Is F1 getting boring?

[smirkoff]

The Indycar race at São Paulo was thrilling because there were BIG random factors in it: a new, very bumpy track and HEAVY rain. Much of the strategic decisions (about tyres and fuel) were left for the drivers. Anyway, the race was won by a driver of one of the richer teams... not really a surprise here.

What the general public wants from F1 is more influence of randomness, which will lead to more position changes. And randomness is just what F1 engineering avoids at a cost of millions of dollars.

The question is how much randomness they can allow into the show without destroying the fundamental competition, becoming just an artificial game.

And about old races, oh yes, there was many, many boring races in that sense of processional merry-go-rounds, and a few sensational nail-biting events. I saw my first race in 1973. And still love F1.

[Deerfield805]

Road course Indy cars use paddle shifting and yes it was a fun race to watch. Apply pressure to the leader, Brisco makes a mistake. Then 4 attempts at lead changes with 2 being successful all in the last 15 laps. I love F1 but this was more entertaining.

[Giblet]

Tilke. Tilke makes boring tracks.

The 'real' f1 tracks, like Spa and Suzuka, with it's elevation changes, and legendary corners, are fun to watch the cars, even when the racing is processional.

The only Tilke corner that I think deserves legendary status, is turn 8 in Turkey.

[Roger the knife]

Tilke. Tilke makes boring tracks.

The 'real' f1 tracks, like Spa and Suzuka, with it's elevation changes, and legendary corners, are fun to watch the cars, even when the racing is processional.

The only Tilke corner that I think deserves legendary status, is turn 8 in Turkey.

You've hit the nail on the head here, the tracks are the biggest cause of dull races, Tilke couldn't design his way out of a paper bag

[xpensive]

Guess I'm gonna regret this, staying in one of my mistress's places in Stockholm, god knows where, but remembering my two favourite americans, AJ Foyt and Dan Gurney at le Mans in 1967:
AJ says to the Ferrari driver "You think the track is dangerous, is it? Perhaps you're driving too fast?"

[autogyro]

I agree with the description of 'boring' circuits but I think the reason is the exact oposite. Tilke has designed the new circuits too well.
Safe efficient and without character.
Put in some dips and climbs, tunnels and bridges and it would be better.
Very important issue for F1s future though, Bernie should take note.

[Germanengineering]

The Indycar race at São Paulo was thrilling because there were BIG random factors in it: a new, very bumpy track and HEAVY rain. Much of the strategic decisions (about tyres and fuel) were left for the drivers. Anyway, the race was won by a driver of one of the richer teams... not really a surprise here.

What the general public wants from F1 is more influence of randomness, which will lead to more position changes. And randomness is just what F1 engineering avoids at a cost of millions of dollars.

The question is how much randomness they can allow into the show without destroying the fundamental competition, becoming just an artificial game.

And about old races, oh yes, there was many, many boring races in that sense of processional merry-go-rounds, and a few sensational nail-biting events. I saw my first race in 1973. And still love F1.

Sao Paulo was an incredible race. Love how Indy can race Ovals and road courses they mix it up. F1 would be even better if they raced a couple of ovals. And comeback to America!

[Pandamasque]

Bahrain GP '10 was a remarkably boring race. Basically the top 10 was defined in quali and slightly adjusted during the pitsops (+ Vettel falling out of the podium).

I think FIA should act ASAP because they might just as well award points for qualifying and let them go home afterwards. Everyone knew that Webber's pace was as good as Vettel's and that Ferraris were catching Vettel at some point in the race, BUT COULDN'T USE THE ADVANTAGE due to overheating, loss of DF/punishing the tires in the wake of the car in front.

How about removing the mandatory pitstop from the rules? Button said the tyres held much better than he expected. Maybe some teams will opt for 0-pitstop strategy.

EDIT: added the missing bit in CAPS

[donskar]

If you can't point at what things to change precisely, objectively (i.e: the things are really a problem in the context) then ask yourself if it is not you the source of your boredom.

Not being able to name a problem with precision does not mean there is no problem. One might have a faulty vocabulary.

However, I will take up your challenge. One problem is the aero devices used to generate massive downforce and the effect they have on following cars. I'll even posit a precise solution: flat bottoms, no diffusers, "spec" front and rear wings.

Another precise, objective problem? Stopping distances are too short, contributing to a lack of passing. That problem can be alleviated by reducing downforce, going back to non-carbon braking components, and possibly by working with the tire manufacturer.

[manchild]

No matter what the rest of the rules are, as long as the engines and gearboxes must be preserved for next race(s), and as long as the pit stops for any reason are mandatory, there will be no racing.

As a matter of fast, since cars run filled up, the overtaking in this season will decrease as the engines and gearboxes close to their final race before replacement.

Wait and see.

I'd rather watch F1 with half as much teams who can afford one engine and gearbox per race, raced to the limit, than tripled number of teams in this boring cost-cutting endurance F1.

Preserve engine and gearbox = don't even think about pushing and overtaking.

[WhiteBlue]

Everyone knew that Webber's pace was as good as Vettel's and that Ferraris were catching Vettel at some point in the race, due to overheating, loss of DF/punishing the tires in the wake of the car in front.

I think you are quite alone with that knowledge. The rest of the world knows that Vettel fell back due to a spark plug failure causing his engine to run on seven cylinders only. It seems a mystery how Vettel could punish his tyres in the wake of the car in front when he was leading the race to the point where his engine lost power.

No matter what the rest of the rules are, as long as the engines and gearboxes must be preserved for next race(s), and as long as the pit stops for any reason are mandatory, there will be no racing.

As a matter of fast, since cars run filled up, the overtaking in this season will decrease as the engines and gearboxes close to their final race before replacement.

Wait and see.

I'd rather watch F1 with half as much teams who can afford one engine and gearbox per race, raced to the limit, than tripled number of teams in this boring cost-cutting endurance F1.

Preserve engine and gearbox = don't even think about pushing and overtaking.

There is nothing substantially different this season in engine and gear box rules to the last which saw thrilling races. This shows how little sense the endurance argument makes.

The only point one could make against endurance rules is tyre conservation but I don't think it has a huge impact here. As Michael Schumacher said the problem is a lack of overtaking opportunities either on track or in the pits.

In my view they will have this problem until they address a proper downforce/power ratio as demanded by the FiA since 2006. The teams and their OWG have messed with this for five years and always missed the 1,25 ton maximum doenforce which was set by the FiA as a target for solving this problem.

[RacingManiac]

Preserve engine and gearbox = don't even think about pushing and overtaking.

Somehow endurance racing managed this though? The full tank racing took the incentive out of pushing on track limit as you can't make up for the extra tire stop. So it ends up being easier to just drive at 8/10th. In that case Whitmarsh's proposal makes sense in that they can't save the tire any more(edgier tire), or they won't have to(mandated stop), so you have to push because the next guy will.

[kalinka]

Tilke. Tilke makes boring tracks.

The 'real' f1 tracks, like Spa and Suzuka, with it's elevation changes, and legendary corners, are fun to watch the cars, even when the racing is processional.

The only Tilke corner that I think deserves legendary status, is turn 8 in Turkey.

Very much agree ! Just think of Imola, and other great tracks missing from the calendar. Tracks like Singapore and Abu Dhabi I think has the potential to become "classic", but not Bahrein. I'm watching F1 since 1988-1989, and I think also that the process of loosing classic track from calendar has a big effect on this boring thing.

EDIT : I forget a never-worse television broadcast. It's just a shame. You can get better tv-show in other series where the complete season is on budget like a single F1 team.

[manchild]

...so you have to push because the next guy will.

Remember what they've radioed Vettel before his engine failed? Something like - "No worries, just keep the gap, Alonso will burn his tyres if he continues to push like that."

That basically means, that a driver in front can easily manipulate with the driver behind him, (the way Alonso played with Schumacher in Imola 2005).

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK2uV9ApLts[/youtube]

[RacingManiac]

...so you have to push because the next guy will.

Remember what they've radioed Vettel before his engine failed? Something like - "No worries, just keep the gap, Alonso will burn his tyres if he continues to push like that."

Because they know that if he made the gap he'll have to stop an extra time and therefore lost the advantage that he gained by pushing. But if a) Vettel's tire can't last anyway(tire with less grip), or b)he will HAVE to stop regardless by rule, then the engineer's point become null and he'll have to gap him. It might still be the same result, but at least it'll be a procession at the limit(where mistakes will count and more likely), as opposed to at 8/10th.