Formula 1 Thread

mr.checkerboards

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2010
Messages
36,798
Likes
61,556
Am I supposed to think that was epic? Because I feel like I just watched someone win a marathon because they got to ride in a car for two miles, got dropped off 100 meters before the finish line, and then won because they were more well rested then the guy who actually led the entire race.
Thats why I called it a Nascar finish. 100% feels rigged AF
 
Likes: tvolsfan

ptclaus98

Look at that SWUG
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
5,476
Likes
1,136
I've been watching since Novemberish of last year maybe? Whenever Grosjean had his crash. Was channel surfing, stopped to see what was going on and have been interested ever since.

It's a good season, but there are things I still wonder about.

So far as I can tell being a new F1 fan it seems like the cars aren't even close to even. I don't see the point in celebrating a driver so much when 90% of the grid has no chance to win and won't even fight for position because they'll be happy finishing 5th or 6th.

Honestly I'd rather see more parity on the cars so you can actually see driver achievement, but I have a feeling I'd be shouted down by longtime F1 fans. Yea, Lewis has won a ton of championships but if he were in a Williams or Hass the last few years and someone else was in the Mercedes how would it have fallen out then? It's a distinct advantage when your car is the fastest in the straights fastest in the corners.

I like that the teams can modify their cars to each track and there is strategy involved, but at the same time it's kind of a letdown when you know before the race even starts that Mercedes or Red Bull will likely have two of the 3 podium spots if not all 3.
I've just seen this, but I'm going to back the lack of parity here. I like it, because it really emphasizes all the tools a proper racecar driver should have. Lewis Hamilton is in the best car because he's learned how to work with the team to push a car to the front, but even more than that, through what he's been able to do on the track over the last 7 years, he's earned their trust to be able to dictate the direction in which a car is designed. Mercedes might be a massive outfit, with some of the biggest budget and brightest minds. But they had all that before Hamilton went there, and they weren't faring well. On the opposite end, McLaren, where Lewis won his first championship, was falling apart behind the scenes but his driving kept them afloat. Once he left that operation fell off a cliff and they're only just starting to recover. Red Bull are starting to come along as well. They have a similar budget spend to Merc and are one of the best organized teams in the world with one of the best designers to ever exist in Adrian Newey. They've had a strong stable of drivers to choose from for years as well. The issue with them after their period of dominance was their loyalty to Renault, who misstepped on the initial direction of their power units. Even still they were best of the rest until they parted ways with Renault and moved to Honda which was thought to be the worst engine in the sport, and regularly made fun of/memed/whatever. You say Lewis couldn't win with Haas? That's because Haas is a joke of an organization built to be a billboard for Haas CNC and not to actually compete. At Williams, give him a competent technical director(they honestly have one right now, IMO) and more budget year on year and he could build them into at least a solid midfield team.


There's this myth in racing that if the cars are equal that the drivers make the difference, but money matters just as much in series like IndyCar and NASCAR, they just spend less of it. But the richest teams usually win the most. In Formula One, if you hit on a development, or get the right symbiosis between driver and car or driver and engineer, you can punch well above your budget. Pierre Gasly is proof of that, and even more proof of that is Brawn GP in 2009. From the remnants of Honda, who left in disgrace, with an engineer from their sister team who didn't have enough budget to finish out the 2008 season(even after punching above their weight in an year old car in 2007), Ross Brawn forged a championship out of a shoestring(for F1) budget and a bunch of pieces no one wanted, beating Mercedes, Ferrari and Red Bulls 150 million plus budgets. You might see a small team punch above their weight in IndyCar or NASCAR over a race, or stretch of races, but if you look at the last 15 years of IndyCar, you'll see one of three teams at the top at the end of every year. In NASCAR, you at least have the Truex and Furniture Row season in 2017, but they also have a hegemony of the rich as well. They just have greater money spread as it has had monstrous financial backing for 25 years now.
 

ptclaus98

Look at that SWUG
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
5,476
Likes
1,136
Am I supposed to think that was epic? Because I feel like I just watched someone win a marathon because they got to ride in a car for two miles, got dropped off 100 meters before the finish line, and then won because they were more well rested then the guy who actually led the entire race.
It was historical, but a historical farce. This has been a legacy of the dogshit stewarding we've had all year. But Max was ultimately deserving of the title, as would Lewis have been if he had won.
 

newyorkvol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
2,858
Likes
3,758
Am I supposed to think that was epic? Because I feel like I just watched someone win a marathon because they got to ride in a car for two miles, got dropped off 100 meters before the finish line, and then won because they were more well rested then the guy who actually led the entire race.
I see what you’re saying. But this is much less individual than a marathon. Hamilton absolutely had the faster car all weekend. Verstappen/Red Bull did what they needed to do (soft tires) in qualifying to get the pole. But Hamilton drove away from them. Red Bull played the hand they were dealt. They took pit stops when needed and had teammate Perez work to help narrow the gap. Verstappen took the pit stop at the end in an all-or-nothing move relying on a re-start. Hamilton stayed out on old hard tires so as not to lose the spot. Hamilton and his car were better. Red Bull team won that race for Versrappen.
 

VolunteerHillbilly

Spike Drinks, Not Trees
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Messages
38,854
Likes
12,938
It was historical, but a historical farce. This has been a legacy of the dogshit stewarding we've had all year. But Max was ultimately deserving of the title, as would Lewis have been if he had won.
A lot depends on perspective. I was thinking the race was rigged for Hamilton when he did not receive a penalty on the first lap. I really think that if it had been any other driver, he would have had time added. Maybe I’m wrong but that’s how I saw it, which made the result all the more amazing.
 

volfan4lyfe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2008
Messages
1,452
Likes
613
It took me all day to process Masi's absolute disaster of a finish. Yes, Verstappen is deserving of the WDC, but Hamilton deserved the win yesterday. I think without question Hamilton had the better car and was driving a better race than Verstappen until Masi decided "to have a race" between only two people.

If I am Ferrari, I'd be a little upset that Masi completely denied Sainz the opportunity to compete for a win himself. There's no telling if he'd have been able to pass Lewis too on a restart with fresher tires. Utterly insane. I'd have to think Mercedes' legal challenge will result in some form of admission of wrongdoing by the FIA and some monetary penalties (obviously they aren't going to change the ultimate outcome). It is tough for Max to get his first WDC with an asterisk attached to it. I'm sure he'll get plenty more, and the controversy will fade, but still.

That being said, I'm THRILLED for next year with the new car/new tires. I think a few teams have absolutely punted the last year(s) to get their new tech up and ready for competition (Haas and Aston Martin for sure). Will be fun!
 

VolunteerHillbilly

Spike Drinks, Not Trees
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Messages
38,854
Likes
12,938
Hamilton said finish manipulated

I just find this amusing, even if it’s true. He’s been the beneficiary of the F1 equivalent of the Brady Rule for the better part of a decade. I’ve had a hard time finding interest in this sport because of the dominance of the Mercedes run and lack of an American driver. At least this spices things up a bit.
 

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
76,860
Likes
44,604
I've been watching since Novemberish of last year maybe? Whenever Grosjean had his crash. Was channel surfing, stopped to see what was going on and have been interested ever since.

It's a good season, but there are things I still wonder about.

So far as I can tell being a new F1 fan it seems like the cars aren't even close to even. I don't see the point in celebrating a driver so much when 90% of the grid has no chance to win and won't even fight for position because they'll be happy finishing 5th or 6th.

Honestly I'd rather see more parity on the cars so you can actually see driver achievement, but I have a feeling I'd be shouted down by longtime F1 fans. Yea, Lewis has won a ton of championships but if he were in a Williams or Hass the last few years and someone else was in the Mercedes how would it have fallen out then? It's a distinct advantage when your car is the fastest in the straights fastest in the corners.

I like that the teams can modify their cars to each track and there is strategy involved, but at the same time it's kind of a letdown when you know before the race even starts that Mercedes or Red Bull will likely have two of the 3 podium spots if not all 3.
Americans are obsessed with 1st place and international sports fans have a different perspective. It's more about how you do with what you got than it is 1st place (I mean this all relatively speaking). It's different. Only 8 countries have ever won the world cup, and most countries are unlikely to qualify in any given decade, but that won't stop Guatemalans from being rabid fans of the process and proud of doing well in qualifiers (while not qualifying).
 
Last edited:

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
76,860
Likes
44,604
Am I supposed to think that was epic? Because I feel like I just watched someone win a marathon because they got to ride in a car for two miles, got dropped off 100 meters before the finish line, and then won because they were more well rested then the guy who actually led the entire race.
Epic? IDK. Exciting, yes.

We should be impressed with how Verstappen performed this year. He is driver of the year. Mercedes clearly has the better car and Max was neck and neck with Hamilton, down to the final week. That shouldn't happen if Lewis is better.

For the people saying it's rigged...was it rigged when they didn't make Lewis give Max 1st place back on lap 1?
 
Last edited:

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
76,860
Likes
44,604
Hamilton said finish manipulated

I just find this amusing, even if it’s true. He’s been the beneficiary of the F1 equivalent of the Brady Rule for the better part of a decade. I’ve had a hard time finding interest in this sport because of the dominance of the Mercedes run and lack of an American driver. At least this spices things up a bit.
Being new to the sport, one thing that jumps out is there seems to be tons of inconsistency with rule enforcement and ALL the drivers/teams are ALWAYS complaining about something.
 

VolunteerHillbilly

Spike Drinks, Not Trees
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Messages
38,854
Likes
12,938
Being new to the sport, one thing that jumps out is there seems to be tons of inconsistency with rule enforcement and ALL the drivers/teams are ALWAYS complaining about something.
I'm not a hardcore fan by any means. My wife was a big Michael Schumacher fan and I went to the USGP at Indy with her a couple of times. I don't recall her supporting Vettel but she latched on to Hamilton at some point. Most of my exposure to F1 has come during the runs of those two drivers, which has made it sort of boring for me. I wasn't following the sport in the 70s and early 80s, but when you look back at the history it seems like the field was much more competitive and the top drivers switched teams with more regularity. Of course, we Americans had Mario Andretti in the field.

I liken current F1 to current EPL. I enjoy watching the premier league, but I kinda wish I had been paying more attention back in the day when the participation rules and financials made it possible for clubs like Notts Forest, Leeds and Derby County could actually with the league.
 

TheDeeble

Guy on the Couch
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
8,482
Likes
6,304
Americans are obsessed with 1st place and international sports fans have a different perspective. It's more about how you do with what you got than it is 1st place (I mean this all relatively speaking). It's different. Only 8 countries have ever won the world cup, and most countries are unlikely to qualify in any given decade, but that won't stop Guatemalans from being rabid fans of the process and proud of doing well in qualifiers (while not qualifying).
Yea I get that and I have no criticism of any fans. It just seems to me all the prestige and excitement should be for the constructor's championship, not so much the driver championship. But I doubt that's as interesting for F1 and fans. The gap between Mercedes/Red Bull cars and everyone else was pretty big. And that's a credit to the entire team.

Being new to the sport, one thing that jumps out is there seems to be tons of inconsistency with rule enforcement and ALL the drivers/teams are ALWAYS complaining about something.
I noticed the same. Steward decisions seem to be all over the place.

Anytime someone defends their position against Lewis he calls it dangerous driving or gets on the radio and whines. Maybe it's just the coverage by Sky Sports, but it didn't seem like other teams/drivers complained nearly as much as Mercedes/Red Bull.
 
Likes: n_huffhines

ptclaus98

Look at that SWUG
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
5,476
Likes
1,136
I'm not a hardcore fan by any means. My wife was a big Michael Schumacher fan and I went to the USGP at Indy with her a couple of times. I don't recall her supporting Vettel but she latched on to Hamilton at some point. Most of my exposure to F1 has come during the runs of those two drivers, which has made it sort of boring for me. I wasn't following the sport in the 70s and early 80s, but when you look back at the history it seems like the field was much more competitive and the top drivers switched teams with more regularity. Of course, we Americans had Mario Andretti in the field.

I liken current F1 to current EPL. I enjoy watching the premier league, but I kinda wish I had been paying more attention back in the day when the participation rules and financials made it possible for clubs like Notts Forest, Leeds and Derby County could actually with the league.
This is revisionist at best, on account of both F1 and the top division of English football. I wasn't alive in the 70s or 80s but seeing season reviews and speaking to people who were, if you weren't in a McLaren, you likely weren't going to win the title, especially in the 80s. And back in those days even if you had a thrilling title fight, you'd have people regularly winning by 30-45 seconds at best, then a further 30-45 seconds to third, and often 4th would be a lap down. The field spread was comical, and often you had like 8 cars finishing. As far as English football, Leeds, Derby, and Notts were all well supported(and still are) clubs, and I'd say even super club in the case of Forest. They didn't adapt to the formation of the Prem, and they didn't organize to stop it, either.
 

ptclaus98

Look at that SWUG
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
5,476
Likes
1,136
The gap between Mercedes/Red Bull cars and everyone else was pretty big. And that's a credit to the entire team.
It really isn't, the difference isn't in ultimate pace of the car, but how easy they are on tires and the ultimate pace of Hamilton and Verstappen, combined with how good their teams are in strategy and pitstops. Pierre Gasly is consistently close to the top on the timing sheets, but he doesn't have the team to fight with them on Sundays, even though he's beaten Bottas and Perez on occasion and was in Red Bull a few years ago where he didn't perform to this level
 

VolunteerHillbilly

Spike Drinks, Not Trees
Joined
Sep 26, 2005
Messages
38,854
Likes
12,938
This is revisionist at best, on account of both F1 and the top division of English football. I wasn't alive in the 70s or 80s but seeing season reviews and speaking to people who were, if you weren't in a McLaren, you likely weren't going to win the title, especially in the 80s. And back in those days even if you had a thrilling title fight, you'd have people regularly winning by 30-45 seconds at best, then a further 30-45 seconds to third, and often 4th would be a lap down. The field spread was comical, and often you had like 8 cars finishing. As far as English football, Leeds, Derby, and Notts were all well supported(and still are) clubs, and I'd say even super club in the case of Forest. They didn't adapt to the formation of the Prem, and they didn't organize to stop it, either.
I think champions won in a mcclaren maybe once in the 70s and early 80s. Anyone can look at champions year by year and see that different people were winning in different cars with different engines. Maybe you should just use google instead of the old timers you consulted.
 

ptclaus98

Look at that SWUG
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
5,476
Likes
1,136
I think champions won in a mcclaren maybe once in the 70s and early 80s. Anyone can look at champions year by year and see that different people were winning in different cars with different engines. Maybe you should just use google instead of the old timers you consulted.
Sorry, missed where you said early 80's. But that was a unique period in time where aero was not understood, and you could just drop in a Cosworth V8 like everyone else did and take your chances. Great in theory, but that period is oft romanticized, but in truth, a dark period of the sport filled with death and ineptitude by the sport's leadership. In truth, parity back then was less about the formula being right, but variables that either can't exist, or or ones that no one in their right mind should want to exist
 

ptclaus98

Look at that SWUG
Joined
Dec 10, 2008
Messages
5,476
Likes
1,136
Also, on the stewarding. The inconsistency is a new thing. Controversial decisions have been part and parcel of F1 for decades, but lately it seems like they make **** up on the go. F1 has always been more lenient on drivers defending their positions but there have some very questionable moves that have been brushed off the last couple of years. I can't help but think it's being done for what they think the American audience wants. Instead of manufacturing drama in Drive to Survive, they're going full NASCAR and doing it on the track.
 

VN Store




Top