Sorry, but it's really hard to take you seriously when your main argument is "it was better when tires were harder", and you refuse to elaborate when people call you out on it. We just watched one of the most dull races we've had in recent history, primarily caused by the tires being so hard that they could last pretty much indefinitely. What do you think was better about the era of extremely hard tires? What do you think was special about the most recent race that meant it was an exception to your "hard tires make for good racing" idea?strad wrote:so, so wrong.
Absolutely true, Mclaren dominated the season and when one of the contenders of the team was out there was nothing interesting to see. But fans seem to have mythologized those years.NathanOlder wrote:It was also dull because one of the main guys fighting for a win threw it away on lap 1. Back in 88 , if senna or 0rost went out or screwed up on lap 1, the fight for the win was equally boring. But people seem to see those days as the good old days when every race was dynamite!
I'm sorry, but that's totally idioticPhil wrote:How about awarding points for qualifying and then start them in reverse order? The points for qualifying will give incentive to teams to qualify up front and the reverse order will make them come through the field.
As long as you have quicker cars qualifying, starting and finishing up front, you wont have many overtaking situations...