How is Bernie and the FIA going to help Clifford now?

What's a "seasoned" country? England? We struggle to qualify most times, damnit!

I already noted that the pools aren't "equal" - That's the way it goes. FIFA itself may be corrupt (almost as much as UEFA). But, countries are pooled based on geography with names pulled from a randomizer. Win your pool and you're in. Unless you're also implying there's match fixing going on. Which I concede may have happened (Middle East?) but is very, very, rare.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Meant to comment on this earlier, but the TFHB distracted me.

We're getting to the heart of the matter..... I still think there's much "engineering excellence & innovation" in F1 - It's just very subtle these days. The rules today do indeed restrict much of what they can do - Same for everyone.

But even within these constraints the cream continues to rise, as it should. The "top teams" remain the top teams, midfielders come and go. Tail end Charlie's sometimes improve. It's always been that way. No conspiracies required.

Cheers,
Ian

 

Of course I have nothing to back it up. but the safe assumption is that in Formula 1 is, in some form and to some extend, corrupt. Just like any other business. But that is not the point in this discussion. In this discussion the propostion is that Formula 1 is 'orchestrated'. That the season is being played out to a scenario that is aimed at increasing the television audience. And I don't think that that is the case. Primarily because those who would need to be orchestrated, are the teams. In the short term, teams have only one natural interest and that is winning. That is also the interest of their sponsor. Being attached to a winning team means airtime and since everyone likes a winner, it will get you positive promotion, which leads to an increase in sales. That is basically the whole raison d 'etre of sponsoring. But when the teams would be tempted to put their interest in winning aside and act according to the wishes of the FIA and/or Bernie, there is also the driver who needs to be orchestrated. A driver also has one natural interest, which is, again, winning.

I am not to sure that everyone involved (team principles, drivers) would be corruptable enough to choose money over winning, since I assume money could be the only realistic incentive that could lead to put your primary interests aside. Would Kimi for instance be happy to give up a good result in exchange for cash? I think not. And when the FIA and/or Bernie can't totally rely on all those involved to be prepared to actually be orchestrated, than the whole operation is useless. Besides, you'd only need one driver or teammember to blow the whistle. Too big of a risk.

And in all fairness, everything that may seem to be orchestrated in order to influence the course of a championship, can be explained in terms of the rules. Just like Vettels fuelincident, or the bargeboards-saga after Malaysia 1999. Looking closer, there is always a logical explanation.

 

My comments re: World Cup and Olympics were about the selection process of the hosting country/city. Not about the athletes/teams.

Agreed on that: I don't think for a moment that an entire season is orchestrated. But individual races probably have been manipulated. That doesn't mean "everybody is in on it" but just the necessary people. You only need to "persuade" one team manager, who calls the shots on the pitwall to alter the race strategy (Shanghai and Sao Paulo 2007) or one engineer to not top off a fuel tank etc.

I don't think manipulation is prevalent. Quite the opposite. But I also strongly believe it happens towards the end of the season for the sake of the show. Apart from that the usual gimmicks with interpreting the rules do their part to "level the playing field" (read: neutralize an unpopular contestant).

 

Engineering is top notch within limited parameters. Innovation is even more limited.

 

Oops! My bad! Sorry I opened a can of worms there..... Completely agree on that one BTW.

Nope, still not buying it, sorry! IMO, there's simply way too much at stake - If it ever came out (and it would) the sport would be finished. We may like to think it lacks credibility today, but any manipulation and it's over. As I've said, these are some of the most competitive people on the planet - They're not going to give up even a solitary point without a fight and *definitely* not for the sake of the show.

They've all made what turned out to be dodgy strategy calls over the years - Again, they all make mistakes that us armchair QB's can see with hindsight. Unless you've sat on a pitwall you can't imagine the pressure they're under at times. **** happens. No conspiracy.

Cheers,
Ian

 

+1

Very true. I guess the root of the problem then becomes how do "we" allow innovation without costs skyrocketing? It's all very well to say if you can't afford it don't join in but the much hated "show" needs full grids and not everyone has $100MM plus to spend. Or, throw the rule book out ala Can Am, restrict fuel flow and let 'em at it. Unsustainable IMO.

Fer sure, there's no easy answers.

Cheers,
Ian

 

But there is.
What we've got.
It works for everyone but the traditional fan.

 

Another "ouch!"....... I consider myself a very traditional fan and I'm loving it!

- Closer than they've ever been.
- More than half the teams in with a (semi) realistic chance of a win.
- Varying strategies.
- Almost as quick as ever, and certainly still the quickest way round a road course.
- No conspiracies / manipulation. (Since the Lunatic left anyway )
- Borderline insane reliability - Astounding longevity from the major components.
- Stable regulations.

OK, I'll concede we won't see anything like Colin's twin chassis or ground effects etc, but they are still innovating within the restrictive rules. And at least it's sustainable........

Cheers,
Ian

 

Like a frog in a pot. One doesn't notice if the heat is turned up slowly enough.

 

You guys are all fools with this conspiracy theory stuff. Next thing you'll be saying professional wrestling is fake and there's no father christmas!!!

Get over it guys!! It's all real.

 

Fair comment. You got me there.

What would you do to "fix" it?........

Cheers,
Ian

 

I know am not conspiring nowt, I believe everything you say as well...

 

Let it go on as it is and let it selfdestruct/correct.

 

A major negative in my book.

 

Huzzah and amen bro.

 

Fair enough.

I too enjoyed the "kablamo" years of highly stressed motors and stuff blowing up all the time. But, was the racing better?

Cheers,
Ian

 

Sanity at last!

 

IMO the constant risk of a mechanical failure while your favorite driver was leading was interesting. Although some teams *ahem* McLaren *ahem* still provide that thrill for their fans.

Was the racing better in the V10 era? Debatable...but I think so. The cars were certainly much better looking and more interesting to watch and hear. They had more of a sense of occasion. I went back and watched some qualifying videos from 2004 on YouTube the other day and was amazed at how much faster the cars were. They were loads faster than today and certainly looked it. PLUS the drivers were really getting after it, pushing balls to the wall, brake dust flying out of the wheels. The battles back then were epic! When a guy was leading trying to hold off a much faster car it was more interesting because you knew the car behind wasn't going to simply fly by with DRS. Senna couldn't have held off Mansell today. It wouldn't happen.

Then I compared that with the "cruising" we see today, managing tires. Closer racing doesn't equal better racing. I think it's a bad sign when a Force India is .3 off of a Ferrari. It shows they have dumbed down the rules and made the cars "spec" enough that even mid fielders can run with the big dogs. No high HP exotic factory-spec motors anymore, no outlandish aero concepts, no innovation like DDD and the F-duct. There's no room for that, it's all too regulated. The customer guys have the same thing as the big boys and there isn't enough play in the rules to allow innovation. Sure a genius like Newey can find a couple tenths but it's all relative...

 

+1

 

Am exactly not disagreeing, but looking back can be looked at with fond memories.

The fact is times change, and I don't think F1 is as bad as some make out right now, we have to accept that in economical hard times, F1 as a whole flies in the face of it, so IMO they have to toss a occasional bone to the green side to show willing, either that be engine size, KERS and cost reduction ect.

So it is a double edge sword, tyres that don't last that's a different matter, but they will never completely satisfy all F1 fans all of the time.

Other than that, we can go back to cavorting druids, death by stoning and dung for breakfast.

 

Well, back in the 80s there was some Balestre BS, and it was then that the big car manufacturers and the tobacco corporations that don´t give a dang about racing but have deep pockets made the ultra-expensive sport that F1 is today. Ultra-expensive means that teams need the money of Bernie and the TV, etc, etc... and some years later we have DRS and fake tyres.

As Nietzche said, there are not happy eras, just happy moments.

 

V10 cars still hold nearly all the lap records (by a wide margain) nearly a decade later. Sad, IMO.

 

I agree. Personally I thought that even the V10 was a retrograde step.
To be fair the circuits don't get faster. Eventually that causes real safety concerns.