4 ms·

I'm too young to have seen any refueling races by the time I could watch F1, but I can agree with you that over-regulation seem to stifle innovation. Even if th

I'm too young to have seen any refueling races by the time I could watch F1, but I can agree with you that over-regulation seem to stifle innovation. Even if the innovation it stifles is "we put a w16 engine in a car just to see if it would work" (it didn't) it made for races you weren't totally sure who would even take part since there were more teams than grid slots, and qualifying actually had more excitement than just seeing who had pole. Did that quirky team with the experimental aero package make it into the race, or did the team with the heavier engine and worse braking make it? Regarding tires, the lack of refueling means they have to make some kind of choice to add strategic opportunity and forcing at least one tire change per race is about the only thing they can do. It's a lot more interesting to watch something like IMSA where a damaged car is put into the pit, a mechanic jumps on the bent hood to squash it back down, and then they put some sturdy duct tape on it to hold it down for the rest of the race. In F1 any damage means you won't get into the top 10, so you won't get points, so you may as well not even finish the race. Racing still needs to be a spectacle at some point, and I can only imagine being a fan who watched Senna in the wet back in the day, engine screaming, passes made with skill, and comparing it to a modern race where the engines are quiet and they had to add push to pass systems like DRS and the "add 160 horsepower" electric motors just to try to allow drivers to pass in the first place because the cars are so much larger than they used to be. I'll always be a motorsport fan but F1 kind of seems like a shell of what it could have been. I suppose this is where it "gets political" but the F1 regulations are also attempting to reduce the carbon footprint of the sport. A lofty and worthy goal, but I don't think the cars themselves make up the bulk of the carbon footprint - transporting the cars all around the world does. So how about we make the cars fun to watch again? Improve the carbon footprint of the transport, and don't restrict the cars to try to offset it. Just let the cars be cars! It feels like artificially limiting the amount of food you can feed a champion race horse just to say "We reduced grain dependence across the whole sport!"

bluecalm 3y ago
The problem is that car racing is very boring if you allow engineers to go wild. For example using airflow to increase grip at some point gives advantage to the car in front. Pair that with powerful engine and there won't be any passing ever once that car is in front. Making fast, unpassable car is just to easy. Regulations are about crippling them enough to make racing interesting. If you have to do it anyway then why not add other lofty goals like driver's safety, efficiency, disallowing solutions that would drain everyone's budget etc.
- withinboredom 3y ago
  That’s like saying once Usain Bolt was born, there’s no point in running any more. There may be a team always in front, but the simpler rule would be: once you make it, you are out for a season or two. That drives incentive to not be over-the-top winning unless you want a guaranteed one-and-done team.
- NovemberWhiskey 3y ago
  >The problem is that car racing is very boring if you allow engineers to go wild. Or ridiculously dangerous. The cars are much less fast than they could be.
the_gipsy 3y ago
I always thought some innovations in F1 are going back into the consumer market. So it would make sense to push for emission efficiency on the engineering side, regardless of the emissions due to the whole event logistics. With your horse analogy, imagine mixing in the champion's genes back into work horses. Probably a net win.
simion314 3y ago
>So how about we make the cars fun to watch again? F1 can be very boring, the guys that were starting first were finishing first, I would watch it to see overtakes and piloting skills and the problem is that without limits the company with the big money will win. This is not fun, it does not make money and rules change to limit costs so all the teams can compete using a similar budget. I stopped watching 2 decades ago, I stopped also watching or reading the summaries, it got to boring for me but I suppose that there are soem that want to see that kind of sport where the teams have no limit and you just watch the cars running around in circles and admire them. I think there are only a few engines providers anyway , so I am not sure on what they are optimizing on this days, maybe aerodynamics and fuel strategy.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago
  The fun part of F1 races nowadays is watching Ferrari repeatedly kick itself in the balls by fucking up the strategies of their drivers in the most creative ways possible, despite having a great car, great drivers and more money than God.
  - I_Am_Nous 3y ago
    My favorite example of this off the top of my head is when they sent out Vettel to qualify with intermediates when there was basically no rain actually happening and the standing water on the track was minimal. As a Ferrari fan myself it's comical how badly they can call things sometimes lol
piva00 3y ago
> So how about we make the cars fun to watch again? Since you mentioned you are too young to even have watched the refueling era of F1, you need to understand: F1 could always be boring to watch. During Schumacher's era you'd see P1 and P2 lapping over P4 or even P3 sometimes. Reliability was a mess, engines exploding, some races had barely 8-10 cars finishing; richest teams could run 3-5 engines in a single weekend while the non-competitive teams couldn't simply because they didn't have the budget. The races now are much more competitive, even though RBR has been dominating, and previously Mercedes, the difference in lap time nowadays is much more competitive and entertaining to watch the midfield than it ever was in the 90s/2000s.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago
  This. Reliability in F1 20+ or so years ago was appalling, even though cars back then had the complexity of a toaster compared to the hybrid cars of today with their split turbos with energy recovery. Advancements in CAD/CAE simulations really made an impact since manufacturing tolerances were never an issue.

bluecalm 3y ago

The problem is that car racing is very boring if you allow engineers to go wild. For example using airflow to increase grip at some point gives advantage to the car in front. Pair that with powerful engine and there won't be any passing ever once that car is in front. Making fast, unpassable car is just to easy. Regulations are about crippling them enough to make racing interesting. If you have to do it anyway then why not add other lofty goals like driver's safety, efficiency, disallowing solutions that would drain everyone's budget etc.

withinboredom 3y ago
That’s like saying once Usain Bolt was born, there’s no point in running any more. There may be a team always in front, but the simpler rule would be: once you make it, you are out for a season or two. That drives incentive to not be over-the-top winning unless you want a guaranteed one-and-done team.
NovemberWhiskey 3y ago
>The problem is that car racing is very boring if you allow engineers to go wild. Or ridiculously dangerous. The cars are much less fast than they could be.

the_gipsy 3y ago

I always thought some innovations in F1 are going back into the consumer market. So it would make sense to push for emission efficiency on the engineering side, regardless of the emissions due to the whole event logistics. With your horse analogy, imagine mixing in the champion's genes back into work horses. Probably a net win.

simion314 3y ago

>So how about we make the cars fun to watch again? F1 can be very boring, the guys that were starting first were finishing first, I would watch it to see overtakes and piloting skills and the problem is that without limits the company with the big money will win. This is not fun, it does not make money and rules change to limit costs so all the teams can compete using a similar budget. I stopped watching 2 decades ago, I stopped also watching or reading the summaries, it got to boring for me but I suppose that there are soem that want to see that kind of sport where the teams have no limit and you just watch the cars running around in circles and admire them. I think there are only a few engines providers anyway , so I am not sure on what they are optimizing on this days, maybe aerodynamics and fuel strategy.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago
The fun part of F1 races nowadays is watching Ferrari repeatedly kick itself in the balls by fucking up the strategies of their drivers in the most creative ways possible, despite having a great car, great drivers and more money than God.
- I_Am_Nous 3y ago
  My favorite example of this off the top of my head is when they sent out Vettel to qualify with intermediates when there was basically no rain actually happening and the standing water on the track was minimal. As a Ferrari fan myself it's comical how badly they can call things sometimes lol

piva00 3y ago

> So how about we make the cars fun to watch again? Since you mentioned you are too young to even have watched the refueling era of F1, you need to understand: F1 could always be boring to watch. During Schumacher's era you'd see P1 and P2 lapping over P4 or even P3 sometimes. Reliability was a mess, engines exploding, some races had barely 8-10 cars finishing; richest teams could run 3-5 engines in a single weekend while the non-competitive teams couldn't simply because they didn't have the budget. The races now are much more competitive, even though RBR has been dominating, and previously Mercedes, the difference in lap time nowadays is much more competitive and entertaining to watch the midfield than it ever was in the 90s/2000s.

FirmwareBurner 3y ago
This. Reliability in F1 20+ or so years ago was appalling, even though cars back then had the complexity of a toaster compared to the hybrid cars of today with their split turbos with energy recovery. Advancements in CAD/CAE simulations really made an impact since manufacturing tolerances were never an issue.