2015 Australian Grand Prix - Melbourne

[Artur Craft]

True enuf.

One option would be to bring back ultra soft 5 lap qually tires and then make the top ten start the race on their last set from Q3.

Pirelli supersoft is pretty much that. It will survive more on a smooth low speed corner's track like Monaco but, in Barcelona, it works just as a qualifying tyre that lasts one fast lap. I remember the Softs last year, on Interlagos, were lasting only 7 laps...

It's just annoying to me that WEC manages to: allow tyre competition(it's open but nobody dares to challenge Michelin, there), which won't allow manufacturers to bring fast degrading tyres; doesn't allow any sort of overtaking aid(Push to Pass, DRS....) and the racing is much better.

For those who missed last season, I suggest you to watch just the first hour of Silverstone's and Austin's rounds. When LMP1 cars performances are not far between themselves, they can follow closely and, if a driver is skilled enough, pull an overtake after working hard for it.

Anyway, I think that people miss real battles where drivers used to push to the limit. All the fans say that the period 2000-2004 was pretty boring due to Shumi and Ferrari´s dominance but audiences were much bettter. Why? I think that those battles between Schumi and Hakkinen/Kimi/Montoya,etc.. didnt show a lot of overtakes but they were true and intense. This is what fans miss.

Exactly my view about F1, and WEC provides just that. No surprise WEC/Le Mans' repercussion have only grown in the last years.

[Moose]

One problem with that argument - the ratings weren't higher in 2004. They were much much lower, and rapidly dropping, the more Schumacher dominated.



For reference, Australia (which was on at 5am in the country these stats are from) recorded 3.5 million viewers. That was slightly down on 2014, but still much higher than the Schumacher era.

[zeph]

Thanks for offering some common sense. I can relate, as I stopped watching F1 myself, and did not get back into it until 2007.

[Moose]

Thanks for offering some common sense. I can relate, as I stopped watching F1 myself, and did not get back into it until 2007.

Yep, I can give an anecdote of exactly the same experience - I stopped watching around 2002, and started again in 2008.

[alexx_88]

I think that puts a logical spin to Bernie's taking RB's side in the equalization debate. He probably has seen this numerous times and knows that close competition is what produces good viewership numbers, which in turn provides more money to him.

How would you create that close competitiveness?

[andartop]

One problem with that argument - the ratings weren't higher in 2004. They were much much lower, and rapidly dropping, the more Schumacher dominated.



For reference, Australia (which was on at 5am in the country these stats are from) recorded 3.5 million viewers. That was slightly down on 2014, but still much higher than the Schumacher era.

There's another 3 champions in that decline! It appears Villeneuve was the original cause of the problem (understandable) and Kimi saved F1. I was having a s%!t. Would be interesting to account for more variables than WDC...

[Richard]

That graph is showing UK viewers, so I'd say it is closely linked to the fortunes of British drivers.

The peak in 95/96 coincides with Hill at his peak, then Coulthard kept the flame alive, then the decline in viewers during the Schumacher years.

The increase in 2007 co-incides with Hamilton bursting onto the scene, then Button's WDC in 2008, then the dream team of Hamilton & Button at Mclaren.

The viewers decline after 2010 due to the switch from free to air to subscription, which is also compounded by Vettel dominating and the UK drivers at Mclaren struggling.

[WaikeCU]

That graph is showing UK viewers, so I'd say it is closely linked to the fortunes of British drivers.

The peak in 95/96 coincides with Hill at his peak, then Coulthard kept the flame alive, then the decline in viewers during the Schumacher years.

The increase in 2007 co-incides with Hamilton bursting onto the scene, then Button's WDC in 2008, then the dream team of Hamilton & Button at Mclaren.

The viewers decline after 2010 due to the switch from free to air to subscription, which is also compounded by Vettel dominating and the UK drivers at Mclaren struggling.

You mean Hamilton's WDC in 2008 and Button's WDC in 2009?

[Andres125sx]

That graph is showing UK viewers, so I'd say it is closely linked to the fortunes of British drivers.

The peak in 95/96 coincides with Hill at his peak, then Coulthard kept the flame alive, then the decline in viewers during the Schumacher years.

The increase in 2007 co-incides with Hamilton bursting onto the scene, then Button's WDC in 2008, then the dream team of Hamilton & Button at Mclaren.

The viewers decline after 2010 due to the switch from free to air to subscription, which is also compounded by Vettel dominating and the UK drivers at Mclaren struggling.

Obviously there´s a conection between national drivers/teams and audience, but you can´t assume that´s the only factor, or the main one

This is italian audience, as you see even on Ferrari´s domination era the audiece felt down quite fast. Then in 2010 and 2012 when Alonso managed to fight Vettel/RBR it increased, but the overal tendency is going down


Another example on how national drivers/teams are not that important for audience numbers was german GP last year, even with Mercedes domination and Rosberg battle for title, the audience was a complete disaster, so IMHO we can assert it´s the lack of competition for the title what produce the biggest drops in audience, and not even national drivers/teams can solve this problem, they sure help a bit, but just a bit, they don´t change the tendency, wich is consistent no matter what country numbers you look at, when there´s any team domination audience fall down like a brick into the water

I´m sure this season will prove this theory right again, just wait for Hamilton beating Rosberg some more races and we´ll see how audience decreases even on England

[Phil]

These are odd graphs. RAI is an Italian broadcaster, and accoarding to that graph, in mid 2012 (not end) there was a huge drop-off in viewership, despite the grand finale in which Alonso & Ferrari narrowly lost the WDC in the last race. Perhaps the graph is highly rounded and thus inaccurate, but it doesn't show the decline due to what is necessarely happening at the track either. Or did Rai give up its rights for F1 free broadcasting like the BBC in 2012?

EDIT:
Aaaah, look what I found: http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/2012/06/i ... -with-sky/

The Italian rights to broadcast live Formula 1 racing in Italy have been won by Rupert Murdoch’s Sky Italia, leaving the state owned free to air channel RAI to lick its wounds.

In a variation on the deal organised in the UK with SKY and BBC, from next season onwards SKY will have exclusive live rights for 11 of the 20 races, with 9 races available to a free to air broadcaster to show live at the same time as the SKY broadcast, with the Italian GP at Monza as one of the live races and highlights packages for the SKY exclusive races. Colleagues from RAI said in Monaco recently that the problem for them was that they would have to negotiate with SKY as well as FOM for the nine races.

So, in other words, the drop off seen in the graphs can be somewhat attributed to Sky buying the rights to F1 and leaving free to air broadcasters with scraps. Pay-TV might have bought in more money, but it has certainly eliminated viewers.

[ChrisDanger]

I would suggest people to stop complaining, after each race, that F1 is boring, though. I realise that there are quite a few people that share the same views as I do and there is no point in repeating it every F1 weekend. Don't expect the current "show" to present what it's not intended to.

I watch it for the engineering side more than ever, nowadays. It's just not good to spoil the fun of those who are enjoying the races.

Thanks. I wish more people thought like this. I quite enjoyed the race and was quite happy with the various outcomes, some disappointing, some quite satisfying. In any case I'm happy the season is underway, and I'm looking forward to seeing how it all unfolds.

There's only one thing more depressing when coming on here than reading posts about how some people found the race boring, and that's reading suggestions on "how to fix F1". I don't think the race thread is the place for these posts, and I find them really pointless anyway. It adds nothing meaningful to the topic and I think actually detracts from it in a big way.

[PistoniRoventi]

These are odd graphs. RAI is an Italian broadcaster, and accoarding to that graph, in mid 2012 (not end) there was a huge drop-off in viewership, despite the grand finale in which Alonso & Ferrari narrowly lost the WDC in the last race.

Sorry but you aren't reading the graph properly. It shows the pick variations from one year to the next. There is an increase in 2012 from 2011 and a huge drop from 2012 to 2013.

So, in other words, the drop off seen in the graphs can be somewhat attributed to Sky buying the rights to F1 and leaving free to air broadcasters with scraps. Pay-TV might have bought in more money, but it has certainly eliminated viewers.

This is italian audience, as you see even on Ferrari´s domination era the audiece felt down quite fast. Then in 2010 and 2012 when Alonso managed to fight Vettel/RBR it increased, but the overal tendency is going down

Both right, in 2012 sky won the right to broadcast F1 in Italy starting from the 2013 season. The second half of 2013 was utterly dominated by RBR. So i'd say it's a combination of the two factors

[Phil]

These are odd graphs. RAI is an Italian broadcaster, and accoarding to that graph, in mid 2012 (not end) there was a huge drop-off in viewership, despite the grand finale in which Alonso & Ferrari narrowly lost the WDC in the last race.

Sorry but you aren't reading the graph properly. It shows the pick variations from one year to the next. There is an increase in 2012 from 2011 and a huge drop from 2012 to 2013.

Yes you are right. The graphs clearly is just comparing season to season. The granularity of the graph therefore doesn't help in determing what the factors were. I'd say the biggest factor that attributed the decrease in viewership was the Sky take-over, not RedBull dominance. Otherwise, one could argue 2011, one of Vettels biggest dominations, should have had an equal impact. It did have an impact, but not the kind of drop-off we saw in 2013. And 2013 wasn't that dominated - Mercedes was quite close until the summer break. That there is some fluctuations based on the excitement of a season is only to be expected. Alienating casual viewers by going pay-tv (where people chose with their money if they want to actually pay something to watch) was always going to result in huge drops. Hardcore F1 fans might dish out money for their A+ Sky fix on race day, but the casual F1 viewer doesn't.

[ChrisM40]

That graph is showing UK viewers, so I'd say it is closely linked to the fortunes of British drivers.

The peak in 95/96 coincides with Hill at his peak, then Coulthard kept the flame alive, then the decline in viewers during the Schumacher years.

The increase in 2007 co-incides with Hamilton bursting onto the scene, then Button's WDC in 2008, then the dream team of Hamilton & Button at Mclaren.

The viewers decline after 2010 due to the switch from free to air to subscription, which is also compounded by Vettel dominating and the UK drivers at Mclaren struggling.

Add in another factor, that the ITV coverage was absolutely diabolical, including ad breaks during the race and on one famous occasion missing the end of the race for a commercial break!

[SparkyAMG]

True enuf.

One option would be to bring back ultra soft 5 lap qually tires and then make the top ten start the race on their last set from Q3.

Pirelli supersoft is pretty much that. It will survive more on a smooth low speed corner's track like Monaco but, in Barcelona, it works just as a qualifying tyre that lasts one fast lap. I remember the Softs last year, on Interlagos, were lasting only 7 laps...

It's just annoying to me that WEC manages to: allow tyre competition(it's open but nobody dares to challenge Michelin, there), which won't allow manufacturers to bring fast degrading tyres; doesn't allow any sort of overtaking aid(Push to Pass, DRS....) and the racing is much better.

For those who missed last season, I suggest you to watch just the first hour of Silverstone's and Austin's rounds. When LMP1 cars performances are not far between themselves, they can follow closely and, if a driver is skilled enough, pull an overtake after working hard for it.

Anyway, I think that people miss real battles where drivers used to push to the limit. All the fans say that the period 2000-2004 was pretty boring due to Shumi and Ferrari´s dominance but audiences were much bettter. Why? I think that those battles between Schumi and Hakkinen/Kimi/Montoya,etc.. didnt show a lot of overtakes but they were true and intense. This is what fans miss.

Exactly my view about F1, and WEC provides just that. No surprise WEC/Le Mans' repercussion have only grown in the last years.

Ideally F1 would want a tyre at every race weekend that's good for 10-15 qualy style laps, and then gradually, not sharply, drops off in performance over 5 laps or so. Each race would be 2-3 stops depending on how hard the cars are on their tyres, which is where you'll get variations of strategies.

I don't think that's manageable with just 4 compounds for all tracks and conditions across a season, but if it remained as S/S, S, M and H then 3 compounds should be taken to each weekend with Pirelli deciding on the final 2 compounds after FP1 and 2. It's too difficult naming compounds weeks in advance, not knowing how the weather or new generations of cars will affect tyre performance.

Ultimately though, the aero rules are what's preventing cars from battling in close quarters... getting too close to the car in front destroys your performance. Until that's looked at thoroughly, no type of tyre would improve racing.