260 replies to this topic

[ensign14]

It is now Indycar.

 

Take this year's 500.  You have McLaren, one of the great names of GP racing, and currently the fourth best in F1 as it stands.  With two drivers regularly in the top 10.

 

They go to Indianapolis with a double world champion.   And cannot get higher than 34th.

 

Beaten by part-timers like Juncos and Clausen with unheralded drivers like Mann and Kaiser.

 

It is apparent therefore that, when it comes to a formula with less spending in it, where the budgets are a bit more equal, where you cannot throw £100m on a problem to solve it rather than use brains and guts, F1 teams cannot actually manage to do it.

 

They've all forgotten the genius of racing.   They've forgotten that once upon a time a Chapman or a Duckworth could come up with a stroke of genius that would change the sport forever.   They no longer have the skills to come up with something imaginative.   Instead everything goes through computers or a simulator.   They don't find the right solutions through brainpower; they find it through trying 100 different options with the vast money they have.

 

Take that away from them, and you're better off with the sprintcar blacksmiths rather than doctorate-rich academics.

 

Give the McLaren F1 budget to Juncos, and they'd be at least 4th in F1.  Because they have the racing gene.

 

Discuss.

[BRG]

Give the McLaren F1 budget to Juncos, and they'd be at least 4th in F1.  Because they have the racing gene.

 

Discuss.

Mclaren ARE fourth in F1.

 

So stop being silly and let's discuss something sensible, like Lewis Hamilton's jewellery.

[ARTGP]

Don't you think this is a massive apples to oranges comparison...

 

 

What is the point even of this thread. Seems fundamentally off base..

[Proto402]

I don't think it diminishes F1's reputations as the pinnacle of motorsport.

 

What it does show is that outside of the bubble that is F1, there are many talented drivers and teams out there, and what works in the bubble that is F1, does not always work outside of it.  Also, McLaren is new to Indycar, and the rules package is nearly a single spec formula, so finding out what works is going to take some time, not to mention Alonso had that accident early in the week, which set them back.

 

Certainly a bit of humility doesn't hurt either.  Perhaps F1 can learn something from Indycar.

[Knowlesy]

I am not sure McLaren really threw anything at this tbh.

Don't judge a category by how those bozos perform.

A shred of humility would have probably found them enough to scrape onto the grid.

Edited by Knowlesy, 19 May 2019 - 21:50.

[P123]

It's only a truly apt comparison if it were exactly the same folks who prep the F1 cars that did so the Indy entry. Not sure about that, but it's a good example that you can't just jump in on one race and expect to be a success, regardless of who you are.

It's perhaps just yet another example of the shambles that McLaren have become as a racing organisation over recent years. But then again how much of it was pure McLaren, apart from the paint scheme.

Edited by P123, 19 May 2019 - 21:50.

[Frood]

I don't think this will go down too well... I think we might be over-reacting to today's proceedings.

 

I'm not going to get involved.

[NoForumForOldPole]

F1 is just 'thermometer games'.

Edited by NoForumForOldPole, 19 May 2019 - 21:52.

[kumo7]

Interesting statement, I find. I can partly agree.
F1 made its reg to create the car much easier to drive. It goes faster in corners, but aided with computers engineers setup skills and knowledge system of racing had become much data dependent.

Perhaps an unfair example it might be, the situation on McLaren is. Bit like a Harvard professor stepped into an Domestic trading scenes full of extremes thereby failed to resolve issues.

Still the competitors compete hard at Formuka1 to which hard to judge if drivers given the same car and compete on the same track the results cannot be predicted.

That said, previously it did.

[SonGoku]

This is just McLaren being the embarrassement they are, nothing more, nothing less. You can't put that on F1 as a whole.

[TomNokoe]

Don't tempt Mercedes to Indycar, ffs

[Marklar]

I don't think this will go down too well... I think we might be over-reacting to today's proceedings.

 

I'm not going to get involved.

This forum over-reacting? No way! 

[JHSingo]

Team turns up to an event they have little experience with, and have done no preparation for, in a race where the competition is miles closer than it is F1, and pay the price for it. As simple as that.

 

It shows a degree of arrogance perhaps, but I wouldn't really go any further than that.

Edited by JHSingo, 19 May 2019 - 21:56.

[Christbiscuit]

This is McLaren applying "GP2 engine" philosophy to Indycar and, again, coming up short. They appear to have greatly underestimated the competition and, more importantly, their own competency once again.

[Anja]

Quite frankly, I find the whole "pinnacle of motorsport" discussion to be pretty much harmful to the overall motorsport world. It's really subjective and doesn't add anything to the sport, just creates more division among fans. 

[Vitesse2]

Don't tempt Mercedes to Indycar, ffs

They did rather well the last time they tried.

 

Although that was mainly down to Penske of course!

[Vielleicht]

I really don't care if it is or isn't. I like watching IndyCar because it is great top-level racing and I do so alongside all sorts of other motorsport throughout the year.

 

Who needs a pinnacle anyway?

[Knowlesy]

I really don't care if it is or isn't. I like watching IndyCar because it is great top-level racing and I do so alongside all sorts of other motorsport throughout the year.

Who needs a pinnacle anyway?

Indeed.

[noriaki]

Even as a big Indycar fan I wouldn't agree. F1 is still the pinnacle of motorsport.

 

But even amidst the trolling, ensign14 has an interesting point somewhere in there. For a long time F1 has not been an exercise of who has the best engineering talent anymore, but mainly one where having the biggest budget and most engineering staff gets rewarded. 

 

Sure we have Ferrari and McLaren who keep underperforming a bit when you contrast to their budgets, regularly getting beaten by respectively similarly resourced Mercedes and Red Bull, but it doesn't change the big picture. I would go as far as arguing that the Haas and JordanMidlandSpykerForceIndiaRacingPoint teams are doing a much better job than Ferrari and McLaren as racing teams, with building competitive cars with very small resources. But in the long term their grit won't be rewarded, they will simply never* be able to be beat those 2 just due to the sheer amount of money and manpower the big boys have. 

 

(*barring a complete revisal of the ruleset in 2021, but I wouldn't be confident of that happening)

[NixxxoN]

It is now Indycar.
 
Take this year's 500.  You have McLaren, one of the great names of GP racing, and currently the fourth best in F1 as it stands.  With two drivers regularly in the top 10.
 
They go to Indianapolis with a double world champion.   And cannot get higher than 34th.
 
Beaten by part-timers like Juncos and Clausen with unheralded drivers like Mann and Kaiser.
 
It is apparent therefore that, when it comes to a formula with less spending in it, where the budgets are a bit more equal, where you cannot throw £100m on a problem to solve it rather than use brains and guts, F1 teams cannot actually manage to do it.
 
They've all forgotten the genius of racing.   They've forgotten that once upon a time a Chapman or a Duckworth could come up with a stroke of genius that would change the sport forever.   They no longer have the skills to come up with something imaginative.   Instead everything goes through computers or a simulator.   They don't find the right solutions through brainpower; they find it through trying 100 different options with the vast money they have.
 
Take that away from them, and you're better off with the sprintcar blacksmiths rather than doctorate-rich academics.
 
Give the McLaren F1 budget to Juncos, and they'd be at least 4th in F1.  Because they have the racing gene.
 
Discuss.

Scott Dixon is one of the best IndyCar drivers if not the best.

His best result was 20th in V8 supercars.

Therefore V8 supercars has to be the true pinnacle of motorsport!!!!1

Edited by NixxxoN, 19 May 2019 - 22:14.

[Myrvold]

Had to google the definition of "pinnacle".

 

F1 is still that.

However, F1 is far, far from the most exciting motorsport. And it's not getting better.

[Risil]

It's certainly the pinnacle of my interest in motor racing. Not sure how to put it, except that it's retained charms that many other kinds of racing have lost. And that spec parts and parity of equipment needn't mean a lack of engineering or driving challenge.

[Bloggsworth]

F1 drivers don't win in DTM therefore DTM is the pinnacle of motor racing... Or a false syllogism, take your choice.

[noikeee]

Scott Dixon is one of the best IndyCar drivers if not the best.

His best result was 20th in V8 supercars.

Therefore V8 supercars has to be the true pinnacle of motorsport!!!!1

 

We can play this game all night long.

 

Sebastian Bourdais was comprehensively outperformed by Sebastian Vettel. Not to mention Zanardi back in 99 or Michael Andretti. F1 > North American open wheeler series.

 

Multiple race winner and multiple times vice-champion in F1 Rubens Barrichello struggled in Indycar. Now multiple F1 champion and legend Alonso doesn't even qualify for a 33-car grid. North American open wheeler series > F1.

 

Andre Lotterer did a midseason 1-off race in F1 and humiliated regular driver Marcus Ericsson in qualifying. WEC > F1.

 

Nico Hulkenberg does a midseason 1-off appearance in Le Mans, "the greatest race" and easily wins. Hulkenberg isn't even anything special in F1. F1 > WEC.

 

Double F1 champion Mika Hakkinen was poor in DTM. DTM > F1.

 

DTM champions Christijan Albers and Paul di Resta were average midfielders at best in F1. F1 > DTM.

 

F1 world champion Kimi Raikkonen struggled even after years in rallying. WRC > F1.

 

Sebastian Ogier has had several circuit racing appearances and has generally been average. Was way off the pace in DTM. Since we've already established that DTM is worse than F1, F1 > WRC.

 

Etc.

Edited by noikeee, 19 May 2019 - 22:56.

[Myrvold]

We can play this game all night long.

 

Sebastian Bourdais was comprehensively outperformed by Sebastian Vettel. Not to mention Zanardi back in 99 or Michael Andretti. F1 > North American open wheeler series.

 

Multiple race winner and multiple times vice-champion in F1 Rubens Barrichello struggled in Indycar. Now multiple F1 champion and legend Alonso doesn't even qualify for a 33-car grid. North American open wheeler series > F1.

 

Andre Lotterer did a midseason 1-off race in F1 and humiliated regular driver Marcus Ericsson in qualifying. WEC > F1.

 

Nico Hulkenberg does a midseason 1-off appearance in Le Mans, "the greatest race" and easily wins. Hulkenberg isn't even anything special in F1. F1 > WEC.

 

Double F1 champion Mika Hakkinen was poor in DTM. DTM > F1.

 

DTM champions Christijan Albers and Paul di Resta were average midfielders at best in F1. F1 > DTM.

 

F1 world champion Kimi Raikkonen struggled even after years in rallying. WRC > F1.

 

Sebastian Ogier has had several circuit racing appearances and has generally been average. Was way off the pace in DTM. Since we've already established that DTM is worse than F1, F1 > WRC.

 

Etc.

The racing-series version of Hill > Villeneuve > Frentzen > Hill > Villeneuve > Frentzen > Hill > Villeneuve > Frentzen > Hill > Villeneuve > Frentzen > Hill > Villeneuve > Frentzen

[Nonesuch]

It is apparent therefore that, when it comes to a formula with less spending in it, where the budgets are a bit more equal, where you cannot throw £100m on a problem to solve it rather than use brains and guts, F1 teams cannot actually manage to do it.

 
There's no need for the plural. In this case, you're also talking about a team that is equally unable to solve their problems to a meaningful degree in F1.

 

The problem here is with McLaren, not F1. And specifically the low-effort involvement McLaren thought they could get away with.

 

The world hasn't seen an Indycar driver amount to much in F1 since last the millennium, so it's also just a case of different people doing well in different series.

 

 

 

Edited by Nonesuch, 19 May 2019 - 23:04.

[Seanspeed]

I generally ignore the whole Indycar fanboy contingent here, but by golly, this really takes the cake. 

 

The OP has given almost nothing to actually discuss, just a bunch of vagaries and lousy assumptions.  

 

The reality is that Indycar is a 2nd rate open wheel category.  And it has been for all of recent history.  Nobody grows up dreaming to drive in Indycar, especially not outside the US.  There's a reason for that.  The top competition exists in F1 and nowhere else.  The only reason drivers aspire to Indycar is when their F1 dreams are dashed from early on.  

 

As for the original talk about how Mclaren cannot get higher than 34th - you'd either have to be insanely ignorant or insanely dishonest to really believe that meant anything.  Stuff like this just reinforces more why I cant bother with the Indycar crowd here.  They live in total delusion.  The fact is that F1 is simply a much higher standard of talent and it's not even questionable.

 

I also personally think that Indycar is a ****ing mess, and while some people like that it's 'chaotic', I think that just shows its lower standards of driving and course selection.  

[noikeee]

I generally ignore the whole Indycar fanboy contingent here, but by golly, this really takes the cake. 

 

The OP has given almost nothing to actually discuss, just a bunch of vagaries and lousy assumptions.  

 

He isn't a Indycar fan, just trying to make an "edgy" shallow jab at modern F1.

[kumo7]

 

 
There's no need for the plural. In this case, you're also talking about a team that is equally unable to solve their problems to a meaningful degree in F1.

 

The problem here is with McLaren, not F1. And specifically the low-effort involvement McLaren thought they could get away with.

 

The world hasn't seen an Indycar driver amount to much in F1 since last the millennium, so it's also just a case of different people doing well in different series.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Entirely disagree. 

Is the thread made to blame McLaren, but not to rethink the current state of Formula 1?

I took the latter as the reason to commence this discussion.

 

Obviously, like Hamiliton has just said, the current F1 car is fairly easy to drive, he says that your star can just jump in and with no practical skills, he can win. 

Formula 1 is a very fine machine, that is for sure, but is it enough to say that Formula1 is the highest category of racing?

 

 

In the past, F1 guys went to Indy and won. now not, so ... 

Back then F1 took own car there, but now, a spec car. It appears that setting up a spec car is easier than building up a compete new car, but it was sort of not true.

Even if Mecedes tries, it might end up in the same result, unless you have good argument that it is solely McLaren's fault.

 

 

 

 

But I must say that this argument is a bit over the edge, as no F1 team took own car to Indy and raced.

F1 were working on their turf.

 

The question can be, Can a championships winning Indy car team win the Formula one WCC title of the second year that they joined the Formula1 series?

I bet not, absolutely not.

[Ben1445]

I generally ignore the whole Indycar fanboy contingent here, but by golly, this really takes the cake.

The OP has given almost nothing to actually discuss, just a bunch of vagaries and lousy assumptions.

The reality is that Indycar is a 2nd rate open wheel category. And it has been for all of recent history. Nobody grows up dreaming to drive in Indycar, especially not outside the US. There's a reason for that. The top competition exists in F1 and nowhere else. The only reason drivers aspire to Indycar is when their F1 dreams are dashed from early on.

As for the original talk about how Mclaren cannot get higher than 34th - you'd either have to be insanely ignorant or insanely dishonest to really believe that meant anything. Stuff like this just reinforces more why I cant bother with the Indycar crowd here. They live in total delusion. The fact is that F1 is simply a much higher standard of talent and it's not even questionable.

I also personally think that Indycar is a ****ing mess, and while some people like that it's 'chaotic', I think that just shows its lower standards of driving and course selection.

And this post is any better than the OP because...?

[goldenboy]

F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport technology.

But as far as being the pinnacle of motorSPORT...

[BuddyHolly]

I'm really not much of an indycar fan, I've watched one indy 500 (Alonso's first) and three indycar races (this year), compare that with over 40 years of F1 races.

 

as for F1 being the pinnacle or not, I cannot really comment, but what I will say is that F1 is in dire trouble indeed, when a long standing 'fanatical' F1 fan such as myself gets far more enjoyment from two days of indycar qualifying than five full F1 races.   ..Well, it's not good is it?

[BalanceUT]

I don't watch Indycar on ovals because it's too damned deadly there. 

[917k]

The regular Indycar thread participants, of which I was one for many, many years, have long blasted any trolling or baiting from those that don't see the sport in the same light........and then we have threads like this....seems like an open invitation for a flame war in any Indy thread, which will only produce crap dialogue, or none at all.

 

Really poor form, Ensign and really hypocritical.

[noikeee]

The regular Indycar thread participants, of which I was one for many, many years, have long blasted any trolling or baiting from those that don't see the sport in the same light........and then we have threads like this....seems like an open invitation for a flame war in any Indy thread, which will only produce crap dialogue, or none at all.

 

Really poor form, Ensign and really hypocritical.

 

I'm not a Indy thread guy, but this, really.

 

By the way let me vaguely take the premise of this thread seriously and refute it:

 

Modern F1 has a few bad problems no question, but this poor showing from Alonso/McLaren says absolute squat **** about it. Much as F1 is derided for being "tyre temperature games", Indycar is largely "Dallara DW12 setup games". All this proves is that McLaren were idiots about this, and packed full with arrogance and hubris to go tackle a pretty difficult motor racing exercise that is highly prestigious in its own right, going into it accumulating little or no expertise in the performance differentiating details. All of the expertise McLaren might have in designing and building cars to a very specific formula, obviously matters very little when it comes to setting up a car they did not design, to a very different formula, in a very alien type of circuit, against several highly professional organizations specialized in it, regardless of how much budget cash they might have. It's much easier to talk about this with the hindsight of knowing what happened, but it does seem logical, really.

 

If anything it's a shame they ran that badly, as success might've made other F1 teams and drivers consider it, instead this might have the opposite effect. I'm not a huge fan of Indycar but respect the Indy 500 prestige, tradition and performance standards, and it seems to me motorsport overall only benefits with these crossover attempts. It's a shame this might end up scaring off any other potential entrants that could eventually consider doing the same.

Edited by noikeee, 19 May 2019 - 23:41.

[Radoye]

This is just McLaren being the embarrassement they are, nothing more, nothing less. You can't put that on F1 as a whole.

 

Would be no better if it was Mercedes with Hamilton or Ferrari with Vettel instead of McAlonso. McLaren's biggest folly was that they arrogantly believed they can just waltz in and show up for Indy practice and have a shot because they're F1. It doesn't work that way.

 

F1 people tend to look down upon everyone else in the motorsport world be it Indy or WEC or whatever, thinking they're all second-rate just because they're not in F1. F1 cars are incredible pieces of technology being prepped by some brilliant people who are very good at what they do, but while lacking in the advanced tech part due to much stricter rules IndyCar also is full of brilliant people very good at what they do. And the expertise in one discipline however it might look similar on the outside doesn't necessarily apply to the other 1:1. It's like soccer and rugby - they're both some sort of football but it doesn't mean if you're successful in one you'd be guaranteed to succeed in the other as well. Each discipline requires time and effort to master.

 

Penske, Ganassi, Andretti are every bit as good and capable in what they do as anyone in F1 is. You can't win at Indy as a tourist, 2017 was all Andretti - you either commit fully or you end up with egg on your face. McAlonso just learned that lesson.

[Nathan]

Imagine the reverse, Penske designs a F1 car for 2020. Where would they be?

That leaves F1 the pinacle IMO.

[PlayboyRacer]

I wonder how many here were watching CART/IndyCar cicra early to mid 90s prior to the split? I'd bet not many outside the hardcore Indy fans.

It was the equal of Formula 1, at that point, in my opinion and the competitive nature/pure racing aspect was superior. Also superior was the star power, particularly post Sennas death. What Michael Andretti failed to do in F1, Villeneuve then put right just like Mario before both. So how much difference was there really, at that point, between the two categories in terms of skill and talent? Bravery? Clearly the disciplines have their differences...

Would you have ever got Michael Schumacher on an oval however? Perish the thought.

The split set things back two decades. Fortunately for Formula 1.

Edited by PlayboyRacer, 19 May 2019 - 23:48.

[jonpollak]

So all that bullschitt I’ve been posting for years on end has come true just now.

How nice.

Happy to be ‘your man on the ground here at the Speedway’ to bring all y'all the hot scoops and info...



Jp

Edited by jonpollak, 19 May 2019 - 23:52.

[Myrvold]

I generally ignore the whole Indycar fanboy contingent here, but by golly, this really takes the cake. 

 

The OP has given almost nothing to actually discuss, just a bunch of vagaries and lousy assumptions.  

 

The reality is that Indycar is a 2nd rate open wheel category.  And it has been for all of recent history.  Nobody grows up dreaming to drive in Indycar, especially not outside the US.  There's a reason for that.  The top competition exists in F1 and nowhere else.  The only reason drivers aspire to Indycar is when their F1 dreams are dashed from early on.  

 

As for the original talk about how Mclaren cannot get higher than 34th - you'd either have to be insanely ignorant or insanely dishonest to really believe that meant anything.  Stuff like this just reinforces more why I cant bother with the Indycar crowd here.  They live in total delusion.  The fact is that F1 is simply a much higher standard of talent and it's not even questionable.

 

I also personally think that Indycar is a ****ing mess, and while some people like that it's 'chaotic', I think that just shows its lower standards of driving and course selection.  

You haven't really watched IndyCar have you? Also, I'd take Barber, Laguna Seca etc. over Paul Ricard and other tarmac-fields any day.

I still watch every F1 race, and I will probably travel to my 2nd F1 race instead of ever travel to watch IndyCar. 

 

The regular Indycar thread participants, of which I was one for many, many years, have long blasted any trolling or baiting from those that don't see the sport in the same light

Uh? The humor and happiness in the NASCAR-threads when JPM was there, and the way the IndyCar threads are... are way more happy and cheerful than basically any F1 thread in here? I saw there had to be taken some action from a mod in the Indy thread today, but other than that, those threads feels much more like a group of friends bonding over something they love. Where F1 threads are more groups going at each other for liking the wrong person (very much exaggerated to make a point).

There was some, uhm friction in 2017, and when Räikkönen had his NASCAR-races, but I feel that's more down to some users coming in, with no interest in trying to learn something about a sport they logically know little about. If a person without IndyCar knowledge jumps in to the threads it won't be any bad reactions from that.

 

However, posting in the Indy threads just to complain are rather pointless.

[ch103]

indycar is more entertaining id say.  more chance for variability for winning between teams and drivers,

[Marklar]

F1 people tend to look down upon everyone else in the motorsport world be it Indy or WEC or whatever, thinking they're all second-rate just because they're not in F1.

What are you basing this on? I see *far* more cheap shades from WEC or IndyCar drivers to F1's direction than the other way around (heck, F1 drivers often shade their own series even!).

Maybe they do think like that in private and McLaren's showing could indicate it as well (rather think they just did a honest mistake), but you are just making an assumption here IMO.

As for the discussion itself: Motorsport has become pretty complex. Except of Haas with *massive* Ferrari support nobody managed the opposite way in recent years either. And many failed.

I'm kinda baffled that the OP tries to question F1's status based on their expertise (still their strong point IMO) instead of the entertainment/excitement factor, especially since the circlejerk has been strong on the latter one recently

[Seanspeed]

You haven't really watched IndyCar have you? Also, I'd take Barber, Laguna Seca etc. over Paul Ricard and other tarmac-fields any day.

I still watch every F1 race, and I will probably travel to my 2nd F1 race instead of ever travel to watch IndyCar. 

No, the many dozens of races I've watched were all just charades. 

 

smh

 

You tell yourself what you need to.  

 

And yes, you'd take Barber and Laguna Seca over the worst F1 venues you can think of - great insight there.  Because Paul Ricard is just totally representative of the best F1 has to offer.  We'll just ignore the dozen other tracks that, if Indycar went to them, would be so much better as well.  But Indycar is stuck with tons of subpar courses, many of which contribute to its 'crash->caution->strategy lottery' state that is so regular in the sport.  

[maximilian]

It's certainly the pinnacle of my interest in motor racing. Not sure how to put it, except that it's retained charms that many other kinds of racing have lost. And that spec parts and parity of equipment needn't mean a lack of engineering or driving challenge.

 

Very eloquently put, and my feelings exactly.

 

F1 was what got me interested in motor racing a LONG time ago, when it had some of the best drivers, was unpredictable, exciting, and yes, indeed a bit dangerous - and when it gave an underdog a chance to shine on his best day.  None of that remains today, except still attracting some of the best drivers, but most of them have not a showball's chance in hades to win a race, ever.  Therefore, F1 has gone from pinnacle to nadir for me.  I deliberately missed the Spanish GP with palatable disdain for what was predictably transpiring, and was glad I did so.  With 95% of all F1 races, it turns out to be the right decision to just ignore them.

 

Some of the best drivers, unpredictable, exciting, and yes, indeed a bit dangerous - and gives an underdog a chance to shine on their best day: this is what IndyCar is today.  I fell in serious love with IndyCar many years ago, as it filled that void F1 created even longer ago when it began to be what it is today.  I was glued to 7 straight hours of yesterday's Indy 500 qualifying coverage, and not bored for even a second - and almost every qualy and race is similarly engrossing.  Contrast that to the misfortune of watching any F1 race, where I am immediately bored as soon as the start is over.

 

Edit: forgot to mention, F1 cars used to be beautiful, now they are ugly AF, and have been for many years.  Meanwhile, Indycars are...        a visual feast!

Edited by maximilian, 20 May 2019 - 13:09.

[teejay]

Imagine the reverse, Penske designs a F1 car for 2020. Where would they be?

That leaves F1 the pinacle IMO.

 

If they took all their technical talent they would land midfield immediately imho - they have a spread of engineers and resources across Indy, Nascar, V8's - certainly no shortage of people with the the capability. 

[noikeee]

Uh? The humor and happiness in the NASCAR-threads when JPM was there, and the way the IndyCar threads are... are way more happy and cheerful than basically any F1 thread in here? I saw there had to be taken some action from a mod in the Indy thread today, but other than that, those threads feels much more like a group of friends bonding over something they love. Where F1 threads are more groups going at each other for liking the wrong person (very much exaggerated to make a point).

There was some, uhm friction in 2017, and when Räikkönen had his NASCAR-races, but I feel that's more down to some users coming in, with no interest in trying to learn something about a sport they logically know little about. If a person without IndyCar knowledge jumps in to the threads it won't be any bad reactions from that.

 

However, posting in the Indy threads just to complain are rather pointless.

 

I think you might've misunderstood what he was trying to say, I could be wrong on my interpretation but I think his point was that the general Indycar thread consensus by all the regulars, is to be nice rather than to provoke F1 or anything, hence aggressive posts in that direction are shut down by the majority.

 

But I think it's a bit misleading to try to compare Indy threads to F1 threads. This is essentially a F1 board (former AtlasF1 incorporated into Autosport, who's a general motorsport magazine but sells primarily to a F1 crowd), and you guys are a niche in here who are interested in something else. As such it's natural that everyone interested in Indycar here cheers for this niche as a whole, rather than further segregate into factions cheering for Indycar teams or whatever. The Indy threads do have its own particular subculture, but it's not that different from the F2 threads or the WRC threads in which I know you participate as well, we don't see Hyundai fans going at the neck of Toyota fans? Because we're all united by the niche thing of liking rallying. Just like in the office I work at, when we discuss football which is the mainstream thing, we get into these big arguments for and against teams, but when I talk to the one single other guy who is interested in F1, we chat enthusiastic about the details of the sport instead of getting into Mercedes vs Ferrari fighting arguments. Or in another forum I'm a part of, which has absolutely nothing to do with F1, in the big F1 thread everyone is nice to each other and enthusiastic about the sport.

 

When you're part of a small group that has that one obscure interest in common, you unite around that common interest, you don't get tribalized into factions within that interest. This is why F1 threads are so toxic in here but Indy it's a big old cheer - you Indy guys are the weird kids with one weird obscure common interest. Perhaps on a specialized Indycar forum, all hell would break loose in Penske vs Ganassi or something...

[Radoye]

What are you basing this on? I see *far* more cheap shades from WEC or IndyCar drivers to F1's direction than the other way around (heck, F1 drivers often shade their own series even!).

Maybe they do think like that in private and McLaren's showing could indicate it as well (rather think they just did a honest mistake), but you are just making an assumption here IMO.
 

 

"F1 people" i meant also journos and fans.

[MattPete]

In Indycar, there are clearly some teams that are better than others at setting up a car.  Yet, they have, more or less, the same equipment.

 

In F1, you have an extra variable: car design. But, in talking about the differences between cars, we ignore the differences between the teams.  For example, how might Racing Point fare if they were running MCL34s?  Maybe they are better at car setup compared to McLaren and would outperform the factory team?  What about Williams?  Certainly this year's car stinks, but what if part of their deficit is due to poor setup skills? Perhaps the FW22 wouldn't look so bad (but still look bad) if Racing Point was setting up the cars.  Of course, those examples are just hypotheticals and food for thought.

[Myrvold]

No, the many dozens of races I've watched were all just charades. 

 

smh

 

You tell yourself what you need to.  

 

And yes, you'd take Barber and Laguna Seca over the worst F1 venues you can think of - great insight there.  Because Paul Ricard is just totally representative of the best F1 has to offer.  We'll just ignore the dozen other tracks that, if Indycar went to them, would be so much better as well.  But Indycar is stuck with tons of subpar courses, many of which contribute to its 'crash->caution->strategy lottery' state that is so regular in the sport.  

I would love to know what races you've seen then, there are some races that's been rather, uhm. Interesting to put it nicely, but that's far far from the majority.

Nope, it's not representative of what F1 has to offer. But what are the best F1 has to offer? I feel Monaco is really good - majority of fans disagree with that. I feel Spa has been sanitized, the huge tarmac runoffs there have ruined the track. Blanchimont? Run off and just keep the throttle down, lose 3 tenths, or maybe set up an overtake from it. Pouhon. Used to be one of the corners in F1. Now it's just a long sweeping left. Make a mistake, lose 0.5 seconds. I like the low DF challenge of Monza, but Parabolica have been sanitized. I like Baku, Canada, Austria (though, that could also use more non-tarmac outside the corners), Singapore, Mexico, Suzuka and Interlagos.

COTA probably is one of the worst tracks on the calendar for IndyCar this year. I don't feel the tracks are subpar, many of them are challenging, not at least with cars that has less aero, no driving aids and no power steering. It's a bit like F1 in the early 90's (with the exception of driver aids). It's challenging. The tracks are very different throughout the calendar. On the majority of the tracks you cannot make a mistake, as the mistake actually will cost you. Not make you drive 75m longer and lose half a second.

You see that as supbar, I see it as challenging. Just a different view on what we like in a racing circuit.

 

The attitude with "smh" and "tell yourself what you need to" however, are completely unnecessary. Got to be able to discuss without this... 

[Atreiu]

How do we define the pinnacle?

I think Indy is at a rare terrific intersection of competitiveness, fun and great driving. In this aspect it is clearly in a better place than F1.