47 replies to this topic

[Requiem84]

This thread is not about the question whether a season is boring or not or about the history of boring periods in F1. 

 

It merely is a topic to discuss what we, as fans of the sport, are looking for in F1 to consider a season a great season. So I am not asking for any any comparisons of era's, or any criticism on the current period. 

 

I am merely interested in what excites us fans in F1. Is it the racing on track, even if it is in the midfield? Is it your favorite driver winning? Is it any battle between two drivers, or does there need to be an extra element? 

 

What are the ingredients we as fans are looking for?

Edited by Requiem84, 01 December 2020 - 09:21.

[pitlanepalpatine]

You forgot to add individual unpredictable upsets, like underdogs winning races/getting podiums. 

[shure]

I think a good addition to the poll would be unpredictability of results

 

edit: ninja'd by pitlanepalpatine.  The force was with him on that one

Edited by shure, 01 December 2020 - 09:16.

[PlayboyRacer]

A tight, season long World Championship battle. 4 or more teams winning races, underdogs nailing podiums in exceptional circumstances.

Some off track tension and personality clashes between the title protagonists doesn't hurt either. Quite the contrary.

[balage06]

I, for one, don't like unpredictability in general. If you can tell if Hamilton or Latifi has a higher chance of winning, then something is wrong with the system, right?

[Rediscoveryx]

I think the following would be my prerequisites (spelling?) for a truly great season:

 

 

1) Unpredictability of results.

 

2) A hard fight for the Championship, that lives until the last race.

 

3) Variation in the pecking order across various venues.

 

4) No one driver wins more than 30% of the races.

 

 

Of course, there may be exceptions to this. It's funny though how many seasons that were really, really boring when they occurred now feel like classics (1994 springs to mind), while others that had a lot of variation and unpredictability are more or less forgotten (1985 springs to mind). Perhaps there's even a difference between "great to experience" and "great to remember"?

Edited by Rediscoveryx, 01 December 2020 - 09:22.

[Requiem84]

I think a good addition to the poll would be unpredictability of results

 

edit: ninja'd by pitlanepalpatine.  The force was with him on that one

 

You forgot to add individual unpredictable upsets, like underdogs winning races/getting podiums. 

 

Added this option to the poll, thanks!

[Rediscoveryx]

Just the usual reminder that "unpredictability of results" doesn't necessarily mean that all 20 drivers have to have a 5% chance of winning each race. It could be something along the lines of... well, the top teams having two drivers who are relatively evenly matched. Or the second team in the pecking order actually being able to challenge regularly for wins. Or even (heaven forbid) that reliability isn't bullet-proof.

Edited by Rediscoveryx, 01 December 2020 - 09:30.

[Spillage]

I think it needs a title battle - preferable between two teams - lots of different winners and some exciting racing. 2008 and 2012 are good examples.

[Ali623]

For me:

 

• Championship battle obviously (between at least 2 drivers)
• Multiple teams capable of winning races (and getting podiums)
• A sizeable amount of exciting races 
• Some drama thrown in

[Augurk]

 

For me:

 

• Championship battle obviously (between at least 2 drivers)
• Multiple teams capable of winning races (and getting podiums)
• A sizeable amount of exciting races 
• Some drama thrown in

 

I agree. Although to be a great season the first one is essential and can be enough if they are really 2 great drivers, then at least two out of the next 3 would definitely help.

[Requiem84]

If more poll options are needed... just let me know. I think there is a maximum of 8 options.

[Marklar]

good racing and regular fight for wins between at least two teams. A WDC fight would be better, but not a requirement, too many good seasons had no real WDC fight.

[SophieB]

The platonic ideal would be a close title race between a driver I really liked and one I really didn't like, who were both brilliant drivers. Ideally in different teams. 

[TheFish]

A truly great season needs a title race imo. No-one says 2013 is their favourite F1 season, for example. Except maybe Vettel's family.

 

There have been periods when we've turned up to a race weekend and not known who would be quickest when we arrived. Those were great, waiting until qualifying to really see who was fast.

 

There's no set rules to make a season great, and people will have different opinions on a season. I really liked 2014 for example. The first year of the new rules, lots of overtaking, a season long title battle, plenty of drama. Other people think this season was boring.

[Spyker]

I think the cars need to be fairly competitive, with the best drivers in good cars. Domination doesn't bother me if others have the opportunity to fight.

Edited by Spyker, 01 December 2020 - 09:53.

[Arundo]

For me a good season is a season where there is fighting for the WDC between atleast two teams.

Sure its fun to see midfield battles but in the end it is the F1 WDC so I want to see a real fight for that, not like the list 7 or so years where there is hardly any fighting between teams for the WDC. 

[danmills]

A challenge. Surprises.

[jpm2019]

I never really realise during the season if it's great or not, it is mostly looking back. 

 

For me a great season has a tight championship but mostly great races. 

[Jovanotti]

A nice variety of tracks and a close title battle, preferably between drivers of different teams.

[Retrofly]

I can't put a finger on one specific thing that makes F1 great. I guess its easy for me to sit here and enjoy F1 when my favorite driver is winning all the time.

 

Its not 1 thing, its everything. I actually really enjoy the people side of it, we've kind of grown up with these people, the greats of the old times, the youngsters of today, and the youngsters of yesterday who are now in the evening of their careers.

I feel like its a journey we've all been on, following them every step of the way through the ups and down, mixed in with the blisteringly fast cars, danger and unpredictability of motor racing.

 

The "sport" aspect is only part of the equation, There's something for a everyone in F1.

Edited by Retrofly, 01 December 2020 - 10:11.

[Beri]

I can't put a finger on one specific thing that makes F1 great. I guess its easy for me to sit here and enjoy F1 when my favorite driver is winning all the time.

 

Its not 1 thing, its everything. I actually really enjoy the people side of it, we've kind of grown up with these people, the greats of the old times, the youngsters of today, and the youngsters of yesterday who are now in the evening of their careers.

I feel like its a journey we've all been on, following them every step of the way through the ups and down, mixed in with the blisteringly fast cars, danger and unpredictability of motor racing.

 

The "sport" aspect is only part of the equation, There's something for a everyone in F1.

 

Honest question here; I know that this is great for you as Hamilton fan and all, but does it make Formula One exciting for you as a fan? Does it make Formula One a fun sport to watch? I could imaging me being in your position, and becoming seriously bored with it. Even so much, in my case, that the secondary things that you have mentioned, are not enough to compensate the lack of excitement.

 

Again; not throwing a tantrum here, just an honest question.

[FTB]

2012 with Alonso winning would have been the greatest season ever, with nothing topping it. It's still very probably the best season I've watched though ( watching since 2005 ).

Edited by FTB, 01 December 2020 - 10:33.

[messy]

1. Great wheel to wheel battles between the top drivers

2. A really close title fight that could go either way

3. Individual upsets like underdog race wins

4. Some races that'll be remembered in years to come for whatever reason

5. Interesting stuff behind the scenes and silly-season surprises

6. A clean battle won the right way

7. A new, emerging threat from either a promising young driver, or a team

8. Uncertainty weekend to weekend in terms of who's going to be on top

 

Very few seasons have it all. 2020 has had 3, 4, 5 and arguably 6 if you consider it any kind of 'battle'

 

2012 got pretty much all of them. 

[TheFish]

Honest question here; I know that this is great for you as Hamilton fan and all, but does it make Formula One exciting for you as a fan? Does it make Formula One a fun sport to watch? I could imaging me being in your position, and becoming seriously bored with it. Even so much, in my case, that the secondary things that you have mentioned, are not enough to compensate the lack of excitement.

 

Again; not throwing a tantrum here, just an honest question.

I'm finding it a lot easier than I did 2013. I stopped watching at the end of the season then, I guess it makes me a hypocrite.

 

It doesn't make it as exciting as other times though. I still find it fun to watch, especially this season with the new/old circuits. Also for a few races this season, it wasn't always certain that Lewis would win, even though he mostly did. When he was stuck behind Vettel in Turkey, when he was stuck behind Max in Imola, when he was on 3 wheels in Silverstone, etc.That keeps the excitement up for me.

[Izzyeviel]

Interesting things happening. Its not about making sure the titles go to the last race, but having ups and downs for everyone, star performances, shocks, a freak feelgood result, young talent making a name for themselves, lower order battles, a bit of drama.

[masa90]

Well for me it needs following things: great cars, great drivers, proper battles, actual battles on the track for the lead and championship. Good tracks are important aswell. I have watched every race since 1999. (And well, seen pretty much every race in the 90s atleast in highlights format)

 

The titlebattle really needs to be contested. Doesnt matter if it is inside the team, aslong as there is proper battle. I love it when there is variation from race to race. Like Murray Walker used to say "Anything can happen in f1" -> well now it seems like it isnt true. Race is 45-70 laps and Mercedes win.

 

My favourites have been 97,98,99,00,03,06,07,08,10,12,16

 

Ok seasons 01,05,09,13 (early season was great, late season as crap as 20), 14,17,18

 

Absolute horrid seasons 02,04,11,15,19 and 20.

 

For 19 and 20 it propably is just tiredness. So many races, so little excitement. When champion is already sure before the season begins it is incredibly sad. I have big doubts about next season aswell...

[MasterOfCoin]

A season full stop....

[Counterbalance]

A season full stop....

 

Plus anything without Johnny Herbert in it. That'll do for me.

[Requiem84]

A season full stop....

 

Plus anything without Johnny Herbert in it. That'll do for me.

 

Feel free to vote for option 1 in the poll then:

 

Watching F1 already is great, whatever happens on track

[Izzyeviel]

Interesting things happening. Its not about making sure the titles go to the last race, but having ups and downs for everyone, star performances, shocks, a freak feelgood result, young talent making a name for themselves, lower order battles, a bit of drama.

I say a bit of drama, i mean a lot of drama.

 

Back in the 80's/90's it didn't matter if Senna, Prost, Mansell, Schumacher et al zoomed off into the distance. Reliability wasn't a thing back then, you were always left wondering/hoping they could hold on or for their engine to explode it. How would they deal with traffic? You'd see several spins a race. Some tracks would benefit some teams, some tracks would benefit other teams

[Atreiu]

An intense battle for the driver's championship, preferably between drivers of different teams, would be my starting point.

[Rediscoveryx]

I say a bit of drama, i mean a lot of drama.

 

Back in the 80's/90's it didn't matter if Senna, Prost, Mansell, Schumacher et al zoomed off into the distance. Reliability wasn't a thing back then, you were always left wondering/hoping they could hold on or for their engine to explode it. How would they deal with traffic? You'd see several spins a race. Some tracks would benefit some teams, some tracks would benefit other teams

 

Yeah, for me that was the golden era. Also, qualifying was made on completely different compounds than the race (and in some seasons the quallies wouldn't even last a full lap, so there was a lot of unpredictability/randomness already in qualifying).

 

A few more or less quick fixes to bring something like that back could be:

 

1) Bring back hyper-soft qualifying tyres. The driver should need to nurse them on their in-lap, so fragile should they be.

 

2) Strive for variety in circuit choice. When deciding whether or not to add/remove circuits from the calendar, the most relevant point should be "does including this circuit increase or reduce circuit variability?" More variability means that it's much harder to optimize the package, and some teams can gamble on designing a car that's suitable for one type of track while others would gamble on a different design philosophy.

 

3) Ditch the longevity rules for parts completely. If there needs to be regulations around this, just go the other way. If you're engine hasn't blown up in seven races, that's a trip down to the back of the grid for round 8.

 

4) In the absense of a true tyre war, let Pirelli stage a fake one, by forcing teams to chose between two different sets of compounds for each round (e.g, teams can either chose a soft/medium package or a super-soft/hard package, but not mix between them). 

 

Yes, a few of these are a bit tounge-in-cheek, but with a bit of imagination I think a lot could be done with relatively small means to spice things up in a relatively non-artificial manner.

[Atreiu]

I still think 2010 was the last historicaly exceptional season we had (even if the best driver to me, Hamilton, didn't win).

 

- multiple winners and contenders;

- terrific races;

- a dash of unreliability spread between contenders;

- genuinely fast and fantastic cars (no DRS, no KERS, no recovery systems, no bullshit - just fast, light and loaded with DF) which looked distinct and beautiful;

- mid field which was healthy and competitive enough to become factors in several GPs.

[Anderis]

Unpredictability of results is definetely the most important factor for me. I can't enjoy races if I know what to expect before watching the event and rarely get surprised.

 

But for a truly great season, it should also have a championship battle ongoing until the last race, and preferably with drivers from at least 2 different teams involved.

 

Also there need to be some very good races with good wheel-to-wheel racing and tactical variety along the way.

 

So that's 3 most important things for me in that order. A truly great season should have all 3 but if a season have 2 out of these 3 things I'm still quite happy. Unfortunately, it didn't happen even once since the beginning of the hybrid era, hence my interest in F1 has been waning for quite some time.

[Atreiu]

I think unpredictability itself is highly overrated.

 

NASCAR is unpredictable but is never great.

[Anderis]

- mid field which was healthy and competitive enough to become factors in several GPs.

But actually nowhere near as much as in 2008, 2009 or 2012.
 

[Risil]

As universally applicable as possible: I want competitive racing at the front, new stuff to experience and understand, and compelling stories that unfold across the season.

[Rediscoveryx]

I think unpredictability itself is highly overrated.

 

NASCAR is unpredictable but is never great.

 

It's probably more about hitting an unpredictability-sweet-spot, where F1 has too little and NASCAR has too much.

 

Sort of like overtaking in that regard. For years (the refuelling era to be more precise) everyone just wanted "more overtaking", "more overtaking". Now we have highway-passes aided by DRS and battles are rarely exciting anymore for precisely the opposite reason than what was the case in the past. In the past it was because we knew that the quicker driver wouldn't get past and now it's because we know that the quicker driver will get past. Actually, the point there seems to be that unpredictability may be what we want in the end after all. 

Edited by Rediscoveryx, 01 December 2020 - 14:24.

[shure]

Yeah, for me that was the golden era. Also, qualifying was made on completely different compounds than the race (and in some seasons the quallies wouldn't even last a full lap, so there was a lot of unpredictability/randomness already in qualifying).

 

A few more or less quick fixes to bring something like that back could be:

 

1) Bring back hyper-soft qualifying tyres. The driver should need to nurse them on their in-lap, so fragile should they be.

 

2) Strive for variety in circuit choice. When deciding whether or not to add/remove circuits from the calendar, the most relevant point should be "does including this circuit increase or reduce circuit variability?" More variability means that it's much harder to optimize the package, and some teams can gamble on designing a car that's suitable for one type of track while others would gamble on a different design philosophy.

 

3) Ditch the longevity rules for parts completely. If there needs to be regulations around this, just go the other way. If you're engine hasn't blown up in seven races, that's a trip down to the back of the grid for round 8.

 

4) In the absense of a true tyre war, let Pirelli stage a fake one, by forcing teams to chose between two different sets of compounds for each round (e.g, teams can either chose a soft/medium package or a super-soft/hard package, but not mix between them). 

 

Yes, a few of these are a bit tounge-in-cheek, but with a bit of imagination I think a lot could be done with relatively small means to spice things up in a relatively non-artificial manner.

1)and 3) would improve the racing without a doubt, but would be completely at odds with F1's green and cost commitments and so are a non-starter.  4) would also improve the racing but would also be artificial IMO and a true tyre war would be better - but that remove the FIA's ability to control the racing by means of artificial tyre degradation, so is also out.

 

Pity, as they'd all be good

Edited by shure, 01 December 2020 - 15:15.

[JHSingo]

What makes a great season? Simple, just copy and paste what made MotoGP so great this year.

 

On a serious note, for me there's a few things that go towards making a classic season: hopefully a close and competitive season, with numerous different race winners. A high number of exciting races, and a championship battle ideally featuring two or more drivers from rival teams. 2010 and 2012 were the standouts for this. I wasn't so enamored with 2016, because I prefer championship battles from drivers/rivals from different teams, and I didn't particularly care who won out of Rosberg or Hamilton that year. I didn't really want either of them to!

 

This year's not been awful, there's been a few good races here and there. My complaint is more that, even though in many ways it has been different, it has still felt very similar to recent years. Partly because the end result is the same yet again, and parly because the outcome felt so inevitable from so early on. When you know that we're relying on Valtteri sodding Bottas to have any hope of a championship battle, you know things are bad. I wouldn't mind Hamilton winning if we could get closer to seasons like 2017 and 2018, where there was more uncertainty till later in the year, but when from the second or third race the destiny of the championship is only ever going to go in one direction, it's hard to get too enthusiastic about the season. At least, speaking from a personal perspective. 

 

Recently (even this year), I've felt like seasons have dragged on and on. Some seasons fly by, and you're left craving more, like 2008, 2010 or 2012, but for me it was like before last weekend, feeling how are there still three races to go this year?!

Edited by JHSingo, 01 December 2020 - 15:12.

[THEWALL]

Close racing at the top. By racing I mean on track and not necessarily a close points battle for the WDC, although that’s a bonus. More than two drivers and one team fighting for the championships is also a bonus.

Cars that take real talent to drive. Good rules, good rule enforcement. Good looking and sounding cars a bonus.

Drivers that are more than just corporate employees also a plus. Naomi instead of Will...

[Izzyeviel]

when the seasons over, we should one of those forum 'survivor games' to decide the best season of F1

[PayasYouRace]

I normally have a loose categorisation of quality of racing seasons (F1 or otherwise).

 

Category 1 is when there is a championship fight between at least two drivers of different teams, and at least 7 winners (meaning from 4 teams) throughout the year. This for me is the gold standard for F1. I sometimes call it "CART competitiveness" because it reflects the level of close competition in that series' heyday. Recent examples of this category are 2012, 2008 and 2003. With this level of competition, it's unlikely the races themselves will be that dull.

 

Category 2 is when there is a tight title battle, but other teams don't get a good look in and wins outside these are either rare or non-existent. The best of this category would be 2010, with five genuine title contenders, four in the hunt in the final race, but nobody else won at all. Other examples could be 2006, 2000 or 1998. I'm usually fairly happy with this.

 

Category 3 is when there's a decent title battle, but it's over before the final race. But there's still enough unpredictability to keep things a bit interesting. 2018, 2017 or 2005 drop into this category. They can be good seasons, but end with a bit of an anticlimax.

 

Category 4 is the teammate title battle. This is when one team is dominant, but their drivers are battling for the title so it keeps things interesting at the front. 2016, 2014, 1996 and 1988 can be used as examples of this. Not ideal, but at least the fight at the front will have an intensity to keep things interesing.

 

Category 5 is when there is a single driver and car combination that is just able to extend their title lead with no problem, but the races themselves throw up some surprise winners. This is a 2019, 2011 or 2001 type season. We usually know after a few races who will be champion, but at least the other drivers can take it in turns to keep some interest.

 

Category 6 is when a single driver dominates with no real hope of competition. The inevitability of their wins sucks the fun out of the battle at the front. 2020, 2004 and 2002 are the obvious examples. This is when you have to focus on the midfield to find some entertainment.

 

This is how I've categorised it today. It's a loose system, but roughly sticks to those ideals. If every season was my Cat. 1, I'd never be bored.

[Branislav]

I vote for this: "For a season to be great, there needs to be a Championship battle between at least two drivers from two different teams"

 

But this: "For a season to be great, there needs to be a Championship battle between at least two drivers. It does not matter whether these drivers come from the same team or different teams" I would also vote but only if two superstars are in that team (read Lewis v Max)

[Kev00]

I’m not so fussed on a championship battle. I just want a bit of unpredictability going into weekends and into races. Even during the Vettel years. There was races where you didn’t know who was going into the weekend as favourites. You couldn’t pick a winner from 4 or 5 teams and 7-8 drivers. It’s the closeness of the battle up front. Right now there one team. There should always be 3 or 4

[Atreiu]

But actually nowhere near as much as in 2008, 2009 or 2012.
 

 

I strongly disagree. The points Alonso lost to midfield drivers at Istambul, Valencia and Abu Dhabi literaly decided the title in Vettel's favour.

 

Kubica got podiums on merit and Mercedes was always within striking distance whenever a front runner messed up. Rosberg had 10 finished within the top 6, but the Mercedes itself was never a top three car.

 

I could go on, but I think the evidence is clear enough after we dig in just a little.

[William Hunt]

I, for one, don't like unpredictability in general. If you can tell if Hamilton or Latifi has a higher chance of winning, then something is wrong with the system, right?

 

Unpredictability doesn't mean that drivers like Latifi or Pietro Fittipaldi are going to win races.

 

Unpredictability in results means we would have seasons again as we had in the 1970's & 1980s (bar '88). 

I've just picked a random season from that era here, just look at the number of different winners or podium scorers:
https://en.wikipedia...mula_One_season

Nothing worse as the same team or driver winning virtually everything and 80% of the field that can only dream of a podium with most of the time the same 2 teams filling the podium. That's how it currently is and I dislike it strongly. It's not fun to watch something when you can predict  the podium finishers before the race start and that it most of the time turns out right.