43 replies to this topic

[Sir Frank]

Reading the other actual Hockeheimring thread I followed the links to Hockenhimring.de

And the webcam

One thing that struck me looking at these images, that the passing opportunity that looked so good on paper might just turn out to be a complete disaster for passing.

I remember when in 1987 the Hungaroring was changed a bit by cutting across a tight right-left with a straight. Everybody said that now overtaking would be possible, only to find that it was solely good for lapping. That straight had only one competitive pass to its history and that is the famous pass Nigel put on Senna when he was stuck behind JJ. Not a power pass if you remember.

Will this happen to this piece of tarmack as well?

Lets just look at it.



You come out of a tight right corner, go onto the curbs just like you would do at Melbourne, outaccelarating, that is a type of corner where you lose a lot of ground on the car you are following. The next corner is a left. I dont know if it goes full throttle or not (I assume not). When it does, no problem but you are already a long way back. If it does not, then again, you lose ground because you lose front end grip because of the turbulence. The straight itself is long, but then the slight left hander just before the tight right hairpin has a lot less radius than you could assume by looking at the track map. How should two cars go through that side by side? I think its right at the braking point or just before that.

What do you think by looking at these images? Is overtaking possible there?

[SeanValen]

Interesting pictures. I can't really tell much until I see the cars racing on it, I was thinking alot about the hungry track while looking at this one. That long curved type straight reminds me a bit of the magney cours track, and the slow corner, for some overtaking, we'll see how it pans out, but in the rain could provide races like France 99.

[Witt]

Even if the racing is good on this BS track, i would still rather have the normal Hockenheim back. We fans want variety in our tracks, not 17 clones.

Back to the point. From that photo the corner/straight in question looks too sharp to allow side by side racing. But the angle of the photo is probably a bit deceiving.

It's all moot point anyway. The new 'long' straight is not long enough for the cars to get close enough to make a pass as 'easy' as it was on the normal Hockenheim. The cars are carrying too much wing on the new track, giving them a more stable exit from the previous corner. While passing didn't happen all the time on the normal Hockenheim, it was much more frequent than on other clone circuits like the new Hockenheim.

Get ready for a "Is he 1 stopping or 2 stopping?" race. Like spain, hungary, Imola, magny cours, any relevant passing will happen in the pits.

[Daniel Lester]

poor forest, waste of time and money. The original track may have looked boring on paper but at least it proved that under the right circumstances on the right track cars could pass.

It's not the cars or drivers fault that theres little overtaking it's the tracks.

[gerry nassar]

Any thing good in F1 is taken away. The sport is being run into the ground!

[Liam]

I never liked Hockenheim. Stupid silly chicanes that looked awfull. and boring straights that went on forever.
It must have cost an awful lot of money to put marshalls and doctors around that huge track, and there wasn't even anyone out in the forest to see the cars! After Jean Alesi's big accident two years ago the organisers felt changes were needed. Jean's accident was at over 200 mph. He was lucky he didn't hit anyone, for at that speed no accident is minor.

I don't know about the changes, I think they might work, but I'm not convinced by the gentle turn. Something straighter would have been better. The end is a hairpin, a much better option to a chicane. We'll just ahve to see really.

[mikedeering]

I've "raced" the new track on GP3, and it is very boring. Too twisty, and little opportunity to overtake. Turn 2 is a good place (abit like Adelaide at Magny-Cours), but pretty easy to defend against as well. The turn into the stadium is still there (where Rubens passed DC last year), but with the twisty corners before hand, I am not sure a car could get close enough to make a pass - judging by the tree line on the plan, the straight is still just as long as before when the Senna chicane was in place though, so that gives some hope... verdict:

[Ghostrider]

Seems almost like a high-downforce circuit with the new layout, doesn't look to good for overtaking, but I guess we'll have to give it a chance first!

[pekarting]

How short it seems in comparison with the old one!!

I haven't still driven on it, but I enjoyed the old one. I like chicanes very much, thought from
the point of view of the spectator aren't very good because it's difficult to overtake.

Yes, Daniel, poor forest

About the hairpin... I think it's not going to be easy to overtake there because:
- In my opinion the right-left bend preceding the "straight" doesn't seem to be easy to take near
the front car because of the aerodynamics, so it's difficult to begin the "straight" near
enough.
- The slight left will be done by the left side, so if a car wants to get side by side with the front
car would have to go by the right side, that has a major ratio, so the car behind would have to
be much faster.


I agree with most of you... What's happening with the old F-1?

[RaymondMays]

Originally posted by Liam
I never liked Hockenheim. Stupid silly chicanes that looked awfull. and boring straights that went on forever.

In my opinion, one of the most spectular sights in F1, were the cars blasting through the forest at maximum speed, and giving each other a real chance of getting into the slipstream of the car in front.

It also made the race interesting, from a reliability view, plus it was good to see people getting it wrong at the chicanes, and going straight over them.

I am truly saddened that we will be seeing a great circuit castrated!

Just like the Nurburgring, Austria, Spa and others.

[Ali_G]

But its like this guys.

At least the old sections of circuit still exist. If the FIA decide to they can still ask them to go back to teh old circuit.

But take a second and think of the Ostereichring. Thats been completely mauled. That'll never be driven again.

And RImes, in France, bulldozed to the ground last year.

Niall

[Rediscoveryx]

I don't think the tracks are the biggest problem for overtaking. The biggest problem is the heavy reliance on aerodynamic downforce which prevents cars from running close enough through the corners to allow for overtaking on the track.

Lets compare identical tracks from different eras:

Monaco 1985: 20 passes for position
Monaco 1986: 21 passes for position
----------------------------------------------
Monaco 2000: 2 passes for position
Monaco 2001: 6 passes for position


Nürburgring 1985: 45 passes for position
---------------------------------------------------
Nürburgring 2001: 7 passes for position


Montreal (slightly different layout) 1985: 49 passes for position
--------------------------------------------------
Montreal 2001: 13 passes for position


Hockenheim 1986: 70 passes for position
--------------------------------------------------
Hockenheim 2001: 15 passes for position


Hungaroring 1986: 53 passes for position
---------------------------------------------------
Hungaroring 2001: 5 passes for position


Spa-Franchorchamps 1986: 41 passes for position
--------------------------------------------------------------
Spa-Franchorchamps 2001: 8 passes for position


Monza 1986 (slightly different layout): 63 passes for position
-----------------------------------------------
Monza 2001: 19 passes for position


Suzuka 1987: 52 passes for position
----------------------------------------------
Suzuka 2000: 8 passes for position





In fact, from the entire period of 1985-1989, the Grand Prix with the fewest amount of passes for position was the 1988 Monaco GP with 13 passes. Last year seven out of seventeen races had fewer passes than that, and one race (Imola) had the exact same amount.

[Frank Tuesday]

Originally posted by Rediscoveryx
I don't think the tracks are the biggest problem for overtaking. The biggest problem is the heavy reliance on aerodynamic downforce which prevents cars from running close enough through the corners to allow for overtaking on the track.

That is one problem, but IMHO, reliable semi-auto gearboxes are just as big of a culprit. While still shifting manually, drivers would miss shifts and as a result, lose positions. In two nearly equal cars, the driver ahead needs to make a mistake for a pass to occur. Two (relatively) recent changes have lessened the likelyhood of a driver making a mistake. 1. semi auto gearboxes. No longer can a driver miss a shift. 2. Traction control. The driver can't give too much throttle which results in wheelspin, which leads to decreased speed on the straight. Coupled with reliance upon aero grip, passing is much more difficult.

Frank

[Ali_G]

Originally posted by Rediscoveryx
I don't think the tracks are the biggest problem for overtaking. The biggest problem is the heavy reliance on aerodynamic downforce which prevents cars from running close enough through the corners to allow for overtaking on the track.

Lets compare identical tracks from different eras:

Monaco 1985: 20 passes for position
Monaco 1986: 21 passes for position
----------------------------------------------
Monaco 2000: 2 passes for position
Monaco 2001: 6 passes for position


Nürburgring 1985: 45 passes for position
---------------------------------------------------
Nürburgring 2001: 7 passes for position


Montreal (slightly different layout) 1985: 49 passes for position
--------------------------------------------------
Montreal 2001: 13 passes for position


Hockenheim 1986: 70 passes for position
--------------------------------------------------
Hockenheim 2001: 15 passes for position


Hungaroring 1986: 53 passes for position
---------------------------------------------------
Hungaroring 2001: 5 passes for position


Spa-Franchorchamps 1986: 41 passes for position
--------------------------------------------------------------
Spa-Franchorchamps 2001: 8 passes for position


Monza 1986 (slightly different layout): 63 passes for position
-----------------------------------------------
Monza 2001: 19 passes for position


Suzuka 1987: 52 passes for position
----------------------------------------------
Suzuka 2000: 8 passes for position





In fact, from the entire period of 1985-1989, the Grand Prix with the fewest amount of passes for position was the 1988 Monaco GP with 13 passes. Last year seven out of seventeen races had fewer passes than that, and one race (Imola) had the exact same amount.

Quite the oppostie. this is a fad started by Martin Brundle from ITV. He claimed that this is what stopped passing in F1.

yet when he first started commentating he said a different reason was hampering passing.

The real reason is that f1 cars have become too aeroynamically efficient. They are not giving off enough drag. that makes sense. In the last few years gigantic windtunnels have come into usage and aerodyanmics are a fine key in car design. Back 15 years ago they were far less understood.

And if anything the reduction in drag or turbulence coming from the car would only mean that a following car should be able to follow more closely.

In fact I often remember Mansell talking about cronic understeer while trying to pass. But the extra drag meant he could pass.

Niall

[Andre]

Maybe some kind of "Handford Device" could help solve the lack of overtaking problen.

[Ali_G]

Originally posted by Andre
Maybe some kind of "Handford Device" could help solve the lack of overtaking problen.

i was thinking of other solutions. Wider tyres with more grooves.

Single element rear wings etc etc.

Note how the Handford Device does improve pasing in CART though.
But I wouln't like to see F1 running wings made by the FIA, wouldn't be the same. teams sould design pieces of the cars, not the rulling body. Its not F3000 were running.

Niall

[jimm]

I don't know if they can pass, but if that is the track, it is now the crappyist one on the calandar. Now the cars will only stretch their legs 4 times a year (Monza, Indy, Spa and Suzuka)

[texfan]

OH NO!!!!!!!This is not the track where they raced through the forests is it? The scene of F1 cars blasting through the forest to me is the essence of F1.

The long straight is what made that race interesting. Many a blown engines in that race. A great equalizer.

The only saving grace is that someone stated the old section was not torn up......I hope not.......Maybe someone need to start a petition to get the extra two miles added.

If not enough drag is the problem,mandate a set wing angle in the rear,or increase the frontal area of the cars,while also increasing driver saftety.

[Sir Frank]

Originally posted by texfan
OH NO!!!!!!!This is not the track where they raced through the forests is it? The scene of F1 cars blasting through the forest to me is the essence of F1.

Sadly it is

[Indian Chief]

Originally posted by Rediscoveryx
I don't think the tracks are the biggest problem for overtaking. The biggest problem is the heavy reliance on aerodynamic downforce which prevents cars from running close enough through the corners to allow for overtaking on the track.

Lets compare identical tracks from different eras:

Monaco 1985: 20 passes for position
Monaco 1986: 21 passes for position
----------------------------------------------
Monaco 2000: 2 passes for position
Monaco 2001: 6 passes for position


Nürburgring 1985: 45 passes for position
---------------------------------------------------
Nürburgring 2001: 7 passes for position


Montreal (slightly different layout) 1985: 49 passes for position
--------------------------------------------------
Montreal 2001: 13 passes for position


Hockenheim 1986: 70 passes for position
--------------------------------------------------
Hockenheim 2001: 15 passes for position


Hungaroring 1986: 53 passes for position
---------------------------------------------------
Hungaroring 2001: 5 passes for position


Spa-Franchorchamps 1986: 41 passes for position
--------------------------------------------------------------
Spa-Franchorchamps 2001: 8 passes for position


Monza 1986 (slightly different layout): 63 passes for position
-----------------------------------------------
Monza 2001: 19 passes for position


Suzuka 1987: 52 passes for position
----------------------------------------------
Suzuka 2000: 8 passes for position





In fact, from the entire period of 1985-1989, the Grand Prix with the fewest amount of passes for position was the 1988 Monaco GP with 13 passes. Last year seven out of seventeen races had fewer passes than that, and one race (Imola) had the exact same amount.

I don't see how its a valid comparison with F1 now. In the 80s, drivers had turbos - so to overtake, they could turn the boost up and give themselves several more horsepower to overtake. Also, who cares if Christian Danner managed to overtake Piercarlo Ghinzani for 23rd place? Its the passing at the front that counts.

Why don't you compare 2000 or 2000 with any year from the 1970s or the early 90s. I am certain that the stats will be a lot closer, in fact 2001 may even be ahead of many of those years.

Just as an example, the number of races which had passes for the lead (not counting the first lap and those made with pitstops) -

1986 - 8
1989 - 4
1991 - 4
1994 - 1 (I can only think of one, Estoril)
1995 - 3
1996 - 2 (IIRC)
1997 - 3
2000 - 6
2001 - 5

Its a lot closer, don't you think?

Not surprisingly, 1986 is ahead, because of the turbos, but not by much.

[Rediscoveryx]

Indian Chief:

That's exactly my point, how the regulations and car design of today have made it more difficult to overtake.

[Sir Frank]

The track has changed quite a bit. The first corner now is more of a kink and then a sweeping exit. Also at the end of start/finish the track goes a bit left first and then the kink. They use the small circuit, so nothing of the new was shown only the parts that are the same. The stadium section is just as tight as it used to be but resurfaced, totally smooth. Nothing here has been changed only the last corner leading on to start finish. It is still vaery much the same as it used to be, only a little sharper maybe. It is still a double corner. So the first map is ideed incorrect, both first and last corner and the new hairpin is different than shown here.

[Indian Chief]

Originally posted by Rediscoveryx
Indian Chief:

That's exactly my point, how the regulations and car design of today have made it more difficult to overtake.

Yes, but only when compared to the Turbo years. The last 2 years compare well with any year from 1988 onwards.

[Rediscoveryx]

Ok Indian chief, I'll give it another try

Monaco 1989: 22 passes for position
-------------------------------
Monaco 2000: 2 passes for position
Monaco 2001: 6 passes for position

Conclusion: Huge diff


Montreal 1988: 20 passes for position
--------------------------------
Montreal 2001: 13 passes for position

Conclusion: slight diff though not extreme, the track layout has changed a bit.


Hockenheim 1989: 28 passes for position
---------------------------------
Hockenheim 2001: 15 passes for position

Conclusion: Roughly twice as many


Hungaroring 1988: 31 passes for position
Hungaroring 1989: 34 passes for position
----------------------------------
Hungaroring 2000: 10 passes for position
Hungaroring 2001: 5 passes for position

Conclusion: Huge diff


Spa-Franchorchamps 1988: 31 passes for position
---------------------------------
Spa-Franchorchamps 2001: 8 passes for position

Conclusion: Huge diff


Monza 1988: 28 passes for position
---------------------------------
Monza 2001: 19 passes for position

Conclusion: Not an extreme difference


Suzuka 1987: 52 passes for position
Suzuka 1988: 54 passes for position
--------------------------------------
Suzuka 1999: 4 passes for position
Suzuka 2000: 8 passes for position
Suzuka 2001: 17 passes for position

Conclusion: This track is probably the best example, the modern cars can't lie as close to each other through Spoon and 130R to set up an overtaking manouver at the chicane.

[Indian Chief]

Originally posted by Rediscoveryx
Ok Indian chief, I'll give it another try

Me too.

I don't think anyone cares for any passing at the back of the feld. At the front of the field, where it really counts, its virtually the same - like I said in the numbers I mentioned in my previous post.

[mikedeering]

Originally posted by Indian Chief


Me too.

I don't think anyone cares for any passing at the back of the feld. At the front of the field, where it really counts, its virtually the same - like I said in the numbers I mentioned in my previous post.

Where's the evidence for this? I would expect that then as now, the number of overtaking maneovures is probably split fairly equally between the leading cars and those in the midfield/tail runners.

Also, taking the recent San Marino GP - Massa's pass on Trulli was about the only highlight of that race. It was "only" for eighth but I still enjoyed it, and my appreciation for Massa increased immeasurably. Did it matter that it actually gained him nothing in terms of WDC points? Would Peter Sauber or Jean Todt think "Well why did he bother - it was only for 8th?" I don't think so.

[Liam]

In the 80's you had about 35 cars turning up for a GP weekend. Not all would qualify, indeed not all would pre-qualify, but you'd have something like 26/28 cars on the grid. The extra 4/6 cars in a race, esp those at the back of the grid, mean you would have more overtaking.

I can't believe there were really that many passes for the lead when the MP4/4 was winning everything, plus the teams have now spend millions on windtunnels making their cars more aerodynamically efficient, lots of downforce, little drag. This makes passing harder, but not so much due to the lack of front downforce on the car behind, but the reduction in the strength of the tow. IN order to get a decent tow in a modern F1 car you need to be very close, but following a car out of a corner that close has never been easy. So more often you see the car behind not getting a tow, wheras 15 years ago they'd be in the tow further back, and could make the pass.

The other big difference is pitstops. 15 years ago you couldn't refuel. The weight difference between full and empty fuel was big. It was so big, you would need fairly different setup's for the start and end of a race. Obviously you couldn't change setup mid race, so you had to compromise. This led to different cars being fast at different times. When your car was fast, you had to maximise it, and you passed people, but later, when their car was fast, and your's wasn't, they could pass you back. Modern F1 cars have a near perfect setup all through the race with cars not having much of a "fast" time (2 laps before refueling), hence you get less passing.

Your not going to get the teams to ever agree to scrap their million pound wind tunnels, and I think it would be a travesty if you did, they simply wouldn't be F1 cars. But banning refueling could be done purely on safety grounds (pit lane fires), plus it would add some driver skill back into the equation, and increse the passing.

[Indian Chief]

Originally posted by mikedeering


Where's the evidence for this? I would expect that then as now, the number of overtaking maneovures is probably split fairly equally between the leading cars and those in the midfield/tail runners.

I did post the numbers in a previous post. The number of races which had ontrack passes for the lead were -

1989 - 4
1991 - 5 ( I am not sure abpout the exact numbers for 1990)

2000 - 6
2001 - 5

There was more overtaking for the lead in 2000 and 2001 put together than there was in 1989 and 1991 put together.

[AndreasNystrom]

Pitstops have actually ruined lots in F1 i think. If they removed that, they could probably even lower speeds, since you cannot go into pits changing tires, they have to last the whole race, and you have to keep an eye on the fuelconsumption. Not to mention how you go behind the leader, waiting for him to go into the pits, so you can go around the track a few more laps a bit faster then he can, and then pitstop, taking over the position 1. well well :/

[mikedeering]

Originally posted by Indian Chief


I did post the numbers in a previous post. The number of races which had ontrack passes for the lead were -

1989 - 4
1991 - 5 ( I am not sure abpout the exact numbers for 1990)

2000 - 6
2001 - 5

There was more overtaking for the lead in 2000 and 2001 put together than there was in 1989 and 1991 put together.

OK - playing devil's advocate, you could say there are mitigating factors that explain the difference - e.g. safety card periods. I assume in the 2001 count you include JPM passing MS at Brazil - was that a fair pass for the lead, being as it came after the safety car period? Similarly in Autralia 2002, where JPM again passed MS (and the pair passed DC) due to the safety card - would you count that as 2 changes of lead - I haven't checked the lap chart but I believe it would show DC-MS-JPM leading a lap. The lack safety cars pre 1994 mean this would not happen. In recent years I believe we have seen the SC deployed more frequently.

Also, the issue of tires - back in 1989-91 period, it was pretty much Goodyar all the way. Although Pirelli were involved, they did not have a top team (Benetton scoring one lucky win for the Italian manufacturer). Recently we have seen scenarios where Williams have been strong in qualifying and the early part of a race, and then their tires have gone off - Austria 2001 and Melbourne 2002. They have gone off to such an extent that they are relatively easy prey for the Ferraris - so more passing. It is not really all that exciting - like in Melbourne this year - you knew MS would get past JPM, and you knew as soon as he did, he would romp away.

And then of course there are pitstops, which mean cars are on different loads - would RB's "pass" on MS in Brazil 2002 count as a lead change - looking at a lap chart it would, but you could hardly call that exciting. Again, in 1989 cars were more evenly matched, so was a pass down more to driver skill than the strategy they were on? I am not saying you are wrong in your analysis - or that these points have much weight - I am just chucking a few ideas into the pot.

[Veronika]

[quote] Original byLiam
I never liked Hockenheim. Stupid silly chicanes that looked awfull. and boring straights that went on forever.
It must have cost an awful lot of money to put marshalls and doctors around that huge track, and there wasn't even anyone out in the forest to see the cars! [/quote]

Excuse me,but do you have any feelings for nature????





[quote] Original by Daniel Lester

poor forest, waste of time and money. The original track may have looked boring on paper but at least it proved that under the right circumstances on the right track cars could pass. [/quote]

Imagine,they put a webcam to capture the destruction.I sent a letter saying they should remove it,but they didn't even reply!



[quote] Original by gerry nassar

Any thing good in F1 is taken away. The sport is being run into the ground! [/quote]

Yup,this was the last good thing that existed...


[quote] Original byRaymondMays

In my opinion, one of the most spectular sights in F1, were the cars blasting through the forest at maximum speed, and giving each other a real chance of getting into the slipstream of the car in front.

It also made the race interesting, from a reliability view, plus it was good to see people getting it wrong at the chicanes, and going straight over them.

I am truly saddened that we will be seeing a great circuit castrated!
[/quote]


Castrated is a real word.How sad.

[quote] Original byAli_G

At least the old sections of circuit still exist. If the FIA decide to they can still ask them to go back to the old circuit. [/quote]

That's what I've been thinking about..why don't we make a petition????


[quote] [b]Original bytexfan[/quote]

OH NO!!!!!!!This is not the track where they raced through the forests is it? The scene of F1 cars blasting through the forest to me is the essence of F1.

The long straight is what made that race interesting. Many a blown engines in that race. A great equalizer. [/quote]


Absolutelly...

Now I am sorry for taking so much quotes,but I haven't been here for so long and I just knew I'll see a topic like this.I think this is a great proof that Formula 1 is just money,money,money.No one asked the drivers and the spectators,they just decided to do it.They are making a stupid clone out of the best track in F1 and we're just sitting here with no ability to change it.And,as a couple of you remarked,choping trees and wanting people to watch it is a crime.

I cannnot really explain everything,but it's sooo terrible!

[Indian Chief]

Originally posted by mikedeering


OK - playing devil's advocate, you could say there are mitigating factors that explain the difference - e.g. safety card periods. I assume in the 2001 count you include JPM passing MS at Brazil - was that a fair pass for the lead

I counted all races which had passes for the lead, except ones in which the only pass was where a driver let his teammate through deliberately. Anyway, In Brazil '01, DC's overtaking move on MS would have got the race on the list even without JPM's pass.

Also, the issue of tires - back in 1989-91 period, it was pretty much Goodyar all the way. Although Pirelli were involved, they did not have a top team (Benetton scoring one lucky win for the Italian manufacturer). Recently we have seen scenarios where Williams have been strong in qualifying and the early part of a race, and then their tires have gone off - Austria 2001 and Melbourne 2002. They have gone off to such an extent that they are relatively easy prey for the Ferraris - so more passing. It is not really all that exciting - like in Melbourne this year - you knew MS would get past JPM, and you knew as soon as he did, he would romp away.

There were plenty of tyre strategies in 1989-91 too. Just as an example, the only reason Mansell overtook Berger in Estoril '89 for the lead was that Berger had gone flat out at the start, while NM took it easy. Later on, Mansell passed him very easily.

And then of course there are pitstops, which mean cars are on different loads - would RB's "pass" on MS in Brazil 2002 count as a lead change - looking at a lap chart it would, but you could hardly call that exciting. Again, in 1989 cars were more evenly matched, so was a pass down more to driver skill than the strategy they were on?

There were plenty of strategies even then. For e.g. There were 2 passes for the lead in Brazil '86 only because Piquet's strategy was to make 3 stops compared to 2 by many others.

Brazil 2002 wouldn't qualify as a pass because Schumacher deliberately let him through.

[Turbo]

I wonder what Max and Bernie's dream track would look like:

3 miles of chicanes, low speed constant radius turns, and hairpins surrounded by 100,000 stadium seats and 10,000 luxury boxes, pit suites that look like something out of James Bond film, and absolutely no overtaking whatsoever? Max could get all orgasmic over biting his nails all race about who's going to come out of the last pitstop first while everyone else tunes in moto gp?

[Veronika]

I guess you're right about Max...poor,poor trees

[Indian Chief]

Originally posted by Turbo
I wonder what Max and Bernie's dream track would look like:

3 miles of chicanes, low speed constant radius turns, and hairpins surrounded by 100,000 stadium seats and 10,000 luxury boxes, pit suites that look like something out of James Bond film, and absolutely no overtaking whatsoever? Max could get all orgasmic over biting his nails all race about who's going to come out of the last pitstop first while everyone else tunes in moto gp?

:yawn::yawn: Your comments are getting pretty old. You sound like a stuck record.

[Turbo]

Max and Bernie's BS is getting old. Let's take the best drivers on the planet and make it practically impossible for their skills to make a difference with grooved tires, chicanes, cookie-cutter circuits, launch control, auto gearshifts, and two-way telemetry. Then let's take the most dedicated racing fans on the planet and make them mortgage their homes to be able to afford a ticket and halfway competent TV coverage and give everone else crap coverage. Yippee!

And how can I sound like a stuck record? I'm hardly ever on this board anymore because I realize that many people here think F1 is just fine as is. Maybe I should change my name to Reality Check and just drop in every month or so to remind everyone that F1 is not completely and totally perfect in every way. Maybe that would be more tolerable.

[Indian Chief]

Originally posted by Turbo
Maybe I should change my name to Reality Check and just drop in every month or so to remind everyone that F1 is not completely and totally perfect in every way. Maybe that would be more tolerable.

The number of fans who think F1 is perfect in every way is probably zero! Its whiners like you are overflowing here.

[Veronika]

A NEW MEMBER DESPERATELLY TRYING TO GET YOUR ATTENTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!TAKE THREE!!!!!!

[Turbo]

Hi Veronika! Welcome.

Yes it is a horrible shame about the trees.

Beyond that I also have always looked forward to Hockenheim to see the cars blast through the long forest straights and actually battle and pass each other going into the next turn. That will all be gone now. Instead we have another cookie-cutter circuit.

I'm so glad for the tire war, that's the only thing that keeps overtaking something of a (still often remote) possibility.

On another thread someone posted passing statistics at various tracks from the mid 80s and now. Huge difference! I don't think overtaking is everything, but if you are significantly faster you should at least have a chance to battle with the car in front. In current aero config that chance mainly exists now at the end of a long straight connected by two slow, tight, or difficult corners. Like Hockenheim!

I started watching F1 in the mid 80s and it was absolutely the coolest thing around. Now I still enjoy it but there is little doubt at least in my mind that it is a pale shadow of its former self.

I guess I need to contact Nigel the tapemaster and get some 80s tapes. I wish something like that still existed in the racing world. Manual gearboxes, heel-toe downshifting, turbos, big fat sticky slick tires. There is still good racing out there--CART, sportscars, bikes, sometimes even F1--but nothing as cool as what F1 was around 1984 or so. Some of the lower class open wheel and touring car stuff is terrific, but not with the horsepower and speed I crave.

Take the starts as just one example. I long to see drivers have to get on and off the throttle optimally and control wheelspin while battling for position. Now it's "wow look at that launch control system work!" Is this racing or just an engineering and software programming exercise?

Good thing we still have the likes of MS, Montoya, and Fisichella and other brilliant drivers who still manage to make things interesting despite the relative lack of on-track action.

To Chief and others who complain about me from time to time:
If wanting to see drivers actually be able to DRIVE the cars and have to CONTROL them themselves and RACE with each other makes me a whiner then so be it. If objecting to Max and Bernie destroying track after track and pursuing anti-racing regulations and spouting off about the excitement of watching 2 pitstops per race rather than 10 on-track battles per race makes me a whiner then so be it. I will whine loud and proudly!

I know you weren't trying to give me a hard time originally, but when you get me started on this subject you can expect a rant to follow.

Beyond that, boards like this are here to air opinions and reasoning of all sorts. If you don't like my opinion that's fine, but you don't have to reply or read it. Just like I will ignore being called a whiner and continue to talk about whatever I please.

Ah I have now killed enough time that I am now expected at the tavern. Cheers!

[Witt]

Originally posted by Turbo
If wanting to see drivers actually be able to DRIVE the cars and have to CONTROL them themselves and RACE with each other makes me a whiner then so be it. If objecting to Max and Bernie destroying track after track and pursuing anti-racing regulations and spouting off about the excitement of watching 2 pitstops per race rather than 10 on-track battles per race makes me a whiner then so be it. I will whine loud and proudly!

Amen to that!

[Slyder]

Bleh

Bullshit track, and TOTALLY unnecessary.

[Indian Chief]

Originally posted by Turbo
Take the starts as just one example. I long to see drivers have to get on and off the throttle optimally and control wheelspin while battling for position. Now it's "wow look at that launch control system work!" Is this racing or just an engineering and software programming exercise?

I can't disagree here. I didn't want TC and especially LC to become legal again.

Max and Bernie destroying track after track and pursuing anti-racing regulations and spouting off about the excitement of watching 2 pitstops per race rather than 10 on-track battles per race makes me a whiner then so be it

My only points are that

1. There were pitstops in the 1980s too, there were pitstop strategies just like now and you also had lots of overtaking in the pitstops just like it is today. For example, Berger won Mexico '86 only because of his tyre stop strategy - he didn't overtake a single caron the track. Piquet was quicker but had the wrong strategy.

2. Not every race was a great one then either. For example, in 1986, I would say that 5 or 6 were very good races and the rest were average or boring. Its the same now.

[Rediscoveryx]

Originally posted by Indian Chief


2. Not every race was a great one then either. For example, in 1986, I would say that 5 or 6 were very good races and the rest were average or boring. Its the same now.

I don't agree with you on this one. Let's go through 1986 quickly and compare to last season:

Round 1:
1986: Brazilian GP Jacarepagua - Not a classic race, but a race that saw some good overtaking for the lead and a great fight at the end of the race between the two Ligier's (how often do we see that in modern F1?) Verdict: Average

2001: Australian GP Melbourne - Apart from the tragic incident between Villeneuve and Ralf, nothing out of the ordinary happened. Verdict Dull

Round 2:
1986: Spanish GP Jerez - A true classic with Nigel Mansell hunting down Senna and Prost in the closing stages and drawing alongside Senna across the finish line. Verdict: Great

2001: Mlaysian GP Sepang - A very entertaining race thanks to the rain, Verstappen and Michael Schumacher. Verdict: Great

Round 3:
1986: San Marino GP Imola - Not a real classic race, it was a race where fuel consumtion was the key to success. We did however see a great drive from Keke Rosberg and a classic Alain Prost win. Verdict: Average

2001: Brazilian GP Interlagos - A true classic already. Montoya's big breakthrough and two wonderful passes on Schumacher (Montoya & DC). Verdict: Great

Round 4:
1986: Monaco GP - Not one of the better GP's in Monaco. Keke Rosberg stood for some entertainment, but I believe it was a rather dull race. Verdict: Dull

2001: San Marino GP Imola - Ralf Schumacher's first win. Apart from this it wasn't really an interesting race. Verdict: Dull

Round 5:
1986: Belgian GP Spa-Franchorchamps - Nelson Piquet led until his car failed. Mansell took over for the win. Alain Prost made one of his greatest races ever, charging back from almost one lap down to sixth with a damaged car. Verdict: Average

2001: Spanish GP Barcelona - Apart from Häkkinen's last lap mechanical failure absolutely nothing out of the ordinary happened. Verdict: Dull

Round 6:
1986: Canadian GP Montreal - Lots of overtaking for the points positions, Rosberg once again charging hard, looking like a winner until experiencing fuel problems. Mansell took the win. Verdict: Great

2001: Austrian GP A1-Ring - Great battle early on between Montoya and Schumacher. The race was "destroyed" by the embarrasing team orders from Ferrari. Verdict: Average

Round 7:
1986: Detroit GP - A classic race. Senna took the win, the Ligier's were up there with the big boys and we actually saw the "big four" (Senna, Mansell, Piquet and Prost) battling together with lots of overtaking throughout most of the race. Verdict: Great

2001: Monaco GP - DC couldn't pass Bernoldi. The end. Verdict: dull

Round 8:
1986: French GP Paul Ricard - A pretty dull race, Mansell dominating. Verdict: Dull

2001: Canadian GP Monteal - Until the first pitstop the Schumacher brothers had a great fight. After the pitstops, Ralf stormed away to take his second win. Verdict: Average

Round 9:
1986: British GP Brands Hatch - A classic in the eyes of many Englishmen. Nigel Mansell beating Nelson Piquet fair and square. Other than that, it was not a classic race. Verdict: Average

2001: European GP Nürburgring - The only "excitement" was Ralf's foolish crossing of the pit exit line. Verdict: Dull

Round 10:
1986: German GP Hockenheim - An Absolutely amazing race, a fight between the Williams drivers, McLaren drivers and Ayrton Senna. Verdict: Great

2001: French GP Magny-Cours - I almost don't remember this one. Verdict: Dull

Round 11:
1986: Hungarian GP Hungaroring - The first race at the Hungaroring was a great race. Piquet's pass on Senna for the win was the pass of the decade. Verdict: Great

2001: British GP Silverstone - I have a soft spot for Mika, so I enjoyed this one a lot. It wasn't a great race, but an enjoyable one atleast. Verdict: Average

Round 12:
1986: Austrian GP Österreichring - The race started out great with the battle between the two Benetton's (this show how much F1 needs variety, at power circuits, the 1986 Benetton was superb), after their failures the race settled a bit too much. Verdict: Average

2001: German GP Hockenheim - After the huge startline accident between Burti and Schumacher the race became a battle between the Williams boys. Verdict: Average

Round 13:
1986: Italian GP Monza - A 4-way battle for the lead between the Williamses, Alboreto and Berger in the early stages. Prost came charging through the field at an incredible pace after starting from the pitlane. Verdict: Average

2001: Hungarian GP Hungaroring - Michael Schumacher clinched the title. The end. Verdict: Dull

Round 14:
1986: Portuguese GP Estoril - This was not an exciting race for the lead (Mansell just drove off into the distance), but Piquet and Senna had a great fight for second place. Verdict: Average

2001: Belgian GP Spa-Franchorchamps - A horrifying accident between Burti and Irvine. Frentzen lost a potential point scoring finish from Prost on the startline. Great drive by Fisichella. Verdict: Average

Round 15:
1986: Mexican GP Mexico City - Not a great GP, but Berger's great tactical drive let him beat better drivers in better cars. Verdict: Average

2001: Italian GP Monza - Montoya and Barrichello had a great fight. Unfortunately this fight was destroyed by a bad pitstop for Barrichello. Verdict: Average

Round 16:
1986: Australian GP Adelaide - One of the best GP's of all time. I actually watched this race just a few days ago and it's just one of the greatest races I have ever seen... Verdict: Great

2001: US GP Indianapolis - Great drives from Barrichello and Montoya set this race on fire. Verdict: Great

Round 17:
2001: Japanese GP Suzuka - Boring... Verdict: Dull


This gives the following:

2001-1986
Great races: 3-6
Average races: 6-8
Dull races 8-2

Ofcourse, this list is highly subjective...

[Veronika]

Wow,I thought I was too obsessed with this theme to be noticed,but now I see you guys actually like my presence...aww

Yes,it's all gone,but i still believe there's a possibility to bring it all back...although it might take some time.

To Witt: Yes,the drivers should really try to drive,for a change