7 ms·

I stopped watching F1 about 10 years ago, and these new changes just reaffirm that decision. It's no longer about best car + best driver. It's about mixing it u

I stopped watching F1 about 10 years ago, and these new changes just reaffirm that decision. It's no longer about best car + best driver. It's about mixing it up, making it random, to maximise viewer numbers. Not the kind of racing I go for.

oliveoil 13y ago
Same here, stopped watching around 1998. I though it's mostly about the car (which is largely random per-season, yes) and instead of celebrating the design/engineering behind the only things celebrated around f1 are the personalities of drivers, their excesses and their egos.
- CWuestefeld 13y ago
  the only things celebrated around f1 are the personalities of drivers I don't think that's quite true. Quite a lot gets said about at least a couple of designers, most especially Adrian Newey (all agree that Vettel is an amazing driver, but also that the recent RB cars that Newey has designed are dominant). We hear a lot from team principals like Horner, Brawn, Kaltenborn (first female in this role!). And race engineers like Rob Smedley and Rocky Rocquelin get their voice heard as well.
spacecadet 13y ago
No it isn't! Racing has always been the source of innovation in automotive- safety harness for example.. ABS, etc Its exactly the fact that racing became "about best car + drive" that innovation slumped and we still drive cars that are pretty much no different than when Fuel Injection was introduced in the 70's! I welcome these challenges. I have been slowly developing my own diesel/electric hybrid using similar technology, it makes more sense than full electric at this point in time. Hub motors are very inexpensive and modern diesels running on waste bio can last upwards of 1,000,000 miles. Thanks to Audi and their endurance Diesel R8 racecar... They challenged themselves under no regulation and it helped prove a technology.
- Spearchucker 13y ago
  Respectfully disagree. Your post suggests that motor industry innovation is driven (pardon the pun) by F1. Some of it is, but typically for super cars. Certainly not all of it, or even most of it. Besides, constraining the car specs in and of itself stifles innovation. How much F1 tech is there in Tesla, for example?
  - gdrulia 13y ago
    I know very little about Tesla, but quick search tells that its made from carbon fiber, probably has a tyres yes? Tyres very much evolved because of formula 1. Carbon fiber and a few more. No need to underestimate development in F1, especially when manufacturers itself are involved. Prove of that is that Honda announced coming back to F1 as an engine manufacturer straight after new rules was confirmed. Link gives more details about some F1 innovations in the road cars. http://www.gocompare.com/covered/2013/03/eight-driving-innovations-which-came-from-f1/ http://www.gocompare.com/covered/2013/03/eight-driving-innov...
001sky 13y ago
I agree. The silly cost and stil 840 hp @ 1x,000 rpm is just a bunch of window dressing for the Lefties. The entire enterprise of F1 will never be "green", once you take into account the production of the cars, the crash repleacements, fuel used in training and lower Fxx series, and...the fact that these clowns fly all of this junk around the WORLD to drive. They are doing to f1 what they did to the America's cup. Basically turning a sport into a spectacle to which no 'normal' sportsman can really relate.
- gambiting 13y ago
  Have you considered,that technologies developed for F1 by lets say....Mercedes, can later be used in their regular cars and therefore improve efficiency of not just a single F1 car,but millions of cars on the road? With the promotion of turbochargers in F1, a stupid amount of research is going to go into them - and they are used in pretty much every diesel car on the road now, so if the technology can be improved further, then it's all for the best. I've read the article and I don't think it mentions making F1 greener - it's not what it's about.
  - masklinn 13y ago
    > With the promotion of turbochargers in F1 Then again, that follows their ban in 1989.
  - thedrbrian 13y ago
    The £300 million that the f1 teams have wasted on these engines is a drop in the bucket compared to what all the manufacturers spend on their road cars. And none of the tech comes out of f1 , only in.
    - oijaf888 13y ago
      Nothing has ever been developed in F1 that has made it into road cars? What about active suspension, sequential gear boxes, etc?
  - 001sky 13y ago
masklinn 13y ago
> It's no longer about best car + best driver. It already wasn't about best car 15 years ago, or in the 90s for that matter. Turbos were banned in 1989 for instance.
- Spearchucker 13y ago
  You're right, but up until 10 years ago the best driver still had a chance. Schumacher turned Ferrari around, proving it. And that's when they really started changing the rules to promote random outsider wins.
  - Fuzzwah 13y ago
    You're posting as fact about something which you've admitted being out of touch with for a decade. Do you not think Vettel is the best driver in F1? How is the fact that he has now won 4 consecutive championships aligned with your statement that the rules promote random outsider wins?
    - Spearchucker 13y ago
      The best F1 driver was Schumacher. The greatest F1 driver was Senna. My favourite is Jodie Sheckter. Greatest car is the McLaren MP44 - an unmitigated beast. Favourite car the Tyrell P34. Race commentary isn't the same without Murray Walker. One of my greatest moments was watching Keke Rosberg do a 360 and keep going[1]. That was at the US GP in 1983, when I was 13 and thought those drivers walked on water. F1 is not what is once was - the romance is gone. Vettel? He's a n00b that does it for the money. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMHi8JUBMG8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMHi8JUBMG8
DanBC 13y ago
"Best car" in 2014 technology could be seriously very dangerous. It would also be so expensive that you'd get 4 companies competing. And best driver? Well, one guy seems to do quite well year after year, so maybe he's pretty good. It'd be cool to see (even simulated) how a Computer driver would do.
- prof_hobart 13y ago
  But a lot of the regulation changes aren't really about safety - things like standardised suppliers of tyres, or limiting the amount of track testing allowed. Sure, unlimited budgets would allow some companies to absolutely dominate - but that's not really any different today. And yes Vettel is possibly the best driver. But the car and the support he gets from the team give him a pretty good head start. F1's not about the best car you could build (or even the best "safe" car you could build), or about the best driver. It's mostly about the best car you build within the set of sometimes arbitrary constraints set by the FIA.
rlu 13y ago
Yikes. You ought to watch the 2008-2011 (maybe 2012) seasons. Truly awesome. 2013 has been a bore - but partly because the past few seasons have been spectacular.
chaz 13y ago
Just about every pro sports league needs to manage its rules to ensure that the playing field gets leveled every season. For example, NFL draft picks are in reverse order of season success. If last year's Super Bowl winner was able to choose their next team on a completely free market, they would simply use their boosted revenue and pay the most for the best players, thus making it much more likely that they'll increase their domination. No one wants to watch a dominating team shut out clearly inferior teams game after game. F1 needs rules to tighten gaps between the team and to prevent one team from spending their way to success. I think we can argue about whether the new power units, DRS, and tire management are the right way to do this, but I'm glad they're trying something.
- corin_ 13y ago
  Outside of America there are far more sports that don't try to even the playing field artificially. Motor racing (I don't know much about non-F1 racing anyway) is pretty much the limit in the UK, team games generally work on the free market, individual games can generally be dominated by great individuals.
  - chaz 13y ago
    Wage restrictions in Premier League would act similar to NFL salary caps: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2274957/Financial-Fair-Play-Premier-League-agree-financial-cap-clubs-face-points-deduction.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2274957/Fi.... Also, the foreign player rule: http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/fans/faqs/home-grown-player-rule.html http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/fans/faqs/home-grown-play...
    - corin_ 13y ago
      FFP is generally considered slightly better than nothing, but only just - it's a joke. It's talked about as if it will stop clubs like Man City and Chelsea dominate financially, but it only affects TV money, not any other sources of income (e.g. sponsorships), so realistically it is going to have hardly any effect. Even if it was implemented in a stronger way, it would still only serve to bring football closer to how it was 20 years ago before big money owners were so prominent, it would never take it to a US-sports level where they try to balance teams out completely. The foreign player rule is about trying to boost national players rather than international players and has nothing to do with trying to even the (metaphorical) playing field.

oliveoil 13y ago

Same here, stopped watching around 1998. I though it's mostly about the car (which is largely random per-season, yes) and instead of celebrating the design/engineering behind the only things celebrated around f1 are the personalities of drivers, their excesses and their egos.

CWuestefeld 13y ago
the only things celebrated around f1 are the personalities of drivers I don't think that's quite true. Quite a lot gets said about at least a couple of designers, most especially Adrian Newey (all agree that Vettel is an amazing driver, but also that the recent RB cars that Newey has designed are dominant). We hear a lot from team principals like Horner, Brawn, Kaltenborn (first female in this role!). And race engineers like Rob Smedley and Rocky Rocquelin get their voice heard as well.

spacecadet 13y ago

No it isn't! Racing has always been the source of innovation in automotive- safety harness for example.. ABS, etc Its exactly the fact that racing became "about best car + drive" that innovation slumped and we still drive cars that are pretty much no different than when Fuel Injection was introduced in the 70's! I welcome these challenges. I have been slowly developing my own diesel/electric hybrid using similar technology, it makes more sense than full electric at this point in time. Hub motors are very inexpensive and modern diesels running on waste bio can last upwards of 1,000,000 miles. Thanks to Audi and their endurance Diesel R8 racecar... They challenged themselves under no regulation and it helped prove a technology.

Spearchucker 13y ago
Respectfully disagree. Your post suggests that motor industry innovation is driven (pardon the pun) by F1. Some of it is, but typically for super cars. Certainly not all of it, or even most of it. Besides, constraining the car specs in and of itself stifles innovation. How much F1 tech is there in Tesla, for example?
- gdrulia 13y ago
  I know very little about Tesla, but quick search tells that its made from carbon fiber, probably has a tyres yes? Tyres very much evolved because of formula 1. Carbon fiber and a few more. No need to underestimate development in F1, especially when manufacturers itself are involved. Prove of that is that Honda announced coming back to F1 as an engine manufacturer straight after new rules was confirmed. Link gives more details about some F1 innovations in the road cars. http://www.gocompare.com/covered/2013/03/eight-driving-innovations-which-came-from-f1/ http://www.gocompare.com/covered/2013/03/eight-driving-innov...

001sky 13y ago

I agree. The silly cost and stil 840 hp @ 1x,000 rpm is just a bunch of window dressing for the Lefties. The entire enterprise of F1 will never be "green", once you take into account the production of the cars, the crash repleacements, fuel used in training and lower Fxx series, and...the fact that these clowns fly all of this junk around the WORLD to drive. They are doing to f1 what they did to the America's cup. Basically turning a sport into a spectacle to which no 'normal' sportsman can really relate.

gambiting 13y ago
Have you considered,that technologies developed for F1 by lets say....Mercedes, can later be used in their regular cars and therefore improve efficiency of not just a single F1 car,but millions of cars on the road? With the promotion of turbochargers in F1, a stupid amount of research is going to go into them - and they are used in pretty much every diesel car on the road now, so if the technology can be improved further, then it's all for the best. I've read the article and I don't think it mentions making F1 greener - it's not what it's about.
- masklinn 13y ago
  > With the promotion of turbochargers in F1 Then again, that follows their ban in 1989.
- thedrbrian 13y ago
  The £300 million that the f1 teams have wasted on these engines is a drop in the bucket compared to what all the manufacturers spend on their road cars. And none of the tech comes out of f1 , only in.
  - oijaf888 13y ago
    Nothing has ever been developed in F1 that has made it into road cars? What about active suspension, sequential gear boxes, etc?
- 001sky 13y ago

masklinn 13y ago

> It's no longer about best car + best driver. It already wasn't about best car 15 years ago, or in the 90s for that matter. Turbos were banned in 1989 for instance.

Spearchucker 13y ago
You're right, but up until 10 years ago the best driver still had a chance. Schumacher turned Ferrari around, proving it. And that's when they really started changing the rules to promote random outsider wins.
- Fuzzwah 13y ago
  You're posting as fact about something which you've admitted being out of touch with for a decade. Do you not think Vettel is the best driver in F1? How is the fact that he has now won 4 consecutive championships aligned with your statement that the rules promote random outsider wins?
  - Spearchucker 13y ago
    The best F1 driver was Schumacher. The greatest F1 driver was Senna. My favourite is Jodie Sheckter. Greatest car is the McLaren MP44 - an unmitigated beast. Favourite car the Tyrell P34. Race commentary isn't the same without Murray Walker. One of my greatest moments was watching Keke Rosberg do a 360 and keep going[1]. That was at the US GP in 1983, when I was 13 and thought those drivers walked on water. F1 is not what is once was - the romance is gone. Vettel? He's a n00b that does it for the money. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMHi8JUBMG8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMHi8JUBMG8

DanBC 13y ago

"Best car" in 2014 technology could be seriously very dangerous. It would also be so expensive that you'd get 4 companies competing. And best driver? Well, one guy seems to do quite well year after year, so maybe he's pretty good. It'd be cool to see (even simulated) how a Computer driver would do.

prof_hobart 13y ago
But a lot of the regulation changes aren't really about safety - things like standardised suppliers of tyres, or limiting the amount of track testing allowed. Sure, unlimited budgets would allow some companies to absolutely dominate - but that's not really any different today. And yes Vettel is possibly the best driver. But the car and the support he gets from the team give him a pretty good head start. F1's not about the best car you could build (or even the best "safe" car you could build), or about the best driver. It's mostly about the best car you build within the set of sometimes arbitrary constraints set by the FIA.

rlu 13y ago

Yikes. You ought to watch the 2008-2011 (maybe 2012) seasons. Truly awesome. 2013 has been a bore - but partly because the past few seasons have been spectacular.

chaz 13y ago

Just about every pro sports league needs to manage its rules to ensure that the playing field gets leveled every season. For example, NFL draft picks are in reverse order of season success. If last year's Super Bowl winner was able to choose their next team on a completely free market, they would simply use their boosted revenue and pay the most for the best players, thus making it much more likely that they'll increase their domination. No one wants to watch a dominating team shut out clearly inferior teams game after game. F1 needs rules to tighten gaps between the team and to prevent one team from spending their way to success. I think we can argue about whether the new power units, DRS, and tire management are the right way to do this, but I'm glad they're trying something.

corin_ 13y ago
Outside of America there are far more sports that don't try to even the playing field artificially. Motor racing (I don't know much about non-F1 racing anyway) is pretty much the limit in the UK, team games generally work on the free market, individual games can generally be dominated by great individuals.
- chaz 13y ago
  Wage restrictions in Premier League would act similar to NFL salary caps: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2274957/Financial-Fair-Play-Premier-League-agree-financial-cap-clubs-face-points-deduction.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2274957/Fi.... Also, the foreign player rule: http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/fans/faqs/home-grown-player-rule.html http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/fans/faqs/home-grown-play...
  - corin_ 13y ago
    FFP is generally considered slightly better than nothing, but only just - it's a joke. It's talked about as if it will stop clubs like Man City and Chelsea dominate financially, but it only affects TV money, not any other sources of income (e.g. sponsorships), so realistically it is going to have hardly any effect. Even if it was implemented in a stronger way, it would still only serve to bring football closer to how it was 20 years ago before big money owners were so prominent, it would never take it to a US-sports level where they try to balance teams out completely. The foreign player rule is about trying to boost national players rather than international players and has nothing to do with trying to even the (metaphorical) playing field.