Jump to content


Photo

When did you lose interest?


  • Please log in to reply
292 replies to this topic

#251 MCS

MCS
  • Member

  • 4,696 posts
  • Joined: June 03

Posted 21 May 2006 - 20:18

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
F1's TV figures are no more or less accurate than any other sport's, even with the new conservative numbers they still do very very well. Few championships are as widely televised as F1. Some sports are more popular, but very few single championships are.

Whether that translates to sponsor value when you can only afford the endplate of a car doing 300kph+ on a telephoto tv camera lense at the end of a 1km straight, is another issue...

Which bit is the, er, "endplate" these days, Ross? :confused:

(There seem to be so many possibilities...)

Advertisement

#252 angst

angst
  • Member

  • 7,135 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 21 May 2006 - 21:30

Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
F1's TV figures are no more or less accurate than any other sport's, even with the new conservative numbers they still do very very well. Few championships are as widely televised as F1. Some sports are more popular, but very few single championships are.

Whether that translates to sponsor value when you can only afford the endplate of a car doing 300kph+ on a telephoto tv camera lense at the end of a 1km straight, is another issue...


Widely televised perhaps, just perhaps , because they are among the very few sports to be regularly broadcast that are available 'free to air'. It would be interesting to know how many would actively pursue a subscription service on the basis of F1 being available that way.

#253 St.Hubbins

St.Hubbins
  • Member

  • 119 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 21 May 2006 - 22:04

I don't believe this article breaks any new ground, only further demonstrates the probable inaccuracies of television viewing figures.

http://online.wsj.co...ff_main_tff_top

#254 Gary Davies

Gary Davies
  • Member

  • 6,460 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 22 May 2006 - 00:51

There are times when this thread brings to mind Sybil Fawlty's endless telephone conversations with Audrey.

Posted Image

"I know. Yes I know. I know. Ooh, I know."

#255 Paul Butler

Paul Butler
  • Member

  • 71 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 22 May 2006 - 14:15

Originally posted by Vanwall
There are times when this thread brings to mind Sybil Fawlty's endless telephone conversations with Audrey.


"I know. Yes I know. I know. Ooh, I know."


:lol:

#256 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 22 May 2006 - 17:51

I've just finished reading Iain Wilton's C B Fry: King of Sport. No motorsporting references in it (though Fry was a keen early motorist) - pity he didn't get involved at Brooklands ;)

There's a lovely Fry quote, about losing some of his interest in cricket post-WW2:

I have been young; I now am old. I saw a great game then. I pray to see a good game now. Continuously great, uninterruptedly. Great as a physical fine art; great as a popular interest; great in its elevation of character and conduct.


I'm only 37 but by 'eck that's how I feel about F1 these days -- "then" wasn't all that long ago.

#257 WHITE

WHITE
  • Member

  • 1,498 posts
  • Joined: July 05

Posted 22 May 2006 - 17:59

Originally posted by petefenelon
I've just finished reading Iain Wilton's C B Fry: King of Sport. No motorsporting references in it (though Fry was a keen early motorist) - pity he didn't get involved at Brooklands ;)

There's a lovely Fry quote, about losing some of his interest in cricket post-WW2:



I'm only 37 but by 'eck that's how I feel about F1 these days -- "then" wasn't all that long ago.


:up:

The way you feel, I am afraid that won't improve, believe me. I am 49.

#258 man

man
  • Member

  • 1,525 posts
  • Joined: October 01

Posted 25 May 2006 - 17:34

Funny. I just found myself re-watching the 1991 US GP. Not a particularly great GP by any stretch of the imagination, the rot was well and truly sinking into the sport by then. However, the cars were just so much more spectacular looking.

I remember attending the British GP that season and it was a rewarding experience.

#259 Haddock

Haddock
  • Member

  • 917 posts
  • Joined: November 01

Posted 25 May 2006 - 18:09

Am I alone in finding the sport more interesting than it was ten years ago?

On the other hand, I do wonder, if I was a young kid now, would F1 get its hooks into me in the way that it did back in the early 1980s.

I thought the 1991 British Grand Prix was pretty dull, to be honest. Of the ones I attended, the really entertaining ones were the 1986 and 87 races, and the European GP in 93

Advertisement

#260 Chris Bloom

Chris Bloom
  • Member

  • 778 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 25 May 2006 - 18:13

Originally posted by Haddock
Am I alone in finding the sport more interesting than it was ten years ago?


In here, you probably are :p

#261 paulhooft

paulhooft
  • Member

  • 873 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 25 May 2006 - 18:57

Am I alone in finding the sport more interesting than it was ten years ago?
:rotfl:

I recently found out that the world Championship for drivers is the right moment to take a good sunday midday nap...:
Passing is forbidden if you are not in the PITS!!!

#262 WHITE

WHITE
  • Member

  • 1,498 posts
  • Joined: July 05

Posted 30 July 2006 - 14:28

Originally posted by paulhooft
Am I alone in finding the sport more interesting than it was ten years ago?
:rotfl:

I recently found out that the world Championship for drivers is the right moment to take a good sunday midday nap...:
Passing is forbidden if you are not in the PITS!!!



:up: :wave:




#263 FredF1

FredF1
  • Member

  • 2,284 posts
  • Joined: April 00

Posted 30 July 2006 - 15:30

Well, at least it wasn't as dull as the US & French GP's.


Still, I turned James 'shoutypants' Allen waaaaay down, opened a book and the race just flew by.


Strangely enough, reading a book/newspaper with the race as background noise is pretty much how I first began watching F1 back in the mid '80's. Now if I could only regress back to the slim figure I had back then....

#264 Tom Thomas

Tom Thomas
  • Member

  • 43 posts
  • Joined: July 06

Posted 30 July 2006 - 16:01

Maybe its just part of getting old, but I feel not only F1 but most forms off motorsports have lost much of what attracted me to them many years ago. I guess the main reason I read the Nostalgia Forum posts is because I miss the days of Moss, Von Tripp, Clark, Hill, Ward, Bettenhausen and so many others who had me sitting on the edge of my seat and cheering them on. Gone are the independants. Watching racing in North America is like sitting through an endless commercial. I know racing is expensive and someone has to pay for it. I can't ever remember Moss getting out of his car and saying "I wanna thank my crew. the Suds-O, BurgerWorld, Empire Paint, Joe's Hardware, Wamo Spark Plug, Lotus ran real good". I realize we must move forward and this is century 21, but there seems to be something missing today. There is no turning back, so I'll just have to live with it. If I got off the point of F1, I'm sorry. Just an old fart thinking about the good old days.

#265 WHITE

WHITE
  • Member

  • 1,498 posts
  • Joined: July 05

Posted 30 July 2006 - 16:09

Originally posted by Tom Thomas
Maybe its just part of getting old, but I feel not only F1 but most forms off motorsports have lost much of what attracted me to them many years ago. I guess the main reason I read the Nostalgia Forum posts is because I miss the days of Moss, Von Tripp, Clark, Hill, Ward, Bettenhausen and so many others who had me sitting on the edge of my seat and cheering them on. Gone are the independants. Watching racing in North America is like sitting through an endless commercial. I know racing is expensive and someone has to pay for it. I can't ever remember Moss getting out of his car and saying "I wanna thank my crew. the Suds-O, BurgerWorld, Empire Paint, Joe's Hardware, Wamo Spark Plug, Lotus ran real good". I realize we must move forward and this is century 21, but there seems to be something missing today. There is no turning back, so I'll just have to live with it. If I got off the point of F1, I'm sorry. Just an old fart thinking about the good old days.



Please, keep sharing with us your thoughts :wave:

#266 Ross Stonefeld

Ross Stonefeld
  • Member

  • 70,106 posts
  • Joined: August 99

Posted 30 July 2006 - 16:15

I dont know about interest, but I lost some time napping.

#267 angst

angst
  • Member

  • 7,135 posts
  • Joined: December 03

Posted 30 July 2006 - 22:56

I find myself unwilling to spend the time watching, or even recording the highlights (surely a misnomer, given the races so far this season) - let alone the whole race. The latest sham rule 'clarification', on top of the 'negotiations' regarding the engine freeze, on top of all the other awful fiddles and changes over the years has finally dropped me off the edge. I really couldn't care less who wins or what happens at Hockenheim (a shadow of it's former self, which was never that much, but so much better than what now passes itself as a new racing circuit).

#268 Manel Baró

Manel Baró
  • Member

  • 134 posts
  • Joined: July 06

Posted 31 July 2006 - 17:47

Originally posted by Tom Thomas

[B]
-...I know racing is expensive and someone has to pay for it.
Sure Tom. Who used to pay F1 for decades before tobacco started to back Lotus?

-...there seems to be something missing today.
Humility, courage.

-There is no turning back...
I feel real enthusiasts have turned their backs long time ago.

-...so I'll just have to live with it.
No need: Its too boring. Enjoy yourself elsewhere, or just writing your thoughts here.

-If I got off the point F1, I'm sorry.
Me too. And suspect there quite a few around.

#269 paulhooft

paulhooft
  • Member

  • 873 posts
  • Joined: January 01

Posted 31 July 2006 - 17:57

YES!!!,
Its such a waste..
Of so much money... :rotfl:
Paul

#270 Tom Thomas

Tom Thomas
  • Member

  • 43 posts
  • Joined: July 06

Posted 31 July 2006 - 18:37

Originally posted by RTH
I do believe it is the evolution of the Racing Car which has been allowed, that is behind the deminishing spectacle and level of interest.

Just have another look at those pictures taken by Geoff Goddard at the on the very limit of control of those cars. Technical advance has made the drivers job easier and safer (even though its all done at much higher speeds ).

Now they have both power assistance from all the controls brake,clutch gearchange, throttle steering which as recently as 18 years ago were not present and intelligence assistance from a miriad of electronic dynamic systems, even radio voice and telemetry assistance. Assistance from the elements with the help of aircraft wings pushing one ad a half tons of force through the tyre in to the tarmac.

In short its been allowed to get so good its predictable. I want to see human error, missed gears,degrading tyres , losing gears, fading brakes, heavy steering delicate human throttle control difficult to handle cars being wrestled around with no help, just one person out ther dealing with it all a once ...........just as it used to be,........ not ,in the scheme of things, all that long ago.

Many other people have said these things time and time again here , the rule makers and sport controllers either don't know, don't listen , don't care or just don't understand.

We could (and have ) list technical changes and deletions from the current racing cars which would re- introduce racing spectacle and as a by- product cut the cost of it all by three quarters or more.
But it's a waste of breath.


Richard, I think you hit the problem right on the head. You want to see "human error, missed gears,degrading tyres, losing gears, fading brakes, heavy steering, delicate human throttle control and difficult to handle cars being wrestled around ". I agree with you completely, but safety is very important too. F1 has a pretty good safety record under this new technology. I personally don't think the average fan goes to F1 races just to see blistering speed (robot races). Some of the best racing I've watched over the years the lower formula classes. Even the IRL puts on a hellava show, and those cars are very low tech by F1 standards. It should'nt be a matter of downloading new software to go fast, hell, your can do that with a video game at home, and the future potential fans are the ones who play those video games. So why pay big bucks to go to the races? :mad: When driver to driver combat and the total skill of drivers to be competitive in ill handling cars is gone, so are the fans. OW racing has got to evolve, but not at the cost of the folks who pay to watch it.
Some body stop me, I'm starting to babble.

#271 Barry Boor

Barry Boor
  • Member

  • 11,549 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 31 July 2006 - 19:10

Maybe you are, Tom, but there are a lot of people around here who babble in very similar ways...

#272 Spaceframe

Spaceframe
  • Member

  • 258 posts
  • Joined: December 05

Posted 01 August 2006 - 20:26

Yes, please keep babbling :up:

#273 LotusElise

LotusElise
  • Member

  • 888 posts
  • Joined: March 06

Posted 01 August 2006 - 20:44

Drivers should win races, not computer programming teams. (Apologies to any programmers out there).

Technology has taken the fun out of F1. Hard to say when, but it has.

#274 David Beard

David Beard
  • Member

  • 4,997 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 01 August 2006 - 20:51

Originally posted by LotusElise
Drivers should win races, not computer programming teams. (Apologies to any programmers out there).

Technology has taken the fun out of F1. Hard to say when, but it has.


There was technology in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and even before that. It was just different.

#275 Vitesse2

Vitesse2
  • Administrator

  • 41,857 posts
  • Joined: April 01

Posted 01 August 2006 - 21:15

Originally posted by David Beard


There was technology in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and even before that. It was just different.

Yes. It was mechanical, visible and understandable.

Now it's electronic, undetectable and inexplicable. :rolleyes:

#276 WHITE

WHITE
  • Member

  • 1,498 posts
  • Joined: July 05

Posted 01 August 2006 - 21:31

Originally posted by LotusElise
Drivers should win races, not computer programming teams. (Apologies to any programmers out there).

Technology has taken the fun out of F1. Hard to say when, but it has.




Yes, a drivers championship should be only this: a drivers championship.

However, with the vast sums of money being injected into F1 by the sponsors, I doubt very much that they would be pleased to see how their big investments depended on a single chap having a good day, taking the right risks, etc.
Putting all his hopes on a guy's hands, seems too risky and money do not like taking unnecessary risks. Driver's importance has been being reduced in the same proportion that turnovers have been increasing. As long as there is so much money involved in F1, drivers role will remain limited to a mere complement, except before the audience. It still is more interesting to associate one's brand name to a driver than to a machine: drivers have fans, machines do not. After all, it is a question of selling something and F1 is a good way to advertise what they sell.

Yes my former interest has gone. Quite often I feel as if I were a simple consumer before their eyes, not as a fan anymore. :cry:

#277 Twin Window

Twin Window
  • Nostalgia Host

  • 6,611 posts
  • Joined: May 04

Posted 01 August 2006 - 21:37

Originally posted by Vitesse2

Yes. It was mechanical, visible and understandable.

Now it's electronic, undetectable and inexplicable. :rolleyes:

:up:

#278 David Beard

David Beard
  • Member

  • 4,997 posts
  • Joined: July 02

Posted 01 August 2006 - 21:38

Originally posted by Vitesse2

Yes. It was mechanical, visible and understandable.

Now it's electronic, undetectable and inexplicable. :rolleyes:


True. The mechanical stuff used to get explained to us. The electronic stuff could maybe be interesting too if someone would, could or was allowed to explain...

#279 ensign14

ensign14
  • Member

  • 61,944 posts
  • Joined: December 01

Posted 01 August 2006 - 21:51

Originally posted by David Beard


There was technology in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and even before that. It was just different.

But you could see the drivers right on the edge of their ability and the laws of physics despite the technology. Watching one car on its own was exciting, dangerous, mind-blowing. Now it's like watching Scalextric cars at half-pace.

Advertisement

#280 Barry Boor

Barry Boor
  • Member

  • 11,549 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 01 August 2006 - 21:58

Although I cannot argue in any way with the majority of the views vouchedsafe on this thread, and accepting that I have not seen a current F.1 car driven by a top F.1 driver in 20 years..... if you listen to people who DO watch races, actually at the circuit (that's the important factor) they say that the speed of these things, regardless of whether they appear to be on rails or not, is quite breath-taking.

But speed isn't everything, is it?

#281 Roger Clark

Roger Clark
  • Member

  • 7,506 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 01 August 2006 - 22:22

Originally posted by David Beard


True. The mechanical stuff used to get explained to us. The electronic stuff could maybe be interesting too if someone would, could or was allowed to explain...

Is it true? You could argue that the technology of the past was also chemical. undetectable and inexplicable (tyres and fuels). Even the mechanical bits weren't always visible and understandable. How clear to the race going public was the W196's desmodromic valves, the Chaparral's transmission, the Fiat's supercharger or the Peugeot's camshafts? If you wanted to be really argumentative you could claim that today's aerodynamic technology is far more visible than anything of the past.

#282 Stoatspeed

Stoatspeed
  • Member

  • 235 posts
  • Joined: June 06

Posted 01 August 2006 - 22:30

Originally posted by Barry Boor
.... the speed of these things, regardless of whether they appear to be on rails or not, is quite breath-taking.

But speed isn't everything, is it?


:up: :up: :up: :D

Hence the reason we'll still flock to see vintage racing? Seeing a skinny-tyred historic being wrestled around a track at pedestrian sppeds is much more thrilling than watching Bernie's Circus printing/burning money every couple of weeks.

These guys just aren't hungry enough (with the possible exception of Nico Rosberg, who seems to have a healthy dose of Dad's lust for excitement - remember Keke's banzai lap of Silverstone?) to take the risks that stir our souls .... i am already planning to sleep through Hungary this weekend!

Well, said Barry ...

#283 scheivlak

scheivlak
  • Member

  • 16,488 posts
  • Joined: August 01

Posted 01 August 2006 - 23:04

Originally posted by Stoatspeed

These guys just aren't hungry enough (with the possible exception of Nico Rosberg, who seems to have a healthy dose of Dad's lust for excitement - remember Keke's banzai lap of Silverstone?) to take the risks that stir our souls ....

Sorry, but that's complete nonsense. Among all possible culprits it's simply ridiculous to blame the drivers for today's misery. They have to work not only with what they have but, more importantly, also against what all the others have - machines that are far easier to drive without mistakes than in previous eras, just to name one important factor.

#284 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member

  • 240 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 02 August 2006 - 10:59

Hockenheim on Sunday was like a Scalextric game,at least the long track made it somewhat exciting

#285 Barry Boor

Barry Boor
  • Member

  • 11,549 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 02 August 2006 - 11:11

Will you all please stop this terrible habit of ridiculing Scalextric!!!!!! :lol:

#286 Andrew Kitson

Andrew Kitson
  • Member

  • 2,535 posts
  • Joined: July 03

Posted 02 August 2006 - 11:15

Alright it was like watching paint drying...which is what I am doing now as it happens. ( Well at least, waiting for it to dry ) :)

#287 petefenelon

petefenelon
  • Member

  • 4,815 posts
  • Joined: August 02

Posted 02 August 2006 - 11:19

Originally posted by scheivlak
Sorry, but that's complete nonsense. Among all possible culprits it's simply ridiculous to blame the drivers for today's misery. They have to work not only with what they have but, more importantly, also against what all the others have - machines that are far easier to drive without mistakes than in previous eras, just to name one important factor.


And, like factory-farmed animals given their freedom, put them in proper cars on proper circuits and they become happy bunnies again -- most of them are still "proper racers" enough to recognise that there's more fun to be had outside F1. Look at most of them (Ralf Schumacher excepted; go and look at Mike Lawrence's column entitled 'Ralf's A Little S**t') at Goodwood, or when they finally break out of the FIA pyramid and go and race in Champcar or sports cars or somewhere else where the human element is still significant...

No, you can't blame the drivers for F1 being rubbish -- most of them know of little else; they haven't had the time to find out about the better world outside. You can blame the environment they grow up in - hothousing into F1 at ridiculously early ages, no experience of life outside 'the sport', living in a PR glasshouse, and of course the ever-present shadow of the Pushy Dad).

#288 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member

  • 240 posts
  • Joined: June 04

Posted 02 August 2006 - 13:03

Sorry Barry, I love scalextric ..... I have missed something why is the long Hockenheim not used,does Bernie E think its dangerous etc

#289 Sharman

Sharman
  • Member

  • 5,284 posts
  • Joined: September 05

Posted 02 August 2006 - 16:19

A few years ago I was thinking of having another go (very gently) and I was talking to Gerry Marshall about it, he suggested an MGB so I looked at them. Compared with the 60's their speed was enormous. Given my state of general decrepitude I shelved the idea to the great relief of my sons who were trembling at the thought of the old man getting the taste and pinching their cars for a change

#290 oldtimer

oldtimer
  • Member

  • 1,291 posts
  • Joined: October 00

Posted 02 August 2006 - 18:42

Originally posted by Vitesse2

Yes. It was mechanical, visible and understandable.

Now it's electronic, undetectable and inexplicable. :rolleyes:


So true, and, we can add aerodynamic twiddly bits, which though detectable (and ugly, ugly) are also inexplicable.

#291 cosworth bdg

cosworth bdg
  • Member

  • 1,350 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 03 August 2006 - 10:03

Originally posted by Ray Bell
I can't say that I've lost interest at all, but possibly that a seriously delayed progression to maturity has caused me to lose some of the burning desire that is expressed by many on the RC Forum... and the increase in commercialism attached to all racing - combined with the consequent escalation in costs - makes it harder to get the fires flickering.
Not much help to you, is it?

This sums it up exactly for myself, thanks very much Ray, Cheers, PN.............

#292 RTH

RTH
  • Member

  • 6,066 posts
  • Joined: January 03

Posted 03 August 2006 - 10:20

The sad thing is with some bold changes to the technical regulations it could all be put right.

#293 duby

duby
  • Member

  • 191 posts
  • Joined: April 04

Posted 03 August 2006 - 10:22

hi

for me its not the lose of interest but the lose of the speciall driver who i care for -and that is the day Ayrton Senna died in imola .
i start to follow him in 1984 , in monaco , like many others but the strange thing is that the imola race in 94 was the first i didnt see LIVE !!!
i was in work and cant go near TV then .
when i herad the news it was like the end of the world for me .
i stil watch the races , but its not the same again .


duby