So glad the season is finally over

[Andres125sx]

My personal opinion is that most people have no fricking clue what they want. They clinch on to something they think is the cause without realizing that what they are criticizing has actually been put there to make the sport more interesting.

First, if you disagree that does not mean that person don´t know what he wants

Second, nobody complain about the intention, we all know they tried to make it more interesting. We complain about the result wich is different.

And I'm unsure how a more durable tire would result in more mistakes too; the sheer fact that the tire is more durable means that it is also more predictable. Making mistakes isn't a function of driving quicker - it's a function of driving closer to the limit. If that limit is at velocity x or velocity x+10kmh in a corner matters little really. In fact, we can already look at it now; Drivers start making mistakes mistakes not when the tires are at their freshest and the grip levels at maximum, but when it's the other way around.

Exactly, because before tyres start going they were NOT driving to the limit, but trying to extend the lifespan.

With new tyres they can pass X corner at 200km/h, but to extend the lifespan (or they will last 3 laps as much) they are forced to pass the corner at 195km/h. That means they´re not driving to the limit, so there´re no mistakes.

Some laps later the tyres are gone so they cannot pass at 200km/h anymore, but at 195 wich is the speed they were passing that corner, so now yes, they´re driving to the limit.

Problem is not tyres with more or less grip, problem is tyres with such a short lifespan drivers cannot push them and are forced to drive with some safety margin. That goes directly against racing spirit

I'll say it again; Motorsports is inherently boring. You are never going to end up with a spectacular sport if the quickest car qualifies in front and remains in front, driving off into the distance.

You´re oversimplifying motorsports. Drivers are not robots, some are faster in qualifying while others are faster on long runs, so there will always be some changes in the race.

Even cars can be faster for qualifying or race, so it´s not that easy

DRS and crappy tires were introduced to bring some of the spectacle to the sport, not to decrease it.

Again, we all know what was the intention, but some of us disagree about the result

You either have a technological sport where you end up with cars that are not equal and then domination of one team over others is the logical consequence, or you end up with a spec series where all cars are equal and then you have the unpredictability in the drivers... But you can't have both at the same time... Not when the car accounts for 95% of the performance.

Actually we can. We (more or less) got it in 2012, 2010, 2008, 2007, 2006 and 2005, and that´s only on last decade.

There will always be some season when some team do an awesome job and they dominate, but it shouldn´t be the norm.

Actually I´m not upset because of the dominance, but because of the rules that prevent manufacturers from catching up. One season of dominance is ok, they did an awesome job and deserve it. Once you reach two consecutive seasons of dominance it becomes boring. And it´s artificial dominance, if it would be natural then ok, they deserve it, but that´s not the case since manufacturers are not allowed to catch up because of the frozen rules. That is the problem.

[ME4ME]

I'm also glad the 2015 season is over, for a long list of reasons which I don't care to explain because it's obvious and I don't want to go all negative right now. Instead, looking forward to 2016, it can only become better. As it'll be the 3rd year with these regulations, it should by default close up the field.

Very much looking forward to pre-season testing and the Australian GP. Somehow I think it's the best time of the year as an F1 fan. The build-up and speculation is exciting. All teams seem hopeful and talk up their chances for a successful season. All of the Australian GP sessions are in the night for us Europeans, adding to the feeling. Even though it rarely offers the best racing, the Aussie GP always offers an enjoyable F1 weekend.

[wesley123]

One of the most boring seasons ever, agree. IMO these are the reasons they´re breaking new records on boredom

1- Most dominant car ever

I'm fairly confident in saying that the Ferrari F2002 and F2004 were more dominant, possibly the F2001 as well, oh and let's not forget the MP4/4 which only lost a single race over the course of the season.

3- Crappy tires wich do not allow drivers to push hard so since all of them drive at maybe 90%, there are no mistakes and everything becomes even more predictable

And then they don't push hard because equipment has to last longer than a single race.

4- Rules wich do not allow development, so Mercedes advantage is secured, and Honda and Renault disadvantage is set on stone for the whole season. You know the result after pre-season... what a exciting championship

Compared to Pre-2014 the rules are a bit more open. Turns out that when you spend hundreds of millions a year you'll reach the virtual ceiling in the rules pretty quick.

Merc's advantage isn't secured, they have the advantage because the team overall is better. If this team that created the all-conquering W05 creates the W06, why would their position in the rankings ever be any different? People don't forget everything they know over the winter, no, these same guys will create a better car the next year because they can.

Such reigns are only broken if a team out-develops itself, a significant rule change happens or the crew seeks a new adventure. And seeing how the 2017 rule change is coming along and how they are working with minuscule aero changes(the sawtooth strip last weekend is a pretty good example) it's a good chance they'll lose track on what the hell they are doing somewhere in 2016.

Basically F1 is becoming some sort of competition to find new ways to make racing boring. They´re doing a great job if that´s the target, any of these four reasons would upset fans in any other sport, but in F1 we must suffer the four togheter

I still wonder why people started to watch F1 to begin with if this is their opinion on it.

[nokivasara]

My personal opinion is that most people have no fricking clue what they want. They clinch on to something they think is the cause without realizing that what they are criticizing has actually been put there to make the sport more interesting.

Lets take the tires for example. Lots of people, drivers included, are criticizing the tires for being so 'crappy' and that this results in them not having to push that might lead them to making more mistakes. Okay, although I don't really get that logic. Mistakes are usually a consequence of driving at the limit or when a certain element of unpredictability enters. That precisely happens with sensitive tires. The tire has a limited life span, when it's used up, the tires become more unpredictable as they lose grip. Which results in the car becoming harder to drive.

This has indirectly lead to some of the most exciting battles in the recent years; Situations where a driver on old tires desperately defends against cars further behind with more grip because they are on fresher tires. Or a situation like Bahrain 2014, where two identical cars are offset by a performance differential exaggerated by the fact both cars were on different tires.

People want more genuine racing, but ignore that more genuine racing means more progression. Take away DRS and you get trains of cars following each other. Yes, we have that now too, but to a lesser extent, because cars at least have the chance to get passed one another. More durable tires will only lead to cars driving off in the distance as they'll be more or less flatout with lesser management. And I'm unsure how a more durable tire would result in more mistakes too; the sheer fact that the tire is more durable means that it is also more predictable. Making mistakes isn't a function of driving quicker - it's a function of driving closer to the limit. If that limit is at velocity x or velocity x+10kmh in a corner matters little really. In fact, we can already look at it now; Drivers start making mistakes mistakes not when the tires are at their freshest and the grip levels at maximum, but when it's the other way around.

So... it's all good to wish for less crappy tires and no DRS, but we should at least be aware of what happens when we ban them in favor of something else.

I'll say it again; Motorsports is inherently boring. You are never going to end up with a spectacular sport if the quickest car qualifies in front and remains in front, driving off into the distance. DRS and crappy tires were introduced to bring some of the spectacle to the sport, not to decrease it.

What I find ludicrous is that Mercedes dominance is a problem. Welcome to F1. You either have a technological sport where you end up with cars that are not equal and then domination of one team over others is the logical consequence, or you end up with a spec series where all cars are equal and then you have the unpredictability in the drivers... But you can't have both at the same time... Not when the car accounts for 95% of the performance.

So you dont have any problem with the cars running at 80% of their capacity for the whole race?
The difference in performance of new and old tires is ok, I would be fine with having a 20 lap tire life, but with the tires they have now they can only push 2 or 3 laps and then they're ruined.
If the drivers were actually racing and not just driving around they'd need 20 pit stops per race...

[dans79]

Making mistakes isn't a function of driving quicker - it's a function of driving closer to the limit. If that limit is at velocity x or velocity x+10kmh in a corner matters little really. In fact, we can already look at it now; Drivers start making mistakes mistakes not when the tires are at their freshest and the grip levels at maximum, but when it's the other way around.

The point that i think your missing that others are trying to make, is that the drivers aren't driving at the limit for the majority of a stint. They drive to delta times, and as the tires age they get close and closer to the limit. If the tires where more like the old Bridgestones that had almost no fall off, the drivers would push all the time, because they could, instead of driving to a delta to eek out the proper stint length.


My personal opinion, is that F1 has 2 major problems:

1. Currently the cars are generating down force using vary sensitive methodologies, hence the reason teams tell drivers to maintain a 2 second gap. If they get closer than that and they start getting into the dirty air off the car in-front. The rules need to be changed to allow/mandate less sensitive aerodynamics.

2. The tires are to fragile. This was introduced, because of point 1, to spice up the show.

[strad]

the road to hell is paved with good intentions

[RicME85]

Tbf, Formula E has durable tyres and still Buemi at the first race of this season left the pack for dead because the Renault eDams is the best package.

[Vettel Maggot]

I made this mistake of watching the 1999 season review before Abu Dhabi. Multiple winners and some great races. I made it to lap 20 of Abu Dhabi before I was asleep. Woke up when Nico was getting doused in champagne in the pitlane.

Thank God that is over, horrible predictable season.

[Nickel]

All this talk about the tires not being durable enough to push makes me think back to pirelli's original mandate: recreate Montreal 2010. In this race, it was cold and the tires were too hard. No matter how hard the drivers pushed, they couldn't get the tire into the operating range and so would get graining and performance would fall off.

I'd like to see them try to actually do this for a season, perhaps in conjunction with a ban on tire blankets. I feel like this would reward pushing hard and still lead to varying strategies.

[Vasconia]

I'm fairly confident in saying that the Ferrari F2002 and F2004 were more dominant, possibly the F2001 as well, oh and let's not forget the MP4/4 which only lost a single race over the course of the season.

Statistics say you are wrong. The W05 is the most dominant car in F1 history with they only exception the it has missed more race wining than the mighty McLaren of 1988.

Anwyay, it has been a tremendously dominant car with a great realiabilty. At the last the RB used to have fragile engine.

[Andres125sx]

One of the most boring seasons ever, agree. IMO these are the reasons they´re breaking new records on boredom

1- Most dominant car ever

I'm fairly confident in saying that the Ferrari F2002 and F2004 were more dominant, possibly the F2001 as well, oh and let's not forget the MP4/4 which only lost a single race over the course of the season.

W06 broke the record of most points scored in a season, around 85% of the possible points for the season (can´t remind the exact number). They beated the F2002, F2004, F2001, MP4/4 and all RB6/7/8/9...

3- Crappy tires wich do not allow drivers to push hard so since all of them drive at maybe 90%, there are no mistakes and everything becomes even more predictable

And then they don't push hard because equipment has to last longer than a single race.

Equipment? What equipment?

I´ve never heard any team/driver saying they can´t push because the PU must last 4 weekends, but we all have heard drivers and teams saying they can´t push because tyres must last X laps and if they push hard tyres are gone in 2 laps

4- Rules wich do not allow development, so Mercedes advantage is secured, and Honda and Renault disadvantage is set on stone for the whole season. You know the result after pre-season... what a exciting championship

Compared to Pre-2014 the rules are a bit more open. Turns out that when you spend hundreds of millions a year you'll reach the virtual ceiling in the rules pretty quick.

Merc's advantage isn't secured, they have the advantage because the team overall is better. If this team that created the all-conquering W05 creates the W06, why would their position in the rankings ever be any different? People don't forget everything they know over the winter, no, these same guys will create a better car the next year because they can.

Such reigns are only broken if a team out-develops itself, a significant rule change happens or the crew seeks a new adventure. And seeing how the 2017 rule change is coming along and how they are working with minuscule aero changes(the sawtooth strip last weekend is a pretty good example) it's a good chance they'll lose track on what the hell they are doing somewhere in 2016.

True, the rules are a bit more open than in frozen engine era, but back then all the engines were extensively developed so differences between them were small. And the only one underperforming was allowed to develop his engine further to catch up (Renault) when nobody was allowed to develop their engines, so all of them performed pretty similar.

Completely different to today´s situation, when they´re new PUs so they´re not extensively developed, what causes much bigger differences in perfomance, and none of the manufacturers underperforming has been allowed to catch up like they did in the previous era.

So it really doesn´t matter if they´re allowed to develop their PUs a little bit, because differences are so big some tokens can´t solve it. Ask Honda.

As I said Mercedes did an awesome job and they deserve their success, and I agree if they did it great with the W05, it´s normal the W06 continue as a winnning car. BUT, if you limit development, you´re ensuring that dominance will be extended in the time.

Diminishing returns laws says at some point development curve flatten up, wich means it doesn´t matter how good you are, your competitors will catch up because you can´t continue improving forever. This means with free development dominance periods have a limited lifespan, but if you frozen the rules and limit development, you´re extending that dominant period.

As I said, I´m not against dominant periods, but I´m firmly against artificially extending those dominant periods. It´s a complete nosense.

Basically F1 is becoming some sort of competition to find new ways to make racing boring. They´re doing a great job if that´s the target, any of these four reasons would upset fans in any other sport, but in F1 we must suffer the four togheter

I still wonder why people started to watch F1 to begin with if this is their opinion on it.

Because when I started watching F1 it was NOT like this, drivers were able to push hard without destroying the tyres, this also meant drivers mistakes were common because they drove on the limit so races were a lot less predictable, overtaking was difficult but real (no DRS) so there were awesome battles, and when some team dominated, the rest were allowed to catch up developing their cars, trying new solutions, innovating, and doing their job

Today everything is artificial, drivers who can´t do their job because of crappy tyres, engineers who can´t do their job because of the semi-frozen rules, and races with no real battles because of DRS. It´s all artificial, at any field you look at

[wesley123]

One of the most boring seasons ever, agree. IMO these are the reasons they´re breaking new records on boredom

1- Most dominant car ever

I'm fairly confident in saying that the Ferrari F2002 and F2004 were more dominant, possibly the F2001 as well, oh and let's not forget the MP4/4 which only lost a single race over the course of the season.

W06 broke the record of most points scored in a season, around 85% of the possible points for the season (can´t remind the exact number). They beated the F2002, F2004, F2001, MP4/4 and all RB6/7/8/9...

Fair enough.

3- Crappy tires wich do not allow drivers to push hard so since all of them drive at maybe 90%, there are no mistakes and everything becomes even more predictable

And then they don't push hard because equipment has to last longer than a single race.

Equipment? What equipment?

I´ve never heard any team/driver saying they can´t push because the PU must last 4 weekends, but we all have heard drivers and teams saying they can´t push because tyres must last X laps and if they push hard tyres are gone in 2 laps

Part of why you haven't heard that is because of the tires

But yeah, their PU's etc. have to last for much longer distances, and no one wants a DNF or a penalty because they pushed it too hard.
The championship is still won with reliability.

4- Rules wich do not allow development, so Mercedes advantage is secured, and Honda and Renault disadvantage is set on stone for the whole season. You know the result after pre-season... what a exciting championship

Compared to Pre-2014 the rules are a bit more open. Turns out that when you spend hundreds of millions a year you'll reach the virtual ceiling in the rules pretty quick.

Merc's advantage isn't secured, they have the advantage because the team overall is better. If this team that created the all-conquering W05 creates the W06, why would their position in the rankings ever be any different? People don't forget everything they know over the winter, no, these same guys will create a better car the next year because they can.

Such reigns are only broken if a team out-develops itself, a significant rule change happens or the crew seeks a new adventure. And seeing how the 2017 rule change is coming along and how they are working with minuscule aero changes(the sawtooth strip last weekend is a pretty good example) it's a good chance they'll lose track on what the hell they are doing somewhere in 2016.

True, the rules are a bit more open than in frozen engine era, but back then all the engines were extensively developed so differences between them were small. And the only one underperforming was allowed to develop his engine further to catch up (Renault) when nobody was allowed to develop their engines, so all of them performed pretty similar.

Completely different to today´s situation, when they´re new PUs so they´re not extensively developed, what causes much bigger differences in perfomance, and none of the manufacturers underperforming has been allowed to catch up like they did in the previous era.

So it really doesn´t matter if they´re allowed to develop their PUs a little bit, because differences are so big some tokens can´t solve it. Ask Honda.

I do think the tokens can solve it, because those exact same tokens have screwed up the Renault engine. Ferrari is a pretty solid example of how those tokens can close the gap.

As I said Mercedes did an awesome job and they deserve their success, and I agree if they did it great with the W05, it´s normal the W06 continue as a winnning car. BUT, if you limit development, you´re ensuring that dominance will be extended in the time.

Agreed. However, a team beating the dominant team generally means some sort of trick or loophole. Opening the rules would certainly bring multiple paths towards the same goal, but I still believe teams will converge around the same idea, as it's a benchmark. It's much easier to grasp something that has been done before than to start from scratch, which again is something the midfield and backmarkers wont be capable to do so.

Diminishing returns laws says at some point development curve flatten up, wich means it doesn´t matter how good you are, your competitors will catch up because you can´t continue improving forever. This means with free development dominance periods have a limited lifespan, but if you frozen the rules and limit development, you´re extending that dominant period.

I'm not certain, I think the dominance is based on the quality of the team more so than rules itself. Take for example Ferrari, they have had what, 2 bad seasons since 1997? That's quite a long period of time that has been broken up with many rule changes.

Ferrari has the resources to make a good car, and so they do for almost 20 years now. Mercedes will have those same resources and will make good cars until key members will part ways.

As I said, I´m not against dominant periods, but I´m firmly against artificially extending those dominant periods. It´s a complete nosense.

I don't think it's artificially extended as rules change very, very often. Also if we take your previous quote that would mean Mercedes wouldn't be dominant(or a better example, Red Bull) because the rules change that often. That is combined with tires that are different every year, which makes every year another challenge to get the tires to work, so in that sense, everyone is in the same boat.

Basically F1 is becoming some sort of competition to find new ways to make racing boring. They´re doing a great job if that´s the target, any of these four reasons would upset fans in any other sport, but in F1 we must suffer the four togheter

I still wonder why people started to watch F1 to begin with if this is their opinion on it.

Because when I started watching F1 it was NOT like this, drivers were able to push hard without destroying the tyres, this also meant drivers mistakes were common because they drove on the limit so races were a lot less predictable, overtaking was difficult but real (no DRS) so there were awesome battles, and when some team dominated, the rest were allowed to catch up developing their cars, trying new solutions, innovating, and doing their job

I have been watching since 2000(although i don't watch it anymore) and I don't think i saw drivers push very often, because it's simply not necessary. F1 is won on the pit wall as much as in the car itself, as tactics make a very important part of the race. There simply isn't much reason to push, unless it's your in and outlap. Because if you keep on pushing you'll just end up shortening the life of your tires and fuel(assuming you can pit for fuel), and at some point you'll become stuck behind a driver. So in that sense, it makes much more sense to keep your own pace(the guy in front will most likely do so as well) you'll make your tires last a few laps more, and then, when the guy in front of you pits, you'll push a few laps to get the undercut.

I don't think people realize that F1 is tactics more than it is actually driving, it always has been. And I think there is a change, they weren't able to communicate as well in the 50s, 60s and 70s. So such tactics became much more complex.

Today everything is artificial, drivers who can´t do their job because of crappy tyres, engineers who can´t do their job because of the semi-frozen rules, and races with no real battles because of DRS. It´s all artificial, at any field you look at

The joke is that all those artificial things were created because people complained about not being able to overtake etc. etc., and now that cars actually overtake, people want back again.

[ojlopez]

DRS is not that bad. But the crappy tires, and only Pirelli supplying them is in my opinion a big part of the problem. With tire wars, manufacturers were always trying to get the best tire possible. Bridgestone had the rounded shoulder tires, Michelin were more square like. Just a small example of two different philosophies.

But the biggest problem is the power units, they are so complex that the driver has to be almost a jet pilot and does not focus only in driving. Most exciting racing took place in the early 90's in my opinion and the steering wheels had only a couple of buttons.

[Andres125sx]

Equipment? What equipment?

I´ve never heard any team/driver saying they can´t push because the PU must last 4 weekends, but we all have heard drivers and teams saying they can´t push because tyres must last X laps and if they push hard tyres are gone in 2 laps

Part of why you haven't heard that is because of the tires

But yeah, their PU's etc. have to last for much longer distances, and no one wants a DNF or a penalty because they pushed it too hard.

But that has always happened, and it does not affect the show. The engine revving some hundred revs less than usual does change nothing, driver still is driving to the limit. With crappy tyres that´s not the case

True, the rules are a bit more open than in frozen engine era, but back then all the engines were extensively developed so differences between them were small. And the only one underperforming was allowed to develop his engine further to catch up (Renault) when nobody was allowed to develop their engines, so all of them performed pretty similar.

Completely different to today´s situation, when they´re new PUs so they´re not extensively developed, what causes much bigger differences in perfomance, and none of the manufacturers underperforming has been allowed to catch up like they did in the previous era.

So it really doesn´t matter if they´re allowed to develop their PUs a little bit, because differences are so big some tokens can´t solve it. Ask Honda.

I do think the tokens can solve it, because those exact same tokens have screwed up the Renault engine. Ferrari is a pretty solid example of how those tokens can close the gap.

Because Ferrari engine didn´t new any big change, but I don´t think this proves anything.

OTOH Honda is a pretty solid example of how those tokens can guarantee a big gap cannot be closed

As I said Mercedes did an awesome job and they deserve their success, and I agree if they did it great with the W05, it´s normal the W06 continue as a winnning car. BUT, if you limit development, you´re ensuring that dominance will be extended in the time.

Agreed. However, a team beating the dominant team generally means some sort of trick or loophole. Opening the rules would certainly bring multiple paths towards the same goal, but I still believe teams will converge around the same idea, as it's a benchmark. It's much easier to grasp something that has been done before than to start from scratch, which again is something the midfield and backmarkers wont be capable to do so.

Agree with this, but independently of the route used, you need development to catch up. With a semi-frozen system with limited tokes you cannot develop your car/engine, so the gap is being secured, and the dominant period is being extended.

Diminishing returns laws says at some point development curve flatten up, wich means it doesn´t matter how good you are, your competitors will catch up because you can´t continue improving forever. This means with free development dominance periods have a limited lifespan, but if you frozen the rules and limit development, you´re extending that dominant period.

I'm not certain, I think the dominance is based on the quality of the team more so than rules itself. Take for example Ferrari, they have had what, 2 bad seasons since 1997? That's quite a long period of time that has been broken up with many rule changes.

Ferrari has the resources to make a good car, and so they do for almost 20 years now. Mercedes will have those same resources and will make good cars until key members will part ways.

But you cannot develop a concept infinitely no matter how good you are or how much resources you can use.

You just have to look at the difference between best and slowest engine in V8 or V10 era (proven technology very developed) and now (new technology with very little development)

It is when something is new when we see the biggest gaps. Once teams/manufacturers learn and develop the concept gaps are closed, and it does not matter how good the dominant team/manufacturer is. They´re really good, period, that´s the reason they dominate, but that can´t change the fact that once every manufacturer learns about the tech, they´ll catch up.

Today everything is artificial, drivers who can´t do their job because of crappy tyres, engineers who can´t do their job because of the semi-frozen rules, and races with no real battles because of DRS. It´s all artificial, at any field you look at

The joke is that all those artificial things were created because people complained about not being able to overtake etc. etc., and now that cars actually overtake, people want back again.

If you take what people say, then you can find contradictions on anything you want because there are many different opinions.

To me the joke is trying to improve overtaking numbers, they ruined overtaking. Now the only drivers who fight for positions are those like Verstappen whose engine is so slow he can´t overtake not even with DRS, so they´re forced to fight as always. All the rest only need to wait for the straight and fly pass. I want the whole grid fighting for positions, not only those who have a slow engine in the back

DRS to me is the biggest mistake in F1 history, they managed to ruin the most exciting part of racing, and they did it breaking a basic rule of thumb, racing on equal conditions.

[PlatinumZealot]

Ask yourself if you would enjoy it more watching these crappy cars without DRS and tell if me it would be better or worse lol