Not about the driver...

Not sure if this has always been the case but I feel Formula 1 has come down to pure constructors competition and the driver just benefiting for being behind the wheel.

At this point of the racing ladder, all these drivers are almost equally as good. Sure, some maybe a little more skilled or has that extra will to overtake and find or create a passing lane.

BUT even if you are the best driver, you can only go as far as the car allows.

Was Hamilton really better then everyone? Maybe. His car sure was the quickest.

Look at these scenarios, which would be more exciting to watch:
1. identical cars, different drivers
2. identical drivers, different cars- impossible but i think its the closest thing to formula 1 today


End Rant.

 

A driver in not the best car has very rarely won the championship. Since day 1.

 

And I think efforts have been made to make teams as even as possible but it will never be 100% equal.

Just wishful thinking to be able to watch the best driver and showcase their skills.

Purely for the entertainment factor.

That is why some other racing leagues are so much more entertaining to watch, even the small miata cup cars or go karts lol

 

It'll never happen to be honest.

The best you can hope for (if it's a driver to your liking) is for him to get along and communicate well with a very good team to develop a team/car around him with a huge budget.

Other series have their benefit in all cars being equal (relatively speaking) and a driver can excell in that. None have the glory of F1 though .

 

+ 1000.

Also even if the cars were identical, half the racers would point out that the car doesn't suit their driving style...

Best,

Sammy

 

I would say Hamilton won it in the second best car in 2008. He was helped by the mediocrity of the Ferrari drivers that season though.

 

Even in 2008 the McLaren was so close to us, it is just a big debate which car was marginally better, which makes it so close too call, they were the same for all practical purposes. In the end, the best car and driver wins (that means fast and reliable).

 

The 2008 Ferrari and Mclaren where just about equal. I don't think the drivers where mediocre (I actually think that Massa was at his very strongest back then. Kimi could have been a bit stronger though), the team let them down too often though. Numerous pit errors, strategy calls and car failures cost them the title (I recently rewatched the season).

 

I don't really agree. I think with Alonso and Hamilton being evenly matched during their 2007 season and then witnessing Alonso's demolition derby of Massa and Raikkonen it's not far stretched the Ferrari were better cars in 2007/2008 only to be let down by their drivers.

To be honest, Massa was considered a top driver before Alonso showed up. Now he won't get a mention against either Alonso or Hamilton. I suppose I should have said the McLaren was more reliable, but Ferrari was overall the quicker car on most weekends. Raikkonen's fastest laps and the overall number of race wins in my opinion vindicate my opinion. In regards to mistakes Massa and Raikkonen made number of mistakes throughout the season and not necessarily the team letting the pair down as it was 50/50 from both sides. I still hold my opinion whether Alonso or Hamilton were at Ferrari in 2008 then both championships would have been sealed.

 

Are cars in the same team really equal?

Do you think they give the #1 driver the slightly better car(maybe use experimental things on the #2 car?) or slightly better race strategy?

 

LOLOLOLOLO, yap, they where mediocre all right but still better than him....

 

Pit strategy usually depends on race (or more rarely championship) positions

 

Not this again… It has always been this way. The championship is not about the drivers, it is about the team. The car is the fundamental part of that - and rightly so as it is the product of team work. The nut holding the wheel is the second most important component. That's why the cash is distributed the way it is - WCC order determines who get's what.

 

Driving and racing are different things. Rosburg was a better driver for qualy, hamilton was a better racer.

 

Wasn't the drivers, imo...it was the paddock that was woefully inept.

 

At least when using used to be permitted throughout the season the drivers had a greater influence over development. Now drivers use practice sessions for testing or perhaps embark on a test program if something happens to them early in the race and the whole weekend becomes worthless for scoring any points.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

1) The most exciting races last year were between Hamilton and Rosberg.
2) 2 is equivalent to IRL (n.e. IndyCar)

 

I want variety.

I'll watch NASCAR Cup for close cars, and different drivers. I'll watch F1 for somewhat close-ish cars and different drivers, and WEC prototypes for radically different cars.

Keep the different series unique. ^^

F1, you cannot rank simply by points or position, even if both driver's had the same car. The off track management oft decides the fates. Leave one guy out 3 extra laps to collect data on tire degradation, and his race is fouled, but the knowledge can help the other driver win a race.

Only the driver's themselves can really know, and they need to not be honest if its not them.

 

No longer "real racing"!

GPGuide | News - F1 'no longer real racing' - Briatore

 

except for Keke Rosberg in 82, Hunt in 76, and Fittipaldi in 74 or Lauda in 77, or Surtees in 64 or ... need I go on.

 

Massa is - was by far a better driver than Hamilton. people forget ( already) the near life ending accident with the spring from Buttons Brawn that happend in Hungary... until then he was tops - and is slowly getting back to his old form. but I think age is creeping in...

 

Most of these WDCs had some circumstance that sealed the deal. Had Bandini not punted Hill in Mexico, Surtees would not have been a WDC. Hunt prayed for rain.

 

you're in trouble if his one eyed fans see that!!

 

It was from the Brawn of Rubens Barrichello.

All the best,
Andrew.

 

Hence the ''very rarely'' instead of ''often''.