76 replies to this topic

[TomNokoe]

During the winter break I have been wrestling and wrangling with my relationship to F1, and amidst this self-inflicted thought experiment have stumbled upon a theory. Let me explain.

 

In the earlier days, the best way to follow a grand prix was by watching the pictures and listening to the commentary. Any graphics that did appear only served to remind you of information you likely already knew, and were so scarce and sporadic that it was impossible to gauge the story of a race from graphics alone. In hindsight, this practice now appears ludicrous, but it's fair to say we managed just fine at the time, and my argument is that the scarcity of information made grand prix far more exciting to follow. To build and understand the unfolding picture of a race in your mind was both a skill in its application, but also a blessing in its ability to capture and engage fans.

 

 

 

 

Graphics like this didn't even appear every lap. There would be a sprinkling at the start and during the opening laps, but afterwards it was usually every 3 to 5 laps, sometimes with time gaps, sometimes with the amount of pit stops. In the heat of battle, information would be delivered lap-by-lap, or on the rarest of occasions sector-by-sector! These organic pauses filled a broadcast with anticipation and tension. If one driver was chasing another, you would have to wait at least 60 seconds for the precious update, and as a fan this time was filled by intently watching the pictures, trying to guesstimate the gap yourself, or studying a driver's onboard camera to see how hard they were pushing. I could compare this to watching a movie, piecing together the action scene-by-scene. Just enough information at just the right frequency to keep you on the edge of your seat.

 

It wasn't until the late 2000s and early 2010s when the delivery and frequency of information changed, by way of the timing ribbon across the bottom of the screen.

 

 

 

 

This brought with it the introduction of mini-sectors, allowing the gaps and intervals to update before your very eyes. However, the ribbon wasn't ever-present on the broadcast. Even when it was on screen, because it either scrolled or refreshed through the field, if you were following a driver or battle exclusively through the graphics, you still had to wait 30-45 seconds before your next hit of data.

 

In 2017, the timing tower was born, but it still wasn't ever-present and would routinely disappear in favour of battle-specific graphics and other tidbits. Sometimes the tower and ribbon would be used interchangeably. When the tower was used, its primary purpose was for summary and classification. A quick "snapshot" before disappearing again to focus on the action. Mini-sectors were here to stay, but the first iteration of the tower did not abuse them, often favouring simpler, cleaner layouts.

 

 

However, once Liberty got their feet under the table, it was time for change. The timing tower as we know it today is affixed permanently to the left-hand side of the screen, spitting out updates every 200 metres.

 

 

Following a race has been irreversibly changed. No longer are updates fed lap-by-lap, or even sector-by-sector. Over the course of a race, one driver will record roughly 1500 mini-sectors. For a field of 20 drivers that is 30,000 individual updates.

 

For example, I am so well-trained in following the tower that I can usually predict an overtake based on the mini-sector gap at DRS activation. 0.800s? Too far away, 0.650s? Slam-dunk. The thrill of the chase, the heat of battle, the tension, hope and jeopardy of watching a grand prix has been surrendered to a sea of numbers, thrust before us and impossible to ignore. The magic and anticipation of live motorsport is no longer led by the camerawork and commentary but by the looming, dispassionate presence of the timing tower.

 

Discuss below

[Paa]

I never really realized this until now, but this more or less coincides with me watching the race without live-timing.

During the early 2010s, I watched every race with the notebook on my lap, probably watching it more, than the actual TV screen.

During recent years, I gave up that habit, as I can pretty much follow what is going on from the broadcast alone
Sometimes I check the timings after the race, but only for tiny details or to get exact gaps for close situations. But now I prefer to focus on the broadcast, rather than distract myself with the laptop and I still get a very good overall picture about the race.

Edited by Paa, 28 December 2023 - 02:50.

[NotAPineapple]

Hard disgree. I find it's a big improvement.

You can watch the on-screen action and easily ignore the timing tower if you think its spoiling.

Or you can follow parallel battles on-screen and off-screen by watching the action and monitoring the timing tower.

Edited by NotAPineapple, 28 December 2023 - 02:54.

[GreenMachine]

I never really realized this until now, but this more or less coincides with me watching the race without live-timing.

During the early 2010s, I watched every race with the notebook on my lap, probably watching it more, than the actual TV screen.

During recent years, I gave up that habit, as I can pretty much follow what is going on from the broadcast alone
Sometimes I check the timings after the race, but only for tiny details or to get exact gaps for close situations. But now I prefer to focus on the broadcast, rather than distract myself with the laptop and I still get a very good overall picture about the race.

 

 

^^  That's me!   

[TomNokoe]

To illustrate my point, one race that springs to mind is Spa 2008. I would invite users to re-watch the closing stages but focus on the broadcasting. Link.

There are no mini-sectors whatsoever for the Hamilton-Kimi chase and battle. The majority of the final 3 laps are completely unimpeded. It is played out exclusively through the camera. Massa closing in on them is not spoiled by an interval graphic but instead revealed by well-timed TV directing, which adds real and genuine surprise. The chaos and tension is impeccable. Alonso's last-gasp charge to 4th is captured perfectly over the line (Heidfeld's climb is replayed later). This is how I like to watch sport. There is nothing that flashy graphics could have added to this scene. Less is more.

Another example would be Brazil 2008. If there was a timing tower showing that Hamilton was catching Glock, ticking down from 14 seconds at the start of the final lap to nothing at Juncao, the surprise, drama and wonder of that moment would have been heavily, heavily lost, because as a viewer it would've been easy to predict before it had happened. Even thinking about this alternate reality makes me queasy, I'm thankful I experienced it in 2008 and not 2018!

Edited by TomNokoe, 28 December 2023 - 03:41.

[TomNokoe]

Another point that springs to mind is that attending a race live used to be inferior to watching at home, but recently I've found myself really enjoying going to races.

You only see the cars once a lap and so it's exciting watching the gaps ebb and flow. Every lap is a mini-reveal. When I was in the crowd at Silverstone 2021, the sheer excitement seeing Hamilton chase down Leclerc was amazing, but I'm sure if I was watching at home with timing and updating gaps it wouldn't have been the same.

Also, despite this thread focussing on graphics and the presentation of data, I think DRS is unfortunately linked in that racecraft and overtaking are crucial to an exciting product. When you combine incredibly granular graphical data with the inevitability and power of DRS borne out through the pictures, it's almost like watching a simulated race in a video game. There is no uncertainty or jeopardy. I don't need to watch the pictures because I have seen this hundreds of times. There are some very rare occasions like Alonso-Perez in Brazil that are truly unpredictable and must-watch, but this was an exception.

Perhaps I am feeling a little too nostalgic, but the feeling before DRS (or in the early days when it wasn't very powerful) of thinking "can driver X overtake?" and having to actually watch the TV to find out, and what it meant for the unfolding story of the race, was very exciting.

Edited by TomNokoe, 28 December 2023 - 04:24.

[LolaB0860]

After watching Indycar race and it's horribly inaccurate and slow timing, modern F1 timing even with all of it's unnecessary data seems like Christmas present every time.

[Organic]

More data doesn't make for a better experience. I went to Multiviewer with live timing, tons of video feeds and data available real-time and became less and less interested in things. Once you have enough data, the realities of the race scenarios are extremely obvious and there is little to no jeopardy involved. You can see how anything will pan out from a mile away.

I've since started watching without following live timing of any sort and not looking at laptimes. Has made things far more enjoyable

Edited by Organic, 28 December 2023 - 06:31.

[Dolph]

I used to watch live timing in a separate computer to understand what else is going in in a race. I largely dont have to now. 20 years ago what happened in places 10+ would largely be unknown.

[Bleu]

Silverstone 2020 was an example when seeing one driver in trouble (Hamilton), the continuously updating time gaps built the excitement - will Verstappen be able to catch him? In the end he was not.

[PayasYouRace]

I think the point made in the OP is very valid. We’re currently overloaded with information and it takes most of the tension out of watching a Grand Prix. By having less information, it almost forces the viewer to engage more with the race.

 

Going to a race and watching it live is fun because you’re sitting trackside with very little information. I think back to the 1997 European GP and how we watched Villeneuve get closer to Schumacher, lap after lap, until finally we had one lap where the Ferrari did not appear.

 

I think this ties in nicely with the overall problem with the F1 broadcast today which is that it’s very formulaic. They show the same things at the same times becuase that’s what some algorithm has determined is “best”, but it shows little engagement from the TV director. They’re not there to show us the race and generate excitement, but to deliver this polished product that they themselves have decided what it should look like.

[ConsiderAndGo]

I just don’t use live timing anymore. It’s effectively replaced that.

I do agree with your points though. The experience is certainly diluted and I spent more time watching the timing tower than the actual picture.

Could just spent £20 a year for live timing and ditch Sky. Experience wouldn’t be too different !

Edited by ConsiderAndGo, 28 December 2023 - 08:58.

[Beri]

The timing tower is the result of fans wishing for more information. And now we are discussing if it is a bit too much.

 

For all its worth I only miss "TAG Heuer Official Timing" on the yellow timing table.

[P123]

I sometimes find myself paying more attention to the live timing than the TV footage..... but without live timing, or timing info, the race is pretty much dead.  I think seeing the gaps, knowing who is catching, and by how much helps build tension, whereas TV alone misses most of it, and quite often what is relayed through commentary isn't entirely accurate.

[Clatter]

What annoys me is that you can see where the battles are building, and where overtakes are about to happen, via the timing tower, yet FOM miss it all. We have to rely on it, because the production is so damn bad.

[Taxi]

Can't agree with this one. I love the time tower. Its the way we can follow other battles other than the camera action. Also it improves the analytical experience: When are the tyres of this or that driver falling off, who are the drivers managing or attacking, how does a specific problem afects the times, where is driver X after that first lap tangle, etc etc.  Give me all the relevant information to read the race, please. 

 

 

That being said, of course there has been graphics that are useless like the percentage tyre one because it was not accurate at all. 

Edited by Taxi, 28 December 2023 - 09:43.

[F1Frog]

In the past, if there was nothing interesting happening at the front, the race would be boring as there was no coverage of the midfield. But because of the timing tower, you can watch every battle across the entire grid so a race can still be interesting even if it is obvious who will win. I think the timing tower is great and would love for it to be somehow implemented into races of old.

[Francesc]

I wish there was an option where you could change the screen to view a determinate battle by scrolling down the timing tower and clicking over the name of the drivers.

[F1 Mike]

I don't mind the timing tower, but it would be nice if it was taken away every now & then and alternated between something like the mid 90s.

I feel much more let down by the actual pictures we're given. The coverage of the races between 2006-2016 seemed far more coherent to what we're given now. Funnily enough, it could be related to the sheer amount of broadcast material they're trying to juggle with compared to 10-15 years ago. Again, too much information having a negative effect?...

[68targa]

I have watched TV coverage for years and also attended many times.  IMO There is no better experience than attending a live GP watching everything in 'real' time lap after lap.. You can see the whole field and know who is catching who. Way back before I had grey hair I would even manage to keep a lap chart !

 

Watching on TV is has developed to the point where there is just too much information.  I never look at the dashboard graphics - I don't care what G forces are happening or how hard Lewis is  braking etc. And the most pointless graphic is when they show the drivers name floating above the cars when it is obvious who they are generally when the commentators are talking about them.

 

The most useful graphic is the tower with timing gaps. The TV cannot watch the whole field so the tower tells pretty much all the viewer needs especially when gaps are reducing or not. It is useful to know who has had a pit stop and what tyres they are using and for me, that's it. 

 

Too much information does not mean a better TV experience.

[SenorSjon]

I love the timing tower. Everytime I watch Indycar I feel like I'm watching stone age timing. Very slow to update. And the live timing online? Even worse. It updates only every few minutes it seems. They can learn a lot from F1, which had better online timings when it still was free and archaic.

F1 could learn from MotoGP timings in qualy though. 4 instead of 3 sectors and in the timing tower you can see everyone's sectors next to their time to see if they improve or not. F1 only shows 3 at a time and intervals instead of laptime so you have to calculate needed times on a whim.

We had minisectors on the world feed for a few races, but they are only visible in the F1-app now.

The tower (and live timing) do stress out FOM missing battles though.

And yes, it can be improved. Why not tire + tirelife next to the intervals? Should be tiny but can really help understand unfolding tactics.

Edited by SenorSjon, 28 December 2023 - 10:37.

[ANF]

I have watched TV coverage for years and also attended many times.  IMO There is no better experience than attending a live GP watching everything in 'real' time lap after lap.. You can see the whole field and know who is catching who. Way back before I had grey hair I would even manage to keep a lap chart !
 
Watching on TV is has developed to the point where there is just too much information.  I never look at the dashboard graphics - I don't care what G forces are happening or how hard Lewis is  braking etc. And the most pointless graphic is when they show the drivers name floating above the cars when it is obvious who they are generally when the commentators are talking about them.
 
The most useful graphic is the tower with timing gaps. The TV cannot watch the whole field so the tower tells pretty much all the viewer needs especially when gaps are reducing or not. It is useful to know who has had a pit stop and what tyres they are using and for me, that's it. 
 
Too much information does not mean a better TV experience.

+111

I love the current timing tower but find almost all other graphics pointless.

[PayasYouRace]

In the past, if there was nothing interesting happening at the front, the race would be boring as there was no coverage of the midfield. But because of the timing tower, you can watch every battle across the entire grid so a race can still be interesting even if it is obvious who will win. I think the timing tower is great and would love for it to be somehow implemented into races of old.

 

The solution to that isn't the timing tower. It's showing the midfield battles.

[Sterzo]

And the most pointless graphic is when they show the drivers name floating above the cars when it is obvious who they are generally when the commentators are talking about them.

Even worse than pointless. I want to be there, not watching a processed image on a plastic screen, and this rams home the point that I'm not.

[Stephane]

As said before, since the permanent tower, i don't need another screen with the live timing.

 

 

 

 

Speaking of the past, i loved the 90's end, when we had the gaps to leader appearing in real time on screen as they crossed the line. It helped the feel for those gaps.

[jonpollak]

For me the current Tower is great when you are either…..
A) watching in a bar with 37 other TV’s on.
B) in a foreign country where you don’t speak the language.
C) you absolutely HATE the commentary team.

F1 is all about data these days so…..
Jp

[TomNokoe]

You can watch the on-screen action and easily ignore the timing tower if you think its spoiling.

I find it too difficult to ignore. I wish F1TV would give me the option to hide it, or choose a simpler layout. This is surely within the capability of modern technology.

I was watching Monaco 2003 recently, and for some reason the archived video on F1TV is missing the TV overlays and graphics, even the sacred "F1" logo is gone! I had to watch the whole race with pictures and commentary only, but it was fine.

Compared to most sports, F1 has a very high barrier of entry, so I can see why Liberty lean towards giving as much information as possible, but it is too far IMO. Collombin's ski racing comparison is very apt.

I've also developed a penchant in recent years for listening to radio commentary, as I find it's far more descriptive and engaging than TV commentary, owing to the fact in normal circumstances the listener cannot see the pictures.

Surprised to see opinion is split!

Edited by TomNokoe, 28 December 2023 - 12:03.

[noikeee]

I've had times where I've felt sensory/data overload watching F1, but I'm with the "the timing tower allowed me to stop having to have live timing" guys. I can now actually just watch the race instead of scrambling back and forth across two screens and feeling utterly exhausted by the end.

[RedRabbit]

Can't agree with this one. I love the time tower. Its the way we can follow other battles other than the camera action. Also it improves the analytical experience: When are the tyres of this or that driver falling off, who are the drivers managing or attacking, how does a specific problem afects the times, where is driver X after that first lap tangle, etc etc. Give me all the relevant information to read the race, please.


That being said, of course there has been graphics that are useless like the percentage tyre one because it was not accurate at all.

Agree with this.

Every race we have complaints on the TV director missing action, and now we want less information?

The timing tower is great, and it allows us to follow a battle that might not be on screen. That creates more tension for me, than watching the directors favourite pounding around on their own.

There are PLENTY of other graphics we don't need. The "Striking Distance To Overtake" being a prime example.

Or the video game graphics from 1996, showing the driver name and highlighting the car, with a bright green arrow telling us the distance in front constantly.

All that can be ditched, and just leave the tower. It's the one graphic that really adds something worthwhile.

[balmybaldwin]

Despite it's omnipressence the timing tower is regularly displayed with completely useless information on it....  e.g. why is there a mode which shows team logos when there is already the colour accents? In my view it should show gap to leader, interval and perhaps tyres on a rotation

 

More importantly in qualifying it regularly does not show any times despite times having been set.every quali session the first few minutes they inexplicably choose not to display the times, just the order and names.

 

This means you get things like

 

1. Ves

2. Albon

3. Leclerc

 

 

which means you have no idea if Albon has just put in a screamer or leclerc is doing a double warm up lap.

 

This is especially important in wet/dry quali sessions when these early times can mean everything

[Nathan]

Timing tower works for me.  I don't need things taken away for a minute to appreciate them.

[SenorSjon]

Despite it's omnipressence the timing tower is regularly displayed with completely useless information on it.... e.g. why is there a mode which shows team logos when there is already the colour accents? In my view it should show gap to leader, interval and perhaps tyres on a rotation

More importantly in qualifying it regularly does not show any times despite times having been set.every quali session the first few minutes they inexplicably choose not to display the times, just the order and names.

This means you get things like

1. Ves
2. Albon
3. Leclerc


which means you have no idea if Albon has just put in a screamer or leclerc is doing a double warm up lap.

This is especially important in wet/dry quali sessions when these early times can mean everything

The pointless outlap graphic where you don't see any laptimes. There used to be a P behind the names in the previous tower.

Regarding live timing. It was broken in Vegas and I surely missed it. I just want to keep track of the laptimes.

[JHSingo]

Personally, I miss the days when the commentary team was having to commentate on a race from a broom cupboard at the BBC, rather than track side. I think they should go back to that, as well as having to share one microphone between them so we get less of David Croft's inane rambling. Whilst we're at it, I think we should revert to black and white coverage too. That way, it's easier to focus purely on the racing rather than being distracted by gaudy liveries and advertising hording. 

 

I do take the point that the TV presentation of F1 is much too cluttered these days. There are a lot of graphics and information that don't really provide much meaningful information, imo. Particularly the AWS ones. 

 

But the timing tower serves it purpose by allowing you to see where the action is, or where your favourite driver is, at a glance at any time - even if they're not actually being shown on screen at the time. And it's particularly useful if you're multi-screening (as I happened to be when the final MotoGP and F1 races of the season clashed) and have one race on mute or whatever. There's nothing more frustrating than if you have to step away for a time, and then it takes you forever to figure out what the hell the order is when you come back. 

 

And yes, whilst the TV direction of races is so shockingly abysmal, the timing tower is a necessity, really.

 

I think there's a lot of viewing stuff through rose-tinted spectacles here. It's nice to go back and watch old races for the nostalgia of how things were back then, but I dare say that if they got rid of the timing tower for the 2024 season, it would be a universally unpopular move that many struggled to understand the logic behind. 

Edited by JHSingo, 28 December 2023 - 15:31.

[Grippy]

I like the timing tower but not all the graphics superimposed on the cars on track (although an occasional G-force or speed indicator is a good reminder of what they are going through).

The tower is useful for following the ebb and flow of competitors further down the field, recoveries after a pitstop or spin, etc, and often shows a problem before the race director notices.

[Ruusperi]

I dunno. I used to follow sessions with official javascript Live Timing anyway to fill my information needs.

https://web.archive....timing/721.html

 

But once TV graphics got precise enough, there was no reason to follow live timing....well, actually, the real reason was that online streams were ~40 seconds behind the live timing, so you would be spoiled all the time by watching live timing. With F1TV you can have it synced with TV images, but I prefer single-monitor setup anyway.

[lustigson]

For all its worth I only miss "TAG Heuer Official Timing" on the yellow timing table.

 

I remember the days of “Longines times the winner”. 

[IrvTheSwerve]

Too much info can definitely be a bad thing. For me, this came to a head with the ‘mini sector’ thing that was put on the main broadcast a year (or two?) ago. You could easily tell in qualifying if someone was going to get pole or not, because you could see if there were a couple of yellow mini sectors even within a purple sector. Suspense is a big part of F1 IMO (and this is the main reason I hate sprints).

 

It would be nice for the timing tower to be minimised now and again so that we can have full view of cars battling on track. It’ll probably be incorporated into digital tv soon…having the option to hide stuff. Sky are close with their red button stuff.

[Risil]

Longer ago than two years! But yeah it's a great example.

[Afterburner]

I was watching Monaco 2003 recently, and for some reason the archived video on F1TV is missing the TV overlays and graphics, even the sacred "F1" logo is gone! I had to watch the whole race with pictures and commentary only, but it was fine.

Rewatching the 2003 season last year around this time prompted me to start a similar thread—I don’t think it’s just you, I think the “product” was better then than it is now, and the lack of on-screen graphics is one reason for that. It forces the viewer to be more engaged and can hide the fact that a race is overwhelmingly dull.

Not a chance in hell that we’re putting this genie back in the bottle given the average attention span of younger viewers though.

[azza200]

Rewatching the 2003 season last year around this time prompted me to start a similar thread—I don’t think it’s just you, I think the “product” was better then than it is now, and the lack of on-screen graphics is one reason for that. It forces the viewer to be more engaged and can hide the fact that a race is overwhelmingly dull.

Not a chance in hell that we’re putting this genie back in the bottle given the average attention span of younger viewers though.

 

The DTS fanbase would hate the lack of info 

[Disgrace]

If the future is F1TV, perhaps at some point in the near future this will be something you be able to toggle on or off?

[AlexPrime]

I like the info, this year it made the US GP feel like Jaws   
But I loved most graphically the blue colored ones, from Premiere and DSF Plus. Very pretty.

[loki]

I just duct tape over that part of the TV.  Problem solved…

[Dolph]

The DTS fanbase would hate the lack of info 

 

 

 

This whole thread and discussion is ridiculous.

 

I'm an F1 fan and a racing fan. I'm interested in what goes on at the front end of the pack and at the rear end. With the added info I get to see all that. Without it I can't. How is it better that I can't!? Nonsense. Complete and utter nonsense.

 

 

As to your point about DTS, you have your wires crossed. The people who watch DTS are into F1 for the fake drama and the "epic" fights. They are not interested if Albon is gaining on Tsunoda by 0.2 sec per lap for 12th.

[southernstars]

This is the most "okay, boomer" OP I've seen in a while.

 

I like to go back and watch 1996 Spain every now and again, just to bask in the greatness. But you know what? If I was watching that race live I would have no idea of how incredible that drive was. No timing gaps, no laptimes, barely any info on where the cars were in the field. Relying on the commentator for everything. Not even being able to properly see what happened to him at the start and certainly no way to clearly see that he was four seconds a lap faster in torrential rain.

 

Imagine having the timing tower for that race. Imagine. You see him slipping back, then suddenly he's eating gaps and drivers alive. Oh my god. The excitement. 

 

Including the tower makes the races more exciting and easier to follow. I can track a driver through the field that is getting no TV coverage. I can track a gap, I can see the progress. It makes watching races more exciting and discussions more involved. 

[noikeee]

This is the most "okay, boomer" OP I've seen in a while.

I like to go back and watch 1996 Spain every now and again, just to bask in the greatness. But you know what? If I was watching that race live I would have no idea of how incredible that drive was. No timing gaps, no laptimes, barely any info on where the cars were in the field. Relying on the commentator for everything. Not even being able to properly see what happened to him at the start and certainly no way to clearly see that he was four seconds a lap faster in torrential rain.

Imagine having the timing tower for that race. Imagine. You see him slipping back, then suddenly he's eating gaps and drivers alive. Oh my god. The excitement.

Including the tower makes the races more exciting and easier to follow. I can track a driver through the field that is getting no TV coverage. I can track a gap, I can see the progress. It makes watching races more exciting and discussions more involved.

This is how I feel about 1980s F1.

I love the era, it's an integral part of my childhoods imaginary as I re-read dozens of times car magazines my uncle bought at the time and left at my grandma's house.

When I go watch the races though, even if I don't know the result beforehand, it is so boring to follow. Part of it is the TV direction obviously, part of it the huge gaps between cars, but also the fact you're just totally watching it blind, relying on occasional mentions by the commentators and very rare TV overlays that only come up once in a while. So often watching these races I totally lose battles that happened. We've evolved so much from this...

Tom I suspect the way you feel about this is because you get just a tad too obsessive and can't help yourself but focus on the tower way too much. Maybe try the duct tape method as suggested above?

[TomNokoe]

Tom I suspect the way you feel about this is because you get just a tad too obsessive and can't help yourself but focus on the tower way too much. Maybe try the duct tape method as suggested above?

Maybe. It had been stirring in my mind for a while.

I don't want to go back to the 80s, 90s or even 00s. There is a very fine line between "just enough" and "too much" information, and for me somewhere between 2010-17 was the goldilocks zone. Even though 2018- is technically only a small step forwards, the effect is very big.

I simply don't need to know the gaps between cars every 5 seconds over a 90 minute race, and truly don't understand why anyone would.

Edited by TomNokoe, 29 December 2023 - 01:39.

[chrcol]

I find F1 without live timing a poor experience.  What contributes to the problem is how poor the world feed is, lots of full screen replays, shots of celebs, pit crew etc.

 

The pit lane channel on F1TV was some way getting to what I consider acceptable, but they dropped it the last 2 years.

 

Without live timing I feel I am just blind as to the bigger picture of the race.

 

The timing tower (and the ticker previously) have gone a long way to making it more watchable without access to live timing, although they still not as good as live timing.  Its a clear step forward.

 

Anyone who watches live timing knows what I am on about, the world feed probably only touches up on less than 5% of the fights for position in the race, just not enough cameras on screen, and a poor race director who cant keep up with the action.

 

In addition live timing has a clear indicator of pace as well.  So you know how someone's strategy is playing out, whether they going backwards or forwards etc.

Edited by chrcol, 29 December 2023 - 01:50.

[Dolph]

Maybe. It had been stirring in my mind for a while.

I don't want to go back to the 80s, 90s or even 00s. There is a very fine line between "just enough" and "too much" information, and for me somewhere between 2010-17 was the goldilocks zone. Even though 2018- is technically only a small step forwards, the effect is very big.

I simply don't need to know the gaps between cars every 5 seconds over a 90 minute race, and truly don't understand why anyone would.

 

 

Its not about every 5 seconds. Its about when I find the action on screen not engaging I take a recap of where everyone stands and whos making what kind of progress, instead or relying on someones elses idea when that information should be made available to me. I decide when to read the info, not someone else.

 

Imagine Alonso makes a pitstop. Under your conditions I'd be given the info how long his stop was and where he came out and that's about it. But now I can follow is he passing the people he came out behind or not. If Hamilton is to stop next I know if he is gonna come out ahead or behind Alonso, instead of being totally clueless about it. I can then understand he is not coming into pit, because he'd just fall behind Fernando anyway, so it makes sense for him to extend his stint and hope for a virtual safety car. Most all of this information would be lost with your version and I'd be at the end of the race scratching my head why Hamilton didn't come in to cover Alonso. I can read the race.

Edited by Dolph, 29 December 2023 - 02:03.

[noikeee]

yeah i'm definitely not looking at it every 5 seconds lol