89 replies to this topic

[eronrules]

Keeping the Silver Arrows on target - exclusive Toto Wolff Q&A

 

 

...

Q: It has obviously been a good season for you so far, but has F1 racing 2014 style been a success in your eyes?

TW: I watched the final race of the 1984 championship in Portugal recently, and I came into it one third of the way through. These races were much more boring: you couldn't hear the engines on TV because they were also turbos, and the only overtaking was lapping. So I wonder. I think we have a great product, some great races. Will we always have great races? No. But is every football match great? No. You had Bahrain, Montreal, Austria... I think we have a good product.

 

In trying to make it more exciting, have we gone into territory we shouldn't have? Maybe - maybe double points are not right. But let us do double points and then judge at the end whether we have done something wrong or not. Is it pure and simple, as F1 should be? No it is not, and I am against it. But maybe once we have gone through it we will like it. 

There are a couple of people who always say how good it was in the old times and how we need to go back in the regulations. But you cannot be blind to what is happening in the world. I think F1 is the pinnacle of motor racing; it is the best drivers and the best cars. Contrary to what is being said I think the fans do care that these are the best and quickest cars. For us at Mercedes the reason we are here is that there is a clear link and exchange between F1 and the road cars, in both directions. That is not a marketing gag but reality, it happens. Honda has proved the concept is interesting and who knows what discussions are ongoing at the various companies about joining. Looking at what Mercedes have done, maybe we could be seeing some of the others joining.

 

couldn't agree more with most of the things he said.   (except for the Red part ... double points is stupid, no amount of argument in the world will make it right)

[Force Ten]

Well, the team boss of a team that is figuratively lapping the field in championship standings thinking that Formula One is in great shape? Shocked I am, shocked!

[Sash1]

Better than 30 years ago maybe. But better than 50 years ago, or 20 years ago, or 10 years ago? I doubt it.

[Collombin]

Does the thread title really reflect what he said though? And based on 2/3 of one race?

Of course there was less overtaking. But at least what there was was real.

Was the racing more interesting then? Not really. But the drivers, the cars and the tracks were. By far.

Can't agree with Sash1 though. 1984 was far more interesting than 1994 or 2004.

[ExFlagMan]

If he believes that to be true, then why the **** is his team one of those TWG members that voted to for new 'features' to liven the show up.

 

Or is he going to claim that 'The bigger boys made me do it'

Edited by ExFlagMan, 15 August 2014 - 09:45.

[P123]

If he believes that to be true, then why the **** is his team one of those TWG members that voted to for new 'features' to liven the show up.
 
Or is he going to claim that 'The bigger boys made me do it'

Because they are all clueless. Stick them together in a room and they are dangerous to the health of the sport.

As for the general idea that F1 is better now than 30 years ago..... there were plenty of boring races then, and in each following decade.

[DarthWillie]

The 1984 Portuguese gp had Lauda comming through te field from a bad start position to claim his 3rd wdc , and that is an example. Oh dear Toto, justin Bieber is better than the Beatles because you didn't follow it live?

1984 was dominated by McLaren and so much more exciting than this year. No parc ferme, a Sunday warm up so a driver who screwed up quali had a chance to setup his car for the race and still have a chance. A lot of the changes have been necessary over the years, but please don't talk nonsense Toto

[byrkus]

But it's still kind of weird that he chose the '84 Portugal GP for being 'boring'. Lauda had to be classified first or second, if he wanted to win his 3rd title - and he only made it to 11th on the grid. After which he passed driver after driver and finally finished as 2nd, and won the title by 0.5 point margin.

 

I wish all races would be so boring.

[Force Ten]

Better than 30 years ago maybe. But better than 50 years ago, or 20 years ago, or 10 years ago? I doubt it.

It is DEFINITELY better than 10 years ago.

[FullThrottleF1]

No era is better than the rest. All of them have had ups and downs.

[rf90]

No era is better than the rest. All of them have had ups and downs.

Written as if it is a fact, when in fact, it's just a personal view of yours.

[Seanspeed]

Agree with him 100%. F1 is not perfect by any means, but I think we've got one of the biggest talent pools in F1 history, an exciting qualifying format, and an ability for drivers to actually race on raceday, rather than getting stuck in a procession based on their grid position and start. I wish the cars sounded better(and looked a bit better), but its otherwise still a hugely entertaining package overall in my view.

Edited by Seanspeed, 15 August 2014 - 10:46.

[Kristian]

10 years ago we had some truly dire races. Those are few and far between now. 

 

And generlaly I think F1 is the most competitive its ever been in terms of racing. 

 

Its just not very inspirational right now - overtaking aids, double points, asphalt everywhere, boring personalities, etc. - that's the problem. But racing wise I think we are in good shape.  

[travbrad]

Better than 30 years ago maybe. But better than 50 years ago, or 20 years ago, or 10 years ago? I doubt it.

 

10 years ago?  2004?  REALLY?

[7MGTEsup]

10 years ago we had some truly dire races. Those are few and far between now. 

 

And generlaly I think F1 is the most competitive its ever been in terms of racing. 

 

Its just not very inspirational right now - overtaking aids, double points, asphalt everywhere, boring personalities, etc. - that's the problem. But racing wise I think we are in good shape.  

 

I don't think the personalities are boring, just there is so much sponsership involved that people are just taught to act like drones as not to uspset their sponsers. I have no gripe with DRS either as there is nothing more frustraiting watching a faster car not be able to overtake because he loses 20% of his downforce once he gets within 1 second of the car infront. But double points and asphalt run offs are a bit poor in my opinion.

[Ferrari_F1_fan_2001]

Better? Yes.

 

Popular? I'm not so sure.

 

10 years ago I think it was a bigger sport, or maybe I am thinking that because there was more money going around.

[LuckyStrike1]

This comes from one of the people who was in charge of getting the double points scheme in, and it's the exactly same people that said afterwards what they had just proposed and decided is a bad idea that will stay. 

 

These people really do live in their own little fantasy bubble world so it's hard to take their public opinions serious. 

[rhukkas]

The problem they face is the racing might be 'good' but so what? Sim racing is epic and kart racing is epic but they don't bring in spectators, no one cares.

 

F1's biggest problem is its lack of relevance in the modern market place, and the fact it's been sanitised beyond belief.

 

IN 1984 the race may have been boring but you knew one-mistake and the driver was dead. Not saying that was a 'good thing' just it is very much a draw.

[PlatenGlass]

I think because of the McLaren domination, 1984 wasn't the best year around then, but it's not as if they dominated every race from start to finish, especially since Piquet got 9 poles in the Brabham. But even if this year was better than 30 years ago, it's a very literal interpretation, because it's not better than 29 or 31 years ago...

[JHSingo]

I completely agree with what he's said. Really, in terms of exciting racing (wheel-to-wheel battles, overtakes etc), we've never had it better.

 

As I've said before, I think a lot of people have a rose tinted spectacles mentality, where they believe things in the past where far better than they are now. Really, we've been spoilt with a lot of good races over the last few races that it is very easy to forget how bad it once was.

[discover23]

I think the formula now is good and provides better racing than 10/20 years ago except DRS..
The double points for last race, I am still undecided about this one..
In the 80s they also had a different points scheme where the worse results were dropped, which I don't think is a bad idea..

They have to try and do something with the sound.. That I really miss..

Edited by discover23, 15 August 2014 - 12:45.

[Timstr11]

Those who believe things were better 25-30 years ago think of many things as being better 25-30 years ago anyway. It's called aging and nostalgia.

 

If you study the facts, the racing certainly was not better then.

 

You've just grown much older and you're not as easily excited by things as when you were 30 years younger.

Edited by Timstr11, 15 August 2014 - 12:41.

[rf90]

Those who believe things were better 25-30 years ago think of many things as being better 25-30 years ago anyway. It's called aging and nostalgia.
 
If you study the facts, the racing certainly was not better then.
 
You've just grown much older and you're not as easily excited by things as when you were 30 years younger.

There's some truth to that I guess, but remember, those that have the years behind them are better placed to make valid comparisons than newbies to F1, especially newbies whose "knowledge" is based on sitting in front of the telly.
Not suggesting that's you, by the way, just generalising :-)

[Longtimefan]

Confirmation that the guy is a nut job..

[Ferrari_F1_fan_2001]

The gimmicks - DRS, KERS etc - and too much FIA nanny interference have taken away from what has been very very good racing.

 

Lose the nanny state interference and the moaning and groaning will stop. We'll even pretend the cars sound good.

[pdac]

If it was better than 30 years ago people would notice and no one would need to make such statements. The pure fact that he's made the statement means to me that it cannot be true.

[HoldenRT]

The headline was worse than what he actually said.  I still think though, in terms of anything he has said this year, I ask myself if he'd be saying it if the pecking order was the same as last season?

 

I liked F1 more in the old days without the cost cutting, but F1 still has it's moments.  Hungary was a fun race and there have been a few this year.  But I also enjoyed others last season or even the season before.  And not just because Redbull were winning.  The control tyre brings situations sometimes that are unique and exciting but I always preferred a tyre war.  Or an engine war, or the sprint format etc.  Can't comment about the races he is talking about.. waaaaay before my time.

 

I liked F1 the most when they were setting the fastest laptimes ever.  But there is still good racing these days.  It's still fun to watch the drivers compete.

Edited by HoldenRT, 15 August 2014 - 15:06.

[HoldenRT]

Agree with him 100%. F1 is not perfect by any means, but I think we've got one of the biggest talent pools in F1 history, an exciting qualifying format, and an ability for drivers to actually race on raceday, rather than getting stuck in a procession based on their grid position and start. I wish the cars sounded better(and looked a bit better), but its otherwise still a hugely entertaining package overall in my view.

 

I sometimes wonder what it would have been like to have those same races, only with the addition of DRS.  On some tracks it wasn't needed, but on others it could have really helped.  The other aspects I can't really fault it, mainly just that on some tracks, the driver infront had too much of an advantage in terms of maintaining position.  There was actually extreme blocking and weaving allowed back then as well.. funnily enough.

[Force Ten]

It is DEFINITELY better than 10 years ago.

Though quoting oneself is kinda gay (NTTAWWT), then again I don't remember Luca di Montezemolo back in 2004 pissing and moaning that Formula One is heading down the shitter. Funny that.

[HoldenRT]

The picture that comes through the TV screen in HD and widescreen is definitely better, at least maybe we can all agree on something.

[Collombin]

I think we've got one of the biggest talent pools in F1 history

True enough - but when comparing to a season with Piquet, Prost, Senna, Mansell, Lauda and Rosberg amongst others, I don't think 1984 can be criticized in that regard either.

I do think there was only one truly great race in 1984 though - and ironically at its shittiest track.

Edited by E.B., 15 August 2014 - 15:16.

[FerrariFanInTexas]

Seeing as how I was around thirty years ago and following F1 (even in Texas - we had our own race that year where I saw Nico's dad take ole and the race win in horrible conditions), I can't agree with Toto that the races were boring, or that today's formula is better. 

 

In 1984 there were 5 winners from four different teams in sixteen races.  And although a McLaren or two was always expected on the podium, there were a total of 13 drivers who finished on the podium, representing six different teams (including a youngster named Senna, who twice finished 3rd for Toleman).  And while Piquet in the exploding Brabham did rule qualifying, there were a total of 6 different drivers who grabbed pole, representing five different teams.  At the time, it seemed like a pretty entertaining year, especially given McLaren's dominance with the Porsche TAG engine.

 

This year, in 11 races so far, we've had three winners from two teams.  In terms of pole, we've had three drivers representing two teams.  And as to podiums, we've had nine drivers from six teams. 

 

So in 1984 there was more variability in who would win, less in who would take pole, and about the same in terms of podiums.  I'm enjoying this season (mostly by ignoring the silver cars), and I certainly enjoyed 1984.  And I remember several races in 1984 where drivers came through the field to finish well ahead of their starting position, so my recollection is there was a similar amount of action going on behind the McLaren's, just as today the action behind Mercedes is pretty fun.

 

As to things like the live experience, I'll give a report after this year's U.S. Grand Prix.  I was at Dallas thirty years ago, and I'll be here in Austin this year, so I'll be able to compare turbo eras.  As of right now, with no live experience, I'd say the two seasons are similar, but the uncertainty of 1984 (would the cars blow up, would someone hit a wall, would someone run out of fuel), I think my enjoyment of the races was slightly higher.

[johnmhinds]

Wait, he is saying he doesn't like the double points idea now?

 

Well why the smeg didn't you vote against it then Toto?!?!?!

 

If he thinks the sport is doing ok why is he part of the same group that a few weeks ago voted in standing restarts to liven up the show?

 

What an idiot.

[RealRacing]

The problem they face is the racing might be 'good' but so what? Sim racing is epic and kart racing is epic but they don't bring in spectators, no one cares.

 

F1's biggest problem is its lack of relevance in the modern market place, and the fact it's been sanitised beyond belief.

 

IN 1984 the race may have been boring but you knew one-mistake and the driver was dead. Not saying that was a 'good thing' just it is very much a draw.

F1's biggest problem is that they think they have to be relevant to road cars, that there somehow has to be a link between a dedicated racing machine and a, mostly, utilitarian vehicle.   Yes, they are both machines with an engine and tyres but that's where the similarities should end. F1 should be a spectacle, an event, able to stand on its own for what it represents: auto racing, not marketing, PR or a test bed for road-relevant technology (or at least that should not be the main focus). I mean, they already have those giant, banked tracks to test their crap.

[HoldenRT]

When he talks, he sounds like Arnold Schwarznegger, he's not all bad..

[rf90]

Seeing as how I was around thirty years ago and following F1 (even in Texas - we had our own race that year where I saw Nico's dad take ole and the race win in horrible conditions), I can't agree with Toto that the races were boring, or that today's formula is better. 
 
In 1984 there were 5 winners from four different teams in sixteen races.  And although a McLaren or two was always expected on the podium, there were a total of 13 drivers who finished on the podium, representing six different teams (including a youngster named Senna, who twice finished 3rd for Toleman).  And while Piquet in the exploding Brabham did rule qualifying, there were a total of 6 different drivers who grabbed pole, representing five different teams.  At the time, it seemed like a pretty entertaining year, especially given McLaren's dominance with the Porsche TAG engine.
 
This year, in 11 races so far, we've had three winners from two teams.  In terms of pole, we've had three drivers representing two teams.  And as to podiums, we've had nine drivers from six teams. 
 
So in 1984 there was more variability in who would win, less in who would take pole, and about the same in terms of podiums.  I'm enjoying this season (mostly by ignoring the silver cars), and I certainly enjoyed 1984.  And I remember several races in 1984 where drivers came through the field to finish well ahead of their starting position, so my recollection is there was a similar amount of action going on behind the McLaren's, just as today the action behind Mercedes is pretty fun.
 
As to things like the live experience, I'll give a report after this year's U.S. Grand Prix.  I was at Dallas thirty years ago, and I'll be here in Austin this year, so I'll be able to compare turbo eras.  As of right now, with no live experience, I'd say the two seasons are similar, but the uncertainty of 1984 (would the cars blow up, would someone hit a wall, would someone run out of fuel), I think my enjoyment of the races was slightly higher.

Good post, interesting stuff, and not once was a driver slagged off :-)

[George Costanza]

Toto is, IMO, wrong. 1984 had great stuff with Niki Lauda returning and beating Alain Prost by half a point. We also had Stefan Bellof, Keke Rosberg, Nelson Piquet, and the debut of Ayrton Senna....

 

The drivers were more outspoken and can talk straight up with today's PR crap.

Edited by George Costanza, 15 August 2014 - 18:36.

[George Costanza]

It is DEFINITELY better than 10 years ago.

 

The cars sure hell aren't. Ask Fernando Alonso how much slower they are this year compared with 2004.

[JHSingo]

When he talks, he sounds like Arnold Schwarznegger, he's not all bad..

 

[George Costanza]

Agree with him 100%. F1 is not perfect by any means, but I think we've got one of the biggest talent pools in F1 history, an exciting qualifying format, and an ability for drivers to actually race on raceday, rather than getting stuck in a procession based on their grid position and start. I wish the cars sounded better(and looked a bit better), but its otherwise still a hugely entertaining package overall in my view.

 

I think the 1984 grid would beat today's grid by quite a margin.... Put Ayrton, Alain, Niki, Nelson, Nigel and Kek vs Seb, Fernando, Lewis, Kimi, Nico? 

 

There is only one driver that came out and was beating the previous generation and the current generation; that man is Michael Schumacher. Late 1991-1992 is a good example how Michael was doing versus Alain, Ayrton, Nigel and Nelson. 2006; was beating everyone including Fernando, until the last race. 2012 he showed flashes of old speed, and was on par pace wise with the today's crop. I think one can say, Schumacher was the finest driver of the past 25 years along with Ayrton Senna and Fernando Alonso.

Edited by George Costanza, 15 August 2014 - 18:49.

[Ducks]

We currently have many many top drivers, right now we have Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, Ricciardo, Rosberg, Raikkonen, Bottas and Button. I can't comment if its better than 30 years ago as I wasn't around to experience it but for me its better than what we saw in the early 2000s.

[George Costanza]

We currently have many many top drivers, right now we have Alonso, Hamilton, Vettel, Ricciardo, Rosberg, Raikkonen, Bottas and Button. I can't comment if its better than 30 years ago as I wasn't around to experience it but for me its better than what we saw in the early 2000s.

 

Because Michael made them look "average." If Michael wasn't there, it would be loaded...

[Ducks]

Because Michael made them look "average." If Michael wasn't there, it would be loaded...

 

So if the list of drivers I mentioned had been on that same grid as Michael he would have made them look "average"

[renton]

F1's biggest problem is that they think they have to be relevant to road cars, that there somehow has to be a link between a dedicated racing machine and a, mostly, utilitarian vehicle.   Yes, they are both machines with an engine and tyres but that's where the similarities should end. F1 should be a spectacle, an event, able to stand on its own for what it represents: auto racing, not marketing, PR or a test bed for road-relevant technology (or at least that should not be the main focus). I mean, they already have those giant, banked tracks to test their crap.

 

That's all folks.

[superden]

Sorry Toto, but whether something is 'better' is an entirely subjective matter. You might think so, but not all of us do and neither party is right.

[pathogen]

This man is a newcomer... careerist and oportunist. Lauda, Prost, Mansell, Rosberg, Picket, De Angelis, Laffite, Alboreto, Arnoux, etc. Superior level in the grid, in my opinion.

Powerful teams and real circuits. This businessman talks without historic perspective.

[RealRacing]

This man is a newcomer... careerist and oportunist. Lauda, Prost, Mansell, Rosberg, Picket, De Angelis, Laffite, Alboreto, Arnoux, etc. Superior level in the grid, in my opinion.

Powerful teams and real circuits. This businessman talks without historic perspective.

Which would be worrying as he's the leader of one of the most important F1 teams of the moment. However, I think he's just playing the classic corporate interest game: F1 is best whenever your team is winning, when you are in a position of responsibility in F1 or when you have something to gain from it. For most people currently involved in F1 the best moment is...now.

[garagetinkerer]

The cars sure hell aren't. Ask Fernando Alonso how much slower they are this year compared with 2004.

Don't forget that his car used to run on rubber more fun than durex... Michelin!

[garagetinkerer]

Which would be worrying as he's the leader of one of the most important F1 teams of the moment. However, I think he's just playing the classic corporate interest game: F1 is best whenever your team is winning, when you are in a position of responsibility in F1 or when you have something to gain from it. For most people currently involved in F1 the best moment is...now.

Mercedes has already been worrying. They only came back as a manufacturer proper in 2010, and since 2012 there have been rumblings about potential withdrawal from the sport, peaking last year post, ahem, a test. Appeasing board is very important, as they properly control the future of their F1 participation and level (manufacturer/ engine supplier etc.),

[Briz]

That race even features a serious Niki Lauda vs Ayrton Senna battle, ffs. Most people would be surprised such a thing even exists, let alone call the race boring