In all honesty, the early '11-'13 era Pirelli tyires were the gimmick I loathed most. Artificial drama provided by products meant to break - like some late-capitalist planned obsolescence nightmare.
Also, those painfully awkward podium interviews by celebrities. Crippling cringe to leave your palette in ruins after every race.
Add the DRS and aero gimmicks that spawn hideous cars and it all coalesces into the 2013 season; a disgusting season.
In hindsight the Pirellis were one of the things that kind of soured F1 for me, but at the time I thought the idea wasn't bad, and I still think that it works in theory. Like, we all knew how impossible it was for those rock solid Bridgestones to provide different any variety in strategies. Have one faster but more degradable + one slower, but more durable compound (+ a third one i suppose) should mean difference in strategies and more interesting racing.
But that wasn't really the case, was it... It was kind of - one bad, and one worse tyre compound. Not even "faster and more degradable", just worse.
Still, DRS remains the gimmick that I hated the most. I understand why it exists, I know that races (on some tracks anyway) would probably be worse without it. But it really should be a last ditch effort and a temporary solution at best. Yet it's 10 years later, and more prominent than ever, it killed racing on tracks where lack of overtaking hadn't been a problem (eg. Spa). And when I look around online (more reddit or social media than here maybe), it seems like fans have gotten so used to that. If a faster car unable to overtake a slower car, it's seen as proof that the DRS zone should be longer, or that the track is no good "for modern racing".
As far as "short lived" gimmicks if you can call them that, how about qualifying with race fuel onboard? Remember when they introduced knockout sessions, and Q3 started and it was just.. driving around to burn fuel?
Edited by greenman, 15 April 2021 - 13:18.
