Pulled the Plug on F1

[Juzh]

My only problem with this season is that getting lucky on engine performance is allowing some teams to outperform teams who did a better job on their chassis. If we had last years motors(or any motors that didn't confer a huge advantage on lucky teams), Red Bull and Merc would be nec and neck with Ferrari almost just as quick. We need some sort of push button boost from the mgu-k.

This basically. It's not competition if you're not allowed to compete. I'm fine with 1 team dominating like merc currently is. What I'm not fine with is other teams are forbidden to catch up by means out of their control (same as pirellotery in first half 2012). They're stuck in this rabbit hole and there's not much they can do about it (I can only lol at software tweaks that will suddenly give you 80bhp without hardware changes). 1st year engine freeze after a change of regulations on this magnitude was plain retarded on the fia's behalf.

[thomin]

Personally, I don't like engine freeze period. I also don't think it will save anyone any money, it merely leads to a reallocation of money towards aero.

[beelsebob]

Look beelsebob, If you wanna say it was a good race, fine,,,If ya wanna say it was the best in the last two seasons,,,Fine.. but to say ""the race at the weekend was one of the single best F1 races I've ever seen""" , that's either pure hyperbole or says you have been watching a much shorter time than I thought.
I tell ya,,,I open my files, at random I click on one...'79 Monza...not a great race but better than Bahrain '14 in my opinion

Really? Monza '79 involved nearly no action at all. It was decided on lap 2. What do you think was more exciting in that than Bahrain '14?

Honestly, I'd suggest that you're the one using hyperbole there.

[Pierce89]

My only problem with this season is that getting lucky on engine performance is allowing some teams to outperform teams who did a better job on their chassis. If we had last years motors(or any motors that didn't confer a huge advantage on lucky teams), Red Bull and Merc would be nec and neck with Ferrari almost just as quick. We need some sort of push button boost from the mgu-k.

I think that could be said for all of the last few seasons. RedBull had an insurmountable lead in managing to make the exhaust gas work, and an insurmountable lead (the rules banned changing the engines or mappings enough to make any progress) in producing that gas.

We just have a different team benefiting (by a larger margin) from the rules freezing engine development.

I don't think Red Bull benefitted so much from Renault's mapping as Red Bull's ability to use EBD better than anyone else.

This year, Williams and Force India have an engine advantage that is allowing them to beat teams that built a better chassis than them.

[Pup]

Honestly, I'd suggest that you're the one using hyperbole there.

Strad? Never!

[Moxie]

The only thing that could possibly have made this better would be if Mercedes had slightly less of a lead over the rest of the field, so that one team were not near guaranteed the win.

I struggle to remember a single F1 race as good as this, and honestly, if you can name one, I'd be amazed.

This is my point exactly.



I am not one of those guys who roots for a single driver, or a single team for that matter. One of the things that drew my interest to F1 when I was young was that the teams were not all buying the same one or two chassis, as in Indycar. McLaren, Ferrari, William, Lotus...etc, all had to build their own. While F1 crowns a drivers' champion every year, the prize money is awarded according to the Constructors Championship. As I entered adulthood, I found myself less enamored by Alain Prost and Nigel Mansell, but I continued to have interest in the cars and the competition between engineers. While many in this forum are all geeked up about Hamilton vs. Rosberg, the truth is that I don't care that much. What I saw was Mercedes running away with the show. and the rest of the field doing a pretty good job of running two by two.

[beelsebob]

I am not one of those guys who roots for a single driver, or a single team for that matter. One of the things that drew my interest to F1 when I was young was that the teams were not all buying the same one or two chassis, as in Indycar. McLaren, Ferrari, William, Lotus...etc, all had to build their own. While F1 crowns a drivers' champion every year, the prize money is awarded according to the Constructors Championship. As I entered adulthood, I found myself less enamored by Alain Prost and Nigel Mansell, but I continued to have interest in the cars and the competition between engineers. While many in this forum are all geeked up about Hamilton vs. Rosberg, the truth is that I don't care that much. What I saw was Mercedes running away with the show. and the rest of the field doing a pretty good job of running two by two.

Except, the rest of the field weren't running two by two. They were fighting every inch of the way. We had basically 3rd to 11th all separated by a second between them, and all fighting each other.

[strad]

Really?
I don't see any contrived passes...I already said that it wasn't a GREAT race...just better than Bahrain. To each his own I guess.
http://youtu.be/C8L6V0VOsKY

[GitanesBlondes]

The thing Beelsebob forgets is that back in that era, Monza, along with Hockenheim were true engine killer tracks.

There was a little more to the race than just the on-track racing. Engineering reliability was a huge factor as well. There was a huge thrill to be had when mechanical failures were routine business in F1 whether it was exploding engines, or something else.

The great thing about F1 in all the eras prior to the homologation/overly restricted era, was even if a race was dull in terms of on-track action, you could be surprised in other ways. The problem when you make everything ultra reliable is that all of the suspense goes out the window too...so all you really have to rely on is the hope there is on-track battles. If not...may as well DVR and fast forward through the whole thing.

[beelsebob]

The thing Beelsebob forgets is that back in that era, Monza, along with Hockenheim were true engine killer tracks.

There was a little more to the race than just the on-track racing.

You are miss-remembering. There was tyre saving, fuel saving, and as you say, engine reliability. This was era of having exciting races robbed from us because engines went pop in 1/3 of the cars.

There was a huge thrill to be had when mechanical failures were routine business in F1 whether it was exploding engines, or something else.

Not really, no. Pot luck is no where near as exciting as actual on track battles, and strategic calls, all of which can actually be affected by the teams.

The great thing about F1 in all the eras prior to the homologation/overly restricted era, was even if a race was dull in terms of on-track action, you could be surprised in other ways. The problem when you make everything ultra reliable is that all of the suspense goes out the window too...

Not really, no. There's nothing exciting in random failure. That's why people were so disappointed when we had random tyre explosions taking random people out of the race in Silverstone.

so all you really have to rely on is the hope there is on-track battles. If not...may as well DVR and fast forward through the whole thing.

Thankfully... There are lots of on track battles at the moment. Also, apparently, you're not really thinking about strategy enough.

[FoxHound]

Really?
I don't see any contrived passes...I already said that it wasn't a GREAT race...just better than Bahrain. To each his own I guess. http://s22.photobucket.com/user/STRAD2/ ... 2.gif.html
http://youtu.be/C8L6V0VOsKY

Shall we also find a few random boring races from the 70s and 80s? There are many more than those rose tinted glasses are allowing you to see.

[Moxie]

There was a little more to the race than just the on-track racing.

You are miss-remembering. There was tyre saving, fuel saving, and as you say, engine reliability. This was era of having exciting races robbed from us because engines went pop in 1/3 of the cars.


Not really, no. Pot luck is no where near as exciting as actual on track battles, and strategic calls, all of which can actually be affected by the teams.

Not really, no. There's nothing exciting in random failure. That's why people were so disappointed when we had random tyre explosions taking random people out of the race in Silverstone.

[/quote]

I respectfully but strongly disagree with all of these statements. Again, for my viewing pleasure and $100 bucs per month, F1 is about the cars, not so much the personalities. I want to see the very highly engineered cars compete. When the cars fail because the engineers have pushed the limits too far, THAT IS EXCITING!!! Watching Alain Prost drive his burning Renault to the track in front of the Renault pits in disgust was exciting. Watching Alain Prost push his fuel starved McLaren to Finish line was exciting. The tire explosions at Silverstone were not random...the engineers pushed the limits on camber, and they ran the tires backwards...and the engineering failures were exciting.

On a side note: can anyone tell me how to upload a chart from excel. I have been doing some statistics competition in F1 and would like to share the charts.

Edit: I screwed up the quotes...so sorry.

[FoxHound]

So people are complaining about the current formula, but actively promote the old formula wherby technical failures robbed us of racing?

[bhall]

So people are complaining about the current formula, but actively promote the old formula wherby technical failures robbed us of racing?

"Any car which holds together for a whole race is too heavy." ~ Colin Chapman

[Sombrero]

When I was young racing was about being the fastest without taking care of fuel, tires, car or racing orders. Think about Gilles Villeneuve or Ronnie Peterson and remember how spectacular they were !

Now I'm old and the racing is about taking care of the fuel consumption, tire degradation and radio comm. I'm sorry but that's not fun anymore. Maybe for engineers and drivers (I hope for them) but not for the spectators.

Without the live qualifying, the in-board cameras and replay I would have quit F-1 since a long time. Now the F-1 may be technologically more advanced or more relevant than before but it's pointless without having drivers racing at the edge.