818 replies to this topic

[Hellenic tifosi]

Theres also a scenario of 2nd and 3rd with unhappy drivers thinking they were treated unfairly and full on drama.

 

That's why you communicate the plan well in advance.

[Gary Davies]

Over at Autosport*, there's an article by Jake Boxall-Legge titled "Why dirty air is such a problem in F1 2025".

 

One of the respondents, someone with the username of Bandini Fan wrote: "It’s been boring and will remain boring is what you are saying.

 

"I have been watching for 60 years and this is the first time I actually switched off before the end of the race. It’s a tragedy what has been done to a once great sport.

 

"Exacerbated by little difference between hard and medium compounds. More tyre degradation and two stopper might have helped.

 

"I fail to understand why all of the complexities around the wings and floor are not simply outlawed. Let’s reduce downforce dramatically and go back to more mechanical grip please."

 

Another (jordidm99) wrote: "...it's the same problem F1 has faced for decades: does it want to be a technological war or does it want to be a spectacle?"

 

They both made excellent points.

 

When I first became interested in Formula One (probably around the same time as Bandini Fan) the battle between constructors around technology was relevant because the technology available to the likes of Chapman, Rudd, Ferrari and Brabham/Tauranac did not require insane amounts of money for full size wind tunnels, computer processors (what were they??) running at warp speed or OxBridge academics.

 

But today, the money in F1 and the available technology make it necessary for the FIA to impose a complicated matrix of rules in order for the sport/business (take your pick) to survive. 

 

I'm neither criticising nor condoning this state of affairs, but jordidm99's question is a good one. 

 

* If you can't see the article because it's behind a paywall, I recommend becoming a subscriber.

Edited by Gary Davies, Today, 09:14.

[Nemo1965]

 

Over at Autosport*, there's an article by Jake Boxall-Legge titled "Why dirty air is such a problem in F1 2025".

 

One of the respondents, someone with the username of Bandini Fan wrote: "It’s been boring and will remain boring is what you are saying.

 

"I have been watching for 60 years and this is the first time I actually switched off before the end of the race. It’s a tragedy what has been done to a once great sport.

 

"Exacerbated by little difference between hard and medium compounds. More tyre degradation and two stopper might have helped.

 

"I fail to understand why all of the complexities around the wings and floor are not simply outlawed. Let’s reduce downforce dramatically and go back to more mechanical grip please."

 

Another (jordidm99) wrote: "...it's the same problem F1 has faced for decades: does it want to be a technological war or does it want to be a spectacle?"

 

They both made excellent points.

 

When I first became interested in Formula One (probably around the same time as Bandini Fan) the battle between constructors around technology was relevant because the technology available to the likes of Chapman, Rudd, Ferrari and Brabham/Tauranac did not require insane amounts of money for full size wind tunnels, computer processors (what were they??) running at warp speed or OxBridge academics.

 

But today, the money in F1 and the available technology make it necessary for the FIA to impose a complicated matrix of rules in order for the sport/business (take your pick) to survive. 

 

I'm neither criticising nor condemning this state of affairs, but jordidm99's question is a good one. 

 

* If you can't see the article because it's behind a paywall, I recommend becoming a subscriber.

 

 

I recently saw the floor of the Ferrari-car, as drawn by Giorgio Piola. Good heavens! Why doesn't the FIA just mandate that the majority of the floor must be completely flat, with the exception of the venturi-channels (providing they/we still want groundeffect-cars). This would get rid of the dirty air for the largest part, I think (saying this with no engineering degree).

Edited by Nemo1965, Today, 09:15.

[TomNokoe]

Coming back to the race in itself, and the baffling decision of McLaren not to pit either Piastri later or Norris, I think I get it now. I think McLaren is really scared to 'disadvantage' any driver. Pit Norris later, the chance is that he gives Max AND Piastri an undercut. Pit Piastri later than Max, he ends up in front of Leclerc, sure, but the risk is that Max and his teammate are then too far up the road to threaten them.

My conclusion: the McLaren-drivers and the team are more busy managing the peace between them than beating Max to the title.

I agree, paralysed by equality.

Piastri qualified behind and spent the first half of the race behind. He should have been used to cover Leclerc and Russell while Norris ran long to attack Max later.

[IrvTheSwerve]

I am not a fan of drivers of teams, so I can not really 'feel' your opinion, only that you seem to think I was being negative about McLaren (like you are with your remark about the 2nd Red Bull-car. Why?) But let me react about the 'only round 3-argument'. Personally I think that if you want to win the championship you always try to to win as many GP's as possible early in the year if you have a clear speed advantage and later in the year, when you have a margin to your rivals, you start to maximize the results. You never know if your advantage (your team, as it were) is going to evaporate (look at Max last year).

 

I don't know if Red Bull looks tense and miserable, I can't watch behind the scenes. I can see Max, who seems totally unperturbed. I can't see behind the scenes at McLaren either, so we will only know after this year how the mood really was. 

 

I think you're absolutely correct. They're using up a lot of their time keeping the peace between the two...perhaps taking their eye off the ball when it comes to looking at the grand scheme of things in a race.

 

Maybe they need a Rubinho in the second seat.

[IrvTheSwerve]

I agree, paralysed by equality.

Piastri qualified behind and spent the first half of the race behind. He should have been used to cover Leclerc and Russell while Norris ran long to attack Max later.

 

That's a good phrase to sum it up.

[KWSN - DSM]

I think you're absolutely correct. They're using up a lot of their time keeping the peace between the two...perhaps taking their eye off the ball when it comes to looking at the grand scheme of things in a race.

 

Maybe they need a Rubinho in the second seat.

 

I think they already have.

[IrvTheSwerve]

I think they already have.

 

 

Good luck. 

 

[RedRabbit]

I think they already have.

Do you think Lando is as good as Rubens? 😋

[rodlamas]

The Japanese GP will have some direct impact on the tire choice on any of the tracks Pirelli still has not manufactured the tires for.

C6 will appear much more than first thought.

Imola first candidate -> Isola had already spoken about it. And that being an impossible track to overtake, they will force a multiple stop race there.

[KWSN - DSM]

Do you think Lando is as good as Rubens?

 

I think both McLaren drivers are at a minimum Rubens level. The fact that I see one of them better than the other do not mean I see the 'inferior' as a bad driver, simply that he has had the misfortune of being teamed with the current second best driver in the world, any other team than McLaren or Red Bull he would be the clear undisputed number 1, it is not outside the realm of possibility that he is currently the 3rd best driver in the world - Which car you race mean something, both McLaren drivers have the 'it' factor, one have that little extra.

 

But I have been wrong before.

[Claudius]

Having watched F1 in the 90s and 00s, where processions were the order of the day, I'm not that bothered by the occasional race like Suzuka.

[Analog]

Having watched F1 in the 90s and 00s, where processions were the order of the day, I'm not that bothered by the occasional race like Suzuka.

Yeah... a race like the one at Suzuka, with the three leading cars in the same picture for almost an entire race, could have been the highlight of the year!

A big difference between now and then is the reliability though, but for the cars  and the drivers themselves, which mean that there was never any safe bets before the checkered flag. Now, the random element is the pit stops and they are also so efficient that you don't even have time to let off a fart.

Edited by Analog, Today, 14:32.

[7MGTEsup]

Yeah... a race like the one at Suzuka, with the three leading cars in the same picture for almost an entire race, could have been the highlight of the year!

A big difference between now and then is the reliability though, but for the cars  and the drivers themselves, which mean that there was never any safe bets before the checkered flag. Now, the random element is the pit stops and they are also so efficient that you don't even have time to let off a fart.

 

Max was only ever one lock up away from being passed so there was a level of tension for a lot of the race. It's not like it was his team mate behind him protecting his rear.

[ensign14]

Having watched F1 in the 90s and 00s, where processions were the order of the day, I'm not that bothered by the occasional race like Suzuka.

To be fair though cars were often visibly on the edge back then.  Now it's a bit Scalextric.

[KWSN - DSM]

To be fair though cars were often visibly on the edge back then.  Now it's a bit Scalextric.

 

Not quite Scalextric when you go see live, there is the poor TV coverage not truly showing what is going on - The Peter Fox picture in one of the Japan threads is happening every lap to every car, the cars bounce, fly, compress, understeer, oversteer and are on the limit.

[Analog]

Max was only ever one lock up away from being passed so there was a level of tension for a lot of the race. It's not like it was his team mate behind him protecting his rear.

I know, I enjoyed the race on Sunday although it must be labelled as "boring" with todays standard. What I mean is that even during the weird races 30 years ago, when only way to understand what was going on was to listen to the commentator and close fights at the end of races was more rare than unicorns, it was still interesting. But in a different way. 

[7MGTEsup]

I know, I enjoyed the race on Sunday although it must be labelled as "boring" with todays standard. What I mean is that even during the weird races 30 years ago, when only way to understand what was going on was to listen to the commentator and close fights at the end of races was more rare than unicorns, it was still interesting. But in a different way. 

 

I would describe races as less exciting rather than boring as there is always something going on somewhere on the track.

[Brawn BGP 001]

The Japanese GP will have some direct impact on the tire choice on any of the tracks Pirelli still has not manufactured the tires for.

C6 will appear much more than first thought.

Imola first candidate -> Isola had already spoken about it. And that being an impossible track to overtake, they will force a multiple stop race there.

I wonder if we will ever see the C1 tyre again this season?