45 replies to this topic

[Ricciardo2014]

I have to say I agree with Mark.

 

He's always been a straight shooter, and he makes some very good points in this short interview.

 

http://www.motorspor...th-mark-webber/

[kamikaze1]

It's a shame driver's / ex-driver's opinions have never been listened to, and probably never will.  Flogging a dead horse at this stage. 

[Peat]

What can you say? He's dead right. F1 should blow your mind for you, not make you want to manually blow your brains out. 

*awaits legions of "Muh, he's just ********....." comments*

[Gyno]

Like Webber said.

I am afraid the cars will only be 5 seconds faster in qualy and then in race trim they are as slow as now because the tires and fuel needs to be saved from lap 2.

 

Wont take long before the  LMP1 cars will outrace F1 cars.

[TheRacingElf]

He is completely right but they won't listen though, all people in F1 live in their own world..

[superden]

Spot on from Webber, yet again.

[Beamer]

Spot on from Webber, yet again.

Ditto

[DILLIGAF]

Gotta say his comments are on the money.

[Jon83]

Characters like Webber are sadly missed from F1.

[Paco]

Well said. Too bad the whole of f1 doesn't see it the same way. So many fans here actually think f1 is good right now. They think think conservation f1 is fine..

[Ghostrider]

Feels like Webber is spot on. 

[Jon83]

Well said. Too bad the whole of f1 doesn't see it the same way. So many fans here actually think f1 is good right now. They think think conservation f1 is fine..

 

Possibly because of the success Hamilton is enjoying?

[HeadFirst]

Well said. Too bad the whole of f1 doesn't see it the same way. So many fans here actually think f1 is good right now. They think think conservation f1 is fine..

 

I don't agree that so many F1 fans really think things are good right now. I think many (myself included) just disagree with the constant negativity by those who see F1 as a waste of time, or that it should be "blown up" and a totally new model created. I see some things that F1 needs to change and areas that could be improved, but I could say the same about any of the top motorsport series. I don't think F1 is good right now, just better than the alternatives.

[rhukkas]

F1 could be worse.... I mean the FIA have just named their new 'top-tier' (it isn't, but anyway) kart class 'OK'. No joke.. that's the official name,.

Edited by rhukkas, 19 June 2015 - 14:47.

[TheRacingElf]

F1 could be worse.... I mean the FIA have just named their new 'top-tier' (it isn't, but anyway) kart class 'OK'. No joke.. that's the official name,.

Which stands for Origins of Karting. They have done away with all the electronic **** and gone back to the basics of what made karting so great, they should do the same with F1

[RealRacing]

The thing is that many of us longtime F1 fans have made it a habit to follow it. We think it's bad but in a way we are addicted so we sometimes try to convince ourselves that it will improve. Then there's the odd good race that keeps us hooked. But, like Webber says, if F1 is competing with other motorsports, like MotoGP or Rally X for new fans, then it's most probably losing. And also absolutely right: if the drivers are enjoying it, that will rub off on the fans. I'm sure most drivers, if not for PR and employment reasons, would criticize it much more harshly than they do now. Behind closed doors, they must really be destroying it.

[GSiebert]

He's right but it's been like that for like 10 years now. Did it take that long for everyone to realize ?

Edited by GSiebert, 19 June 2015 - 14:56.

[superden]

Which stands for Origins of Karting. They have done away with all the electronic **** and gone back to the basics of what made karting so great, they should do the same with F1

F1 ditches all the electrickery, yay!

Oh wait, we still have crap tyres, and crap aero, and crap regulations, and crap funding, and crap celebrity nonsense, and crap governance, and ...

A laudable effort, but simplifying the cars just isn't enough anymore, you can go back to basics but the whole enterprise is just a complete mess from top to bottom.

[TheRacingElf]

F1 ditches all the electrickery, yay!

Oh wait, we still have crap tyres, and crap aero, and crap regulations, and crap funding, and crap celebrity nonsense, and crap governance, and ...

A laudable effort, but simplifying the cars just isn't enough anymore, you can go back to basics but the whole enterprise is just a complete mess from top to bottom.

I was more talking about F1 in general going back to the basics, not specifically about electronics

[BCM]

You're totally right RealRacing. I've watched F1 for 30 odd years but it's really only habit that keeps me going now. And even that is wearing thin these days. Missed Canada...didn't even bother trying to find a copy of the race. Feeling pretty disinterested about this weekend's race as well. 

[gowebber]

Spot on. I miss Mark in F1. Give him the top job and let him sort this shite out!!

Edited by gowebber, 19 June 2015 - 15:11.

[P123]

Spot on... apart from the "5 or 6 seconds faster" mantra.  An utterly pointless target if it's achieved by the cars being on rails and contradictory to the "we want drivers to be like gladiators" mantra. It would also have little impact on improving the on track racing.  A current Merc is about 5s faster than a Manor.  Is it much more enjoyable to watch a Mercedes lap?  Well, no.  The cars have to be visually on edge and give the impression of being difficult to drive.

[Tourgott]

He's right but it's been like that for like 10 years now.

 

Not it's not. There were more enjoyable seasons and less enjoyable seasons since 2005. There were stupid rule changes and things like grooved tires and DRS. The difference is, overall it was still awesome and fascinating. That's all completely gone now.

[P123]

I don't think a DRS pass has ever been "awesome and fascinating", or passing in the pits, or a great number of things F1 has done over the past 15-20 years.  But we get it, they don't make loud enough vroom vroom noises nowadays.

[Tarzaan]

According to this:

 

https://plot.ly/~pfsq/638.embed

 

Webbo was theslowest and less constant of the 9 Porsche driver.

[FerrariV12]

Conservation in itself I don't mind, managing fuel and tyres was a part of F1 in the 80s. The difference was that they were pushing the limits of technology that they had.

 

Regarding the tyres, the debate between high/low degradation I just find monotonous. Back then they were conserving because they were making the best of what they had available rather than the powers that be deciding that something would be better for "the show".

 

You'll never get those days back without resorting to artificial measures because you can't un-invent technology, but F1 has always evolved naturally in that way, so the sport should embrace what it's possible to do, and if that's balls to the wall racing for 90 minutes without the need for tyre saving or pit stops, so be it, let it define the next era of the sport.

 

At the start of the WC era, with supercharged engines giving atrocious fuel mileage, and longer races than present, fuel stops were common.

 

First Talbot at Spa 1950 and then Ferrari in 1951 showed that with a 4.5 N/A engine, you could make up for less of power with less time in the pits, then with smaller 2.0/2.5l engines introduced and then smaller, lighter, more efficient rear engined cars combined with a reduction in the race length made stops the exception rather than the rule, partly because with old knock-off hubs and gravity fed fuel poured in from canisters, you wouldn't make the time back up from running lighter, or with softer rubber.

 

Then decades later Brabham's engineers did some sums and worked out that with modern techniques and equipment for refuelling and tyre changes, even with a shorter race you could offset the time lost with lighter weight and better grip from softer and/or less worn tyres.

 

Refuelling was then banned for safety reasons, but the lessons learned remained, and even taking fuel out of the equation, teams figured out even just changing tyres, you could make up more than the time lost in some situations by choosing a compound that didn't last as long but gave more grip, and with no spec tyre the rubber suppliers were happy to comply with whatever their teams wanted if it gave them more of a chance to have their logo on the cap on the driver standing on the top step of the podium.

 

None of the above was mandated or manipulated for the sake of the show, merely a result of progression in technology, strategic knowledge, or in some cases an unplanned side effect of a rule change made for another reason.

 

I guess 1994 with the refuelling reintroduction was the start of it, 2011 with the tyres took it to a whole other level though. But even within the modern refuelling era, those first races cars made more stops, part of it was I guess the strategists finding their way with the new rules, but partly because there was no pit lane speed limit. When this was introduced post-Imola for safety reasons, the equation changed again and cars would maybe stop less on average, aside from the occasional outlier like Schumacher's 4 stop, that might well have been 5 under the pre-Imola 94 regs who knows. I found neither more or less valid or entertaining, both were just part of the teams and drivers trying to get their car from A to B as quickly as possible under the conditions, which is what I watch motor racing to see.

 

I guess what I'm saying is I find the debate between conserving and pushing, more stops or less, to basically be two sides of the same rusty mouldy 1p coin you sometimes get lumbered with. Create a technical and sporting rule set that allows the cars to run safely, let constructors and suppliers build/supply the best equipment they can within those rules, then let the drivers with their strategists figure out how to get to the chequered flag before anyone else, and see what form the racing takes. It won't be the same as <insert your favourite era here>, in the same way that <insert your favourite era here> wasn't the same as what preceded it, just wish they'd stop trying to micro-manage the style of racing "the fans" want to see, as if the fans are one monolithic group with the same opinions anyway.

[rhukkas]

Which stands for Origins of Karting. They have done away with all the electronic **** and gone back to the basics of what made karting so great, they should do the same with F1

Haha. Decomp valve, powervalve, rev limit and balance gears. Origins of karting i think not

[KingTiger]

I don't agree with him. The cars were very fast and very grippy before, and the races were absolutely terrible and mindnumbingly boring. There was no point in watching the race because the only important thing was qualifying. On top of that competing was ridiculously expensive and most small teams went bankrupt. 

[V8 Fireworks]

On top of that competing was ridiculously expensive and most small teams went bankrupt. 

 

...and the difference to 2015 is 

[SICOM]

I don't agree with him. The cars were very fast and very grippy before, and the races were absolutely terrible and mindnumbingly boring. There was no point in watching the race because the only important thing was qualifying. On top of that competing was ridiculously expensive and most small teams went bankrupt.

No difference today.

The big teams will just out spend and out develop the rest and monopolise the points.

F1 needs stability. Thats what brings the pack closer together. I remember in the mid 2000s where the field spread was around 3 seconds or one tiny mistake could be 3-6 spots on the grid.

Now, if Lewis or Nico make a mistake and end up at the back of the grid they will still get a podium position.

[JHSingo]

Hard to disagree with anything he's said there. I wish past (or even current) drivers were asked for input into the regulations. After all, they're fans like you and I, and talk a lot of sense due to their experience. It's not just sour grapes. They care about the sport and are obviously annoyed about how things are going, as it seems the majority of people are.

 

No doubt people who think F1 is fine will be quick to say he's just another 'failed' driver having a go at F1, but these guys should be listened to. Even the things Bourdais said a couple of weeks ago were spot on.

[GhostR]

According to this:

https://plot.ly/~pfsq/638.embed

Webbo was theslowest and less constant of the 9 Porsche driver.

That plot is useless without knowing how it was constructed. How many yellow flag laps did each driver have? How many night vs day stints? Did they exclude laps Webber ran affected by a penalty Hartley was responsible for? How many backmarker overtakes for each driver?

(Edit: also worth pointing out that the chart *does not* show Webber was slowest. The average (or median) shown in the chart clearly shows Jani was slowest by a considerable margin. For Webber it only shows less consistency and that could be due to non driver factors.)

Edited by GhostR, 19 June 2015 - 19:03.

[Jon83]

According to this:

 

https://plot.ly/~pfsq/638.embed

 

Webbo was theslowest and less constant of the 9 Porsche driver.

 

And the relevance is?

[John Player]

Agree with him

[DILLIGAF]

You're totally right RealRacing. I've watched F1 for 30 odd years but it's really only habit that keeps me going now. And even that is wearing thin these days. Missed Canada...didn't even bother trying to find a copy of the race. Feeling pretty disinterested about this weekend's race as well.

Same here BCM. I've been a fan for close to 40 years and I've never been more disinterested. Embarrassingly, I've been a sucker, believing most of the regulation changes over the past decade would improve the racing and the show in general, only to be disappointed by the results.

[DILLIGAF]

I don't agree with him. The cars were very fast and very grippy before, and the races were absolutely terrible and mindnumbingly boring. There was no point in watching the race because the only important thing was qualifying. On top of that competing was ridiculously expensive and most small teams went bankrupt.

Sounds like you're talking about 2015 to me, except maybe that qualy is not worth watching anymore.

[Meanstreak]

Spot on... apart from the "5 or 6 seconds faster" mantra.  An utterly pointless target if it's achieved by the cars being on rails and contradictory to the "we want drivers to be like gladiators" mantra. It would also have little impact on improving the on track racing.  A current Merc is about 5s faster than a Manor.  Is it much more enjoyable to watch a Mercedes lap?  Well, no.  The cars have to be visually on edge and give the impression of being difficult to drive.

I agree. Spectacle correlates to lap times only to some extent. Cars could be right now as fast as in the early 2000s, but they would simply never look as hard to drive as those looked simply because of other advances in tech. With that said, I bet there would a lot less complaining about this subject, if in fact the current cars were setting new lap times, with lift & coasting present or not, but since they're not, it is easy to blame everything on the speed alone.

Webber has said his LMP1 Porsche is "extremely futuristic, sexy, beast to be tamed". Well, I bet he still loves its traditional traction control, AWD and engine mappings that are even less regulated than in F1 or not at all regulated. His Porsche may have "1000+" bhp (we really need a new way to present power in ERS-assisted era) but it's not diverting much from the usual perfectly-on-rails look when you look at the car handling outside and onboard footage is quite unspiring.

I'm quite amazed he sees this so simplistically or then something was cut from the interview. When a driver says he wants to be again "a gladiator", it comes out a bit like a double standard. What drivers in reality want: cars that feel good to drive even when on the limit... usually that means cars that are also easy to drive. Quick poll to drivers: who wants manual stick gearboxes back?

Edited by Meanstreak, 20 June 2015 - 03:35.

[krapmeister]

...except maybe that qualy is not worth watching anymore.

And that's probably just as well anyway, seeing as we don't get qualifying on free to air tv anymore...

[Timstr11]

Webber is confusing me, along with many who came on here to say they agree with him.

All he's saying is the cars should be much faster, making a comparison with LMP1.

From a technology standpoint, LMP1 is faster because of the technology freedoms like traction control, all wheel drive, higher energy recovery allowance, grippier and more durable tyres, but also closed wheel aerodynamics.

Those who say they agree with Webber, do you agree that F1 should allow more technical freedom like the ones mentioned above?

And do you acknowledge that this will do absolutely nothing to remove predictability of outcome, teams dominating, lack of close racing, lack of unaided overtaking (things that many complain about. Not me.)?

Edited by Timstr11, 20 June 2015 - 05:45.

[krea]

The problem with F1 is that the series lost the reputation of being the absolutly high-tech motorsport series. Too many rule changes to make the car slower + sports unrelated rule changes to make everything more entertainment than sport.

 

Back in the old days there were also rule changes to make cars slower but everything was sold as "the cars are so fast now they are killing the drivers". F1 followed the an European mind set that it's okay if the same 3 teams winning the football league all the time if they are truely the best ones and deserve it.

[SlipLtd]

Which stands for Origins of Karting. They have done away with all the electronic **** and gone back to the basics of what made karting so great, they should do the same with F1

So is it safe to say F1 is not OK?

[krea]

Well, F1 is basically the opposite of "back to basics".

 

Also modern F1 drivers have less electronic **** to support their driving than the drivers in the Senna and Prost era. I remember that Schumacher suddenly became a driver of it's own league after all drivers were forced to drive their cars without driving aids again - while his performance in prior rain races was often subpar because Benetton was several steps behind to Williams and other top teams in that regard.

[Knowlesy]

Not it's not. There were more enjoyable seasons and less enjoyable seasons since 2005. There were stupid rule changes and things like grooved tires and DRS. The difference is, overall it was still awesome and fascinating. That's all completely gone now.

No it isn't ffs.

F1 has many, many problems. The distribution of money being the main one along with anti-competition regulations (I.e. no engine development, no tyre wars etc...). Fix those two problems alone and the majority of the ills are gone.

There are still a lot of positives. It is just the few negatives are quite major.

[Gyno]

Webber is confusing me, along with many who came on here to say they agree with him.

All he's saying is the cars should be much faster, making a comparison with LMP1.

From a technology standpoint, LMP1 is faster because of the technology freedoms like traction control, all wheel drive, higher energy recovery allowance, grippier and more durable tyres, but also closed wheel aerodynamics.

Those who say they agree with Webber, do you agree that F1 should allow more technical freedom like the ones mentioned above?

And do you acknowledge that this will do absolutely nothing to remove predictability of outcome, teams dominating, lack of close racing, lack of unaided overtaking (things that many complain about. Not me.)?

 

You do know that F1 have engine mapping or throttle mapping on every single track for all the tire compounds they use.

Which means that the driver can push the throttle down mid corner and he wont spin out, unless they choose the wrong map or forgets to change map like with Kimi at  Canada.

 

In other words it's TC.

When LC was banned it was to get more wheel spin and driver mistakes at the start.

Well the clever lads and girls came up with something that is just like LC or even better then LC.

 

Sure there are wheel spins every now and then but it's from bad settings or wrong bitepoint on the clutch.

 

Not what we the FANS wanted.

 

We wanted drivers to operate the clutch like back in the day and their right foot was their TC.

No engine mapping no bite points, none of that BS should be in F1.

[Timstr11]

You do know that F1 have engine mapping or throttle mapping on every single track for all the tire compounds they use.

Which means that the driver can push the throttle down mid corner and he wont spin out, unless they choose the wrong map or forgets to change map like with Kimi at  Canada.

 

 

 Dude, where do you get your information from? This would be blatantly against regulations. You don't have a clue. 

[ch103]

The man should have won the WDC in 2010.  If it weren't for Red Bull's marketing and young driver program being too much of a conflict of interests for Mark to get proper support.  Shame for all of us except Seb really.

Edited by ch103, 20 June 2015 - 10:42.