130 replies to this topic

[Stephane]

And not have any idea why driver X dropped of the pace after pitstop Y, or why was team B so good on this track but so bad on the last track. Or why in two nearly identical cars why one teammate is faster than the other. 

 

 

 

Thing is we already kind of do this without the new graphics. ANd we've been doing this for a long long time.

 

And i'm not sure the new graphics will only tell us the driver X is slower, exactly like the good-old timekeeper.

[NotAPineapple]

We've been re-watching lots of old races owing to the lockdown and general lack of sport on. People have complained regularly about the lack of timing information you get in the mid 80s races, or even in 1995 CART, but no one ever complains about the quality of the TV graphics from 1995-2000. I'm sure part of that's because we're so used to them, but they might also have hit the sweet spot between too little and too much.

 

Of course back then you had Murray Walker keeping the show on the road. He could make even a Formula 1 race sound exciting.

 

I can distinctly remember not being able to pick out which car was which from the overhead or otherwise long shots back then. The cars all just looked like grey blobs with 4 tyres until they got close enough to take up 2/3s of the video frame. This has been the single biggest improvement in broadcast quality in my time watching. 

[Marklar]

And not have any idea why driver X dropped of the pace after pitstop Y, or why was team B so good on this track but so bad on the last track. Or why in two nearly identical cars why one teammate is faster than the other.

Honestly I have the impression most of you are just crapping on this idea just for the sake of it. Literally none of your concerns are founded in reality.

TIL not wanting needless and misleading information is "unfounded".

[NotAPineapple]

You've decided it'S misleading and needless based on literally nothing. 

 

That's like the definition of unfounded you know

[Marklar]

You've decided it'S misleading and needless based on literally nothing.

That's like the definition of unfounded you know

Nope.

I know that at least the performance scores *are* misleading because they've published them last year outside of the broadcast and "everybody with half a brain" as you would call it could tell that they are widely off the mark. Combine this with how much off the tyre performance data was I would say that the only thing that is "unfounded" is your confidence that the data will be anywhere near close to reality.

And even if they are it is a fact that many people prefer less busy info graphics. Just because you dont it doesnt mean that the opposite opinion is dumb, crap, unfounded, BS and whatever else you thrown out to everyone who doesnt support this.

The easy solution would be to make it optional via a different channel or the live timing, like they do it for *much* more useful data already.

Guess it's easier to create excitement and narratives by the help of arbitrary data, though.

Edited by Marklar, 25 June 2020 - 15:46.

[NotAPineapple]

The stuff last year was AI based. The stuff this year is not. Completely different and not comparable. 

 

You're basing your assesment of this system on the performance of a completely different system. It's totally illogical hence why I'm labelling it so. 

[Beri]

And not have any idea why driver X dropped of the pace after pitstop Y, or why was team B so good on this track but so bad on the last track. Or why in two nearly identical cars why one teammate is faster than the other.

Honestly I have the impression most of you are just crapping on this idea just for the sake of it. Literally none of your concerns are founded in reality.

Well, this is my last reply to you. But the one who is stubborn and plainly wrong is you. My concerns are valid since the said graphs are projected as a reality and indisputable to the .x percentage. Totally ridiculous because of the one example I have given. It is a fact that those figures will never be 100% accurate. If you deny this, like you do, there is no need to even comment on you anymore.

And to top it off, I applaud changes that actually bring something meaningful. But since we have seen ridiculous things like "tyre life", I am sceptical on new features that would need 100% accurate data to be meaningful. This is such a feature. It could bring a new immersive experience during qualifying when a car is in clean air. But during the race it doesn't. Certainly not when a variation of tyre types are being used. It's a gimmick. Nothing else.

[NotAPineapple]

No system has to be 100% accurate, or even 90% accurate for it to be useful. Moreover they aren't presented as an absolute truth, that's something you made up yourself. It's the same as a commentator speculating on a certain driver's strategy but based on hard data rather than feelings an opinions. 

 

Do you think we should get ride of all the commentators too?

[Jellyfishcake]

I honestly would rather have less info to be honest.

 

In someways it can add to the intrigue, but when you have all the information nothing is a surprise, in the same way I don't really like the team radio especially when it makes the drivers (selectively by the TV director) look like whiny kids. 

 

So yeah, i'd prefer we just had the live timing for the positions like in the past.

[Stephane]

Exactly, like the mini sectors, it killed the suspense on occasions.

[pdac]

Could they not just tell us who will win before the start - then I won't waste my time watching the race and will do something more interesting, instead.

[LucaP]

I would like an indication of the number of hours slept by each driver.

It has a serious impact on performances after all.

[azza200]

next they will have a graph for the amount fly's collected on each car and how it will effect downforce in % per lap, then maybe have fake caution flags like in Nascar 

Edited by azza200, 26 June 2020 - 00:10.

[ExFlagMan]

No need for fake cautions with the latest FIA directive on how incidents are to be handled. Real SC/VSC interventions will be pretty common given any car stopping will require a recovery vehicle.

[SenorSjon]

Keep it clean, keep it simple..

 

I also miss this onboard position. Why not use the left or right side of the halo to fit a camera?

 

That "TAG HEUER" last line is way too big - and it tells me nothing.

 

 

Yeah, we replaced it with an halo... That should learn them!

 

 

Fancy mid-1990s fonts weren't cheap you know

 

Not to mention viewers watching races on 37-55 cm low res televisions, in some poorer countries not even in color.

 

Could they not just tell us who will win before the start - then I won't waste my time watching the race and will do something more interesting, instead.

 

They tried with Mercedes since 2014 and you are still watching.

[pdac]

They tried with Mercedes since 2014 and you are still watching.

 

[paulb]

Basic issue I have is there is no insight into the data sources and algorithms used to generate the metrics. It would be helpful if they were to present the methodology and discuss the reasons behind the choices.

Secondly, I prefer to watch cars on track over graphic clutter, but I suspect I am in the minority.

[pdac]

Basic issue I have is there is no insight into the data sources and algorithms used to generate the metrics. It would be helpful if they were to present the methodology and discuss the reasons behind the choices.

Secondly, I prefer to watch cars on track over graphic clutter, but I suspect I am in the minority.

 

You're thinking about it all too seriously. It's all fluff. Personally, I'd prefer it not to be on my screen. Others think it gives them something useful (I don't know what, though).

[NotAPineapple]

I think I've pretty clearly explained all the extra aspects it can add to a broadcast.

[Stephane]

But how useful will they really be, those extras?

[ExFlagMan]

They will probably provide endless pages of 'discussions' on here after every race!

[pdac]

I think I've pretty clearly explained all the extra aspects it can add to a broadcast.

 

Let me explain what it removes from the broadcast - the view of the race (or are the cars and track only there to manufacture the statistics?)

[ConsiderAndGo]

As any rational person predicted, the new graphics are absolutely dog turd and add nothing to the experience. Adding random, arbitrary numbers does not enhance the viewing experience.

 

Croft's brain nearly exploded trying to work it out / explain it.

 

Ditch it already.

Edited by ConsiderAndGo, 03 July 2020 - 14:34.

[TomNokoe]

I can only assume their "data" is minisectors

[Chillimeister]

Does anyone know if you can turn the new graphics off? I had to laugh when I saw the 'performance in high speed corners' one. Like whoever dreamed them up managed to award Merc 8.8 and RP a much lower score like they could quantify the difference.

[Lights]

Nice new video from Chain Bear that touches on the new graphics.

 

I like how he points out that some of their 'prediction' graphics such as overtakes and pitstop battles are ruining the excitement viewers can have with the uncertainty of what's going to happen. 

[FirstnameLastname]

The pic-in-pic of Hamilton’s onboard at top of the positions tower was very good today - I really liked that

[Myrvold]

The pic-in-pic of Hamilton’s onboard at top of the positions tower was very good today - I really liked that

 

Agreed.

 

Also. Those Amazon tyre percentage things.

[F1 Mike]

The pic-in-pic of Hamilton’s onboard at top of the positions tower was very good today - I really liked that

It's great isn't it? MotoGP have been doing that exact thing for a few years now. Once again F1 slow to adopt the useful broadcasting techniques and quick to introduce useless data

[OO7]

The pic-in-pic of Hamilton’s onboard at top of the positions tower was very good today - I really liked that

They copied that from MotoGP.  Took them long enough!

[w1Y]

They still need to better sync everything.

Sound
Picture
Onboards
telemetry