Jump to content


Photo

Where Are The Fighting Spirits?


  • Please log in to reply
52 replies to this topic

#1 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 05 October 2012 - 12:56

I came accross an article written by G. Donaldson, and while reading, it hit me how fitting topic to end of an era, when one of the very greats says, no more! You can agree or disagree, but his sentiment bode well with my mood about current F1. Take a minute or two and see for yourselve.

Monday, September 17, 2012

Where Are The Fighting Spirits?
"Slow down, Lewis"- "Push harder, Kimi" - "Don't overtake him,
Kamui" - "We'll undercut him in the pits, Checo". The insistent 
voices of the 'driving instructors' in their headsets are turning 
today's F1 stars into remote-controlled robots and robbing the sport 
of a vital dimension in which fighting spirits are able to flourish...  
...The pushy puppeteers who pull the drivers' strings from the
computer-controlled perspective of the 'Prats Perch' along the
pit wall constantly strive to curb the enthusiasm of the real
racers in the field....
It's much harder to see today's fighting spirits, but a shortlist
of those with real racer inclinations reminiscent of past masters
would likely only comprise about a third of the current grid. 


http://www.f1speedwr...01_archive.html



Advertisement

#2 Alx09

Alx09
  • Member

  • 1,278 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 05 October 2012 - 13:01

Tyres controls it. When Pirelli supply tyres that hold up, drivers push and fight - Hungary, Spa, Monza - when they don't, the drivers cruise and are instructed when to do what, because pushing and fighting will get no wins.

It has to do with how the tyres degrade. Pirelli just need to nail the balance between degradation and pushing better. In Singapore they went back to heavy degradation again to try to spice up the race, but it had the opposite effect (cruising isn't exciting IMO).

Edit: More of this - http://www.autosport...t.php/id/102010

Edited by Alx09, 05 October 2012 - 13:18.


#3 alfa1

alfa1
  • Member

  • 1,850 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 05 October 2012 - 13:10


Partly its to do with the new regulations.
In years gone by with refuelling and more durable tyres it was just "push like hell all the time", but now the tyre situation has to be managed and conserved.

But in any case isnt F1 supposed to be a team sport? Why is it a "problem" that the team is helping to maximise the use of the available resources?

Do people want a race series in which the team involvement goes away completely one the race starts, and the driver is left alone to fend for themselves? By reading posts by some people in recent times (suggestions to ban radios, as an example) it would appear that way.


#4 Kvothe

Kvothe
  • Member

  • 6,853 posts
  • Joined: November 10

Posted 05 October 2012 - 13:12

http://www.youtube.c...etailpage#t=46s

?

#5 goldenboy

goldenboy
  • Member

  • 3,494 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 05 October 2012 - 13:12

If I had to pick one major thing to complain about in F1 it would be that I have to ask myself when looking at live timing if a driver is driving to a delta from the team or just slow.

But hey, everythings a trade off.

#6 sharo

sharo
  • Member

  • 1,792 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 05 October 2012 - 13:34

Where Are The Fighting Spirits?

Gone with the wind ... er-r, I mean with the tyres.

#7 TimRTC

TimRTC
  • Member

  • 878 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 05 October 2012 - 14:17

Just watch the btcc this weekend at Silverstone. That is going to have some fighting (spirit).

#8 Longtimefan

Longtimefan
  • Member

  • 3,170 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 05 October 2012 - 14:24

I miss drivers going out and going 'balls to the wall'.

It's good to see them pushing to the ragged edge, driving to a set delta time isn't F1, it's a joke indeed. :(

I think many drivers from the 60's-90's wouldn't even want to race in F1 nowadays as there's no thrill in it.

Thanks FIA/Pirelli



#9 Zeroninety

Zeroninety
  • Member

  • 177 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 05 October 2012 - 15:00

Do people want a race series in which the team involvement goes away completely one the race starts, and the driver is left alone to fend for themselves? By reading posts by some people in recent times (suggestions to ban radios, as an example) it would appear that way.


I'd love to see the drivers fend for themselves. :up: The smartest and craftiest drivers would rise to the top (though a couple are up there already). I have my doubts that pre-crash Massa would have *ever* won a GP without Smedley in his ear, coaching him lap after lap. :rolleyes:

Plus we might see some occasional accidental pit-stacking, since a pitting driver might not know that his teammate's pulled off onto pit lane before it's too late. The pit crews'll have to spend the entire race on their toes.

#10 SpaMaster

SpaMaster
  • Member

  • 5,856 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 05 October 2012 - 15:04

Why do you have to include "it hit me how fitting topic to end of an era, when one of the very greats says, no more! " to this subject? If you are referring to Schumacher, that is just plain opportunism. Schumacher has been well part of pit-radio and electronic aid era and thrived in it. He perfected the driver aid with Ferrari so much that they were in a class of their own in that department. Schumacher absolutely thrived in it. If you did not mean Schumacher, ignore this post.

#11 Seanspeed

Seanspeed
  • Member

  • 14,661 posts
  • Joined: October 08

Posted 05 October 2012 - 15:04

I miss drivers going out and going 'balls to the wall'.

It's good to see them pushing to the ragged edge, driving to a set delta time isn't F1, it's a joke indeed. :(

I think many drivers from the 60's-90's wouldn't even want to race in F1 nowadays as there's no thrill in it.

Thanks FIA/Pirelli

I dont think there's ever a time where every guy in the race was going qualifying-style the entire distance every time. Drivers cant push like they did in the refueling era, because the tires lasted and you knew exactly how much time you had on them, but even those guys weren't going all-out most of the time. Maybe on short stints, but even then there was machinery to worry about and you dont take as many risks in a race driving-wise either.

Drivers now race each other pretty hard when they're pushing for position and thats the important part to me. Yea, to get to the position of making that move, they might have to pick their battles more carefully, but when they go for it, they're pushing.

#12 teejay

teejay
  • Member

  • 3,768 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 05 October 2012 - 15:26

8 engine rule means they will never be flat out either.

#13 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 05 October 2012 - 15:30

I think Gerry has a point that we have lost type of racing when a driver was in charge of strategy, and not some second rate computer would-be driver on a pitwall, which tangibly links to a character of a racer, who could push when he needed or wanted to push, and some, he names couple of them, were pushing all the time. Drivers cannot do that anymore, as they became submissive to a pitwall, and I am flabergasted that we have some in here among us who are just fine with it.

#14 as65p

as65p
  • Member

  • 17,803 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 05 October 2012 - 16:32

I think Gerry has a point that we have lost type of racing when a driver was in charge of strategy, and not some second rate computer would-be driver on a pitwall, which tangibly links to a character of a racer, who could push when he needed or wanted to push, and some, he names couple of them, were pushing all the time. Drivers cannot do that anymore, as they became submissive to a pitwall, and I am flabergasted that we have some in here among us who are just fine with it.


As pointed out already, it was no other than Schumacher in his Ferrari years, specifically with Ross Brawn as his "second rate computer would-be driver on a pitwall", who perfected the art of leaving strategy to the team and concentrating solely on the driving. With great success, I might add.

Are you complaining about that, really?

#15 Slowinfastout

Slowinfastout
  • Member

  • 9,681 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 05 October 2012 - 16:43

The objective still is to win and figuring out the best way to do it... for example there was a time when drivers were instructed not to exceed a rev limit because the engines were fragile. Very often some teams/tire manufacturers had to work with tires that were much more experimental in nature than the current Pirellis, and people accepted it was part of the game (or they didn't, but it didn't make headlines that would be forever discussed on the internet, because there was no internet.)

I think it's a bit ridiculous to pin everything on one season worth of tires. F1 has changed tremendously in a short amount of time and everyone does it's best to adapt. That is the point.

Since the nineties we went through active-suspensions, anti-lock brakes, traction control and launch control... McLaren-Peugeots and all sorts of other unfortunate engines which had to be nursed around to make them last... now there are rules that makes it a priority to have bulletproof engines and gearboxes. Driver adjustable aero and an exotic KERS button was introduced.

For the tires, we had Goodyears and Pirellis, then we went from having just Goodyears, to having Goodyears and Bridgestones, to having grooved versions of those, then just Bridgestones, followed by Michelins and Bridgestones... then these were asked to last a qualy followed by a full GP, then that idea was dropped but a limit of 14 sets was introduced, then Michelin quit and only Bridgestone remained - and two compounds had to be used in a race, then the slicks returned, then only 11 sets per driver were allowed, then Bridgestone quit and Pirelli arrived - they are asked to make tires that wear faster and have a big difference between compounds - the weight distribution of the cars is now fixed, then Pirelli are asked to make norrower fronts and reduce the difference between compounds because teams couldn't really use one of the two compounds and had to do the shortest stint imaginable on the 'bad' one.

but this year is the bad one, right? What are the odds of the current format sticking around and ruin your interest in F1 forever?

Edited by Slowinfastout, 05 October 2012 - 16:51.


#16 OoxLox

OoxLox
  • Member

  • 436 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 05 October 2012 - 16:56

The fighting spirits are still there - I challenge anyone to walk into a pit garage during a race and find it tepid, boring and clinical. It's just that technology has extended the fighting part out of the cockpit and all the way back to base via broadband and satellite-relayed telemetry, and given a lot more people in the team a real-time job to do in the race. If Colin Chapman had pit-to-car radio you can bet your arse he would have had a word with Jim Clark about saving his engine etc when he was already plenty ahead of the field. At the end of all those wired and wireless links, there's still only one person with their hands and feet on the controls of the car.




#17 flavio81

flavio81
  • Member

  • 88 posts
  • Joined: August 12

Posted 05 October 2012 - 17:06

I came accross an article written by G. Donaldson, and while reading, it hit me how fitting topic to end of an era, when one of the very greats says, no more! You can agree or disagree, but his sentiment bode well with my mood about current F1. Take a minute or two and see for yourselve.

Monday, September 17, 2012


http://www.f1speedwr...01_archive.html


G. Donaldson's claims are horse excrement. He thinks tire degradation or engine reliability issues is something new to 2012, and that 80s drivers always drove with the foot to the floor, maximum fuel mixture, maximum turbo boost, with no tire degradation issues? HA HA HA

HA HA HA HA!

The objective still is to win and figuring out the best way to do it... for example there was a time when drivers were instructed not to exceed a rev limit because the engines were fragile. Very often some teams/tire manufacturers had to work with tires that were much more experimental in nature than the current Pirellis, and people accepted it was part of the game (or they didn't, but it didn't make headlines that would be forever discussed on the internet, because there was no internet.)

I think it's a bit ridiculous to pin everything on one season worth of tires. F1 has changed tremendously in a short amount of time and everyone does it's best to adapt. That is the point.

Since the nineties we went through active-suspensions, anti-lock brakes, traction control and launch control... McLaren-Peugeots and all sorts of other unfortunate engines which had to be nursed around to make them last... now there are rules that makes it a priority to have bulletproof engines and gearboxes. Driver adjustable aero and an exotic KERS button was introduced.

For the tires, we had Goodyears and Pirellis, then we went from having just Goodyears, to having Goodyears and Bridgestones, to having grooved versions of those, then just Bridgestones, followed by Michelins and Bridgestones... then these were asked to last a qualy followed by a full GP, then that idea was dropped but a limit of 14 sets was introduced, then Michelin quit and only Bridgestone remained - and two compounds had to be used in a race, then the slicks returned, then only 11 sets per driver were allowed, then Bridgestone quit and Pirelli arrived - they are asked to make tires that wear faster and have a big difference between compounds - the weight distribution of the cars is now fixed, then Pirelli are asked to make norrower fronts and reduce the difference between compounds because teams couldn't really use one of the two compounds and had to do the shortest stint imaginable on the 'bad' one.

but this year is the bad one, right? What are the odds of the current format sticking around and ruin your interest in F1 forever?


Well said !!


#18 stanga

stanga
  • Member

  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: April 11

Posted 05 October 2012 - 17:21

The fighting spirits are still there - I challenge anyone to walk into a pit garage during a race and find it tepid, boring and clinical. It's just that technology has extended the fighting part out of the cockpit and all the way back to base via broadband and satellite-relayed telemetry, and given a lot more people in the team a real-time job to do in the race. If Colin Chapman had pit-to-car radio you can bet your arse he would have had a word with Jim Clark about saving his engine etc when he was already plenty ahead of the field. At the end of all those wired and wireless links, there's still only one person with their hands and feet on the controls of the car.


With a computer holding the throttle open.

#19 alfa1

alfa1
  • Member

  • 1,850 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 05 October 2012 - 17:49

I'd love to see the drivers fend for themselves.



Alfred Neubauer realised that drivers were out there on their own and invented a set of signals to communicate with the driver.
Push, hold position, pit now etc...

If you want to go back to a time when drivers made their own strategy with no help from the pits, it appears to be before September 12, 1926.



Advertisement

#20 Jimisgod

Jimisgod
  • Member

  • 2,956 posts
  • Joined: July 09

Posted 05 October 2012 - 18:07

You mean those wonderful days when certain drivers were handicapped simply because of the brand of tyres their team chose?

Even the period in the 80s and early 90s, forever looked back on today as the 'glory days', cars were running out of fuel left and right, so you had to drive conservatively to stop that.

I'll bet you anything the people of 2022 will whine for the regulations of 2012 just like people moan about how great 2002 was because the drivers could 'push'.

#21 Darth Sidious

Darth Sidious
  • Member

  • 751 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 05 October 2012 - 18:10


I was with a client earlier this week, just shooting the sh*t after fixing his machine, and the conversation turned around to Lewis, Mercedes, Schumacher, tyres, refuelling, and days gone by etc.

Now bear in mind this guy is back in work after retiring, so is at a fairly advanced age, and has followed all sorts of sports all his life. His take on F1 is that it is at its worst ebb ever. He misses the variables that refuelling put into a race, both due to strategic aspects and the possibility of calamity like Verstappen's roasting or the comedy gold following Massa's stop at Singapore in 2008.

A tyre stop now is boring, he pointed out. 2.5 seconds of what exactly? They come in, they stop, they go. Thats it. No fumbling with heavy fuel rigs watching seconds leak away, no rocket like trails of burning leaked fuel as they roar off. Pit stops are now so disinteresting there's no point in TV directors showing them unless a wheel falls off.

Proper overtaking has gone. That's just a push to pass thanks to KERS and DRS. Just bide your time and you'll get past. Most overtakes are just a formality. Then he gets onto tyres. Now the leader is purposefully driving to a target time to degrade the tyres of the car behind him, keeping him in that 2 second zone so that the follower has to pit early and drops into traffic. Theres no flat out anymore, not even from the front. And then there's the cruising, the look after your tyres mantra which, as a viewer, is just annoying. It's just twenty cars going through the motions. He doesn't use live timing to see who is pushing and who is trundling. He just sees them all trundling around getting told to "save tyres save tyres save tyres" perhaps pushing for one lap and then pitting before getting told to save tyres again because they then have to last the rest of the race.

His exact words were that its all pretty much artificial now, confusing at times, and they aren't 'proper racers' any more because there's so much 'management' going on. There's only racing when the management ****s up (his expletive, ahem) and the masterplan goes out the window. And that's not that often.

You can blame it on rose tinted glasses, but this is a guy who does not live and breathe F1 like most of us do, so much so that it drives us to argue about it in our free time/idle work periods. He just watches and switches off until next week. This is the average F1 television viewer, not an obsessed afficionado or armchair expert, and if he's getting irritated with it all to the point where he's now asking me if I think it'll be worth watching the race this weekend instead of tuning in as he habitually did in recent years then there is something wrong when the sport is starting to alienate the lifelong casual viewer.

He summed it up best when he said that it was better under Mosley. At least then you knew you were going to be watching one of his chess matches, albeit played out at full speed with plenty of opportunity for mishaps. Now you get chess at half speed, won at the slowest pace possible, with every fifth word of the commentary either "tyres" or "pirelli", with driving penalties thrown in for those drivers daring to give viewers moments of excitement. Have an incident, here's a penalty. Lets outlaw all incidents. Riveting.

He does, however, admit that the qualifying format these days is just about perfect.

#22 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 05 October 2012 - 18:38

As pointed out already, it was no other than Schumacher in his Ferrari years, specifically with Ross Brawn as his "second rate computer would-be driver on a pitwall", who perfected the art of leaving strategy to the team and concentrating solely on the driving. With great success, I might add.

Are you complaining about that, really?

No.

#23 FenderJaguar

FenderJaguar
  • Member

  • 1,458 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 05 October 2012 - 18:38

I'd like to take his poem and just call it romantic bullshit. Drivers aren't robots today either. That they get instructions isn't the same as switching your brain off. Although drivers like Sato probably needed instructions all the time.

#24 muramasa

muramasa
  • Member

  • 3,270 posts
  • Joined: November 08

Posted 05 October 2012 - 18:45

Although drivers like Sato probably needed instructions all the time.

not as much as drivers like Maldonado or 2011 Lewis.


#25 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 05 October 2012 - 18:47

I was with a client earlier this week, just shooting the sh*t after fixing his machine, and the conversation turned around to Lewis, Mercedes, Schumacher, tyres, refuelling, and days gone by etc.

Now bear in mind this guy is back in work after retiring, so is at a fairly advanced age, and has followed all sorts of sports all his life. His take on F1 is that it is at its worst ebb ever. He misses the variables that refuelling put into a race, both due to strategic aspects and the possibility of calamity like Verstappen's roasting or the comedy gold following Massa's stop at Singapore in 2008.

A tyre stop now is boring, he pointed out. 2.5 seconds of what exactly? They come in, they stop, they go. Thats it. No fumbling with heavy fuel rigs watching seconds leak away, no rocket like trails of burning leaked fuel as they roar off. Pit stops are now so disinteresting there's no point in TV directors showing them unless a wheel falls off.

Proper overtaking has gone. That's just a push to pass thanks to KERS and DRS. Just bide your time and you'll get past. Most overtakes are just a formality. Then he gets onto tyres. Now the leader is purposefully driving to a target time to degrade the tyres of the car behind him, keeping him in that 2 second zone so that the follower has to pit early and drops into traffic. Theres no flat out anymore, not even from the front. And then there's the cruising, the look after your tyres mantra which, as a viewer, is just annoying. It's just twenty cars going through the motions. He doesn't use live timing to see who is pushing and who is trundling. He just sees them all trundling around getting told to "save tyres save tyres save tyres" perhaps pushing for one lap and then pitting before getting told to save tyres again because they then have to last the rest of the race.

His exact words were that its all pretty much artificial now, confusing at times, and they aren't 'proper racers' any more because there's so much 'management' going on. There's only racing when the management ****s up (his expletive, ahem) and the masterplan goes out the window. And that's not that often.

You can blame it on rose tinted glasses, but this is a guy who does not live and breathe F1 like most of us do, so much so that it drives us to argue about it in our free time/idle work periods. He just watches and switches off until next week. This is the average F1 television viewer, not an obsessed afficionado or armchair expert, and if he's getting irritated with it all to the point where he's now asking me if I think it'll be worth watching the race this weekend instead of tuning in as he habitually did in recent years then there is something wrong when the sport is starting to alienate the lifelong casual viewer.

He summed it up best when he said that it was better under Mosley. At least then you knew you were going to be watching one of his chess matches, albeit played out at full speed with plenty of opportunity for mishaps. Now you get chess at half speed, won at the slowest pace possible, with every fifth word of the commentary either "tyres" or "pirelli", with driving penalties thrown in for those drivers daring to give viewers moments of excitement. Have an incident, here's a penalty. Lets outlaw all incidents. Riveting.

He does, however, admit that the qualifying format these days is just about perfect.

Well, he is not alone.


#26 Zeroninety

Zeroninety
  • Member

  • 177 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 05 October 2012 - 20:22

Alfred Neubauer realised that drivers were out there on their own and invented a set of signals to communicate with the driver.
Push, hold position, pit now etc...

If you want to go back to a time when drivers made their own strategy with no help from the pits, it appears to be before September 12, 1926.


Bearing in mind that I said nothing about pitboards, which are quite different from an engineer coaching his driver through every turn like a two year-old, I'll say, "Sure, why not?" The idea of each driver doing his own pitwork has a certain appeal as well.  ;)

The teams have a vested interest in taking as much of the race out of the drivers' hands as possible. That inclination needs to be, and should have been, fought by the rulesmakers at every turn.

#27 fer312t

fer312t
  • Member

  • 818 posts
  • Joined: September 01

Posted 05 October 2012 - 23:17

Gerald is 100% correct...
The apologists can drone on all they wish about how it was 'always this way' but never have the races been as tightly managed and effectively 'driven' by the pitwall as they have been these past few seasons....

#28 Garagiste

Garagiste
  • Member

  • 3,796 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 06 October 2012 - 00:30

"Pastor, try not to - oh."

#29 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,147 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 October 2012 - 01:26

G. Donaldson's claims are horse excrement. He thinks tire degradation or engine reliability issues is something new to 2012, and that 80s drivers always drove with the foot to the floor, maximum fuel mixture, maximum turbo boost, with no tire degradation issues? HA HA HA


:up:

Anyway this is yet another disguised "Pirelli is shit" thread because it's not enough that we have 20 others. But then they don't create much traffic anymore, so clearly a new one is needed base don the same false premises which have been debunked 1000 times before in the other 20 threads. Great work, Sakae!

#30 Eff One 2002

Eff One 2002
  • Member

  • 938 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 06 October 2012 - 01:33

I am flabergasted that we have some in here among us who are just fine with it.


There are some here who would be fine with it if the cars were radio-controlled.....

#31 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 06 October 2012 - 01:43

Who can change F1, and is there will, what it takes, and how long it would take? I have to admit that due to symbiotic relationship among tripartite participation, it is difficult for me to understand who main driver behind situation we are facing is, but I strongly doubt that FiA alone could be singled out, although perplexing stewardship and race control IMO is FiA’ problem. TWG is another source of concern, but ultimately Sporting Regulations could be amended to restrict oral communication and data acquisition traffic. Perhaps most flawed idea of all is lack of agreement how F1 should be defined. Is it a stock exchange share, or is it a sporting club run by selected a few for the love of the sport? Perhaps people will need to reexamine this notion, that Ferrari must be more like Williams or Marussia, rather than the other way around.

Edited by Sakae, 06 October 2012 - 01:44.


#32 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 3,763 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 October 2012 - 12:13

Who can change F1, and is there will, what it takes, and how long it would take? I have to admit that due to symbiotic relationship among tripartite participation, it is difficult for me to understand who main driver behind situation we are facing is, but I strongly doubt that FiA alone could be singled out, although perplexing stewardship and race control IMO is FiA’ problem. TWG is another source of concern, but ultimately Sporting Regulations could be amended to restrict oral communication and data acquisition traffic. Perhaps most flawed idea of all is lack of agreement how F1 should be defined. Is it a stock exchange share, or is it a sporting club run by selected a few for the love of the sport? Perhaps people will need to reexamine this notion, that Ferrari must be more like Williams or Marussia, rather than the other way around.

So what changes are you suggesting to make F1 better in your eyes ? It's easy to criticise something, but to continually do so, day in day out without putting forwards theories to make it better is just tiresome. Lay your cards on the table, and please state exactly what you would do to make the sport more 'pure'. That way, your ideas can be analysed by all and perhaps F1 can move find a future direction to move towards.

Are you suggesting that all computers should be banned on the pitwall ? Are you saying that there should be no in-car radio ? Would you scrap the one-way telemetry system that they have in place entirely ?


#33 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 06 October 2012 - 14:31

So what changes are you suggesting to make F1 better in your eyes ? It's easy to criticise something, but to continually do so, day in day out without putting forwards theories to make it better is just tiresome. Lay your cards on the table, and please state exactly what you would do to make the sport more 'pure'. That way, your ideas can be analysed by all and perhaps F1 can move find a future direction to move towards.

Are you suggesting that all computers should be banned on the pitwall ? Are you saying that there should be no in-car radio ? Would you scrap the one-way telemetry system that they have in place entirely ?

I do not claim to have solution for every conceivable issue, since not all grievances are not black and white issues, but more of individual preferences. Based on Pareto principle, only top twenty percent of issues need to be addressed. Some of it could be as follows:
1. Run F1 as a sports club (American football is good example to study and emulate).
2. Permit two tier racing entity with similar sporting and technical rules, but on different reward systems. (Only Tier one will have regulatory input).
Tier shall consist of five teams based on WCC scoring system. Tier 1 status has to be earned. (Meaning – do not try to slow down Ferrari to HRT level).
3. Let teams decide what they wish to spend. Market economic conditions are best spending regulator.
4. Permit off track testing during a season (10000km), remove Parc Ferme.
5. Permit engine development during a season.
6. Develop its own racing stewardship, and say good bye to FiA.
7. Tire has to be fourth in importance, and only after: driver, vehicle, and a motor
8. Race data acquisition shall be permitted, but cannot be used to control vehicle system from the distance during a race.
9. Radio call shall be permitted only for distress calls, or for safety warning.
10. Strategy shall be discussed with a driver prior race, but not during race. Driver decides what he wants to do, and when.
11. Keep quali as is.
12. Work on cars as long as you want to prior start, and change whatever you want without penalties.
13. Address commercial imbalances.
14. Field for a race race-ready vehicle, not a project in progress.

Enough for now…?


#34 Wheels23

Wheels23
  • Member

  • 416 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 06 October 2012 - 14:40

Nah it's good. Sure it could be better with like less restrictive rules but it is fine.

I like the 2009 season. Pretty competitive minus the start though...I think.

#35 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,147 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 October 2012 - 18:22

Some of these points I can fully agree with, others I find wrong or outright loopy, many would probably create as many unforeseen problems as the current regulations (we are all human after all) and wrt point 7 I am still convinced it's a fundamental misunderstanding of racing physics, like you and I have discussed so often, without you ever acknowledging my point (I don't expect agreement of course), so I know it's a lost cause.

Edited by KnucklesAgain, 06 October 2012 - 18:49.


#36 KnucklesAgain

KnucklesAgain
  • Member

  • 5,147 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 06 October 2012 - 18:53

I was with a client earlier this week, just shooting the sh*t after fixing his machine, and the conversation turned around to Lewis, Mercedes, Schumacher, tyres, refuelling, and days gone by etc.

Now bear in mind this guy is back in work after retiring, (long post trimmed)


That was a very interesting post and well written, thanks. It's just that as always with anecdote there are opposite ones, and neither tells us much. I have several friends and relatives of they type you describe, and they all are telling me that F1 is better than it's been for a very long time. Like I said, neither is proof for anything.

#37 Afterburner

Afterburner
  • Member

  • 3,560 posts
  • Joined: January 11

Posted 06 October 2012 - 18:59

The teams have a vested interest in taking as much of the race out of the drivers' hands as possible. That inclination needs to be, and should have been, fought by the rulesmakers at every turn.

I disagree. I have always seen F1 as a team sport. As tempting as it can be to romanticise the drivers as gladiators, I feel it just isn't the truth. In reality, they're just one part of an enormous team that works to put two cars across the finish line before everyone else, and as a result, I don't fault the teams for trying to make the drivers' races as easy as possible. The drivers are an essential part of the team due to their specialised ablities, of course, but let's face it: in the end, they're not much more important than the people who design, assemble, and maintain the cars, because without them, they wouldn't be competitive at all.

There are (at least) two sides to every story; I feel that a lot of people overestimate the importance of the drivers and underestimate the roles played by the teams and their personnel. In this regard, I find it anywhere from ignorant to laughable to be suddenly disappointed that the drivers are supposedly no longer the undisputed stars of the show, because from where I sit, they never really were--it has essentially been a combined effort between the team and the drivers as a whole for a very, very long time.

#38 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 3,763 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 06 October 2012 - 19:20

I do not claim to have solution for every conceivable issue, since not all grievances are not black and white issues, but more of individual preferences. Based on Pareto principle, only top twenty percent of issues need to be addressed. Some of it could be as follows:
1. Run F1 as a sports club (American football is good example to study and emulate).
2. Permit two tier racing entity with similar sporting and technical rules, but on different reward systems. (Only Tier one will have regulatory input).
Tier shall consist of five teams based on WCC scoring system. Tier 1 status has to be earned. (Meaning – do not try to slow down Ferrari to HRT level).
3. Let teams decide what they wish to spend. Market economic conditions are best spending regulator.
4. Permit off track testing during a season (10000km), remove Parc Ferme.
5. Permit engine development during a season.
6. Develop its own racing stewardship, and say good bye to FiA.
7. Tire has to be fourth in importance, and only after: driver, vehicle, and a motor
8. Race data acquisition shall be permitted, but cannot be used to control vehicle system from the distance during a race.
9. Radio call shall be permitted only for distress calls, or for safety warning.
10. Strategy shall be discussed with a driver prior race, but not during race. Driver decides what he wants to do, and when.
11. Keep quali as is.
12. Work on cars as long as you want to prior start, and change whatever you want without penalties.
13. Address commercial imbalances.
14. Field for a race race-ready vehicle, not a project in progress.

Enough for now…?

That's plenty for now. Lets start with point one. How do you propose that 'we' bring that about ? How do we persuade the owners and people who gain a lot from the sport to completely change the way that their global cashpoint machine is run, presumably in order to make them less money ?

#39 PinkZepStones

PinkZepStones
  • Member

  • 220 posts
  • Joined: September 12

Posted 06 October 2012 - 19:23

Just watch the btcc this weekend at Silverstone. That is going to have some fighting (spirit).


If anyones about im working for GrimeBoss at Silverstone this entire weekend, please buy some heavy duty wipes we had a terrible day today!

Also i get a free hour lunch break to watch the BTCC and Formula Renault race and get paid buckets for it. be jealous indeed.

Advertisement

#40 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 3,763 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 07 October 2012 - 13:12

Ok, point 7. Tire has to be fourth in importance, and only after: driver, vehicle, and a motor.

I cannot see how this can ever be achieved, and I don't think there was ever a time when this was the case. F1 has always been about the car foremost and the driver secondary to that. As for implying that the tyres are more important to the results than the engine, chassis or driver, well if that is the case then why are HRT not ever finishing in the top ten ? After all, they have identical tyres that Red Bull have. Your point is wrong.

#41 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 3,763 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 07 October 2012 - 13:14

Point 8. Race data acquisition shall be permitted, but cannot be used to control vehicle system from the distance during a race.
I believe that this is already the case. Computer telemetry is one way only. The car can transmit but not receive data. All input during a race is made solely by the driver.

#42 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 3,763 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 07 October 2012 - 13:17

Point 3. Let teams decide what they wish to spend. Market economic conditions are best spending regulator.

This will not work, as Max Mosely recognised. He knew that as the Globe sank into a credit driven recession, sponsorship would dry up significantly and if the teams were to be allowed to spend any size budget, we would certainly not have 12 teams this year, but quite probably seven or eight. And it is quite possible that if there were no budget cap at all, within a decade we might only have three teams left.

#43 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 07 October 2012 - 13:57

That's plenty for now. Lets start with point one. How do you propose that 'we' bring that about ? How do we persuade the owners and people who gain a lot from the sport to completely change the way that their global cashpoint machine is run, presumably in order to make them less money ?

It's not about just money; not for the teams for whom F1 is a brand recognition vehicle. Today one site choosed Mercedes, Caterham, Marussia and HRT for post race interviews. There are alternatives to avoid such exposure.

You need a credible salesman (behalf of commercial rights holder) who can deliver a business plan that contains vision beyond 2020. Ten to fifteen years is a right span. This CA is probably Ecclestone's last hurray, and I am not convinced that he is overly concerned what will happen beyond collecting his last dividend. CVC wants to sell it, make as much as possible on that deal, unconcerned about future. (My perception only). Stock exchange is a finicky place to live in, which dictates nature of the sport, and I am not one believing towards a better place.

FOTA (or a similar body) needs to develop partnership and perhaps even buy-off F1, and really own it with all, what such ownership represents. A business plan might propose not as much "fixing" current situation, but propose a better solution. Stability, evenness, trusts would be some of the key elements. The idea is not entirely new one. Ferrari showed signs they would be inclined to evaluate such solution, and based on plans of former "Mfg. series", Mercedes might get on board too. Show me a better mouse trap, and hearts will follow. I could envision a situation when new series could be developed, with new players, and current teams can decide whether they want to joint, or remain. Key - teams must have more interest to see sport to prosper, than just collecting WCC points. They are investing; they are risking all, why not owning it too? Legal foundation of a team - a business unit for manufacturers, Marketing Division. Call it life-style for the Garagistes.

#44 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 07 October 2012 - 14:09

Point 3. Let teams decide what they wish to spend. Market economic conditions are best spending regulator.

This will not work, as Max Mosely recognised. He knew that as the Globe sank into a credit driven recession, sponsorship would dry up significantly and if the teams were to be allowed to spend any size budget, we would certainly not have 12 teams this year, but quite probably seven or eight. And it is quite possible that if there were no budget cap at all, within a decade we might only have three teams left.

Trick is to find self regulating mechanism in liu of an enforcer of arbitrary limits. F1 ownership by the teams in conjuctions with investors can develop financial framework to work with. Mosley worked under assumption that he can dictate conditions to the teams, and with assistance of couple of subservient members showel it through the throats of others. Teams worked with and around idea imposed upon them, and not necessarily with an optimized solution derived from their own assessments. It was doomed to fail from the outset (IMO).

Edited by Sakae, 07 October 2012 - 14:09.


#45 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 27 October 2012 - 04:51

FOTA (or a similar body) needs to develop partnership and perhaps even buy-off F1, and really own it with all, what such ownership represents. A business plan might propose not as much "fixing" current situation, but propose a better solution. Stability, evenness, trusts would be some of the key elements. The idea is not entirely new one. Ferrari showed signs they would be inclined to evaluate such solution, and based on plans of former "Mfg. series", Mercedes might get on board too. Show me a better mouse trap, and hearts will follow. I could envision a situation when new series could be developed, with new players, and current teams can decide whether they want to joint, or remain. Key - teams must have more interest to see sport to prosper, than just collecting WCC points. They are investing; they are risking all, why not owning it too? Legal foundation of a team - a business unit for manufacturers, Marketing Division. Call it life-style for the Garagistes.


Somebody must have been reading forums...

a 'Steering Committee' in Formula 1 for next year will be a huge benefit to the sport.


http://uk.eurosport....-145404115.html


#46 Tsarwash

Tsarwash
  • Member

  • 3,763 posts
  • Joined: August 10

Posted 27 October 2012 - 11:39

Trick is to find self regulating mechanism in liu of an enforcer of arbitrary limits. F1 ownership by the teams in conjuctions with investors can develop financial framework to work with. Mosley worked under assumption that he can dictate conditions to the teams, and with assistance of couple of subservient members showel it through the throats of others. Teams worked with and around idea imposed upon them, and not necessarily with an optimized solution derived from their own assessments. It was doomed to fail from the outset (IMO).

I think that the problem is that neither system works. You cannot expect teams to willingly spend less money than they have available, if more money means the difference between 1st and 2nd in WCC, and equally a mandatory budget cap is expensive to implement and the teams will always find a way to circumvent it.

#47 Sakae

Sakae
  • Member

  • 19,256 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 27 October 2012 - 12:34

I think that the problem is that neither system works. You cannot expect teams to willingly spend less money than they have available, if more money means the difference between 1st and 2nd in WCC, and equally a mandatory budget cap is expensive to implement and the teams will always find a way to circumvent it.

...which is why two tier system could be a solution. Ferrari builds cars for rich people, caters rich clientele, and last thing they want is to explain their customers how HRT "beat" them. Exclusivity is a finicky thing, and for me self regulating global market (not manipulated market by bankers and accountants) is as close to "real thing" as you can get. Maybe for Ferrari and alike the economically acceptable spending runs over 200 - 250 Mill Euro, whereas for Tier 2 it is less, but that's economical reality of our time. Ultimately there is a dead point beyond which no amount of money spend by Tier 1 will buy you a better car because of clever technical and sporting limitations, which hopefully a new steering committee will aim at.

I am against RRA controlled by auditors, since simply there are so many intangiable factors, that you would need a forensic style audit to get right figures, and that is not going to happen, so, why even start what they cannot finish.

#48 undersquare

undersquare
  • Member

  • 18,929 posts
  • Joined: November 07

Posted 27 October 2012 - 12:49

I was with a client earlier this week, just shooting the sh*t after fixing his machine, and the conversation turned around to Lewis, Mercedes, Schumacher, tyres, refuelling, and days gone by etc.

Now bear in mind this guy is back in work after retiring, so is at a fairly advanced age, and has followed all sorts of sports all his life. His take on F1 is that it is at its worst ebb ever. He misses the variables that refuelling put into a race, both due to strategic aspects and the possibility of calamity like Verstappen's roasting or the comedy gold following Massa's stop at Singapore in 2008.

A tyre stop now is boring, he pointed out. 2.5 seconds of what exactly? They come in, they stop, they go. Thats it. No fumbling with heavy fuel rigs watching seconds leak away, no rocket like trails of burning leaked fuel as they roar off. Pit stops are now so disinteresting there's no point in TV directors showing them unless a wheel falls off.

Proper overtaking has gone. That's just a push to pass thanks to KERS and DRS. Just bide your time and you'll get past. Most overtakes are just a formality. Then he gets onto tyres. Now the leader is purposefully driving to a target time to degrade the tyres of the car behind him, keeping him in that 2 second zone so that the follower has to pit early and drops into traffic. Theres no flat out anymore, not even from the front. And then there's the cruising, the look after your tyres mantra which, as a viewer, is just annoying. It's just twenty cars going through the motions. He doesn't use live timing to see who is pushing and who is trundling. He just sees them all trundling around getting told to "save tyres save tyres save tyres" perhaps pushing for one lap and then pitting before getting told to save tyres again because they then have to last the rest of the race.

His exact words were that its all pretty much artificial now, confusing at times, and they aren't 'proper racers' any more because there's so much 'management' going on. There's only racing when the management ****s up (his expletive, ahem) and the masterplan goes out the window. And that's not that often.

You can blame it on rose tinted glasses, but this is a guy who does not live and breathe F1 like most of us do, so much so that it drives us to argue about it in our free time/idle work periods. He just watches and switches off until next week. This is the average F1 television viewer, not an obsessed afficionado or armchair expert, and if he's getting irritated with it all to the point where he's now asking me if I think it'll be worth watching the race this weekend instead of tuning in as he habitually did in recent years then there is something wrong when the sport is starting to alienate the lifelong casual viewer.

He summed it up best when he said that it was better under Mosley. At least then you knew you were going to be watching one of his chess matches, albeit played out at full speed with plenty of opportunity for mishaps. Now you get chess at half speed, won at the slowest pace possible, with every fifth word of the commentary either "tyres" or "pirelli", with driving penalties thrown in for those drivers daring to give viewers moments of excitement. Have an incident, here's a penalty. Lets outlaw all incidents. Riveting.

He does, however, admit that the qualifying format these days is just about perfect.

I think this is all rose-tinted glasses tbh. Before the Bridgestone-only era tyres also had to be changed during the race, for example. Cars and tyres had to be nursed; they ran out of fuel or retired for reasons we never found out. We knew a lot less about everything in fact. But we only remember the best bits.

I've been watching since the mid-70's and for me it's never been better. The racing has never been closer. At the start of the season the tyres were too soft, that's true, but they're alright now.

#49 Timstr11

Timstr11
  • Member

  • 7,974 posts
  • Joined: May 02

Posted 27 October 2012 - 13:37

I disagree. I have always seen F1 as a team sport. As tempting as it can be to romanticise the drivers as gladiators, I feel it just isn't the truth. In reality, they're just one part of an enormous team that works to put two cars across the finish line before everyone else, and as a result, I don't fault the teams for trying to make the drivers' races as easy as possible. The drivers are an essential part of the team due to their specialised ablities, of course, but let's face it: in the end, they're not much more important than the people who design, assemble, and maintain the cars, because without them, they wouldn't be competitive at all.

There are (at least) two sides to every story; I feel that a lot of people overestimate the importance of the drivers and underestimate the roles played by the teams and their personnel. In this regard, I find it anywhere from ignorant to laughable to be suddenly disappointed that the drivers are supposedly no longer the undisputed stars of the show, because from where I sit, they never really were--it has essentially been a combined effort between the team and the drivers as a whole for a very, very long time.

:up: Exactly the way I see it.
And as you say, it has always been like that (at least since I've been watching in the 80's).
I find it much more interesting and rewarding to closely follow what teams are doing and not just the drivers.

To be honest, I don't understand those who's only focus is the driver. It can only be disappointing because once a driver has reached his peak in terms of his talent or ability, his success or lack of success will only depend on the team he his driving for. Whereas teams change over time. F1 has always been very dynamic in that respect. The teams generate the dynamics in the competition, which is interesting. If you're not interested in that, it won't be a lot of fun, unless the driver you focus on happens to be in the winning team of the moment.

Edited by Timstr11, 27 October 2012 - 15:43.


#50 Henrik B

Henrik B
  • Member

  • 2,716 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 27 October 2012 - 15:29

At the start of the season the tyres were too soft, that's true, but they're alright now.


If you have a news report that says otherwise I'm happy to be wrong, but I'm pretty sure each compound is exactly as it was at the start of the season. What's changed is that the teams understanding (and skill) has increased. They have learned and improved.