Formula 1 2019 - General Discussion Thread

jv2000

muckwarrior wrote: »

I have a vague recollection of a system like that being in place a decade or so ago. A few of the lower placed teams got an extra practice session on the Friday or something like that. There certainly needs to be something in place to help level the playing field.

I also agree that a MotoGP type system is the way forward for F1. I see two major problems though.
1. There are not as many engine manufacturers as in MotoGP so this could be a problem, a concessions system though may be just enough to convince Porsche etc to enter F1 and build over a short time period (possibly over 2 years to become a serious entry).
2. Mercedes and Ferrari will probably threaten to leave the sport if this is even suggested

TCP/IP

Perhaps the smaller teams are also a problem for F1 I mean perhaps some should be let go as they will never compete in Modern F1 and to compensate let the larger teams run a 3rd car that is only for up and coming drivers not paid ones.

pjohnson

muckwarrior wrote: »

I have a vague recollection of a system like that being in place a decade or so ago. A few of the lower placed teams got an extra practice session on the Friday or something like that. There certainly needs to be something in place to help level the playing field.

It was a 3rd car in practice for any team outside the top 4 the previous year. Sauber refused citing costs but all others did. Think it was 03 - 05.

TCP/IP

meeeeh wrote: »

That won't work. Small teams need drivers who brig their own sponsors. No midfield driver, no matter how talented, is good enough to offset millions in sponsorship money.

Then perhaps it’s time for these small teams to leave F1.
There is absolutely no point in having a team like Williams for example no point in living in the past but garage teams like Williams should not be in F1.

pjohnson

TCP/IP wrote: »

Perhaps the smaller teams are also a problem for F1 I mean perhaps some should be let go as they will never compete in Modern F1 and to compensate let the larger teams run a 3rd car that is only for up and coming drivers not paid ones.

Nah we dont need to loose any team. I'd be inclined to say keep the cap on re. Maximum of fuel but allow refueling. It might give the strategists something to do and offset the boring that occurs when that "tyre management" shíte kicks in.

Adamocovic

It's a shame this year is looking to be quite dull in terms of racing at the top. Possibly one of the worse.

Looking back at the last 6 seasons opening races the Mercs have completely dominated. Think we got false hope last year that Ferrari were back. Hard to see anyone stopping them, I know teams want the tyres to switch back to the ones where Mercs have blistering issues which goes to show how much ahead they are. Surely won't happen.

It's depressing stuff as a race fan, made even more so with how much they are leaps and bounds ahead.

Pole Race Winners
Mercedes Ferrari Redbull Other Mercedes Ferrari Redbull Other
2019 6 2 0 0 8 0 0 0
2018 3 4 1 0 3 3 2 0
2017 6 2 0 0 4 3 1 0
2016 7 1 0 0 7 0 1 0
2015 8 0 0 0 7 1 0 0
2014 7 0 0 1 7 0 1 0


At least in the previous Merc dominance we were given a Rosberg/Hamilton rivalry that gave us entertainment but it's hard to have much hope this year. Also there was some shuffling on the podiums. It's nearly a given it's a Merc 1 2 these days.

Despite my defence of him and his great qualy pace but in most races he's looked far behind, yet far ahead of the other teams.

I'll still hold out hope that Bottas can make some sort of challenge and give us something to watch but it's looking very grim..

pjohnson

TCP/IP wrote: »

Then perhaps it’s time for these small teams to leave F1.
There is absolutely no point in having a team like Williams for example no point in living in the past but garage teams like Williams should not be in F1.

So no Red Bull, McLaren, Toro Tosso, Racing Point or Alfa Romeo either.....sounds exciting. F1 needs teams.

Jordan 199

Adamocovic wrote: »

I'll still hold out hope that Bottas can make some sort of challenge and give us something to watch but it's looking very grim..

There's not a hope Bottas will make a championship challenge. No way.

TCP/IP

pjohnson wrote: »

So no Red Bull, McLaren, Toro Tosso, Racing Point or Alfa Romeo either.....sounds exciting. F1 needs teams.

No Red Bull and McLaren are very well funded teams so deserve to be in F1 no doubt about it. Alfa are equally well funded with the backing of a very large car company. I would say Toro Rossa and Racing Point bring very little to F1.

meeeeh

Garage teams are passionate about F1. Red Bull will be in F1 as long as it makes money and boosts brand recognition. Merc will be in it as long as they feel having an F1 team is more beneficial than having an LeMans or some other racing series team.

Remember when Honda suddenly decided they are leaving the sport? The only reason they survived was because they became garage team under Brown name. 'Alfa' are in it now but what happens if Fiat decide they need to invest that money into development of electric cars? Bmw left yet Sauber stayed. McLaren are using Toyota wind tunnel. Remember them? You need garage teams who won't leave the moment marketing strategy changes.

TCP/IP

meeeeh wrote: »

Garage teams are passionate about F1. Red Bull will be in F1 as long as it makes money and boosts brand recognition. Merc will be in it as long as they feel having an F1 team is more beneficial than having an LeMans or some other racing series team.

Remember when Honda suddenly decided they are leaving the sport? The only reason they survived was because they became garage team under Brown name. 'Alfa' are in it now but what happens if Fiat decide they need to invest that money into development of electric cars? Bmw left yet Sauber stayed. McLaren are using Toyota wind tunnel. Remember them? You need garage teams who won't leave the moment marketing strategy changes.

I understand where you are coming from but they are pointless there will always be large teams of course they will change over the years but these minnow teams are completely pointless in this day and age. Perhaps we should have promotion and relegation. So bottom two teams each year have to race in F2 the following year and the winner and second place in F2 get to race in F1. Understand they are completely different cars but surely there is away around this like part of the price of winning F2 is to get free engines and Tyres for the following year. At least it would make it exciting for the lower teams with something to actually fight for.

Frank Bullitt

Does anyone think we have reached a tipping point for F1 yet? At what stage will it really be D-Day for the teams and owners to do something?

Mercedes will never want to deliberately slow themselves down for the sake of it, if they win they get all the money and stats to go with it.

These quotes today fro Hamilton and Merc are PR 101

"Don't point fingers at the drivers, we don't write the rules,"

"We have nothing to do with money shifting, all that kind of stuff. You should put the pressure on the people at the head, who should be doing the job."

And from Wolff

"I hear you and from a fans' perspective I get it," he said, "but I think it's an unfair question because what would you do in our shoes? You would continue to push relentlessly for performance. It is what we do.

"But the fans see a race that is less enjoyable to watch."

Maybe they are right, and our issues are being misplaced and we shouldn't be pointing the fingers at them?

Or.

They have to realize they are the figureheads of the sport, these are who the fans turn up to watch, not Ross Brawn or Chase walking around the paddock. If there is to be real change it has to be from the teams, the catch (as there always is in F1) will be that they will only care for themselves in this.

The 2021 rules will end up being a joke at this rate too.

I am probably sounding like a broken record at this stage, but in the 20 odd years I've watched F1, this is bottom of the barrel stuff. It's a shame because clearly there are great drivers to be banging wheels, but managing tires, running minimal fuel and nursing the car as best they can...that's racing? Even Le Mans is not like that at all.

And then we have Hamilton racing towards all of Schumachers records without even breaking sweat. This is such a divisive subject and I will not dare touch it now (need to properly think about it). The manner in which he is doing it and has done with Merc, it just feels a tad hollow somehow. He arrived at Merc to a team that had already invested millions in the new rules and structure to clearly get a run at domination, this is not a stab at Hamilton, but to compare that to Schumacher arriving at Ferrari in the state that it was in and to do what he did. My bias is clearly showing here too, to me Schumacher is the greatest to race a car so for me to judge this with a clear mind is probably not going to happen.

Rant over.

meeeeh

A driver will come who will beat Schumacher's records. It might be Hamilton it might be someone else. That doesn't diminish what Schumacher did neither does it mean Hamilton is as complete driver as him (imo). It does mean that I will have to stop watching F1 because Croft will be completely insufferable.

SharpshooterTom

Lewis Hamilton is going down as the GOAT. No iffs or buts about that.

Never underestimate the power of the British press and Bernie, they wont have it any other way.

The British are very good at marketing, they hype up all their products as the best in the world, premier league, wimbledon, golf open championship etc etc, and everyone else believes it.

They will push Hamilton as the GOAT, and on the UK forums I'm suggesting Schumacher is better than him causes a huge backlash, so you can see where this is going.

TCP/IP

The idea of Lewis as GOAT is laughable and something that only the British press will push because we all know that it simply is not the case.
Now if he stepped away from Mercedes and won a title or two with Ferrari I would change my mind.

Frank Bullitt

https://www.forbes.com/sites/csylt/2019/06/23/f1-crashes-to-lowest-tv-audience-of-the-year-on-britains-channel-4/#799641755230

Formula One’s audience on free-to-air television in Britain continued to crash at this month’s Canadian Grand Prix which had the lowest number of viewers of any race so far this season.

The Grand Prix, which takes place on an island in Montreal’s Saint Lawrence river, was the seventh consecutive race with a lower audience than last year and was watched by just 1.2 million TV viewers. It reversed by 5.1% on 2018 and although this isn’t as big as a drop as some of the other races experienced, it has still lost a staggering 74.4% of its audience since 2013 driven by a switch from showing live races to delayed highlights.

These are some scary numbers. Looks like there are multiple factors at play, but even still...

H3llR4iser

Gintonious wrote: »

Does anyone think we have reached a tipping point for F1 yet? At what stage will it really be D-Day for the teams and owners to do something?

Mercedes will never want to deliberately slow themselves down for the sake of it, if they win they get all the money and stats to go with it.

These quotes today fro Hamilton and Merc are PR 101





And from Wolff


Maybe they are right, and our issues are being misplaced and we shouldn't be pointing the fingers at them?

Or.

They have to realize they are the figureheads of the sport, these are who the fans turn up to watch, not Ross Brawn or Chase walking around the paddock. If there is to be real change it has to be from the teams, the catch (as there always is in F1) will be that they will only care for themselves in this.

The 2021 rules will end up being a joke at this rate too.

I am probably sounding like a broken record at this stage, but in the 20 odd years I've watched F1, this is bottom of the barrel stuff. It's a shame because clearly there are great drivers to be banging wheels, but managing tires, running minimal fuel and nursing the car as best they can...that's racing? Even Le Mans is not like that at all.

And then we have Hamilton racing towards all of Schumachers records without even breaking sweat. This is such a divisive subject and I will not dare touch it now (need to properly think about it). The manner in which he is doing it and has done with Merc, it just feels a tad hollow somehow. He arrived at Merc to a team that had already invested millions in the new rules and structure to clearly get a run at domination, this is not a stab at Hamilton, but to compare that to Schumacher arriving at Ferrari in the state that it was in and to do what he did. My bias is clearly showing here too, to me Schumacher is the greatest to race a car so for me to judge this with a clear mind is probably not going to happen.

Rant over.

Problem is, what to do exactly? I read and hear all sort of ridiculous proposals - from weight penalties to reverse grids, from test allowance to unified aero, at this point it might as well be proposed that Hamilton race with Wolff straddling the airbox of the Mercedes and communication to the driver is only permitted in Klingon.



As someone pointed out above, you can't exactly undo progress; The problem is that the cars are basically frozen in performance relative to one another. If my car is 0.2s a lap slower than yours, then I'll stay within striking distance without ever actually being able to get ahead. The cars don't break down anymore, there hardly are surprises where a track proves to be utterly suiting a car and not another; The differences are minimal - even in Canada, in the end Hamilton was actually faster than Vettel.



Problem is that Mercedes have simply built a perfect, ruthless winning machine. Everything from the Engineering department to the strategy support, from the drivers management to political influence, has been designed, implemented and maintained with surgical precision. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it turned out they've got the best toilette in the paddock as well. They quite simply have a stranglehold on the sport at a total level...not sure if anyone has noticed, but all of the organization cars have been Mercedes for two decades now. They've planned this for a long time.



Part of this is obviously the fault of the other main teams - Ferrari have regressed into "full Italian mode" wasting time and resources over internal bickering, failing not only to produce a true title challenge over a whole season but managing to fade politically as well; They've become a study case in "how NOT to run a team with absolute bollicksload of money".



Red Bull and McLaren both blamed third parties for their failures, they since swapped such third parties in what looks like a play on irony, but largely remained where they were. Renault seem to be on a generally upwards trajectory, but they're taking their dear time at that. The others...Alfa Romeo technically have now the resources to succeed, but it has to be seen if there's the political will; having them beating Ferrari wouldn't go down well in some CEO office in Turin.



As for the "dullness"...in absolute terms, the Ferrari dominance of the early 2000s was similar; The thing was that it was somewhat shorter and punctuated by a bit of more competitive seasons (like 2003) due to the tyre wars and the fact that Michelin were at times better then Bridgestone, allowing inferior chassis like Williams' and McLaren's to compete with Ferrari, albeit briefly.

muckwarrior

TCP/IP wrote: »

Then perhaps it’s time for these small teams to leave F1.
There is absolutely no point in having a team like Williams for example no point in living in the past but garage teams like Williams should not be in F1.

I can't quite find the words to articulate just how much I disagree with you so I'm just going to say NO!

Yer Da sells Avon

TCP/IP wrote: »

Then perhaps it’s time for these small teams to leave F1.
There is absolutely no point in having a team like Williams for example no point in living in the past but garage teams like Williams should not be in F1.

The biggest problem with that terrible idea is that someone always has to finish last - and if that someone is a car manufacturer, then their board will almost always pull the team out of F1. Look at Toyota, BMW and Honda - not to mention Renault, who seem to come and go as they please. And don't count on Mercedes being around forever either. The likes of Williams can tolerate poor results (for a while at least) because F1 is their raison d'être and they're desperate to improve. Far from getting rid of small teams, something needs to be done to make it possible for a modern-day Frank Williams to enter the sport.

Frank Bullitt

H3llR4iser wrote: »

As for the "dullness"...in absolute terms, the Ferrari dominance of the early 2000s was similar; The thing was that it was somewhat shorter and punctuated by a bit of more competitive seasons (like 2003) due to the tyre wars and the fact that Michelin were at times better then Bridgestone, allowing inferior chassis like Williams' and McLaren's to compete with Ferrari, albeit briefly.

I was thinking about this as well. At least in the early 2000's the tracks were at least interesting, and we had the glory of the V10s to at least listen to, the cars looked so much better without all the aero wings and bits, and it was free to watch on TV. Grandstands were packed as well.

Now, we have Sochi...Abu Dhabi...and tarmac run off areas that go for miles.

My rose tinted glasses are showing here though.

H3llR4iser

Gintonious wrote: »

I was thinking about this as well. At least in the early 2000's the tracks were at least interesting, and we had the glory of the V10s to at least listen to, the cars looked so much better without all the aero wings and bits, and it was free to watch on TV. Grandstands were packed as well.

Now, we have Sochi...Abu Dhabi...and tarmac run off areas that go for miles.

My rose tinted glasses are showing here though.

Free to air is obviously a huge advantage - people are never, ever going to pay for F1, for reasons that are complex to explain but boil down to one thing: it's not as culturally ingrained as something like football is in the EU, or the NBA/NFL/MLB are in the US.

As for cars having aero "bits", well...I'm afraid it's another case of rose tinted glasses:

2001


2006


2008


2008 again, seems to be a "good" year


Even the mighty F2004, while certainly not being as bad as the above wasn't devoid of weird protruding bits in the bodywork - current cars look positively clean in the rear compared, and the "cannons" jutting out the sides for, IIRC, cooling are another level entirely


Sure, current cars could do without the horrendous mess around the radiator intake area - it literally looks like they've sucked in a cat that's now splashed all around the bodywork.

As for the V10s sounds...at the time, everyone complained they didn't sound anywhere as good as the V12s, and indeed they didn't

But don't worry too much: a lot of people, especially Ferrari and Schumacher fans down in Italy, are affected by the same "rose tinted syndrome" as you, they all think F1 in the 2000-2004 span was "fantastic", you ain't alone

Also, Internet usage wasn't rampant and people could only complain to their mates down the bar/pub; Now, there's a lot of the "let's be miserable together" syndrome added on top of a fairly problematic situation as well.

Frank Bullitt

H3llR4iser wrote: »

Free to air is obviously a huge advantage - people are never, ever going to pay for F1, for reasons that are complex to explain but boil down to one thing: it's not as culturally ingrained as something like football is in the EU, or the NBA/NFL/MLB are in the US.

As for cars having aero "bits", well...I'm afraid it's another case of rose tinted glasses:

2001


2006


2008


2008 again, seems to be a "good" year


Even the mighty F2004, while certainly not being as bad as the above wasn't devoid of weird protruding bits in the bodywork - current cars look positively clean in the rear compared, and the "cannons" jutting out the sides for, IIRC, cooling are another level entirely


Sure, current cars could do without the horrendous mess around the radiator intake area - it literally looks like they've sucked in a cat that's now splashed all around the bodywork.

As for the V10s sounds...at the time, everyone complained they didn't sound anywhere as good as the V12s, and indeed they didn't

But don't worry too much: a lot of people, especially Ferrari and Schumacher fans down in Italy, are affected by the same "rose tinted syndrome" as you, they all think F1 in the 2000-2004 span was "fantastic", you ain't alone

Also, Internet usage wasn't rampant and people could only complain to their mates down the bar/pub; Now, there's a lot of the "let's be miserable together" syndrome added on top of a fairly problematic situation as well.

Fair points, I do believe that the finicky aero in 2001 didn't last long, and were banned for being unsafe. Ferrari and Jordan ran similar ones at some point and they were all binned.

It all peaked in 2008 for sure, I could not stand the look of them and they were a nightmare to follow.

I am a designer by trade so I like my simple lines and simple aesthetic, so my bias (again) is showing

The social media syndrome is so true as well, here we all are now complaining about the current state of F1 and comparing to yesteryear with the idea that it was all so much better back then.

It's hard to put a finger on, it was probably more of a factor of my youth and the theatre of F1 back then as to what it is now. I have F1 TV and find myself looking at the old races so much more these days, and still enjoying them.

mickdw

While I like the idea of giving lower teams unlimited testing, it goes against all the cost cap stuff but even if that could be bypassed, the likes of mercedes will then just run a B team and test all sorts of experimental stuff before sticking it on their car.

meeeeh

It might be rose tinted glasses but in 97 title was decided in the last race. 98 seasons was decided in the last race, 99 season was decided in the last race I think. In 2000 the title was decided in the penultimate race. Those years of Ferrari superiority came after years of hard work and hard racing when they were trying and trying with an inferior car. Mercedes and less so Red Bull dominance came after rule changes and bigger advantage from the beginning. Ferrari winning became boring as any team constantly winning becomes boring but before it was a team fighting it's way back from mediocrity. With a driver that was divisive yet brilliant, a brilliant strategist and a car that was lacking (first 4 years) all together creating some special races. As a Schumacher fan I will always remember those times fondly. Hamilton was never really put under pressure. He preforms well in a great car, he is excellent last few years and he is less geeat in an average car. But neither Vettel or Hamilton are as exciting to watch as Schumacher was at his peak.

Btw Schumacher was considered great driver before he won with Ferrari, Alonso might be closest in that regard but he gas sense of entitlement and self destruct button. Maybe Vettel and Hamilton are unlucky that they won in superior equipment but they are not there.

the_pen_turner

the fact that 75% of voters on the last race here gave the race a 3 or less really shows how bad fans feel about the sport right now

im sure if you ran a pole on the season so far you would get a similar vote .

AMKC

mickdw wrote: »

While I like the idea of giving lower teams unlimited testing, it goes against all the cost cap stuff but even if that could be bypassed, the likes of mercedes will then just run a B team and test all sorts of experimental stuff before sticking it on their car.

So bring in a rule that states stuff tested on a B teams car can not be used on the main teams car.

meeeeh wrote: »

It might be rose tinted glasses but in 97 title was decided in the last race. 98 seasons was decided in the last race, 99 season was decided in the last race I think. In 2000 the title was decided in the penultimate race. Those years of Ferrari superiority came after years of hard work and hard racing when they were trying and trying with an inferior car. Mercedes and less so Red Bull dominance came after rule changes and bigger advantage from the beginning. Ferrari winning became boring as any team constantly winning becomes boring but before it was a team fighting it's way back from mediocrity. With a driver that was divisive yet brilliant, a brilliant strategist and a car that was lacking (first 4 years) all together creating some special races. As a Schumacher fan I will always remember those times fondly. Hamilton was never really put under pressure. He preforms well in a great car, he is excellent last few years and he is less geeat in an average car. But neither Vettel or Hamilton are as exciting to watch as Schumacher was at his peak.

Btw Schumacher was considered great driver before he won with Ferrari, Alonso might be closest in that regard but he gas sense of entitlement and self destruct button. Maybe Vettel and Hamilton are unlucky that they won in superior equipment but they are not there.

I doubt they think they were unlucky. I would say any driver would prefer to have the best car. I is just a pity there is not at least one or more teams that can also compete at the front with Mercedes and challange them instead of them being so far ahead of everyone else.

mickdw

AMKC wrote: »

mickdw wrote: »

So bring in a rule that states stuff tested on a B teams car can not be used on the main teams car.

There pretty much is such a rule already however things are never that easy.
What is learned aerodynamically cannot be unlearned so if a team of guys discover the next double diffuser or whatever while working for a mercedes run back marker, that info will make its way to the A team even if it meant the staff having to be redeployed to the A team. You cannot really stop this stuff.

tigerboon

AMKC wrote: »

I is just a pity there is not at least one or more teams that can also compete at the front with Mercedes and challange them instead of them being so far ahead of everyone else.

They need to attract the big names. Is it really the pinaacle of motorsport if the biggest manufacturers are not involved. Why have VW, Toyota, Nissan, Ford, BMW etc no interest? Yet they all race WEC and most are involved in FE so obviously see motorsport as important.
The other thing is the circuits. Paul Ricard has to be the worst track out there and yet no race at the Nurburgring. MotoGP has 6 or 7 races between Spain and Portugal (a bit much IMO) but why does F1 stick to 1 per country if there are more top class circuits.

AMKC

tigerboon wrote: »

They need to attract the big names. Is it really the pinaacle of motorsport if the biggest manufacturers are not involved. Why have VW, Toyota, Nissan, Ford, BMW etc no interest? Yet they all race WEC and most are involved in FE so obviously see motorsport as important.
The other thing is the circuits. Paul Ricard has to be the worst track out there and yet no race at the Nurburgring. MotoGP has 6 or 7 races between Spain and Portugal (a bit much IMO) but why does F1 stick to 1 per country if there are more top class circuits.

Is it really the pinaacle of motorsport if the biggest manufacturers are not involved.
Well I suppose as long as Ferrari and one or two other big names are there the can always say it is. Now if Ferrari were to leave or the other big teams left and Ferrari were the only big team left it might be different. Sure Ferrari would probably love that but I would say it would just be like it is now boring except for it would be Ferrari winning all the races and championships.
We all know the diesel scandal that happened with VW that cost them billions and but on end to them joining F1.
You could say Nissan are there as they are an alliance partner with Renault at the moment anyway. It is going through a rocky time at the moment.
Toyota done it and were only good and making the cars go fast in a straight line as for the others they are either to small or have no interest at the moment in it unfortunately.

As for the circuits I would say that is down to money. Countries have to pay or the circuits have to pay to have F1 come race so I guess more than one is just too muck. Still its not that long ago since we used to have two races in Spain every year.

eviltimeban

meeeeh wrote: »

It might be rose tinted glasses but in 97 title was decided in the last race. 98 seasons was decided in the last race, 99 season was decided in the last race I think. In 2000 the title was decided in the penultimate race. Those years of Ferrari superiority came after years of hard work and hard racing when they were trying and trying with an inferior car.

I seem to remember a couple of Vettel's titles went down to the wire.

meeeeh

They did. So did couple of Mercedes wins. The year when there was stupid double points for last race rule and I think when Rosberg won. But there was no Hungary 98 or Spa 2000. The beauty of those seasons was that Ferrari didn't have the car but they had strategic brains and driving talent. Vettel Red Bull years also coincided with birth of our two kids and it's probably when I saw least of the races just because there was often no time and l was too tired to get up in the middle of the night for races.

tigerboon

AMKC wrote: »

Is it really the pinaacle of motorsport if the biggest manufacturers are not involved.
Well I suppose as long as Ferrari and one or two other big names are there the can always say it is. Now if Ferrari were to leave or the other big teams left and Ferrari were the only big team left it might be different. Sure Ferrari would probably love that but I would say it would just be like it is now boring except for it would be Ferrari winning all the races and championships.
We all know the diesel scandal that happened with VW that cost them billions and but on end to them joining F1.
You could say Nissan are there as they are an alliance partner with Renault at the moment anyway. It is going through a rocky time at the moment.
Toyota done it and were only good and making the cars go fast in a straight line as for the others they are either to small or have no interest at the moment in it unfortunately.

As for the circuits I would say that is down to money. Countries have to pay or the circuits have to pay to have F1 come race so I guess more than one is just too muck. Still its not that long ago since we used to have two races in Spain every year.

Long before the diesel scandal, VW were saying that they had no interest in F1 as they didn't see the relevance to their road car development plans. They were the first to win Le Mans with a diesel engine. The TDI engine went on to become the engine for the whole VW group of brands. There was a lot of hope about 10 years ago that they would enter F1 under the Audi badge. Motorsport budget wasn't an issue with them as they were spending huge money at the time on Le Mans/ALMS, DTM and WRC as well as GT classes and lesser single seat formulas and a whole support class at DTM.
With regard to circuits, F1 doesn't have to fleece countries that want to hold races. They choose to. They can charge less and have better circuits. Not to have the Nurburgring as part of the F1 calender is criminal.

LollipopJimmy

Paddy Lowe officially gone from Williams. I wonder did he ever really bring anything to the teams he was with. At Williams and McLaren during successful periods he had Adrian Newey behind him and at Merc it was Ross Brawns car that brought real success.

Hard not to think he's a journeyman

flazio

Was he at Mercedes-Benz at the start of the hybrid era? Aka the current dominating streak? If so, you'd have to credit him with getting that ball rolling.

meeeeh

Wasn't he the one who nudged Brown out? I'll admit I don't like him for purely superficial reasons. He just doesn't come accross as very likeable.

As for Nirnburgring we might want to see them race there but if Germans don't want to go to the races there is not much that can be done. There was a talk of no German gp at all recently, I never paid anny attention to how that was resolved.

Adamocovic

Was doing some thinking today.

As Hamilton continues to dominate my respect for Rosberg is going up. I quite liked him at Williams and then turned off him with Merc but I have to hand it to him, he's probably a much better driver than I ever gave credit to.

Teammate Points Battle
1st 2nd Car
2016 Rosberg (385) Hamilton (38) Mercedes
2015 Hamilton (381) Rosberg (322) Mercedes
2014 Hamilton (384) Rosberg (317) Mercedes
2013 Hamilton (189) Rosberg (171) Mercedes
2012 Rosberg (93) Schumacher (49) Mercedes
2011 Rosberg (89) Schumacher (76) Mercedes
2010 Rosberg (142) Schumacher (72) Mercedes
2009 Rosberg (34.5) Nakajima (0) Williams
2008 Rosberg (17) Nakajima (9) Williams
2007 Rosberg (20) Wurz (13) Williams
2006 Webber (7) Rosberg (4) Williams


Up until Hamilton came along after his rookie season he had beaten all his teammates. Albeit Schumacher was never the same when he came back but still good going by Nico. Mick would still have beaten a few drivers on that grid in the same car, and easily was the big star in the team when they both joined.

Also with Hamilton. To be fair to him he did stay close with him, and for many of the seasons at least brought entertainment in their rivalry. I thought he was crazy to retire after beating him and my valuation of him went down even more looking at him as a quitter, but I suppose he achieved his goal and probably wasn't enjoying racing as much if their relationship was as frosty as we were told.

I would have rated Bottas higher than I did Rosberg at the time they both became Hamilton's teammate but Rosberg is looking even better as time goes on and Hamilton walks away with it. Makes me rate his achievements higher.

Another thing with Nico is to his credit he never joined a team with the car ready to win, always a struggle or a working project. He had such an unreliable car with Williams and when he joined Merc they were far from the sure thing they were when he left, so have to give him respect for that. Surely an inspiration for the likes of George Russell and co at the back.

I think just my opinion of Rosberg being a bit arrogant and posh, and the last few years in a fast merc, might have played a role in me not rating him too highly when he drove, but with time my opinion of him is just improving.

El_Duderino 09

antodeco wrote: »

At a bare minimum, they should allow any of the cars get points for fastest lap!

Completely disagree. That would cheapen the fastest lap point beyond a joke.

If drivers were driving normally and get the fastest lap, then fine. But the idea if someone pitting from 15th position, putting on soft tyres and getting a point, is silly.

Does anyone remember the uproar per season when the fastest lap point was announced and it wasn't clear that it could only get awarded to the top 10? It's quite right that only the top 10 can get the point.

El_Duderino 09

tigerboon wrote: »

They need to attract the big names. Is it really the pinaacle of motorsport if the biggest manufacturers are not involved. Why have VW, Toyota, Nissan, Ford, BMW etc no interest? Yet they all race WEC and most are involved in FE so obviously see motorsport as important.
The other thing is the circuits. Paul Ricard has to be the worst track out there and yet no race at the Nurburgring. MotoGP has 6 or 7 races between Spain and Portugal (a bit much IMO) but why does F1 stick to 1 per country if there are more top class circuits.

The manufacturers want use motorsport for 2 things. Advertising and dual use for testing R&D on future technologies. FE and electric power is the future technology, the internal combustion engine, isn't.

The F1 calendar is dictated by much more powerful factors than good racing. The push towards Asia and America is because that's where the car market us growing while Europe is relatively saturated.

The Dutch GP circuit is completely unfit for purpose by all accounts and will create a terrible race. But it's being added to the calendar because of Max. The Red Bull Ring in Austria is completely unfit and creates terrible racing, but is on the calendar because Red Bull pays for it. The minute red bull pulls out of f1, the Red Bull Ring is out on its ear.

eviltimeban

Adamocovic wrote: »

Was doing some thinking today.

As Hamilton continues to dominate my respect for Rosberg is going up. I quite liked him at Williams and then turned off him with Merc but I have to hand it to him, he's probably a much better driver than I ever gave credit to.

I agree, I always liked Rosberg, he was a strong driver and was really able to pressure Hamilton and hold his position in the team and not be a number 2 driver.

Not bothered about where he came from, sure look at Verstappen, Hill, Villeneuve; "posh" boys for sure but they still had / have to put the work in.

Adamocovic

eviltimeban wrote: »

I agree, I always liked Rosberg, he was a strong driver and was really able to pressure Hamilton and hold his position in the team and not be a number 2 driver.

Not bothered about where he came from, sure look at Verstappen, Hill, Villeneuve; "posh" boys for sure but they still had / have to put the work in.

Oh aye. They're all well off just meant how I thought of him and how he carried himself previously. Probably false or rose tinted from my part.

It's a stupid thing to criticise but I do the same with Stroll still so I guess I haven't learned. Rosberg has won me over though

meeeeh

I have a theory that the only reason Ferrari were matching Merc at the beginning of last season is because Rosberg was better at giving feedback to the engineers than Hamilton and Bottas are. Rosberg is smart, well educated and from well of background. He is also a very good driver but I don't think he is a great driver. There is no comparison to Bottas though, he is better than Bottas.

H3llR4iser

It's incredible how much people still undervalue Rosberg, even after one of the highest rated "up and coming" drivers (a lot of people thought Bottas would be "way better" than Nico) replaced him and proved to be unable to even come close to the same level.

If the reasons for the retirement post-2016 are genuine, respect; Not many successful sportspeople have this kind of insight and usually let their greed for competition and success overtake everything else. I however still suspect intra-team dynamics played a role in that decision. Maybe there wasn't a "Ok Nico, you got your championship, now just play second fiddle" kind of talk, but we won't ever know the truth.

As for the supposed "arrogance", I have no idea where people get it. Rosberg himself never made a mystery of considering himself lucky and having a "jump start" in the sport thanks to his father; He pretty much was one of the few drivers who often came across as a relatively normal guy, even if you could sense the PR coaching. His interviews after his last, WDC winning race were quite something - he was just a happy young man. There are pictures of him eating pizza with his friends at a plastic garden table on a footpath, in one of the worst streets of Naples (trust me I know, I was born there):



Find me ONE F1 driver in the last 10 years, other than Felipe Massa and maybe Daniel Ricciardo, who would do that.

Rosberg really did one mistake in terms of PR - trying to play into the "villain" role after the frankly idiotic way the team handled the Spa 2014 incident and the ever Hamilton-loving press laid into it. That was a pas faux that obviously irked a lot of people, especially English speakers, the wrong way.

Lastly, the "rich boy" thing: time to drop it, plenty of drivers were, are and will be coming from that background; Most notably, Ayrton Senna was the son of Brazilian businessman Milton Da Silva - yet back when I was a young lad, often the myth about him being a "kid from the favela" was paraded around.

elperello

eviltimeban wrote: »

I agree, I always liked Rosberg, he was a strong driver and was really able to pressure Hamilton and hold his position in the team and not be a number 2 driver.

Not bothered about where he came from, sure look at Verstappen, Hill, Villeneuve; "posh" boys for sure but they still had / have to put the work in.

Nothing posh about Hill.
He worked as a labourer and a motorcycle courier in the early days.

flazio

In relation to antodeco's suggestion that all cars should be eligible for fastest lap, the whole reason it became top ten only came about in the second season of Formula E, Sebastian Buemi and Lucas DiGrassi were leading the championship, tied on points going into the last race of the season. They took each other out on the first lap. but made it back to the pits heavily damaged. Out of contention for the race, they just got into their second cars and tried to take the fastest lap point. Completely out of sequence with the rest of the race.

flazio

flazio wrote: »

In relation to antodeco's suggestion that all cars should be eligible for fastest lap, the whole reason it became top ten only came about in the second season of Formula E, Sebastian Buemi and Lucas DiGrassi were leading the championship, tied on points going into the last race of the season. They took each other out on the first lap. but made it back to the pits heavily damaged. Out of contention for the race, they just got into their second cars and tried to take the fastest lap point. Completely out of sequence with the rest of the race.

I like that.

PopePalpatine

I remember watching that live, I thought it was great craic at the time. :pac:

Red Honeysuckle

eviltimeban wrote: »

I agree, I always liked Rosberg, he was a strong driver and was really able to pressure Hamilton and hold his position in the team and not be a number 2 driver.

Not bothered about where he came from, sure look at Verstappen, Hill, Villeneuve; "posh" boys for sure but they still had / have to put the work in.

What I would love to see is Ocons data in comparison to Hamilton and Bottas. I actually rate him higher than both of them. I used to love the Force India battles. Racing point screwed themselves over by losing him. Stroll hasn't a patch on him.

pjohnson

The most annoying thing is Stroll could maybe be a good driver. During races he seems naturally good at managing tyre wear so he can do longer stints (he did the same with Williams) and he almost always gains 3 - 4 positions at the start of evey race. He is just completely incapable of doing a qualy lap and shows no sign of ever mastering how to. Its ridiculous.

skipper_G

aingealsruth wrote: »

What I would love to see is Ocons data in comparison to Hamilton and Bottas. I actually rate him higher than both of them. I used to love the Force India battles. Racing point screwed themselves over by losing him. Stroll hasn't a patch on him.

Ocon is a decent driver, but that's it. People get upset that he's not on the grid but the reality is he's done nothing to deserve that, if Mercedes truly believed he was so special then he'd be in the car not Bottas.

Do I think he could be as good as or better than Bottas? Probably.
As good as Hamilton? Not a chance

El_Duderino 09

pjohnson wrote: »

The most annoying thing is Stroll could maybe be a good driver. During races he seems naturally good at managing tyre wear so he can do longer stints (he did the same with Williams) and he almost always gains 3 - 4 positions at the start of evey race. He is just completely incapable of doing a qualy lap and shows no sign of ever mastering how to. Its ridiculous.

Not a popular opinion but I agree. I
His race craft is pretty good. He doesn’t make terrible decisions like Crashtor Maldonado or Grosjean. He’s not actually as bad as people make out. He’s a pay driver for certain. But he might get enough time do develop into a genuinely grand driver. I’d be surprised if he becomes a top driver but I’m sure he’ll be worth his seat in a couple of years.