly at high speed circuits such as Imola, Spa-Francorchamps, Hockenheim, the Österreichring and Monza, fuel consumption was always a concern, as the FIA lessened the amount of allowable fuel from 220 litres in 1984 and 1985 to 195 litres for 1986. As a result, fuel consumption became a problem for most teams since the engines were slightly more powerful than before."

 

http://en.wikipedia....mula_One_season

 

This is from 1986, one of the best seasons from F1's "golden era", when the FIA lowered the maximum fuel allowance, causing all manner of headaches for the teams. Fuel conservation is nothing new in F1, people need to take their rose tinted specs off and get some perspective.

"At many races, particularly at high speed circuits such as Imola, Spa-Francorchamps, Hockenheim, the Österreichring and Monza, fuel consumption was always a concern, as the FIA lessened the amount of allowable fuel from 220 litres in 1984 and 1985 to 195 litres for 1986. As a result, fuel consumption became a problem for most teams since the engines were slightly more powerful than before."

 

http://en.wikipedia....mula_One_season

 

This is from 1986, one of the best seasons from F1's "golden era", when the FIA lowered the maximum fuel allowance, causing all manner of headaches for the teams. Fuel conservation is nothing new in F1, people need to take their rose tinted specs off and get some perspective.

 

Yes, fuel saving has been an issue in the past. But it's a question of degree. The amount of lift and coasting going on is unprecedented in my time watching the sport. 

  Sure.  From two weeks ago in Monaco leading by almost 20 seconds.    Anytime Hamilton can build a gap he does it.  It's amazing how people try to spin a slim margin into some form of

domination over Rosberg.   

He built that 20s gap in traffic. In Monaco. You know, when driving really matters. Everything else, including his now trademarked 4s-gap-to-the-pitstop, is delta'ing.

"At many races, particularly at high speed circuits such as Imola, Spa-Francorchamps, Hockenheim, the Österreichring and Monza, fuel consumption was always a concern, as the FIA lessened the amount of allowable fuel from 220 litres in 1984 and 1985 to 195 litres for 1986. As a result, fuel consumption became a problem for most teams since the engines were slightly more powerful than before."

 

http://en.wikipedia....mula_One_season

 

This is from 1986, one of the best seasons from F1's "golden era", when the FIA lowered the maximum fuel allowance, causing all manner of headaches for the teams. Fuel conservation is nothing new in F1, people need to take their rose tinted specs off and get some perspective.

 

And these are all high speed curcuits. Today we have fuel saving at all curcuits. At some points even at Monaco.

That is not the same and combined with other factors, such as DRS, it is understandable for those who want to see racing, that the viewing figures are massivly down.

"At many races, particularly at high speed circuits such as Imola, Spa-Francorchamps, Hockenheim, the Österreichring and Monza, fuel consumption was always a concern, as the FIA lessened the amount of allowable fuel from 220 litres in 1984 and 1985 to 195 litres for 1986. As a result, fuel consumption became a problem for most teams since the engines were slightly more powerful than before."

http://en.wikipedia....mula_One_season

This is from 1986, one of the best seasons from F1's "golden era", when the FIA lowered the maximum fuel allowance, causing all manner of headaches for the teams. Fuel conservation is nothing new in F1, people need to take their rose tinted specs off and get some perspective.

Yes, whilst absolutely true its not really relevant or comparable. The reason being back then with no social media, no team radio, no post race discussion on forums fans were blissfully unaware that their driver might infact be fuel saving.. this era we get it repeated to the drivers constantly during the race, it's not rose tinted glasses, it's an entirely different perspective which makes a marked difference.

Yes, whilst absolutely true its not really relevant or comparable. The reason being back then with no social media, no team radio, no post race discussion on forums fans were blissfully unaware that their driver might infact be fuel saving.. this era we get it repeated to the drivers constantly during the race, it's not rose tinted glasses, it's an entirely different perspective which makes a marked difference.

 

So what you're saying is that it's fine for the drivers to lift and coast and save fuel as long as you're not aware they are doing it?

"At many races, particularly at high speed circuits such as Imola, Spa-Francorchamps, Hockenheim, the Österreichring and Monza, fuel consumption was always a concern, as the FIA lessened the amount of allowable fuel from 220 litres in 1984 and 1985 to 195 litres for 1986. As a result, fuel consumption became a problem for most teams since the engines were slightly more powerful than before."

http://en.wikipedia....mula_One_season

This is from 1986, one of the best seasons from F1's "golden era", when the FIA lowered the maximum fuel allowance, causing all manner of headaches for the teams. Fuel conservation is nothing new in F1, people need to take their rose tinted specs off and get some perspective.

I didn't watch in the 80s, only 90s on but doesn't mean it was wise even then. Today's issues are no less valid and I think in the era were drivers are cruising around, barely breaking a sweat and fans complaining about lack of racing and the fia mandating fuel flow rates that limiting fuel makes any sense what so ever. High low sped circuits doesn't matter. They have now a formal fuel flow limit so being tight on fuel makes no sense.

Something also needs to be done with tires, when both spec of tires produce nearly the same outcome it's a major issue - there should be a wide difference in them but so much it make no sense to use the other compound.. Drivers should be able to push the tire for at least 75% of the tire interval with fear of losing temp or grip.

And btw to some that say stop watching if you don't like it... I do. I've boycotted a lot of last season and will do so again this season. I watched mainly cause it's my home gp and would like it to continue on for years so I did my part to watch it. Also, it's a gp that typically is one of the better races so was opening it would have been.

Sad that the grid is pretty strong driver wise, pretty strong team representation wise and yet dull as waiting for water to boil. I hate that the drivers seem to just be lapping and not going all out or even trying due to fuel and weak tires or stuck with bad pu's cause they have limited options to upgrade them..

Edited by Paco, 08 June 2015 - 13:16.

This gotta be the worst ever Canadian GP. 

I can think of a couple that were worse. 1994/1996/2001/2002/2004 & possibly 2005 spring to mind.

 

Doesn't matter - the real problem is there's a massive lack of variety in terms of strategies. The tyres are rock solid and there's nothing more of a turn-off than 90% of the field going for the same strategy: a one-stopper. That's why the field spreads out. 

I seem to recall people complaining when the tyres were softer.

 

As to strategy, 16 cars did 1 stop the other 4 did 2. 5 cars were running an alternative tyre strategy (Starting on softs).

 

Finally most races are not 1 stop. This year most have been 2-3.

I fail to see how it makes racing any better. So some drivers will push too much and run of fuel, whle other will conserve more that necessary and be at disadvantage - but how does it improve things in any way?

Don't know if its really better or not but its how things were in the past & nobody was complaining.

 

So what you're saying is that it's fine for the drivers to lift and coast and save fuel as long as you're not aware they are doing it?

Well its been going on for decades to varying degrees & I don't recall anyone complaining.

 

Was only when we started hearing about it via the team radio that you started hearing complaints, Before that even when it was going on nobody seemed to really notice & it certainly didn't seem to have a negative effect on things.