Why I love Formula 1 (and why you might like it too)
jorisroovers.com
jorisroovers.com
And not just in Russia & Saudi Arabia, F1 is hosted by lot’s of other dictators, human rights abusers countries. Just like FIFA:
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/feb/25/uefa-and-fi...
F1 weekends are frequently extremely boring. They are 3 day long events where you're waiting for moments that last seconds and more than often don't occur. Confirmation bias tends to make people think F1 is an exciting thing, and the owners of the sport would like to keep it that way.
I spent the last decade shooting a photo project on this very thing, that F1 is actually pretty mundane, visiting 25 races in the process: https://www.formulanon.com/ # I'd followed the sport for 20 years prior to that, so had run out of enthusiasm for it, the project kept that interest going for a little while longer.
I'm not sure it was that much of an advantage, but it was a great system.
The best part about the fan example [1] is that they claimed it was there for "cooling" purposes.
Group B is past the line on its way to being gladiator combat. TBIs are non-lethal so American football is tolerated.
It's fine for people to take individual risks, but codifying rules that cause death for a recreational spectator activity is unacceptable.
Nowadays they're a bit less white, don't die or get maimed nearly as often (last death in 2015), but they have largely become a set of meticulous and obsessive kids who spend most of their life in front of simulators.
― Ernest Hemingway
I think this aspect is important and the sport can be exciting if one accepts these conditions. A field of 10 teams where anyone could take the title is probably not even a “design goal” for the regulations.
It all requires some luck with the “pairings” however. Last season was a great example of how it should be with thrilling fights between teams 1..2 and 3..5 and so on. Previous years Mercedes was unfortunately alone in #1 and a fight for 2..3 is obviously not as exciting.
Commonly referred to “Formula 1.5” (the Best of the Rest).
But luckily we still have the magic of the FA Cup, and also soccer is full of surprises!
What I'd like to see is a race with more variation, and surprises. The only rules should be something like:
- The car must cost less than, say, $1 million in material
- The plans must be opened to competitors after some time
- You have to take care of the drivers' safety
And then just get from A to B or do the laps by any means necessary. The race courses would change regularly, so you would have to build new cars. One year they would be very curvy, next year they are short and straight so you need better acceleration, another year there are short stretches of rallye, and so on. I think that would lead to some very interesting cars. And it would shift the focus away from the shaving milliseconds aspect that I find so boring with modern sports, back to the exploratory feeling I imagine motorsports used to have.
- no weapons - no deliberate damage of opponents
or maybe even without those. We might get real life version of wipeout.
What F1 really needs is one monopost for all drivers when only driving skills will make difference and not how much money will someone throw at car R&D.
Later I switched to Moto GP, much more dynamic, you can see multiple changes to positions within few laps and it's about actual skills.
Please correct me if I am wrong and F1 is now dynamic with lot of overtaking since I haven't seen one GP in last 10-15 years.
Btw. do yourself a service and don't watch the new documentary Schumacher, it's just waste of time with NO new information for anyone who watched F1 during Schumacher times.
That would no longer be F1. There are lots of other categories that follow that formula (e.g. F2/3 and IndyCar) if that’s what you’re looking for. Engineering genius is an important part of F1, even historically (e.g. the “fan car”).
I've been watching F1 since Senna burst out. Naturally as a kid I loved seeing him win and could care less about most other drivers of the time, certainly the bottom half. As an adult however, I wish things were more equal.
F1 could do with less of a gap between the poor and rich and showcase drivers who have to constantly make choices and perform at their best to maintain vs car A vs car B where car A is always going to be superior.
Why can't there be 1 open-wheel series that is more about the engineering?
I would say that you are wrong, but with caveats. Firstly, it's dependent on the track. some tracks provide more opportunities to overtake than others. Monaco is one extreme (where overtaking is basically impossible) - on the other end of the scale is Bahrain where overtaking is "easy".
Actually having all cars the same would lead to less overtaking though - because it's not enough to "be a bit faster" than the car in front, you have to be close enough, at the right time, and have enough of a performance advantage to make the overtake in the time available. DRS makes a big difference to this giving an advantage to a trailing car which makes overtaking "easier". But you still need the track to play ball.
Like all sports, F1 goes through periods of boring races, and typically there are then rule tweaks to try and tighten up racing. This year there are all new cars, designed (hopefully) to make following easier and hence overtaking easier.
Of course making overtaking easier is perhaps not the best goal - close racing happens when a faster car is behind a slower car, and overtaking is hard. The defense of the slower car, and the effort required to maintain that position can be enthralling. Letting the faster car pass easily, and disappear into the distance may not actually lead to better racing.
Bonus: watching the aliens hit 220 MPH on 2 wheels is pretty awesome, too.
All cars the same would be boring and overwhelming, the sport is in large part about the teams and the engineering, the upgrades they bring and the sway between which team is the best. I watch it because I love seeing this excellence at work and i'm not even into cars, I don't drive, so i care less about that.
Data says otherwise, in general https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/nf4jkq/f1_overtak...
The late 90s/early 00s had the least amount of overtakes on avg
is there also some stat showing diversity of top positions over years or team/driver points required to win championship? though because of changing points system it's difficult to compare unless converted to percentage
According this championship decided by one point was last time in 2008, 2007 and 1994 with 2007 extremely balanced between top 3 https://www.autoweek.com/racing/formula-1/g36279865/formula-...
Judging by this, last year was from start to finish just race between Verstappen and Hamilton https://www.formula1points.com/season/season-progression/202...
Does that word even exist in English? Nobody uses it in the anglo word. Monoposto is an Italian / Spanish word really, where posto is a seat (hence single-seat car).
The only thing I don't like is the engine "sound". You can watch and hear it here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CX8ItCZz04 Not sure something to be "fixed" or not but the engine sound was always a big part of motorsport and it's simply gone in electric car races.
Certainly don't follow the race weekend live threads, when sorted by new which is the default for those, it's Toxic as hell, in a lot of other threads most people repeat the same nonsense as if they don't know anything about the sport.
As you mention it's grown a huge amount since the hugely fake and misleading drive to survive which means sadly it's a lot of those clueless people that have come and it's suffered from it, constantly repeating the same nonsense narratives, i perfer just to see it as a way to aggravate news and then switch off and just enjoy the races.
Honestly, this happens in every on-line community with a rabid fanbase. I see it here too, way more often than I would like.
Unless you're a pay driver who's bringing enough money to almost wholly fund the team. Nikita Mazepin is surely one of the most talentless people to ever set foot in an F1 car, but he brought Russian Oligarch money with him so we'd have had to endure him for another season had Russia not invaded Ukraine. I'm genuinely curious to see if Haas can last the season now that they've shown him the door.
Incidentally, I believe technically we could have as many as 26 cars on the grid (13 teams), but because even being epically uncompetitive at formula 1 is ruinously expensive, and the fact that only the top 10 teams get any prize money at the end of the season, the grid has been 20 cars for a while.
The truly interesting thing about F1 is hidden from sight: engineering. Yes, your driver matters a bit but if you have money you will have a good car as well, which you need to attract a good driver. I guess it's easier to exaggerate the importance of the driver than the dozens of engineers who are doing new things all the time. Quite hard to do a TV show I guess.
There's also the issue that driving is basically a plutocracy. You can't be a driver without huge, huge amounts of money. You _can_ be a driver if you've only got huge amounts of money. Either you have to be unusually good at driving so that someone sponsors you (an even narrower eye of the needle than pro footie), or you have to be unusually wealthy so that mom and dad can sponsor you. Is this a truly global sport? Top drivers seem to come from a small range of countries that either have a motoring tradition or absurd wealth inequality, or just rich countries.
Finally the races seem to happen in all sorts of places that are to motorsports as Qatar is to football.
This is about a third to a quarter of what Ferrari, Mercedes, and Red Bull were spending per year prior to the cap.
Also, freezing the power unit formula until 2025 has evened the playing field on that front. All of the PUs have as close of parity as they have in the turbo hybrid era.
Lastly, the new 2022 car regs have the potential to shake up the grid.
It's not like the sporting body doesn't recognize this as a problem. How do you balance the field without turning it into a spec racing series?
I think this is speculation, and we wont actually know if this is true until tomorrow & Sunday.
But hey if you're in the HN crowd / an engineer and this piques one's interest, I really enjoy the Tech Talk show with Sam Collins and following Craig Scarborough on social media because they both dive into the technical innovation (one might say "hacking" of the regulations) the teams are doing to try and eek out new advantages.
Uh, I think you mean "almost 10 years now". Hamilton joined in 2013, which is when they got second in WCC. They have effectively dominated since then.
Pros: most advanced cares, if you like engineering. the 'best' drivers.
Cons: Lack of wheel to wheel race Some money-driven decisions. Some boring races
Regardless of that, since Liberty Media acquired F1 it is going in a good direction: A bit less rapid cars, more fights It seems to have found its place in the sustainability space.
In terms of Human Rights and so on, you have double-edge situations here, such as visiting S.Arabia and at the same time solid movements of gender equality and others like black liver matters
Just a race between autonomous cars, pitting teams of engineers directly against each other instead of via the human pilot.
I guessed that would involve some pretty different design of the cars, since without the human much of the current designs around safety wouldn't apply. Cars could go faster, slow less, take more risky trajectories.
There's RobotWars, but these always seem (currently) like a weird RC toys competitions.
But they lack the human aspects, personalities etc, which is a huge part of Formula 1.
After many years away from Formula 1 (because it became boring), which I loved as a kid, I started following it again last year, and absolutely love it again.
https://www.indyautonomouschallenge.com/
Idk if it's going to be recurring, but they had a second race for CES22.
For a good intro: https://youtu.be/EUyHyk6bq0I
Mercedes is the only team (as far as I know) that says things like "we win as a team and lose as a team", try to hold blame-free retrospectives, open collaboration between various sub-teams, and so on.
Every other team goes for cut-throat competition between individuals. "You have to prove yourself or you're out", mistakes are held against you, and so on.
Guess which team has won the last 8 constructor's championships?
I can't believe people aren't talking more about this.
Do you know why the Drive To Survive authors would slant things this way?
When F1 had the idea, Amazon offered them more money, but they went with Netflix because it was more about getting eyeballs on the show so they would then come and watch the sport.
It's entirely marketing and designed to bring people into the sport, also a lot of the top teams/drivers don't provide a huge amount of access as they get in the way / give away secrets / make crap up that makes them look bad, so they focus more heavily on smaller teams and have to invent stories there to make it seem exciting.
But a lot of teams have historically had this "we win as a team" vibe and done things like expect the #2 driver to obey team orders and give up position to let the #1 driver score more points and increase the odds of the driver's championship going to a driver from that team. I don't have further reading on this topic specifically, but if you're wanting to learn more and you're in the HN crowd, Steve Matchett's books are awesome and Adrian Newey's autobiography is also pretty good and covers a lot of the last couple of decades with a ton of cool technical detail.
This is pretty common amongst teams that are on a strong winning streak. Red Bull were very much this way during Vettel's dominance years too.
Ferrari in recent years are extremely this way as well, it just presents in a different way. If a driver speaks out negatively about the team, they're shown the door pretty quickly.