Formula 1

Wanderer78

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Don’t do that, it’s a sneaky low act going out of your way to get someone carded. I never mentioned religion or race, it’s purely based on wealth and we’re seeing the sport becoming centred around the area more and more. It’s not the only sport either.

apologies, but i wasnt trying to do that, we re both talking the same language, but just different approaches, oh and cards are just cards, theyre only a color really, so nothing to be worrying about

seamus

It's a bit like horse racing. A very small number of people actually pay attention to it, but because of the amount of money spent, they're constantly pushing the sport in the media.

Wanderer78

seamus wrote: »

It's a bit like horse racing. A very small number of people actually pay attention to it, but because of the amount of money spent, they're constantly pushing the sport in the media.

im not sure about that, horse racing is huge, gambling is beyond a problem now

Potential-Monke

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I will admit to not watching a full race in a while, so that has changed since I was last watching it. Or maybe I just felt like there wasn't enough. I dunno. I was only ever casual anyway. Even the highlights of modern races aren't that interesting tbh. Something is missing.

If anything passing is too easy now. But the reason is mostly down to tyres having different grip levels so there's a big difference in performance and if you fight then you ruin your tyres.

seamus wrote: »

It's a bit like horse racing. A very small number of people actually pay attention to it, but because of the amount of money spent, they're constantly pushing the sport in the media.

Why doesn't sailing get the same kind of coverage?
Horse racing gets coverage because of gambling, it's a symbiotic relationship with the media/papers. Horse racing has a daily newspaper in the UK like.
F1 got attention because unlike here there's always been a massive motor racing culture in the UK. Even the BTCC used to get massive crowds (might still do) despite being a domestic championship. There is a favouritism towards F1 in the UK over the other racing series due to the teams mostly being located there but it's not must of the reason.

meeeeh

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

the general public turned off when the chance off men dying was reduced to near nothing

That's nonsense. Two teams dominated so strongly(one for 4 years and the other one for what it seems for ever) that the excitement is gone. When the only competition to Hamilton for the win is Bottas you really lose the will to watch the race. It has to do with who is dying but what is going on on the track. And in the last decade tgere was very little excitement. Another reason for people turning off is Croft. The most insufferable sports commentator in history of all sports.

I saw the race when Senna died on tv, I saw the race when Bianchi crashed (tv) and I was sitting on the stands just where Kubica crashed in Canada. I remember very little of the Imola race, I mostly remember Canada as Hamilton's first win. I can't even remember which race Bianchi crashed at. However I remember well Spa when Schumacher was lapping everyone in rain and unfortunately met Culthard who wasn't. I remember Mika's pass in Spa. Those are the moments most of us watch F1 for and not the body count. Unfortunately there is less racing like that nowadays at least for the top positions.

swarlb

Why does everyone tend to hark back to the past, and how 'drivers of today' wouldn't be able to emulate the skills of past champions.
I'm guessing that approaching a corner at 200mph requires slightly more than a 3% driver input. I would also hazard a guess that some of today's drivers are far better than their predecessors in terms of youth, fitness level and in some cases skill. I would also imagine that the rookie at the back of the grid has a level of car handling skill beyond most, just to drive the thing in the first place.
That being said, the races can be seen as dull, as strategy, tyre choice, team tactics seem to play a greater role these days than the past.
Comparing drivers of today with those of yesteryear is a futile exercise, and only worthwhile for armchair debate, like saying was Gallagher a better guitarist than Hendrix, or was such and such a drummer better than some other guy. Flick on YouTube and time of the day and you'll see some unknown 10 year old displaying musical skills that will astound you.
Most people here only watched Formula 1 because of the two Eddies, Jordan and Ervine. And rightly so, it was like the interest in cycling in the 80's because of Kelly and Roche.
Unless you are a die hard fan you'll not pay to watch F1. Then again, I tune in now and again, and have never paid, as C4 show highlights and the odd full race for free.
Ask any professional race driver what they want, and the answer will invariably be the same....The Fastest Car..... end of. If Verstappen could have been offered a Mercedes to drive he'd have jumped at it. The only loyalty these guys have is to winning, (possibly money) but mostly winning. And that's the one thing that is a constant throughout the years. The best team wins, and winners want to be part of the best team.
But don't be fooled into thinking all these guys need to do is sit in the car, and technology takes over, that's far from the case.

ELM327

Watched every season since mid '94. Obsessive fan. Have sky sports pack for the F1 (and NFL).

meeeeh

meeeeh wrote: »

That's nonsense. Two teams dominated so strongly(one for 4 years and the other one for what it seems for ever) that the excitement is gone. When the only competition to Hamilton for the win is Bottas you really lose the will to watch the race. It has to do with who is dying but what is going on on the track. And in the last decade tgere was very little excitement.

That's the main issue. F1 has never seen 7 straight years of dominance by one team. In the 90s you might have had 2 years of real dominance. Even during the Schumacher domination it lasted 5 years and there were a couple of real challengers in there. While Ferrari dominated the FIA changed a load of rules at almost zero notice to try and rein them in. Now they leave the rules pretty much static indefinitely.

guyfo

I see a few "I stopped watching because its all about the car now" type comments and I can't agree at all.

F1 has always been about having the best car, the only difference now is the length of the domination that Mercedes have enjoyed. Think Williams and Mclaren through the 80s and 90s, Ferrari in the 2000s, Red Bull and Merc in the 2010s. Saying that though we could do with a final round title deciders again!

Looking back at drivers who won while not driving the fastest car on the grid over the last 35 years: Prost won against superior Williams in 86, then it was 13 years until Hakkinen beat the Irvine to the title, more of a case of Schumacher missing half the season though. Then Schumacher in 03, Kimi in 07, Hamilton in 08 and arguably Alonso 06 Hamilton in 18.

guyfo

Deleted User wrote: »

While Ferrari dominated the FIA changed a load of rules at almost zero notice to try and rein them in. Now they leave the rules pretty much static indefinitely.

That's a bit much, they changed the cars and engines in 2014, which definitelyshook up the order! Big changes of aero in 2017, banned DAS and changed aero again this year. All they did with Ferrari was change the points system and then put Bridgestone on the back foot in 05.

If anything has has an effect on the domination it's the engine rules, but they have always been stable for years through F1's history.

meeeeh

It's not only about the years someone won in car that was not the fastest. 97, 98 offered some of the most thrilling racing precisely because the best driver wasn't in the best car. 2000 was great for me as a Schumacher fan. The last season I found really entertaining was 2009 just because was so bonkers.

guyfo

guyfo wrote: »

I see a few "I stopped watching because its all about the car now" type comments and I can't agree at all.

F1 has always been about having the best car, the only difference now is the length of the domination that Mercedes have enjoyed. Think Williams and Mclaren through the 80s and 90s, Ferrari in the 2000s, Red Bull and Merc in the 2010s. Saying that though we could do with a final round title deciders again!

Looking back at drivers who won while not driving the fastest car on the grid over the last 35 years: Prost won against superior Williams in 86, then it was 13 years until Hakkinen beat the Irvine to the title, more of a case of Schumacher missing half the season though. Then Schumacher in 03, Kimi in 07, Hamilton in 08 and arguably Alonso 06 Hamilton in 18.

The improved reliability is another thing. You could have the fastest car in the 90s but there was probably a 1 in 3 chance the car wouldn't make it to the end.

guyfo

guyfo wrote: »

That's a bit much, they changed the cars and engines in 2014, which definitelyshook up the order! Big changes of aero in 2017, banned DAS and changed aero again this year. All they did with Ferrari was change the points system and then put Bridgestone on the back foot in 05.

If anything has has an effect on the domination it's the engine rules, but they have always been stable for years through F1's history.

2014 was 7 years ago. That's a long-ass time in F1.
The engines have been stable and will remain stable. The problem is everything has to be commodified now. So with the engines they were basically frozen for a few years. Used to be every team had special engines for Suzuka.
DAS was banned but it wasn't a game-changer to begin with.

dulpit

Hamilton being an extremely unlikeable champion doesn't help, but the netflix series has helped big up the other drivers... I just finished the latest series, and it prompted me to start playing the f1 2020 game which I wouldn't have done otherwise.

guyfo

meeeeh wrote: »

It's not only about the years someone won in car that was not the fastest. 97, 98 offered some of the most thrilling racing precisely because the best driver wasn't in the best car. 2000 was great for me as a Schumacher fan. The last season I found really entertaining was 2009 just because was so bonkers.

That's sort of what I was getting at saying we could do with a few final race deciders again. I was more pointing out that the car being a major factor has always been the case.

One that always sticks out is the "back in the days of Senna vs Prost" as a way of pointing out the glory days... I always think of 88 when Mclaren would have won every single race if a not for a crash at Monza!

I wouldn't agree on 2009, it was another domination style season, granted red bull put on a charge towards the end but 3/4 through it was obvious, Button should have had it wrapped up 3 races from the end.

2012 sticks out for me as the best season in recent memory. Multiple champions on the grid, 8 different race winners including 7 in the first 7 races, down to the wire championship finale with Vettel clawing his way through the field with a car damaged from a spin and contact at the start... class

ELM327

meeeeh wrote: »

It's not only about the years someone won in car that was not the fastest. 97, 98 offered some of the most thrilling racing precisely because the best driver wasn't in the best car. 2000 was great for me as a Schumacher fan. The last season I found really entertaining was 2009 just because was so bonkers.

2012 for me, that was the last real comparison between multiple cars.

Ferrari should have had 16-17-18 but they f00ked up strategies!

ELM327

guyfo wrote: »

That's sort of what I was getting at saying we could do with a few final race deciders again. I was more pointing out that the car being a major factor has always been the case.

One that always sticks out is the "back in the days of Senna vs Prost" as a way of pointing out the glory days... I always think of 88 when Mclaren would have won every single race if a not for a crash at Monza!

I wouldn't agree on 2009, it was another domination style season, granted red bull put on a charge towards the end but 3/4 through it was obvious, Button should have had it wrapped up 3 races from the end.

2012 sticks out for me as the best season in recent memory. Multiple champions on the grid, 8 different race winners including 7 in the first 7 races, down to the wire championship finale with Vettel clawing his way through the field with a car damaged from a spin and contact at the start... class

At least it was senna vs prost.
Not senna vs no one. Like hamilton has had. Repeatedly.

guyfo

Deleted User wrote: »

2014 was 7 years ago. That's a long-ass time in F1.


DAS was banned but it wasn't a game-changer to begin with.

Did you miss the bit where they changed aero regs in 2017 and 2021? That's a shake up of regs after every 3rd season....

I didn't say DAS was a gamechanger, but it was a rule change that only affected Merc, that coupled with the aero changes and it seems to have closed things up this season.

Either way the FIA havent just kept the same rules for years on end, they have tried to change things around just like they did with Ferrari. Mercedes have just plain out performed the other teams every time the rules were shaken up since 2013, hopefully that will have changed this year.

Dr. Bre

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I think, like soccer, the more technical it got, the less entertaining to the general fans. The "real" F1 fans will debate millisecond time increases due to efficiency in modern engines with modern tyres, etc, etc. Most general consumers don't care about that, they want to see head to head battles, overtaking, close calls, crashes. It's all gone very safe (probably rightly so too) but I think that takes some of the thrill out of it. I used to watch a good bit in the late 90s, and watching some modern races, they barely overtake anymore. The sense of danger is gone, and that's part of the thrill of F1 for me, like basically any rally stage, the unknown of what could happen, the close calls or last millisecond saves.

I'm sure someone can come along and explain why there's less overtaking, most likely due to the technological marvels that are the cars these days. But it's like watching soccer, very few games are actually entertaining. And the players, or in F1 case, drivers, it's nearly more about them than the event. Maybe some day the danger will come back, and we'll slowly move towards a Death Race scenario. I'd pay money to see that!

It’s football bro

Wibbs

As a kid in the 70's I used to watch it with my dad, my main memories would be crashes and Lauda being nearly killed I remember very clearly. The 80's and the turbo era was worth watching and that continued into the 90's. Watching Senna being killed shook me I have to admit and interest waned a little after that. I tried watching it since but have found it bland and the drivers even blander. I recall reading somewhere that F1 lost over half of its global audience between 95 and 2005, or something like that. Maybe the electric formulas will claw back some viewers, but I doubt it.

I suspect - and granted this may be an oddball angle from me here - that part of the lack of wider interest in motorsport compared to the past is that people, let's be honest mostly men, are less directly involved with their personal cars. When cars required more hands on attention from the average owner of a weekend so they'd be capable of bringing you to work of a Monday there was more interest in cars in general and motorsport in particular. These days the average person wouldn't ever need to open the bonnet and if anything does go wrong it's the dealer who sorts that stuff out.

guyfo

ELM327 wrote: »

At least it was senna vs prost.
Not senna vs no one. Like hamilton has had. Repeatedly.

Can't argue with that all right, but I was talking about the domination of a team, and that level of performance was mind boggling. Put Max or Russell in the car beside Hamilton and we could easily have one of those seasons again, just like 2016.

guyfo

Wibbs wrote: »

I suspect - and granted this may be an oddball angle from me here - that part of the lack of wider interest in motorsport compared to the past is that people, let's be honest mostly men, are less directly involved with their personal cars. When cars required more hands on attention from the average owner of a weekend so they'd be capable of bringing you to work of a Monday there was more interest in cars in general and motorsport in particular. These days the average person wouldn't ever need to open the bonnet and if anything does go wrong it's the dealer who sorts that stuff out.

Nail on the head there on that one, the amount of younger people interested in cars/motorsport in general now is a fraction of what it used to be, and Bernie only caring about rolexes and TV coverage in the age of social media certainly didn't help. I see a change recently under liberty media, time will tell.

El_Duderino 09

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I think, like soccer, the more technical it got, the less entertaining to the general fans. The "real" F1 fans will debate millisecond time increases due to efficiency in modern engines with modern tyres, etc, etc. Most general consumers don't care about that, they want to see head to head battles, overtaking, close calls, crashes. It's all gone very safe (probably rightly so too) but I think that takes some of the thrill out of it. I used to watch a good bit in the late 90s, and watching some modern races, they barely overtake anymore. The sense of danger is gone, and that's part of the thrill of F1 for me, like basically any rally stage, the unknown of what could happen, the close calls or last millisecond saves.

I'm sure someone can come along and explain why there's less overtaking, most likely due to the technological marvels that are the cars these days. But it's like watching soccer, very few games are actually entertaining. And the players, or in F1 case, drivers, it's nearly more about them than the event. Maybe some day the danger will come back, and we'll slowly move towards a Death Race scenario. I'd pay money to see that!

The overtaking is a red herring. They overtake more in the last few years than any time in the last 40 years. The 90s was a low point though. If you watch a highlight reel of the 80's you might get the impression they were the glory days, but that's the point of a highlights clip.

https://imgur.com/jk1hmZq

The fact that it's not on free to air and the fact that everyone else isn't watching it and talking about it is the main reason it's fallen out of popular culture. I think soccer is a great example. Most people who follow soccer, follow it as a soap opera rather than being hardcore fans of the sport itself. It's great for us vs them, it has highlights shows, column inches and people discuss it as if they actually understand the sport. It provides a little community with a common interest. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with people who don't really have a clue about sport having strong opinions on the technicalities - it's just sport, it's not real life. But i doubt half as many people would watch football if they had to watch it on their own and had nobody to talk to about it.

The 90s were great as an Irish F1 fan. Jordan and Eddie Irvine were involved, it was free on RTE, it had column inches sand news coverage so everyone had an idea about what was going on and it was easy to chat about it. The lads would chat about it in school or work on Monday. F1 has become a solitary sport and you rarely have anyone to talk with about it. I'm lucky because we have a group of 4 who meet up to watch the races together in one of the lads houses, bring a couple of cans and a frozen pizza - nice Sunday afternoon with the lads watching the F1 (pre covid, obvs). We also go to a race once a year if we can organise it. If you have a community to watch it with then it becomes much more interesting again.

Timberrrrrrrr

Not sure if this jhas been mentioned yet, I haven't watched much F1 myself over the last few years but got into the Netflix program drive to survive which takes you more behind the scenes and is not just about the drivers, really funny and informative. A good watch for fans even if you dont watch as much anymore.

guyfo

guyfo wrote: »

Did you miss the bit where they changed aero regs in 2017 and 2021? That's a shake up of regs after every 3rd season....

I didn't say DAS was a gamechanger, but it was a rule change that only affected Merc, that coupled with the aero changes and it seems to have closed things up this season.

It's been small changes though, especially for this season. There's been one "big" revision in 7 years and it wasn't massive. The engine regs being stable is one thing but it used to be that engine rules would come in, one manufacturer would be better and the other would catch up over a couple of years.

Either way the FIA havent just kept the same rules for years on end, they have tried to change things around just like they did with Ferrari. Mercedes have just plain out performed the other teams every time the rules were shaken up since 2013, hopefully that will have changed this year.

In the past they'd change the tyres completely. Either go to slicks. Or to grooved tyres. Or make them have to last the whole race. Or reduce wing width by 20/30%. Or increase it.

KungPao

A peeve of mine is commentators and fans calling the drivers by their first name like they are our pals. Seems a fairly recent thing. “Max is a tenth behind Lewis. Valtteri won’t be happy with his position. Seb and Kimi are **** these days” etc.

In my day it was Schumacher, Senna, Hakkinen, Irvine. Or full names of course.

I don’t remember Murray Walker ever saying “look at that! Oh my word! Ayrton and Alain have crashed!”

meeeeh

KungPao wrote: »

A peeve of mine is commentators and fans calling the drivers by their first name like they are our pals. Seems a fairly recent thing. “Max is a tenth behind Lewis. Valtteri won’t be happy with his position. Seb and Kimi are **** these days” etc.

In my day it was Schumacher, Senna, Hakkinen, Irvine. Or full names of course.

I don’t remember Murray Walker ever saying “look at that! Oh my word! Ayrton and Alain have crashed!”

I think it's more laziness. Drivers whose surnames are easier to type or say addressed by their name and those whose names are easier are addressed by their name.

Anyway I didn't mean that 2009 was particularly great for racing, it was just boners with Honda exiting the sport, Ross Brown scrambling to et the money together to take over the team and then winning the championship.

BrianD3

Much more overtaking and closer racing than there used to be, the teams at the back are also much more professional and closer to those at the front than in the 80s and 90s. However they rarely score points as the cars are so reliable. As is the case with most sports, it is slicker, more corporate, more homogenised and more sanitised than it used to be. There is also IMO a bigger gulf between it and "grassroots" motorsport than ever.

Back in say 1989-1992 the cars looked and sounded very different to each other and there was a huge number of teams (many of them no hopers, more like a cottage industry) compared to today. V8s, V10s, V12s. Many engine manufacturers. Murray Walker and James Hunt commentary. Classic tracks like Imola and Hockenheim. At the time it was considered to be a relatively safe sport and considerably more so than it had been even 10 years previously so maybe there were complaints about it being sanitised at that time, i can't remember. There were definitely a lot of complaints about lack of overtaking.

If Senna was in F1 today and did what he did at the 1990 Japanese GP, he'd probably be banned for many races if not for life! As it was, he wasn't sanctioned at all.

I think Senna's death in 1994 and the publicity associated with it actually gave the sport a boost in popularity for a while at least.

I agree with the points about it not being on FTA TV - imagine if we had today's HD TV and slick production combined with FTA and V10 engines! I also agree with Wibbs' point about young lads not being as interested in cars as young lads of the past. Things are different now, so many other distractions.

megaten

Actually started watching races last year after watching Drive to Survive during the first lockdown. Not from much of a sporting family so never really had a 'in' to following any sports. I found the series to be a good primer for the key players and the general dynamics between teams and the amount of people involved is low enough that its fairly easy to keep track of everyone important.

Hyperbollix

For me personally it fell into the same trap as premier league football. No characters, no blood and thunder competition, too sanitized, too corporate.

In the past they seemed to be sportsmen first, corporate billboards and yesmen second. Or in many cases, only the former and not the latter.

I'm in no way someone who wants or needs to see legs getting broken on a pitch or F1 cars hitting walls at 180mph. But in both sports, all the thrill, spontaneity and danger has been wiped away, partly in the name of safety and mainly in the name of good business practice.