 | |
Re: Boring Grand Prix
Formula 1 Formula 1 motor racing discusions (rec.autos.sport.f1)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
 
| ||||||
| ||||||
|
Re: Boring Grand Prix -
11-06-2009
, 07:15 PM
|
I wrote this in '05 or '06. I've posted this to other groups before but not here so I thought some may find it worth reading. ------- F1 is not about instant gratification. I slept like a baby but hey when that alarm rang at 6:00am I was up like a shot, showered and dressed ready to go by 6:15am. "C'mon we'll be late", "But it doesn't start for 8 hours!" replied my wife. "Practice is at 10:00" was my reply, with coaxing and after breakfast we were in the Ligier pit by 8.00 Jacques arrived much later but we had a chance to talk with his affiable team mate Philippe Streiff. |
Quote:
|
Practice was confusing (we had a lot to learn) the wrong blokes were quick, eeck our favourites looked positively slow! A visit to our mates in the support paddock and a few support races including the new to us and hilarious celebrity challenge and we were back in our seats, TV tuned in and ready for "the race". If you weren't there you cannot imagine the anticipation in the grandstand, it was electrifying everybody half on their bums and half on the balls of their toes no wonder the entire track rose to it's feet a second before the turbos exploded forward. MEEEOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWW, they were off Mansell (a favourite of mine) was in the lead then that bloody young Senna took him off (insert rye smile, I know millions would disagree). The great Rosberg took the lead with young Senna chasing hard then Prost moved to third, that's a danger (I'm also a Rosberg and Williams fan). Piquet moved up with the great Aussie Alan Jones in the pathetic Lola in SIXTH! from a lowly nineteen on the grid, WOW Go Alan! but we were dreaming and AJ's Lola's engine expired. Prost's McLaren expired too and Lauda moved to fourth, now that's a real danger he's won from there many times. We now had Rosberg, Senna, Surer (who's he) and Mr Lauda. Then Rosberg pits and the inexperienced young Senna clips the rear of the Williams losing his front wing BUT he presses on (Oh NO! more inexperience). Rosberg passes Senna and finally he (Senna) pits. Surer disappears (OK, I can't remember everything) and Lauda is SECOND! Damn how does he do it? just when you reckon your blokes got the win the great Niki appears and snatches it away :-( ... but then Senna charges past Niki jeeze he's quick! Keke pits, it goes wrong Oh NO! Lauda is looking terribly good, what a finish to a great career in F1 but we were dreaming again Niki's brakes were toast and he expires dramatically into the wall when his disc explodes at the end of Brabham straight giving Senna the lead with Keke second and Alboreto third, no Alboreto pits, it's a long stop, oh no he's out ... Who's third? YeeeHawwww it's Jacques. At this point perhaps I'd better explain my extacism, the nicest bloke in F1 was third, my fellow smoking mate Keke, the only bloke in pit lane allowed to light a fag had stood next to me on Friday so I wasn't thrown out AND who drives for Williams was second, and the new boy an undisputed future champion was leading, what more could you ask for? Then sadly the new prodigy experienced the sadest of retirements when his Lotus engine expired almost within site of that chequered flag. Never mind, Keke is LEADING! Keke stopped again for tyres but only because his lead was unassailable and then when we thought the drama was all done the third placed man (Jacques team mate) ran straight up his (Jacques) backside, Jacques continued relatively undamaged but Phillipe Streiffe suffered the indignity of driving the last lap minus his front wheel, luckily he retained third place and celebrations continued well into the next day, I can reassure you a great time was had by all. OK, I was pretty sloshed and don't recall much but hey can you blame me? So that was my first real GP! After the grand prix Jaques was asked about Steifs collision with him, he puffed his cheeks and blew through his lips and in his typical way said "What can I say ... " The interviewer was disappointed but those around understood that what he said meant "hey Philip made a mistake, he is young ... It is no big deal, life goes on." Some would say that's the only reason why he never won a championship and they might be right but when ever his name comes up around F1 circles, even today, people smile and you can often see a remembered incident or familiar affection for the man, I wonder if that is not worth more than all the world championships put together? |
Certainly the proof on when they're allegedly "avoidable" is questionable.
Quote:
|
Oh yeah, boring grand prix. Grands Prix of the eighties, just like my school days of the 60's are not the same today, or, are they? We all remember the good times, history glosses over events enhancing their appeal and items even creep in that maybe just never happened. Go on admit it, we all do it. Reality says Keke probably endured my company till he finished his fag, Malboro drivers are paid to endure our company and Jaques, well he's still a great bloke. and apart from blokes trying to knock each other off the track there wasn't much overtaking, so what was so damn great about it? and why was the Aussie public so captivated by it? For one I'd say they were reasonably well educated about F1. Sprinkled through the grand stands were blokes like us who helped those around us identify the cars and drivers etc, it was the Australian way. The local TV broadcaster did a great job of educating viewers even slotting in a late night replay of the action. Showing viewers how to identify each car. Mansell has a red nose, Roseberg a white one etc. So viewers knew who they were looking at. Articles on tyres, pit stops, speed comparisons etc. The local papers and magazines were full of similar stuff. Somewhat easier than trying to id a helmet half hidden by a cockpit. |
Quote:
|
I don't think I've seen anything like it since, even dedicated F1 magazines rarely run educational articles instead they are full of dumbed down insights into the color of Fernandos eyes. Hey, who cares about the colour of his eyes or the size of his bank account? We want to hear about Renaults failure to match Ferrari's flexi-wing, why their strategy at Imola failed etc. And looking further back, who's to say that the old blokes that I know are not polishing the Fangio years? Was it really enthralling watching the same bloke move from the best team to the next years best team and so on (which he definitely did), totally dominating every second Grand prix? I doubt it! That said, I envy them. I could go on about Grands Prix I've seen before and since Aust in '85 like the Mansell Senna battle in Spain, etc etc but quite often a great race to one man is boring to another. Take the recent GP at Imola, I saw a bloke describe it as "uneventful"! was he watching the cricket? A car barrel rolled on the first lap putting the driver in dire peril. Button worried about his strategy tried to take his fuel rig onto the track (in case he needed a top up) and in the process took down half his pit crew. The leaders (FA and MS) diced for the lead lap after lap. Hmmmm, uneventful? No it wasn't but some viewers will never be satisfied unless there's an incident every second lap. OK we can't expect to satisfy them but what about the rest? Oh, there's no denying that it's ceased being a "procession" in the last |
something back. This statement is probably anachronistic to what you were
saying of course.
Quote:
|
In recent years I've become more absorbed by team strategy to the stage where I've developed a little application to predict the final placings, for instance Kimi while running ninth (from memory) was actually leading the Malaysian GP this year albeit on elapsed and predicted times and sure enough he ran second due to Alonsos stunning laps before his fuel stop, fascinating stuff (kept me enthralled anyway). But, how many viewers are motivated enough to go to those lengths to understand and follow the sport? Not many and in this day and age of instant gratification a decreasing number too. Yet as the sport of Grand Prix racing progresses so too does the complexity. Take the new qualifying format, while it has solved the main problems with the old format it has also introduced a quite complex set of rules. How many of you know (or care) about the 110% rule for the final segment? [The FIA replaces fuel used up in the final session but only for laps within 110% of the fastest time for that car] One? Two? ... Not many and yet this has already caught out the Ferrari team costing them valuable fuel and at least one championship point. So what's my point? To understand and enjoy a Formula One race you need to understand an increasingly complex set of rules. Now over the broad spectrum of viewers that is just not going to happen. In the eighties they may have been willing to learn a simpler set of rules but in the 21st century even the most harden fan would be hard pressed to know all the rules and most want *Instant Gratification* they want to see what is going on without reading an encyclopedic rule book. Viewers just want to see a group of blokes line up and race (with dicing and overtaking) to the finish with the best driver winning. We don't want F1 dumbed down to the level of a control formula like Formula Ford or artificial results introduced as with Indy Cars this is and should be the pinnacle of Motor Sport but F1 needs a set of rules that at least ostensibly can be understood by the average viewer so they can follow, understand and enjoy a race. However don't expect instant gratification! F1 will always (and should) require a certain amount of knowledge of the rules. Well I've rambled on too long and run out of time so the last bit will be short. However the racing needs to be close and exciting with drivers overtaking on the circuit. How can that be achieved? Simple introduce more rules. The more rules the less the fans will understand it and turn off. So poor old Max Mosley is caught between a rock and a hard place. But! he is at least having a go and understands the problems. His approach and ongoing proposals are winning over the teams and manufacturers and drawing new competitors to the arena in the expectation of increased viewers. The racing *is* close now. From 3s per lap down to about 1/2s per lap. |
driver. Vettel demonstrated it in Italy last year. When Schumacher was
racing, it wouldn't have been a win, it would have been a podium finish at
best.
Quote:
|
If you edit this down and expand the last bit it should make a good article. Hope it helps, |
One small point however. In previous years there was *one* wing at both
ends. When that changed, the racing started to. I can't recall how that
co-incides with the engine freeze, but one certainly could cause the other
to be arguably necessary.
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
build <buildy (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in news:72505f34-1e73-4b94-9bf8-a39ec441ec1a (AT) j9g2000prh (DOT) googlegroups.com: I wrote this in '05 or '06. I've posted this to other groups before but not here so I thought some may find it worth reading. ------- F1 is not about instant gratification. I slept like a baby but hey when that alarm rang at 6:00am I was up like a shot, showered and dressed ready to go by 6:15am. "C'mon we'll be late", "But it doesn't start for 8 hours!" replied my wife. "Practice is at 10:00" was my reply, with coaxing and after breakfast we were in the Ligier pit by 8.00 Jacques arrived much later but we had a chance to talk with his affiable team mate Philippe Streiff. You still married to her? Remarkable <g>. Practice was confusing (we had a lot to learn) the wrong blokes were quick, eeck our favourites looked positively slow! A visit to our mates in the support paddock and a few support races including the new to us and hilarious celebrity challenge and we were back in our seats, TV tuned in and ready for "the race". If you weren't there you cannot imagine the anticipation in the grandstand, it was electrifying everybody half on their bums and half on the balls of their toes no wonder the entire track rose to it's feet a second before the turbos exploded forward. MEEEOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWW, they were off Mansell (a favourite of mine) was in the lead then that bloody young Senna took him off (insert rye smile, I know millions would disagree). The great Rosberg took the lead with young Senna chasing hard then Prost moved to third, that's a danger (I'm also a Rosberg and Williams fan). Piquet moved up with the great Aussie Alan Jones in the pathetic Lola in SIXTH! from a lowly nineteen on the grid, WOW Go Alan! but we were dreaming and AJ's Lola's engine expired. Prost's McLaren expired too and Lauda moved to fourth, now that's a real danger he's won from there many times. We now had Rosberg, Senna, Surer (who's he) and Mr Lauda. Then Rosberg pits and the inexperienced young Senna clips the rear of the Williams losing his front wing BUT he presses on (Oh NO! more inexperience). Rosberg passes Senna and finally he (Senna) pits. Surer disappears (OK, I can't remember everything) and Lauda is SECOND! Damn how does he do it? just when you reckon your blokes got the win the great Niki appears and snatches it away :-( ... but then Senna charges past Niki jeeze he's quick! Keke pits, it goes wrong Oh NO! Lauda is looking terribly good, what a finish to a great career in F1 but we were dreaming again Niki's brakes were toast and he expires dramatically into the wall when his disc explodes at the end of Brabham straight giving Senna the lead with Keke second and Alboreto third, no Alboreto pits, it's a long stop, oh no he's out ... Who's third? YeeeHawwww it's Jacques. At this point perhaps I'd better explain my extacism, the nicest bloke in F1 was third, my fellow smoking mate Keke, the only bloke in pit lane allowed to light a fag had stood next to me on Friday so I wasn't thrown out AND who drives for Williams was second, and the new boy an undisputed future champion was leading, what more could you ask for? Then sadly the new prodigy experienced the sadest of retirements when his Lotus engine expired almost within site of that chequered flag. Never mind, Keke is LEADING! Keke stopped again for tyres but only because his lead was unassailable and then when we thought the drama was all done the third placed man (Jacques team mate) ran straight up his (Jacques) backside, Jacques continued relatively undamaged but Phillipe Streiffe suffered the indignity of driving the last lap minus his front wheel, luckily he retained third place and celebrations continued well into the next day, I can reassure you a great time was had by all. OK, I was pretty sloshed and don't recall much but hey can you blame me? So that was my first real GP! After the grand prix Jaques was asked about Steifs collision with him, he puffed his cheeks and blew through his lips and in his typical way said "What can I say ... " The interviewer was disappointed but those around understood that what he said meant "hey Philip made a mistake, he is young ... It is no big deal, life goes on." Some would say that's the only reason why he never won a championship and they might be right but when ever his name comes up around F1 circles, even today, people smile and you can often see a remembered incident or familiar affection for the man, I wonder if that is not worth more than all the world championships put together? We certainly need more of that perspective about accidental contact now. Certainly the proof on when they're allegedly "avoidable" is questionable. Oh yeah, boring grand prix. Grands Prix of the eighties, just like my school days of the 60's are not the same today, or, are they? We all remember the good times, history glosses over events enhancing their appeal and items even creep in that maybe just never happened. Go on admit it, we all do it. Reality says Keke probably endured my company till he finished his fag, Malboro drivers are paid to endure our company and Jaques, well he's still a great bloke. and apart from blokes trying to knock each other off the track there wasn't much overtaking, so what was so damn great about it? and why was the Aussie public so captivated by it? For one I'd say they were reasonably well educated about F1. Sprinkled through the grand stands were blokes like us who helped those around us identify the cars and drivers etc, it was the Australian way. The local TV broadcaster did a great job of educating viewers even slotting in a late night replay of the action. Showing viewers how to identify each car. Mansell has a red nose, Roseberg a white one etc. So viewers knew who they were looking at. Articles on tyres, pit stops, speed comparisons etc. The local papers and magazines were full of similar stuff. Somewhat easier than trying to id a helmet half hidden by a cockpit. I don't think I've seen anything like it since, even dedicated F1 magazines rarely run educational articles instead they are full of dumbed down insights into the color of Fernandos eyes. Hey, who cares about the colour of his eyes or the size of his bank account? We want to hear about Renaults failure to match Ferrari's flexi-wing, why their strategy at Imola failed etc. And looking further back, who's to say that the old blokes that I know are not polishing the Fangio years? Was it really enthralling watching the same bloke move from the best team to the next years best team and so on (which he definitely did), totally dominating every second Grand prix? I doubt it! That said, I envy them. I could go on about Grands Prix I've seen before and since Aust in '85 like the Mansell Senna battle in Spain, etc etc but quite often a great race to one man is boring to another. Take the recent GP at Imola, I saw a bloke describe it as "uneventful"! was he watching the cricket? A car barrel rolled on the first lap putting the driver in dire peril. Button worried about his strategy tried to take his fuel rig onto the track (in case he needed a top up) and in the process took down half his pit crew. The leaders (FA and MS) diced for the lead lap after lap. Hmmmm, uneventful? No it wasn't but some viewers will never be satisfied unless there's an incident every second lap. OK we can't expect to satisfy them but what about the rest? Oh, there's no denying that it's ceased being a "procession" in the last couple of years, but opening up engine development certainly would give something back. This statement is probably anachronistic to what you were saying of course. |
start on the engines again, one take. But, in the end, this can only lead to
a greater dominance by the best engine. Ok, not exactly, but its going to
contribute.
I think the engine freeze has helped close the field and is at least
partially responsibly for the recent great racing. More now seems to be in
the hands of the driver.
I am kind of torn because to me "pure" F1 should be each team building every
part of its own car. But standardising various parts and freezing some
development has certainly coincided with 3 great seasons of racing, after a
dire fist full of boring seasons where the teams had more freedom. So to me,
we either compromise the "purity" of F1, or have great racing. Both cannot
happen at the same time.
Or am I missing some thing?
AC
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
"APLer" <AP... (AT) floor (DOT) tilde> wrote in message news:Xns9CBBC3ABCD1F6APLer (AT) 127 (DOT) 0.0.1... build <bui... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in news:72505f34-1e73-4b94-9bf8-a39ec441ec1a (AT) j9g2000prh (DOT) googlegroups.com: I wrote this in '05 or '06. I've posted this to other groups before but not here so I thought some may find it worth reading. ------- F1 is not about instant gratification. I slept like a baby but hey when that alarm rang at 6:00am I was up like a shot, showered and dressed ready to go by 6:15am. "C'mon we'll be late", "But it doesn't start for 8 hours!" replied my wife. "Practice is at 10:00" was my reply, with coaxing and after breakfast we were in the Ligier pit by 8.00 Jacques arrived much later but we had a chance to talk with his affiable team mate Philippe Streiff. You still married to her? Remarkable <g>. Practice was confusing (we had a lot to learn) the wrong blokes were quick, eeck our favourites looked positively slow! A visit to our mates in the support paddock and a few support races including the new to us and hilarious celebrity challenge and we were back in our seats, TV tuned in and ready for "the race". If you weren't there you cannot imagine the anticipation in the grandstand, it was electrifying everybody half on their bums and half on the balls of their toes no wonder the entire track rose to it's feet a second before the turbos exploded forward. MEEEOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWW, they were off Mansell (a favourite of mine) was in the lead then that bloody young Senna took him off (insert rye smile, I know millions would disagree). The great Rosberg took the lead with young Senna chasing hard then Prost moved to third, that's a danger (I'm also a Rosberg and Williams fan). Piquet moved up with the great Aussie Alan Jones in the pathetic Lola in SIXTH! from a lowly nineteen on the grid, WOW Go Alan! but we were dreaming and AJ's Lola's engine expired. Prost's McLaren expired too and Lauda moved to fourth, now that's a real danger he's won from there many times. We now had Rosberg, Senna, Surer (who's he) and Mr Lauda. Then Rosberg pits and the inexperienced young Senna clips the rear of the Williams losing his front wing BUT he presses on (Oh NO! more inexperience). Rosberg passes Senna and finally he (Senna) pits. Surer disappears (OK, I can't remember everything) and Lauda is SECOND! Damn how does he do it? just when you reckon your blokes got the win the great Niki appears and snatches it away :-( ... but then Senna charges past Niki jeeze he's quick! Keke pits, it goes wrong Oh NO! Lauda is looking terribly good, what a finish to a great career in F1 but we were dreaming again Niki's brakes were toast and he expires dramatically into the wall when his disc explodes at the end of Brabham straight giving Senna the lead with Keke second and Alboreto third, no Alboreto pits, it's a long stop, oh no he's out ... Who's third? YeeeHawwww it's Jacques. At this point perhaps I'd better explain my extacism, the nicest bloke in F1 was third, my fellow smoking mate Keke, the only bloke in pit lane allowed to light a fag had stood next to me on Friday so I wasn't thrown out AND who drives for Williams was second, and the new boy an undisputed future champion was leading, what more could you ask for? Then sadly the new prodigy experienced the sadest of retirements when his Lotus engine expired almost within site of that chequered flag. Never mind, Keke is LEADING! Keke stopped again for tyres but only because his lead was unassailable and then when we thought the drama was all done the third placed man (Jacques team mate) ran straight up his (Jacques) backside, Jacques continued relatively undamaged but Phillipe Streiffe suffered the indignity of driving the last lap minus his front wheel, luckily he retained third place and celebrations continued well into the next day, I can reassure you a great time was had by all. OK, I was pretty sloshed and don't recall much but hey can you blame me? So that was my first real GP! After the grand prix Jaques was asked about Steifs collision with him, he puffed his cheeks and blew through his lips and in his typical way said "What can I say ... " The interviewer was disappointed but those around understood that what he said meant "hey Philip made a mistake, he is young ... It is no big deal, life goes on." Some would say that's the only reason why he never won a championship and they might be right but when ever his name comes up around F1 circles, even today, people smile and you can often see a remembered incident or familiar affection for the man, I wonder if that is not worth more than all the world championships put together? We certainly need more of that perspective about accidental contact now.. Certainly the proof on when they're allegedly "avoidable" is questionable. Oh yeah, boring grand prix. Grands Prix of the eighties, just like my school days of the 60's are not the same today, or, are they? We all remember the good times, history glosses over events enhancing their appeal and items even creep in that maybe just never happened. Go on admit it, we all do it. Reality says Keke probably endured my company till he finished his fag, Malboro drivers are paid to endure our company and Jaques, well he's still a great bloke. and apart from blokes trying to knock each other off the track there wasn't much overtaking, so what was so damn great about it? and why was the Aussie public so captivated by it? For one I'd say they were reasonably well educated about F1. Sprinkled through the grand stands were blokes like us who helped those around us identify the cars and drivers etc, it was the Australian way. The local TV broadcaster did a great job of educating viewers even slotting in a late night replay of the action. Showing viewers how to identify each car. Mansell has a red nose, Roseberg a white one etc. So viewers knew who they were looking at. Articles on tyres, pit stops, speed comparisons etc. The local papers and magazines were full of similar stuff. Somewhat easier than trying to id a helmet half hidden by a cockpit. I don't think I've seen anything like it since, even dedicated F1 magazines rarely run educational articles instead they are full of dumbed down insights into the color of Fernandos eyes. Hey, who cares about the colour of his eyes or the size of his bank account? We want to hear about Renaults failure to match Ferrari's flexi-wing, why their strategy at Imola failed etc. And looking further back, who's to say that the old blokes that I know are not polishing the Fangio years? Was it really enthralling watching the same bloke move from the best team to the next years best team and so on (which he definitely did), totally dominating every second Grand prix? I doubt it! That said, I envy them. I could go on about Grands Prix I've seen before and since Aust in '85 like the Mansell Senna battle in Spain, etc etc but quite often a great race to one man is boring to another. Take the recent GP at Imola, I saw a bloke describe it as "uneventful"! was he watching the cricket? A car barrel rolled on the first lap putting the driver in dire peril. Button worried about his strategy tried to take his fuel rig onto the track (in case he needed a top up) and in the process took down half his pit crew. The leaders (FA and MS) diced for the lead lap after lap. Hmmmm, uneventful? No it wasn't but some viewers will never be satisfied unless there's an incident every second lap. OK we can't expect to satisfy them but what about the rest? Oh, there's no denying that it's ceased being a "procession" in the last couple of years, but opening up engine development certainly would give something back. This statement is probably anachronistic to what you were saying of course. I don't get the objection to the engine freeze. It seem to me that if the start on the engines again, one take. But, in the end, this can only leadto a greater dominance by the best engine. Ok, not exactly, but its going to contribute. I think the engine freeze has helped close the field and is at least partially responsibly for the recent great racing. More now seems to be in the hands of the driver. I am kind of torn because to me "pure" F1 should be each team building every part of its own car. But standardising various parts and freezing some development has certainly coincided with 3 great seasons of racing, aftera dire fist full of boring seasons where the teams had more freedom. So to me, we either compromise the "purity" of F1, or have great racing. Both cannot happen at the same time. Or am I missing some thing? AC |
That was written in '06.
The engine freeze was a master stroke conceived by smarter men that I
beers,
build
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
You still married to her? Remarkable <g>. |
that chance a second time ;-)
beers,
build
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
"APLer" <APLer (AT) floor (DOT) tilde> wrote in message news:Xns9CBBC3ABCD1F6APLer (AT) 127 (DOT) 0.0.1... build <buildy (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in news:72505f34-1e73-4b94-9bf8-a39ec441ec1a (AT) j9g2000prh (DOT) googlegroups.com: Oh, there's no denying that it's ceased being a "procession" in the last couple of years, but opening up engine development certainly would give something back. This statement is probably anachronistic to what you were saying of course. I don't get the objection to the engine freeze. It seem to me that if the start on the engines again, one take. But, in the end, this can only lead to a greater dominance by the best engine. Ok, not exactly, but its going to contribute. I think the engine freeze has helped close the field and is at least partially responsibly for the recent great racing. More now seems to be in the hands of the driver. I am kind of torn because to me "pure" F1 should be each team building every part of its own car. But standardising various parts and freezing some development has certainly coincided with 3 great seasons of racing, after a dire fist full of boring seasons where the teams had more freedom. So to me, we either compromise the "purity" of F1, or have great racing. Both cannot happen at the same time. Or am I missing some thing? Well to be honest, my objection to the engine freeze is on purely |
development on *anything* it should be everything. Your point is valid,
but I see it as a kind of stacking the deck: they aren't winning with the
best cars and drivers anymore with the added randomness of mistakes due to
constant development on both sides. They're winning because their car is
tuned to perfection aerodynamically.
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
Namely that if you're going to allow development on *anything* it should be everything. |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
"AC" <xxx (AT) xxx (DOT) xxx> wrote in news:605Jm.59215$Dl6.46350 (AT) newsfe16 (DOT) ams2: [quoted text muted] great racing. Both cannot happen at the same time. Or am I missing some thing? Well to be honest, my objection to the engine freeze is on purely principal grounds (or so I believe). Namely that if you're going to allow development on *anything* it should be everything. Your point is valid, but I see it as a kind of stacking the deck: they aren't winning with the best cars and drivers anymore with the added randomness of mistakes due to constant development on both sides. They're winning because their car is tuned to perfection aerodynamically. |
"I want midgets!"
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
"APLer" <APLer (AT) floor (DOT) tilde> wrote in message ... build <buildy (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in I wrote this in '05 or '06. F1 is not about instant gratification. ---- (snip) So that was my first real GP! I could go on about Grands Prix I've seen before and since Aust in '85 |
Very validly and properly, we each have memories
of times that we view as "the golden age in F1". YMMV.
Quote:
|
I don't think I've seen anything like it since, even dedicated F1 magazines rarely run educational articles instead they are full of dumbed down insights into the color of Fernandos eyes. Hey, who cares about the colour of his eyes or the size of his bank account? We want to hear about Renaults failure to match Ferrari's flexi-wing, why their strategy at Imola failed etc. |
Quote:
|
I am kind of torn because to me "pure" F1 should be each team building every part of its own car. |
Ferrari, Vanwall, BRM and Porsche were good and "pure",
while Cooper (with Climax engines), and later Lotus
(also Climax) were, ahh 'bastards'?
(But, perhaps at times it's the "bastards" in life that
intrigue us, and we find fascinating?)
And Brabham self starting up with modest finances,
may be semi-forgiven by starting up 'unpure',
but when he got a national effort together and
won WDCs & WCCs with Brabham-Repco,
he became ok and "pure"?
Was Gurney with his national effort of Eagle-Westlake
also good and "pure" to you? (seemed dandy to me!)
And Honda's effort finally winning with Ginther and
Surtees appears nice and "pure" (interesting & fun to me).
#9
| |||
| |||
|
|
"AC" <xxx (AT) xxx (DOT) xxx> wrote in message ... "APLer" <APLer (AT) floor (DOT) tilde> wrote in message ... build <buildy (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote in I wrote this in '05 or '06. F1 is not about instant gratification. ---- (snip) So that was my first real GP! I could go on about Grands Prix I've seen before and since Aust in '85 Very nice to read, thank you. Very validly and properly, we each have memories of times that we view as "the golden age in F1". YMMV. I don't think I've seen anything like it since, even dedicated F1 magazines rarely run educational articles instead they are full of dumbed down insights into the color of Fernandos eyes. Hey, who cares about the colour of his eyes or the size of his bank account? We want to hear about Renaults failure to match Ferrari's flexi-wing, why their strategy at Imola failed etc. Sounds valid to me. I am kind of torn because to me "pure" F1 should be each team building every part of its own car. So, to your view (putting context in one of my favorite eras) Ferrari, Vanwall, BRM and Porsche were good and "pure", while Cooper (with Climax engines), and later Lotus (also Climax) were, ahh 'bastards'? (But, perhaps at times it's the "bastards" in life that intrigue us, and we find fascinating?) And Brabham self starting up with modest finances, may be semi-forgiven by starting up 'unpure', but when he got a national effort together and won WDCs & WCCs with Brabham-Repco, he became ok and "pure"? Was Gurney with his national effort of Eagle-Westlake also good and "pure" to you? (seemed dandy to me!) And Honda's effort finally winning with Ginther and Surtees appears nice and "pure" (interesting & fun to me). |
indeed interesting and fun - many times the equal and better of the
"pure" teams. And innovative, the Repco engine(for instance) was based
on the little Olds/Buick Alloy V8, Climax started out with a modified
fire pump engine (their own) though the Weslake V12 was all new. I
suppose the DFV fitted to the Lotus 49 made that a bastard too? Roll on
bastards say I!
--
Chris
I am not young enough to know everything.
Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900)
#10
| |||
| |||
|
|
So what's my point? To understand and enjoy a Formula One race you need to understand an increasingly complex set of rules. Now over the broad spectrum of viewers that is just not going to happen. In the eighties they may have been willing to learn a simpler set of rules but in the 21st century even the most harden fan would be hard pressed to know all the rules and most want *Instant Gratification* they want to see what is going on without reading an encyclopedic rule book. Viewers just want to see a group of blokes line up and race (with dicing and overtaking) to the finish with the best driver winning. We don't want F1 dumbed down to the level of a control formula like Formula Ford or artificial results introduced as with Indy Cars this is and should be the pinnacle of Motor Sport but F1 needs a set of rules that at least ostensibly can be understood by the average viewer so they can follow, understand and enjoy a race. However don't expect instant gratification! F1 will always (and should) require a certain amount of knowledge of the rules. |
pertaining to the construction of the cars, or the rules that
influence racing, tactics and points per position?
In 1985 the rule book was getting more complex and the rules more
arbitrary as the authorities had not long ago closed the door on
ground effect by mandating flat-bottomed cars after rules pertaining
to skirts and minimum ground clearance had too easily been
circumvented. They were also starting to reign in the turbo motors by
imposing fuel load limits on cars with such motors.
Also there may well have been some confusion as to how the reigning
world champion got to that status when the guy who was runner up had
won more races. There was also a system in place in 1985 by which
although there were 16 rounds to the championship, only 11 results
would count towards a driver's final points tally. So how more
straightforward did things look to people who hadn't studied the rule
book?
Or am I missing something here?
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.