Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 8 votes

2013 - F1's Worst Season Ever?


  • Please log in to reply
300 replies to this topic

Poll: 2013 - F1's worst season? (443 member(s) have cast votes)

2013 - F1's worst season?

  1. Yes (179 votes [39.60%])

    Percentage of vote: 39.60%

  2. No (273 votes [60.40%])

    Percentage of vote: 60.40%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#251 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,196 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 28 November 2013 - 00:25

Also, saying that the lack of retirements means "more racing" because there are more cars on the track is simplistic. Racing is a sport of variables, and reliability is one of those variables. When you remove that from the equation, you make things less interesting. I don't advocate returning to the heights of the early turbo era where 10-or-so finishers was common, but the current state is bad, because it doesn't make finishing a Grand Prix feel like any sort of achievement anymore. I mean, you go back a few decades, and basically any given team that actually got a car to the line was in with a decent shot of points. These days, we bring the final points spot down to tenth, and Marussia and Caterham still don't have a prayer, because those cars ahead of them aren't going anywhere.

 

Take 1996: I remember Berger's engine blowout at Hockenheim as clearly as Villeneuve's overtake of Schumacher a few races later in Portugal. Racing is man vs. man vs. physics.


Edited by Risil, 28 November 2013 - 00:26.


Advertisement

#252 Velocifer

Velocifer
  • Member

  • 736 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 28 November 2013 - 13:47

If your entire enjoyment of F1 is derived from the on-track battles, that's fine, but to suggest that anyone who cares a jot about the result is not a 'real' fan is just arrogant and naive. For me it's about 50/50. Of course the wheel-to-wheel action needs to be good, but the results matter too because they give context to the battles you are watching. A battle for the win is more exciting than a battle for 15th because it means more. If one driver dominates a series of races, it gets boring regardless of who it is. That's not partisanship, it's just wanting to see closer competition. If said driver retires from a race it can make the race more exciting despite there being one fewer car in the race.

 

Let me illustrate my point with an example. The last few laps of this year's British GP were exciting because we had Webber and Rosberg battling for the win right to the last lap (among other things). This was facilitated by mechanical issues for Hamilton and then Vettel.  In my opinion, if this battle had been for second or third place it would not have been as exciting. Fast forward to the US GP. Grosjean and Webber were in a battle for second place for a significant portion of the race. If Vettel had retired, this would have been a battle for the win and it would have gone down as a classic (similar to the 2012 race). As it happened, he didn't and the race was quite forgettable.

 

I'm not wishing retirements on any driver because, as you point out, it is unfair. But I do stand by the point that retirements can make races (and seasons) more exciting in some circumstances and the fact we had the lowest rate of retirements in history means that this didn't happen. I mooted the point that this could be a contributory factor to 40% of people voting 2013 the worst season ever in the poll. For what it's worth I don't think it was the worst season ever.

Jeez, that's desperate, come on.. I never said or even suggested that anyone not caring about the result is not a real fan. You're just making stuff up now..

I get your point clearly. You like to spice up the racing with complete random things like breakdowns and probably love safety cars, streakers or Mosley style end-of-season penalties. That it is artificial and affects the true sporting outcome doesn't seem to bother you a bit. They enhance the season no end. I say it's a ridiculous stance and does nothing for the season except distort, but I dare you to watch American racing for a while with constant safety cars 'spicing' things up with random 'unpredictability' and come back after a year or two and tell me what you really prefer..

 

Reductionism at its finest. Tell me: Vettel won the title in 2010 and this year; I loved 2010 and hated 2013. How does that fit into your simplistic model?

 

No matter how much you might like it to be, not everything is about Vettel. If you can't see that the sport has changed dramatically since even three years ago - a change that I see has been for the worse - then I don't know what to say.

'Reductionism' lol. As if the whole thing was an exercise in philosophy. But there is indeed a simple conclusion to make when people's argument don't hold water and they go completely overboard here as the crowd did when booing Vettel.

So tell me then, was 2013 the worst season ever? Because that's what we are discussing here.. Well? Or is the truth that you haven't watched that many seasons at all and you just didn't like this one? Or was it just that in 2010 your favorite driver fared better than 2013 and in 2013 the super cool hero was yet again beaten by the German nerd? Tell me what it was that made 2010 so great and 2013 the worst in F1's 63 year history? Formal logic only please. "A change for the worse" will obviously not do.

 

Also, saying that the lack of retirements means "more racing" because there are more cars on the track is simplistic. Racing is a sport of variables, and reliability is one of those variables. When you remove that from the equation, you make things less interesting. I don't advocate returning to the heights of the early turbo era where 10-or-so finishers was common, but the current state is bad, because it doesn't make finishing a Grand Prix feel like any sort of achievement anymore. I mean, you go back a few decades, and basically any given team that actually got a car to the line was in with a decent shot of points. These days, we bring the final points spot down to tenth, and Marussia and Caterham still don't have a prayer, because those cars ahead of them aren't going anywhere.

What's simplistic is the view that cars not getting points are not racing. Not only that, it's in my opinion downright demeaning. And if your concern was really to get all cars with a chance of points (and not just to argue for arguing sake), it's beyond simplistic to see reducing reliability as the only solution.. 



#253 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 1,332 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 28 November 2013 - 14:18

He stated retirements, not breakdowns. You can also retire when you battle for lap after lap and sustain damage.

 

You are cherry picking two bolded lines in a whole post.

 

And we have silly stewarding in response to SC. And we have the unlap cars rule. A straightforward stranded car gave a 15 minute SC only to let them regain their lap. And on the subject, I think it was Spain where Webber could unlap himself AND come round to the back of the field with nicely warmed up brakes and tires.

 

Better yet, we have random exploding tires to 'spice up the show' and Pirelli 'doing what they are told'.



#254 sock22

sock22
  • Member

  • 400 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 28 November 2013 - 17:22

Jeez, that's desperate, come on.. I never said or even suggested that anyone not caring about the result is not a real fan. You're just making stuff up now..

I get your point clearly. You like to spice up the racing with complete random things like breakdowns and probably love safety cars, streakers or Mosley style end-of-season penalties. That it is artificial and affects the true sporting outcome doesn't seem to bother you a bit. They enhance the season no end. I say it's a ridiculous stance and does nothing for the season except distort, but I dare you to watch American racing for a while with constant safety cars 'spicing' things up with random 'unpredictability' and come back after a year or two and tell me what you really prefer..

 

 

You accuse me of making stuff up and then proceed to take my points out of context every time. You've done the same to SenorSjon as well. If you took the blinkers off and read my entire post (particularly the parts just around the second bit you highlighted) you'd see that that's not my opinion at all. I'm not going to bother repeating myself again as we're just going round in circles now.



#255 FBJim

FBJim
  • Member

  • 100 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 28 November 2013 - 17:25



What's simplistic is the view that cars not getting points are not racing. Not only that, it's in my opinion downright demeaning. And if your concern was really to get all cars with a chance of points (and not just to argue for arguing sake), it's beyond simplistic to see reducing reliability as the only solution.. 

 

Well, they very literally don't matter. Sport, and games, in a very basic, literal level, are about feedback- an artificial system of rules giving feedback on a competitor's performance. So, yeah, if the rules of the sport say that there isn't any real difference between finishing 16th and 17th, then I sure as hell don't see the excitement in an overtake down there. The positions 11-on-down do have significance, but their significance is that by being "bad" finisihing positions, they make points finishes more significant. 



#256 Muppetmad

Muppetmad
  • Member

  • 2,377 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 28 November 2013 - 17:34

'Reductionism' lol. As if the whole thing was an exercise in philosophy. But there is indeed a simple conclusion to make when people's argument don't hold water and they go completely overboard here as the crowd did when booing Vettel.

So tell me then, was 2013 the worst season ever? Because that's what we are discussing here.. Well? Or is the truth that you haven't watched that many seasons at all and you just didn't like this one? Or was it just that in 2010 your favorite driver fared better than 2013 and in 2013 the super cool hero was yet again beaten by the German nerd? Tell me what it was that made 2010 so great and 2013 the worst in F1's 63 year history? Formal logic only please. "A change for the worse" will obviously not do.

I find it amusing you accuse me of being philosophical but then demand I answer using formal logic; clearly a priori logic alone is useless when discussing a posteriori claims.

 

As I clarified earlier in the thread - as you should know, given your claims about the majority of the thread's posts and your demands that others read the thread in its entirety which implies that you have done so yourself - I said that it is the worst season I have watched. I starting watching Formula 1 roughly in 2001. 13 seasons is a reasonable number to work with, I'd say. Of course I can't conclude that it was the worst season full stop given that I haven't been alive for every season, but then very few people have. To begrudge the majority the right to have a discussion about this solely because they haven't watched every season is pedantic; all anyone can reasonably be asked to do is come to a conclusion based on the experience they've had.

 

Actually, my favourite driver in 2010 didn't compete in 2013, so wasn't beaten by Vettel at all. But nice try. Of course "A change for the worse" alone will not do in suggesting 2010 was better than 2013 - but that's why I explicated my argument earlier in my first post here, as you well know since you've read the thread. Allow me to highlight the two variables which I have already discussed: DRS and tyres. Funnily enough, "Vettel" doesn't fit into either of those variables: he was in the sport in 2010 and won and he was in the sport in 2013 and won.


Edited by Muppetmad, 28 November 2013 - 17:42.


#257 Risil

Risil
  • Member

  • 13,196 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 28 November 2013 - 18:18

I liked 2010 more than 2013, but I liked 2011 and 2012 more than 2010. I'm vaguely aware of some objective reality where 2009 was rubbish but I smile every time I think about it. I'm a lost cause for logic.



#258 andyF1

andyF1
  • Member

  • 68 posts
  • Joined: October 13

Posted 28 November 2013 - 18:53

Interesting to note how seem people seem to be very sensitive about the suggestion that 2013 might be the worst season ever. I'm intrigued to hear why this season wasn't dull and wasn't a contender for the worst season ever.

 

As for 2010, it seems to be knocked as a season quite a bit, but I would rate it as one of my favourite seasons. There was a sense of unpredictability and constantly shifting fortunes around the whole season. I can remember it well, sitting down to watch a race in 2010 with a great sense of anticipation because I genuinely had no idea who was going to win the race. Good sport is unpredictable, tight and closely fought and this is exactly what we got in 2010.

 

I could go on. Remember Australia, China, Turkey and Belgium in 2010? Arguably all better races than any race we saw this season. Plenty of rain affected races as well which is always welcome



#259 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 1,819 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 29 November 2013 - 02:40

I remember the days when you could count the finishers on the lead lap on 1 hand. And still loved every minute of it.

 

All these people saying 1 more season like this and they will switch off.. my lord, just switch off now, F1 won't miss you as you've obviously not been around that long  :wave:



Advertisement

#260 MrPodium

MrPodium
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 29 November 2013 - 03:23

I remember the days when you could count the finishers on the lead lap on 1 hand. And still loved every minute of it.

All these people saying 1 more season like this and they will switch off.. my lord, just switch off now, F1 won't miss you as you've obviously not been around that long :wave:

I've been an avid fan since the mid to late 80's, watched the entire 2002 and 2004 borefests, never considered actively missing a race. Yet, for the first time, I found myself not bothering during the latter part of this season.

Is 25 seasons long enough? Which way is the door?

Edited by MrPodium, 29 November 2013 - 03:27.


#261 lbennie

lbennie
  • Member

  • 1,819 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 29 November 2013 - 03:48

I've been an avid fan since the mid to late 80's, watched the entire 2002 and 2004 borefests, never considered actively missing a race. Yet, for the first time, I found myself not bothering during the latter part of this season.

Is 25 seasons long enough? Which way is the door?

I suspect you are already on your way towards it, no need for me to point it out. 

 

I can't even fathom missing a race, Maybe that is where we are different.



#262 404KF2

404KF2
  • Member

  • 2,208 posts
  • Joined: October 99

Posted 29 November 2013 - 04:24

40% say this was the worst season ever…among F-1 fans, that's shocking.



#263 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 1,157 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 29 November 2013 - 07:12

40% say this was the worst season ever…among F-1 fans, that's shocking.

I'd say that most of the 40 % comprises of Hamilton and Alonso fans and that tables would be turned if it was Lewis or Fernando dominating for the latter part of the season. Suddenly it would be the best season ever. The 60 % comprises of Vettel fans and F1 fans who know that this is not the worst season ever.


Edited by Gorma, 29 November 2013 - 07:13.


#264 FredF1

FredF1
  • Member

  • 1,950 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 29 November 2013 - 08:37

I'd say that most of the 40 % comprises of Hamilton and Alonso fans and that tables would be turned if it was Lewis or Fernando dominating for the latter part of the season. Suddenly it would be the best season ever. The 60 % comprises of Vettel fans and F1 fans who know that this is not the worst season ever.

I didn't vote for "Most Boring" as, well, I don't know if it was as  I don't really care enough to ask myself that question. I'm so indifferent to F1 these days that a gigantic fireball crash could happen on Lap 1, severed limbs and decapitated heads flying in all directions and I'll just yawn, say "It'll take them ages to sort this out" and go and do something more interesting like watching paint dry.



#265 chumma

chumma
  • Member

  • 926 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 29 November 2013 - 08:38

Watched every race since 1993 and this year for me, was the first year that F1 to me, lost its 'magic'. It also marks the first season that I haven't watched every race. The last race I watched was India, after that I saw the first lap from each Grand Prix. As someone pointed out, this eclipses 94/02/04 simply because of all the gimmicks, and also, back then, there was always the chance of an engine going bang or a gearbox jamming up. These days with all the long life parts, engineering at its finest, its nearly unheard of for a front running car to retire with a blown engine etc (not that hoping for a blown engine is exciting) but the sport has just backed itself into a corner here and fresh rules are just what the doctor ordered. The fact that Vettel is disliked by many to me is irrelevant, any driver who wins that many races in a row (easily mind you) will be disliked rather quickly. Red Bull/Vettel is excellence but it comes at a cost to the viewing public, which is what this sport needs.

At least back then cars looked nice, sounded better and wasn't loaded with gimmicks, it was pure. I say its time for F1 to go back to the future a little. Let teams decide what compound of tyres to run, let them have qualifying engines (that must last x amount of weekends if they must), give them fatter rear tyres and less aero, and for the love of god, let the teams test if they want to but limit them. People will jump on me and say im only saying this cos it directly affected McLaren this season as im a McLaren supporter, but I said this when Ferrar produced a lemon and Mercedes couldnt work out how to run the car on pirelli cheese tyres, its not good for the sport to watch a front running team, or any team for that matter, struggle with a lemon that can only be fixed with track time. I could go on and on about what this sport should do but its meaningless, I just have my fingers crossed that F1 rediscovers itself and produces magic once again and has exciting racing again where there is actually a battle for the lead/pole position. Fingers crossed and bring on 2014.



#266 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 1,332 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 29 November 2013 - 08:39

@FredF1

Lol and then thinking. Man, this would mean ages behind the SC...


Edited by SenorSjon, 29 November 2013 - 08:40.


#267 MrPodium

MrPodium
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 29 November 2013 - 09:14

I'd say that most of the 40 % comprises of Hamilton and Alonso fans and that tables would be turned if it was Lewis or Fernando dominating for the latter part of the season. Suddenly it would be the best season ever. The 60 % comprises of Vettel fans and F1 fans who know that this is not the worst season ever.


Great, so by your definition, Alonso and Hamilton fans aren't as capable of judging the merits of an F1 season, but Vettel fans (and the rest of the 60%) represent shining beacons, perfect examples of how 'proper' F1 fans think?

Or perhaps you're generalising?

I'll stick with this season being the worst that I can recall. More so even than the 2004 season because everyone knew Ferrari was geared for a Schumacher victory, nothing else, whilst this year we continually had Horner claiming that it was equal status at RedBull. At least Ferrari were honest enough to admit that, RedBull usually just waited a couple of laps for Webber's KERS to fail instead.

#268 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 1,157 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 29 November 2013 - 09:27

Great, so by your definition, Alonso and Hamilton fans aren't as capable of judging the merits of an F1 season, but Vettel fans (and the rest of the 60%) represent shining beacons, perfect examples of how 'proper' F1 fans think?

Or perhaps you're generalising?

I'll stick with this season being the worst that I can recall. More so even than the 2004 season because everyone knew Ferrari was geared for a Schumacher victory, nothing else, whilst this year we continually had Horner claiming that it was equal status at RedBull. At least Ferrari were honest enough to admit that, RedBull usually just waited a couple of laps for Webber's KERS to fail instead.

That's not what I was saying at all. What I was saying that people who watch F1 because of Alonso and Hamilton likely voted this being the worst season since their drivers didn't fare well. Vettel fans naturally liked this season so they must have voted No. People who watch F1 because it's F1 (like me) likely voted No as well since we have seen much worse seasons. In 2002 Schumi was on podium in every race and had almost twice the points of Barrichello who came in second in the championship. Tv coverage focused on Schumi driving alone in the first place and there was no overtaking. 

 

Your last paragraph is just paranoia. 



#269 MrPodium

MrPodium
  • Member

  • 399 posts
  • Joined: January 12

Posted 29 November 2013 - 09:43

That's not what I was saying at all. What I was saying that people who watch F1 because of Alonso and Hamilton likely voted this being the worst season since their drivers didn't fare well. Vettel fans naturally liked this season so they must have voted No. People who watch F1 because it's F1 (like me) likely voted No as well since we have seen much worse seasons. In 2002 Schumi was on podium in every race and had almost twice the points of Barrichello who came in second in the championship. Tv coverage focused on Schumi driving alone in the first place and there was no overtaking.

Your last paragraph is just paranoia.

In your opinion, nothing more. Just like mine.

Edited by MrPodium, 29 November 2013 - 09:46.


#270 Velocifer

Velocifer
  • Member

  • 736 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 29 November 2013 - 10:24

He stated retirements, not breakdowns. You can also retire when you battle for lap after lap and sustain damage.

 

You are cherry picking two bolded lines in a whole post.

 

And we have silly stewarding in response to SC. And we have the unlap cars rule. A straightforward stranded car gave a 15 minute SC only to let them regain their lap. And on the subject, I think it was Spain where Webber could unlap himself AND come round to the back of the field with nicely warmed up brakes and tires.

 

Better yet, we have random exploding tires to 'spice up the show' and Pirelli 'doing what they are told'.

You accuse me of cherry picking parts of a post, then you write to make the point that breakdown is a type of retirement?  :blush: 

The rest of the post doesn't make sense except to go against the poster you are trying to help by saying there should be enough breakdowns and random happenings to satisfy already..

 

You accuse me of making stuff up and then proceed to take my points out of context every time. You've done the same to SenorSjon as well. If you took the blinkers off and read my entire post (particularly the parts just around the second bit you highlighted) you'd see that that's not my opinion at all. I'm not going to bother repeating myself again as we're just going round in circles now.

The points are obviously not out of context, it is the opposite as they are highlighted in context. The points you make are clear and they are refuted clearly. Your response now is just simple denying.

 

I find it amusing you accuse me of being philosophical but then demand I answer using formal logic; clearly a priori logic alone is useless when discussing a posteriori claims.

 

As I clarified earlier in the thread - as you should know, given your claims about the majority of the thread's posts and your demands that others read the thread in its entirety which implies that you have done so yourself - I said that it is the worst season I have watched. I starting watching Formula 1 roughly in 2001. 13 seasons is a reasonable number to work with, I'd say. Of course I can't conclude that it was the worst season full stop given that I haven't been alive for every season, but then very few people have. To begrudge the majority the right to have a discussion about this solely because they haven't watched every season is pedantic; all anyone can reasonably be asked to do is come to a conclusion based on the experience they've had.

 

Actually, my favourite driver in 2010 didn't compete in 2013, so wasn't beaten by Vettel at all. But nice try. Of course "A change for the worse" alone will not do in suggesting 2010 was better than 2013 - but that's why I explicated my argument earlier in my first post here, as you well know since you've read the thread. Allow me to highlight the two variables which I have already discussed: DRS and tyres. Funnily enough, "Vettel" doesn't fit into either of those variables: he was in the sport in 2010 and won and he was in the sport in 2013 and won.

Amazingly well done to miss the irony, congratulations.. Proves yet again your use of fancy latin words is just to show off and nothing more.

This is a discussion whether 2013 was the worst season in history. I make the claim that so many posts are completely ridiculous and have no real points at all, mostly motivated by butthurt driver fans. You disagree and prove it by ... admitting your post was off topic since you can't really say one way or the other, proving my claim that you were one of those who had no real point at all. Case closed.



#271 paulrobs

paulrobs
  • Member

  • 507 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 29 November 2013 - 10:48

Watched every race since 1993 and this year for me, was the first year that F1 to me, lost its 'magic'. It also marks the first season that I haven't watched every race. The last race I watched was India, after that I saw the first lap from each Grand Prix. As someone pointed out, this eclipses 94/02/04 simply because of all the gimmicks, and also, back then, there was always the chance of an engine going bang or a gearbox jamming up. These days with all the long life parts, engineering at its finest, its nearly unheard of for a front running car to retire with a blown engine etc (not that hoping for a blown engine is exciting) but the sport has just backed itself into a corner here and fresh rules are just what the doctor ordered. The fact that Vettel is disliked by many to me is irrelevant, any driver who wins that many races in a row (easily mind you) will be disliked rather quickly. Red Bull/Vettel is excellence but it comes at a cost to the viewing public, which is what this sport needs.

At least back then cars looked nice, sounded better and wasn't loaded with gimmicks, it was pure. I say its time for F1 to go back to the future a little. Let teams decide what compound of tyres to run, let them have qualifying engines (that must last x amount of weekends if they must), give them fatter rear tyres and less aero, and for the love of god, let the teams test if they want to but limit them. People will jump on me and say im only saying this cos it directly affected McLaren this season as im a McLaren supporter, but I said this when Ferrar produced a lemon and Mercedes couldnt work out how to run the car on pirelli cheese tyres, its not good for the sport to watch a front running team, or any team for that matter, struggle with a lemon that can only be fixed with track time. I could go on and on about what this sport should do but its meaningless, I just have my fingers crossed that F1 rediscovers itself and produces magic once again and has exciting racing again where there is actually a battle for the lead/pole position. Fingers crossed and bring on 2014.

 

Good post.

 

I've gone off it myself but I'm sure the excitement will still mount over the winter and during pre-season testing and I'll be initially watching next year. If however I start to see another season of drivers having to nurse cars around at well below their fastest possible race pace in order to save fuel and tyres then I'll likely be switching off for good.

 

I can't decide whether 2013 was the worse season ever, I think it must have been one of the worse for me because I stopped watching all of the races live. But. I think it's been creeping up on me for a while because I wouldn't watch F1 for 30 odd years and then start switching off just because of one lousy season. And when I ay lousy, I mean lousy for me and I most definitely am not suggesting lousy for everyone.



#272 sock22

sock22
  • Member

  • 400 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 29 November 2013 - 11:58

 

The points are obviously not out of context, it is the opposite as they are highlighted in context. The points you make are clear and they are refuted clearly. Your response now is just simple denying.

 

They obviously are out of context. Your highlighted portion omitted the 'in some circumstances' immediately after, and therefore completely changed the meaning of what I said. You also conveniently avoided the parts where I said that I thought retirements were unfair and I didn't think this season was the worst in history. Instead you tried to fit me to some stereotype which is obviously untrue if you read my entire post (and previous posts).

 

I said I wouldn't go over my opinion again but it seems it hasn't sunk in, so I will. I mooted the point that the lack of retirements could potentially be one of many factors that contributed to a common perception that this season was boring. That was my first post in this topic. I have never said I thought this season was the most boring ever (I actually stated the opposite and voted no in the poll). I have explained why I think that retirements in some circumstances can produce excitement but (and don't omit this next part if you're going to emphasise this) that this is not ideal because it can be unfair and artificial.

 

So let's get some things clear:

- I do not want the racing spiced up with completely random things.

- I do not love safety cars, streakers and Mosley style end-of-season penalties (I mean, what? I didn't even come close to mentioning these).

- To refute something you actually have to prove it wrong rather than just state your contrary opinion.

- I haven't denied anything except that which isn't true.



#273 lustigson

lustigson
  • Member

  • 4,745 posts
  • Joined: March 01

Posted 29 November 2013 - 12:50

No-one died or got hurt, so it was quite a fine season to me.

 

But the most exciting? Far from it. Although — speaking as a Ferrari fan, here — the 2002 and 2004 seasons were worse.



#274 Nobody

Nobody
  • Member

  • 1,397 posts
  • Joined: January 07

Posted 29 November 2013 - 13:09

Worst in in last 5 or 6, but by no means worst ever



#275 Velocifer

Velocifer
  • Member

  • 736 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 29 November 2013 - 13:11

They obviously are out of context. Your highlighted portion omitted the 'in some circumstances' immediately after, and therefore completely changed the meaning of what I said. You also conveniently avoided the parts where I said that I thought retirements were unfair and I didn't think this season was the worst in history. Instead you tried to fit me to some stereotype which is obviously untrue if you read my entire post (and previous posts).

 

I said I wouldn't go over my opinion again but it seems it hasn't sunk in, so I will. I mooted the point that the lack of retirements could potentially be one of many factors that contributed to a common perception that this season was boring. That was my first post in this topic. I have never said I thought this season was the most boring ever (I actually stated the opposite and voted no in the poll). I have explained why I think that retirements in some circumstances can produce excitement but (and don't omit this next part if you're going to emphasise this) that this is not ideal because it can be unfair and artificial.

 

So let's get some things clear:

- I do not want the racing spiced up with completely random things.

- I do not love safety cars, streakers and Mosley style end-of-season penalties (I mean, what? I didn't even come close to mentioning these).

- To refute something you actually have to prove it wrong rather than just state your contrary opinion.

- I haven't denied anything except that which isn't true.

 

The context is this thread. The thread is about 2013 being the worst season in F1's history. That is the context. Your point? Too many cars finishing the race under on the finish line and not on the side of the track could be part of the reason why a season could be called worst of all time. I called it bollocks and gave my reasons.

 

It was over at that point but you then went on to argue why you and others would think that, then didn't like how that went as it obviously proved the sillyness of the notion and it all ended with you making stuff up to win back something.

 

Now you seem to be saying you didn't really mean what you said at all and/or posted out of context? Good to hear if so.



#276 sock22

sock22
  • Member

  • 400 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 29 November 2013 - 15:30

The context is this thread. The thread is about 2013 being the worst season in F1's history. That is the context. Your point? Too many cars finishing the race under on the finish line and not on the side of the track could be part of the reason why a season could be called worst of all time. I called it bollocks and gave my reasons.

 

It was over at that point but you then went on to argue why you and others would think that, then didn't like how that went as it obviously proved the sillyness of the notion and it all ended with you making stuff up to win back something.

 

Now you seem to be saying you didn't really mean what you said at all and/or posted out of context? Good to hear if so.

No, you took an isolated few words in my posts out of the context of the rest of those posts. That's what I was referring to when I said out of context. Not the entire thread...

 

I raised the initial point. You argued that fewer cars meant less action (and apparently you stating your opinion means the debate is over  :rolleyes: ). I (and others) argued that retirements could mean increased drama in a race, moreso than if those cars simply ran to the finish. You then falsely extrapolated that to mean that we want to see a dozen retirements and various other random events each race. I've spent the last few posts trying to explain that that's not what we meant at all.



#277 Velocifer

Velocifer
  • Member

  • 736 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 30 November 2013 - 05:43

No, you didn't argue that it was drama in a race, it should be more than clear by now what the topic of discussion here is and what your original post was all about it. This is about the 2013 season which obviously means for more than one race, and it's not about whether it makes for drama, but whether it is makes F1 better or worse..

And I never 'extrapolated' that you want to see "a dozen retirements and various other random events each race". It's another outright falsehood.

Let me hammer this out and leave you no wriggle room whatsoever so we can be done with this endless discussion:

This is the thread:
2013 - F1's Worst Season Ever?

 

And this is your post:

I've just done some analysis of the rate of retirements in 2013 and found that it had the lowest retirement rate in history. I know that Vettel's domination was probably the biggest factor in making this season boring but could this have contributed as well?

Your post is in full, and it is in context, the thread title is reproduced in full as well.

Your meaning is clear for all to see. It's not an argument whether there can be drama in a race with so and so scenario or whatever else, it is obviously: Too many cars finishing races = part of the reason why the 2013 F1 season is worst of all time.

Either stand by your idea or admit it's not on, out of context, an exaggeration or you've since changed your mind. Arguing bits of things, follow-up posts, going off topic, or simply making up stuff and attacking others doesn't win you the argument, it just shows you've abandoned your original idea and trying to diffuse things in a face saving effort.



#278 sock22

sock22
  • Member

  • 400 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 30 November 2013 - 09:50

 

Your meaning is clear for all to see. ... Too many cars finishing races = part of the reason why the 2013 F1 season is worst of all time.

 

This is true. That's been the point I've been standing by throughout and it's the initial point I was referring to in my previous post.

 

The point about retirements creating drama was my justification of that point. Drama in individual races is going to contribute to the overall opinion of the season. A dramatic season is going to be described as better than one lacking in drama.

 

It was at this point that we got bogged down in various spin-off arguments. You misinterpreted some of the points I was making and so I was trying to clarify my position. I hope my position is clear now and we can indeed be done with this endless discussion by agreeing to disagree on an issue that is simply a matter of opinion.



#279 Velocifer

Velocifer
  • Member

  • 736 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 01 December 2013 - 03:04

Good, finally.. Then we are back to square one. And in my opinion it's a ridiculous stance to have and reflects the new type of fans which I will be happy to see gone before the moaning or booing makes F1 into a show where sporting principles and fair competition take a back seat to simplistic circus-like entertainment with random elements introduced. "Cars not breaking down a detriment to the sport" - it's hard to believe people actually coming out with it and especially so on a forum like at Autosport here.

But for some reason the moaning gets listened to, that's the sad part. That's why we got the brittle tyres and other things in the first place.

I would love to see the same kind of argumentation be floated in other sports, I think people would just be laughed out the door but for some reason F1 seems to have attracted a type where anything goes now.

"Hey Bob, did you watch that Tiger Woods knock the course record and crush the field last Sunday at St. Andrews? Blew me away!" "No, couldn't care less, there hasn't been anyone hit by lightning strike, bird flying away with a ball or club head coming off during a stroke for ages now, so no thrill for me anymore, who cares about how he plays.. I believe he didn't even break into a sweat, he's just too trained. Besides, you know I was never really into it for the golf itself, just a fan of so-and-so and like some drama" "Right you are Bob, I hope the powers that be take note of your concerns and does something to cater to the likes of you with major changes to the sport of golf!"



Advertisement

#280 Kingshark

Kingshark
  • Member

  • 2,944 posts
  • Joined: April 12

Posted 01 December 2013 - 04:49

F1 2013's season reviewed in about 7 minutes.  :p

 

 

At least it imposes some sense of humor in an abysmal season.   ;)



#281 FBJim

FBJim
  • Member

  • 100 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 01 December 2013 - 05:02



Good, finally.. Then we are back to square one. And in my opinion it's a ridiculous stance to have and reflects the new type of fans which I will be happy to see gone before the moaning or booing makes F1 into a show where sporting principles and fair competition take a back seat to simplistic circus-like entertainment with random elements introduced. "Cars not breaking down a detriment to the sport" - it's hard to believe people actually coming out with it and especially so on a forum like at Autosport here.

 

 

Mechanical breakdowns, when cars are being designed, built, and pushed beyond the limit, are not "random elements introduced". Oh, of course it's part random, in the sense that all sport can be abstracted to a weighted random number generator, but they aren't utterly arbitrary. They are elements that have been inseparably part of the sport since the beginning. They represent the engineering challenge required to make a car last a race distance, and they represent the empathy certain drivers do, and don't have to their racing cars- think Alain Prost's uncanny ability to drive fast, and save his fuel and tires at the same time, or the brilliant, early Ayrton Senna driving faster than his fragile Lotus could handle.

 

So no, this isn't a golfer being hit by lightning. This is an otherwise great putter muffing an easy one and losing a tournament, or a cyclist mistiming a breakaway and getting caught by the peleton half a kilometer from the finish. It's a variable, and variables are what make for good sport.

 

e: The irony, of course, is that since the cars aren't being pushed to the limit anymore, the only mechanical retirements we have are basically random, unless you really think that driving at 80% to conserve tires is hell on a Red Bull's gearbox. So pushing the cars faster would simultaneously increase the number of retirements, but also make them less arbitrary.


Edited by FBJim, 01 December 2013 - 05:05.


#282 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,663 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 05 December 2013 - 08:34

2004 was far worse.  The rules had been overtly rigged at the end of the previous year and the Michelin runners had all gone up blind paths development-wise.  So you had only one team that had a car which worked - and they then shat in the audience's face at the start of the season. 



#283 Dunc

Dunc
  • Member

  • 429 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 06 December 2013 - 14:46

For me 1988 was the worst season ever.
The supremacy of McLaren-Honda right from the first race on and lasting all season long was much worse then 2013 in which we at least saw more than one victory by another team.
Example of how dominant McLaren waa apart from 15 out of 16 races won?
15 Pole, 15 times at least on if not both cars on the front row.
At imola, the third fastest car behind pole sitter Senna (1:27:148) was some 3 full seconds (!) slower!!!! (3.35 to be exactly)

I agree with one reason about all the moaning about this season mentioned already: Unpopular driver, rather unpopular team doing all the winning since last Summer.
I wonder how the feelings would have been had Vettel obeyed the "Multi 21". He can't help being German and the fact we've seen similar dominance by another German fairly recently.


The often mentioned 2002 and 2004 being boring, for race results certainly. But in 2002 when low fuel qualifying was still on Williams-BMW could still give Ferrari a fight (Ferrari had less tha 10 poles that season) and in 2004 you had that stupid one car on the track only deal with startitng the race as you qualified that enabled some variety on the first row of the grid, if actually less than in 2002. Thus, the Saturday could at least spring some surprises those years, not in 1988.....



Henri


I'm really pleased someone has posted this. There is a lot of nostalgia for the Senna/Prost era, even though it featured all the issues people complain about today - a controversial driver, politics and single team dominance. It's good to read something less than glowing about that time.

#284 Dunc

Dunc
  • Member

  • 429 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 06 December 2013 - 14:51


Mechanical breakdowns, when cars are being designed, built, and pushed beyond the limit, are not "random elements introduced". Oh, of course it's part random, in the sense that all sport can be abstracted to a weighted random number generator, but they aren't utterly arbitrary. They are elements that have been inseparably part of the sport since the beginning. They represent the engineering challenge required to make a car last a race distance, and they represent the empathy certain drivers do, and don't have to their racing cars- think Alain Prost's uncanny ability to drive fast, and save his fuel and tires at the same time, or the brilliant, early Ayrton Senna driving faster than his fragile Lotus could handle.

So no, this isn't a golfer being hit by lightning. This is an otherwise great putter muffing an easy one and losing a tournament, or a cyclist mistiming a breakaway and getting caught by the peleton half a kilometer from the finish. It's a variable, and variables are what make for good sport.

e: The irony, of course, is that since the cars aren't being pushed to the limit anymore, the only mechanical retirements we have are basically random, unless you really think that driving at 80% to conserve tires is hell on a Red Bull's gearbox. So pushing the cars faster would simultaneously increase the number of retirements, but also make them less arbitrary.


Even if cars were being pushedto tneir limits mechanical breakdowns would still be rare because cars are much more reliable. Look at the end of the refuelling era, or even 2010, mechanical failure was rare.

#285 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,663 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 06 December 2013 - 15:13

I'm really pleased someone has posted this. There is a lot of nostalgia for the Senna/Prost era, even though it featured all the issues people complain about today - a controversial driver, politics and single team dominance. It's good to read something less than glowing about that time.

 

The thing with 1988 is that you didn't know which of Senna or Prost would win.  And Monza was such a legendary race because it differed from the pattern.

 

For 2004 you knew the second guy at Ferrari was contractually banned from beating his team-mate.



#286 Henri Greuter

Henri Greuter
  • Member

  • 4,736 posts
  • Joined: June 02

Posted 06 December 2013 - 19:23

Ensign14,

 

I don't know if you followed the 1988 season properly but Sunday was to some extend predictable too that year. Senna was the faster driver and the odds that he would win were higher than that of Prost. That said, the odds were also a bit higher that if one of them would retire it would be Senna because of his character to not only to win the race but make it as humiliating as possible for everyone behind him, Which caused two retirements that Prost would not have allowed himself to happen.

 

Other then that, I liked 2004 and 2002 over 1988 because there was at least some variety within qualifying so other teams also had a moment of glory. Race day boredom due to the team politics of Ferrari, yes, that was indeed true, maybe even more then in 1988.

But at least in 2002 and 2004 the qualifying was indeed still a reason to watch for, in 1988 there was absolutely no reason to look F1 and have some pleasure about if you were no fan of Prost, Senna, McLaren and/or Honda.

It just depends on what you prefer, the uteer one team domination of one single team and two drivers all weekend long or utter dominance on Race day only by a single driver that prevented more entertainment that the Saturday had offered.

 

Henri



#287 Velocifer

Velocifer
  • Member

  • 736 posts
  • Joined: January 02

Posted 07 December 2013 - 11:18

 

Mechanical breakdowns, when cars are being designed, built, and pushed beyond the limit, are not "random elements introduced". Oh, of course it's part random, in the sense that all sport can be abstracted to a weighted random number generator, but they aren't utterly arbitrary. They are elements that have been inseparably part of the sport since the beginning. They represent the engineering challenge required to make a car last a race distance, and they represent the empathy certain drivers do, and don't have to their racing cars- think Alain Prost's uncanny ability to drive fast, and save his fuel and tires at the same time, or the brilliant, early Ayrton Senna driving faster than his fragile Lotus could handle.

 

So no, this isn't a golfer being hit by lightning. This is an otherwise great putter muffing an easy one and losing a tournament, or a cyclist mistiming a breakaway and getting caught by the peleton half a kilometer from the finish. It's a variable, and variables are what make for good sport.

 

e: The irony, of course, is that since the cars aren't being pushed to the limit anymore, the only mechanical retirements we have are basically random, unless you really think that driving at 80% to conserve tires is hell on a Red Bull's gearbox. So pushing the cars faster would simultaneously increase the number of retirements, but also make them less arbitrary.

No, those are sporting and competitor made variables, same as when an F1 driver chokes toward the end of season for example. The equivalent bicycle situation would be chains and gears breaking with no replacement bike available and people saying that's great for the sport of cycling..

And the irony is that today's brittle tyres is the main factor in reducing predictability atm, but hated by the majority who then wants the drivers racing and not the technical reliability to be the main factor.. This of course follows the period when the tyres were solid and people complained it was too predictable etc and was the root cause why the brittle tyres were brought in to begin with lol  :drunk: 

I know the videos above are for fun, but shows a bit the state of affairs. Who won is not really interesting (except when it's the narrator's favorite driver of course) and gets less time in the season summary than another driver's girlfriend etc, crashes and other dramas. There just seems to be a new generation of fans who doesn't really care about pure motorsport as much as waving driver flags and wanting drama etc. There is no doubt this season had a closer field and more and better on-track battles than most seasons in the history of the sport, and we also witnessed live one of the all time greats in F1 set one of his records, but no, that's nothing, the season was horrible, the worst in the history of the sport!  :confused:



#288 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,663 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 07 December 2013 - 11:35


It just depends on what you prefer, the uteer one team domination of one single team and two drivers all weekend long or utter dominance on Race day only by a single driver that prevented more entertainment that the Saturday had offered.

 

Henri

 

I prefer some level of honesty and merit in racing.  Today you could rank the teams in order according to the amount they spend, and rank the drivers within the team according to which one the team likes most.



#289 Kucki

Kucki
  • Member

  • 1,237 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 07 December 2013 - 13:38

I have seen races live since over 25 years.

 

You are watching boring cars on boring tracks with fake overtaking.

 

And before someone says do you want back no overtaking... it was not perfect in the past, cars should and could be closer to each other, look and sound great while still beeing save, tracks could be exciting and spectacular without beeing dangerous, and overtaking could be possible and genuine at the same time. One day F1 world will wake up and wonder what on earth are we watching/producing, when it could be so much better in every way.



#290 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,017 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 07 December 2013 - 13:43

I have seen races live since over 25 years.

 

You are watching boring cars on boring tracks with fake overtaking.

 

And before someone says do you want back no overtaking... it was not perfect in the past, cars should and could be closer to each other, look and sound great while still beeing save, tracks could be exciting and spectacular without beeing dangerous, and overtaking could be possible and genuine at the same time. One day F1 world will wake up and wonder what on earth are we watching/producing, when it could be so much better in every way.

I've been watching for 40 years.

 

Last few years has been as good as it's ever been barring a few exceptional seasons.

 

People keep saying it could be better but a have yet to see a workable, fully thought through, suggestion on this board.

 

One day people will wake up, stop whingeing and enjoy it.


Edited by Lazy, 07 December 2013 - 13:45.


#291 sopa

sopa
  • Member

  • 2,620 posts
  • Joined: April 07

Posted 07 December 2013 - 13:47

Recently I re-watched Abu Dhabi 2010. God damn, I had forgotten that overtaking was so difficult, it was literally impossible to pass throughout the whole race. Now I understand, why did they bring DRS! The lesser evil I guess...



#292 Gorma

Gorma
  • Member

  • 1,157 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 07 December 2013 - 17:57

Recently I re-watched Abu Dhabi 2010. God damn, I had forgotten that overtaking was so difficult, it was literally impossible to pass throughout the whole race. Now I understand, why did they bring DRS! The lesser evil I guess...

And that isn't even the worst example... not even close.



#293 Kucki

Kucki
  • Member

  • 1,237 posts
  • Joined: June 09

Posted 07 December 2013 - 19:52

At least you were glued to the TV. Nowadays the overtakings would have been a formality.



#294 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,663 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 07 December 2013 - 21:21


People keep saying it could be better but a have yet to see a workable, fully thought through, suggestion on this board.

 

 

Drop the noses, ban wings, ban radio contact, get rid of paddleshifting and change the braking materials.  If most drivers are braking 50 yards before a corner, someone has to brake at 40 to overtake.  Impossible.  But if they're braking at 200 yards, then someone might be able to brake at 190.  And it's impossible to miss a gear if you can't miss a gear...



#295 SenorSjon

SenorSjon
  • Member

  • 1,332 posts
  • Joined: March 12

Posted 07 December 2013 - 23:06

Recently I re-watched Abu Dhabi 2010. God damn, I had forgotten that overtaking was so difficult, it was literally impossible to pass throughout the whole race. Now I understand, why did they bring DRS! The lesser evil I guess...

The evil was and is:

1) parc ferme.

2) rev limits all the same.

3) frozen engine development.

4) power equalization between engine brands 



#296 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,017 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 08 December 2013 - 09:04

Drop the noses, ban wings, ban radio contact, get rid of paddleshifting and change the braking materials.  If most drivers are braking 50 yards before a corner, someone has to brake at 40 to overtake.  Impossible.  But if they're braking at 200 yards, then someone might be able to brake at 190.  And it's impossible to miss a gear if you can't miss a gear...

:drunk:

 

See what I mean.



#297 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 36,663 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 08 December 2013 - 09:32

Exactly.  Go back to how it was for years.

 

Of course, the other way to do it is to allow teams to do what they want, almost total free formula, but with a limited spend of £50m.  Let's see who the best engineers really are.



#298 Lazy

Lazy
  • Member

  • 5,017 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 08 December 2013 - 09:44

Exactly.  Go back to how it was for years.

 

Of course, the other way to do it is to allow teams to do what they want, almost total free formula, but with a limited spend of £50m.  Let's see who the best engineers really are.

It wouldn't take much money with the technology they already have to build cars with more g's than any driver could take and cornering speeds so high that no amount of safety cell could save the driver if they came off.

 

This is the problem, the regulators have to deal with reality which is way more complicated than you imply.



#299 wateryturtle

wateryturtle
  • New Member

  • 21 posts
  • Joined: November 13

Posted 08 December 2013 - 10:20

"I dare you to watch American racing for a while with constant safety cars 'spicing' things up with random 'unpredictability' and come back after a year or two and tell me what you really prefer"

 

The last 2 Indycar seasons (ones ive watched) have been about 1000 times more interesting Formula 1. So much more excitement and actual racing.



Advertisement

#300 Fourjays

Fourjays
  • Member

  • 239 posts
  • Joined: September 11

Posted 08 December 2013 - 10:23

Not the worst ever. But pretty poor. 2010 remains my favourite season since the 2009 changes, mainly because it was a closely fought championship, but probably also because it was the last time the drivers were running flat out most of the time. I defended the Pirelli's for a while, but I've come to realise this year that they are the main problem in F1.

For the last two years I've watched V8 Supercars and the 24 Hours of Le Mans, and in both cases it is flat out racing from start to finish with quality drivers and sensible rules. Next year I plan to watch the whole WEC and not just Le Mans, as well as continuing with the V8s. I'll still watch F1 but my interest is waning slowly (as it is with the British Touring Car Crashfest).

Formula 1 desperately needs to rejuvenate itself, and I don't mean by going back to the 90s with V12 monsters that do half a lap and explode. I'm fine with 1.6l turbos and KERS... actually looking forward to the changes next year. But give the drivers tyres they can push on. Use some of the sport's technological boffins to redesign the aerodynamics to allow cars to follow, or at least tune DRS so that it is fairer (DRS could be better if it shut once alongside for example). Stop finding somebody to penalise for every single racing incident. Remove rules that are no longer relevant (two compounds). Consider altering the format to bring it up to date (I'd personally go for a practice is qualifying with two races format). Put the teams in their place - FIA sets the rules and the teams can either follow them or get out. And most importantly, make it financially viable for teams and drivers.

In short, F1 needs to go back to the basics and focus on getting those right. If they got those right, they wouldn't need to keep adding things like cheese tyres and mandatory pitstops to try and get "good" racing.