These regualtions are taking away from the driver. If you qual on a clear day and race on a rainy day - who's driving the car? Yes the team can have input and suggestions but the throttle is direct to driver. Conservation and ideal use of resources is dictated by the driver. No? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
F1 didn't miss refueling and tyre changes before they were introduced by a)Gordon Murray at Brabham, b) the introduction of slicks. From 1950, until the early 70s, GPs didn't have either of them. Do you think there was no team element on race day then?
I think people, in general, love to "feel" involved. This isn't the same sport as it was three decades ago. The odds of the fia entirely removing regulations is a lot more slim than them revising regulations. If the regulations are revised to the point where there is an increased number of "players" with in the entity in an effort to succeed - there will be an increased number of spectators. This isn't rocket science in the sense of flying a rocket. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Given the history of the sport that period is statically an anomaly. There have been more Grand Prixes run with pit stops than without. The Indy 500 doesn't seem to have been compromised by them either.
The driver has to operate under artificial restrictions. Is this Grand Prix racing or the Mobil Economy Run?
Agreed, but the Indy 500 are run over ... 500 miles, so refueling was immediately part of the equation. Today's GPs are run over 200 miles maximum, most of the time less than 90 minutes. You would expect a modern car to have enough fuel to run that length of time, and modern tyres to last that distance. Pit stops were introduced during the modern era to "spice up" the proceedings, but they had nothing to the driving. Pit stops introduced team strategy around them, and this with the safety car periods, has altered the results of many GPs. Personally, I prefer an uninterrupted race.
Chacon a son gout. F1 is a team sport so I see nothing unsporting about pit stops. The Saftey Car is a Red Herring in this discussion. If a team finds an advantage in designing a car that runs flag to flag let them do it. If others find stops an advantage let them design a car with smaller tanks.
This isn't a series for the mean green flying machine but let's get real. If the sponsors aren't going to keep commitments post Kers advances - there's going to be a problem. I personally don't want to watch Honda fits running around like they're hopped up on cocaine and tequila. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Its Mercedes and Renault that pushed for the greening not the sponsors. If the sport attracts fans again they'll be back.
Point being. If you're not changing tires are we gonna start changing cooler filters? The big money is thermo green right now. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In the early days there were fuel and tyre stops but the BIG difference is they were stops that were needed, not to apparently make Bernie's TV show more interesting. And sorry guys, the teams involvement should stop with car preparation. There is no need or want for them to be involved in the race as well ... it is not the special Olympics where everybody needs to get a plastic medal. IMO the best racing in F1 was the late 70's to the 90's (?) where the cars ran from the start to the end with absolutely no stops. Pete
To mine also. I don't like pit stops. I wouldn't mind, however, if, among the tyres, there is one option that is "slightly softer" (meaning "slightly quicker") than the other, BUT for which it is not 100% sure that it will hold the distance. So that the pit spot is not scheduled, but might occur should you calculation proves wrong. Rgds
What are you talking about, there were both fuel and tire stops. Most seasons have had stops for at least one of these. '51 Silverstone GP Fuel and Tire stops [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZsRYedCzNs]Watch and listen from 2:25[/ame] Just don't agree with you on this Pete, but I do concede there was plenty of great racing in the era you mentioned (on of my all time faves is Giles V Arnoux '79 GP for 2nd or 3rd place - epic). In short, there is plenty that can be done to bring back pure racing and competition even without the stops - although IMO its even better with the stops. Get rid of the gimmicks and get down to racing.
The one thing that absolutely must be done is to take away the insane rule that prevents teams from catching up during the season. Having to live through another boring meaningless season where the result is know after race1 is stupid and totally devalues the titles handed out at the end of the year.
Nowadays as we can engineer cars to carry enough fuel and tyres that last the whole race a pit stop is a gimmick. That is the difference. Back in the old days they couldn't engineer the cars/tyres as well and therefore stops were required. The only reason they exist now is as a gimmick as some find it more interesting. Fncked if I can understand this as a pitstop means the racing has temporarily stopped ... ?????????????. Woo hoo they can change all 4 tyres in 3 seconds, big deal. I did not turn the TV on to watch tyre changing races. I could change my cars tyre really fast if I had too many helpers too. What's next, how fast you can change a spark plug, bog and paint a cheap car, do an oil and filter change? If the poor mechanics are feeling left out (and please explain why? If you cannot be proud when the car you prepares enables your driver and team to be competitive you are in the wrong sport) why not have tyre, etc. changing competitions on the first day of practice and give the fastest team a cheap plastic trophy. It is the only motorsport class that forces arbitrary tyre changes and fuel topping up when not actually required. Karts, Formula Vee, Formula Ford, Three, Two ... I could go are not ruined by this farce. Pete
Boring?? Are you kidding? It was a cracking season for racing right through the field. It didn't always work for the Merc's and some of Hamilton's drives from the back were epic and Nico's attempts to drive from the back were enlightening!! And Dan's drives were brilliant. I seriously wonder if you watched at all. John
Impo the fastest way to complete the race is winner . If that a team what's to make 5 pit stops to add fuel and tires is up to them . The engine rules with in season development is a way to control costs . If you can't develop the power units every day way have these green engines at all makes no sense at all .
F1 is interested in appearing green and appearing to save money. They are, of course, neither. Again the "Show" trumps the sport.
Not "boring", "incredibly boring". 2014 was defined by "lift and coast" and the knowledge from the very first race that no team was allowed to catch up for the rest of the year. 2014 boring with meaningless titles.
Big time mistake by F1. When an organization lies to itself, let alone to its customers, and when the customers catch on to the lie before the members of the organization do, it's not a good thing -F
Yep, the fan doesn't like the crud that's being served up and they are staying away and turning off in droves.
100% correct. With regard to sponsors being drawn to F1; it has 0% to do with ERS, KERS, MGU-H, MGU-K, prime tires, option tires or refueling and everything to do with how many eyeballs watch it on TV. The dandruff shampoo guy doesn't make his sponsorship decisions based on a report received every Monday morning telling him how many tons of carbon were not spewed into the air at a particular GP. He makes his decision based on "impressions", how many times his company's logo was scene over the weekend.
True. It's not just that F1 has sacrificed the sport for the show but they haven't even given us a show that people want to watch.
