F1 rant thread

Discussion in 'Community' started by Counterfit, Mar 20, 2005.

  1. Counterfit macrumors G3


    Aug 20, 2003
    sitting on your shoulder
    Have a problem with something in F1? Think Bernie is an ass? Do you want Paul Stoddard to disappear? Well then, here's your soapbox. (Don't turn this into a whatever v F1 flame war!) I'll get things going here

    1. Tires. The news tires rules allow for one set of tires to last for both qualifying sessions, and the entire race. One tire can be changed no questions asked, they can also be changed for safety reasons (cut sidewall presumably, and punctures), and if Charlie Whiting declares a Change of Conditions. This was put it place to reduce costs, but all it seems to have done so far is reduce the amount of passing for position (which F1 has been criticized for in the past, usually wrongly though). It also seems to have caused a few incidents already. Mark Webber and Giancarlo Fisichella came together at one corner this past weekend, due in part to Giancarlo losing the rear end of his car, thanks mostly to having little grip at the rear. (few drivers had much left of the four treads on their rear tires after the race anyway). The new rule also caused the retirement of Rubens Barrichello, who picked up some debris after Kimi Raikkonen's right rear blew. That disturbed the aerodynamics of the car (and F1 cars are very sensitive to an aero imbalance), thus making his tires turn into round, black, blocks of inflated crap. My solution: one tire supplier (hey Goodyear! :D), one set for quali, also used to start the race (like the previous two years), and at least one tire change during the race.

    More from me tomorrow, so now it's your turn.
  2. bartelby macrumors Core


    Jun 16, 2004
    I think the new tyre rule is one of the best changes.
    The drivers just have to learn how to handle the cars on old tyres that's all.
    They've just got to remember braking distances are A LOT longer.

    I watched the MotoGP Pre season qualifying and they're getting rid of Aggregated Qualifying times in favour of 'fastest lap'.
    I do like aggregated qualifying in F1 though, I've definitely liked the grids so far this season.
  3. VincentVega macrumors regular

    Jan 26, 2004
    Scrap the multiple race engine rule, bring back slicks (but keep the ban on mid-race tyre changes), emasculate the aerodynamics and electronics and make Max Mosley quit and I'll be fairly happy. And bring back pre-2003 qualifying.
  4. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Jan 30, 2004
    having a drink at Milliways
    I quite dislike this year's main rule changes (tire and engine), the engine rule is plain dum and I doubt it did much to cut costs. the tire's rule introduces safety issues and has/will ruin many a race. I might agree on limiting the number of changes, but as a minimum you should have separate sets of tires for qualis and race (but of the same batches).

    I would definitively go to one single tire supplier and very significantly limit tire testing. that would help cutting costs a lot. Than the tire supplier would bring "standardized" sets which would be randomly distributed to the teams.

    the real problem is a phylosphical one. What are the priorities here?
    Is F1 about the fastest car/pilot or about providing entertainment (a la WWF)?
    In a way, I wouldn't mind an all-allowed approach (bring back slicks, turbos, miniskirts, full-fledged electronics and enjoy the show), but of course safety becomes an issue. But it's just natural that this year's lap times are faster than last years. that's the whole point.
    There should be limitations, but they shouldn't transform F1 in an endurance championship or a go-kart race. But when limitation ARE introduced, they should be on the "hardware", so that the pilots can go all-out with it. This "nurturing" concept is pathetic.
    Also I find annoying that pit-stop strategies become so determinant.

    so my changes would be:
    - standardized tires, same for everyone (one supplier)
    - every team gets 3 sets. use them as they please between all qualis and race
    - allow change of tires (within 3 sets), but force min 15 sec pit stop when you do, unless for weather, flat etc. so there is less incentive to change and races will be less decided by the mechanics
    - quali like now, but you pick the best lap and you CAN change car setting between quali and race
    - no refueling
    - pilot salary cap (including testers)
  5. iGav macrumors G3

    Mar 9, 2002
    Right then... where to start. :D

    First off Bernie. Now I don't especially like the guy and his method can sometimes be questioned, but I think F1 is better off with such an individual at the helm. Let us not forget that without Bernie... it's likely F1 would've ceased to exist after the FOCA-FISA war back in the late '70's/early '80's.

    It's easy to blame him for not offering a more significant sharing of F1's income, but what we should remember is that the ALL of the teams signed up to the Concorde Agreement, and obviously AGREED to the way the revenues were split for the duration of that agreement... so IMHO the teams whining over the last couple of seasons is totally unjustified in that respect.

    But even if the teams do receive more money (remember these are all $50+ million budget teams already, with most of the grid backed by some of the worlds largest car companies), would that really make any difference to the teams competiveness? unlikely... because every teams performance would increase proportionately. Minardi would still be at the back, and still just as far behind as they are now.

    The Tyre Rule, almost everything I enjoyed about F1 has for the most part has been totally removed by this rule implementation. What was once 1 race sliced into 3 or 4 sprints now consists of drivers 'conserving' their cars in fear of ruining their tyres and thus holding back from actually racing. As Ron Dennis said after Melbourne with regards to Montoya, towards the end rather than make that last push to try and gain an extra position and thus points... they decided to 'conserve' the car... :rolleyes: f****n' 'conserve' the car for christs sake :rolleyes: I don't want to see a driver of Montoya's calibre 'conserving' his car... I want to see him driving like his balls are on fire fighting until the chequered flag.

    With the current rules, it's possible that we'll never again see drives like Hungary '98, Spa '00, Silverstone, France, Monza '04 ever again... because the drivers will be too concerned with 'conserving' their tyres to either drive every lap like they're qualifying, or to fight back after a spin.

    This neatly leads me onto the engine rule... pretty much everything I said about tyres could be copied and pasted and all the instances of the word 'tyre' replaced with 'engine'. In a nutshell, better not race at the limit, just incase the engine blows and drops me out of the race and also loses me 10 places at the next one too. :rolleyes:

    Anyway... that's it for now as I've got to get back to work. But in the next episode iGav will wax rhapsodic about...

    Paul Stoddart
    FIA's supposed Ferrari bias
    Dispel the myths regarding Ferrari
    The Testing Agreement
    The raft of ill considered rule changes bought in after 2002
    The Tyre War
    F1 vs. GPWC
    Why Button thinks he's god.
  6. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Jan 30, 2004
    having a drink at Milliways
    tsk, tsk, tsk iGav...
    what an unexpected vertical drop in credibility.
    I am afraid I will have to disregard anything you said in the last year or so about car racing....
  7. anonymous161 macrumors 6502

    Apr 15, 2003
    Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains
    Ok, this is a rant about the sport, but not about the rules. I miss McLaren, even though it was gone before I was born. Bruce McLaren's rag tag outfit was one of the brightest spots in the history of motor racing and it would have been a joy to watch the rebels race F1, F2, can am, etc etc. When Ron Dennis took over the company it should have changed its name to Dennis Racing or some such thing. I know they have done well and been the patron saint of some great drivers but they just ain't got no soul. The McLaren of today is little more than a brand name that will soon be a wholly owned subsidy of Daimler Chrysler. I know that Bruce wouldn't have built a 900 million dollar cubicle- he would have built one helluva test track (or three)!
    Watching Macca languish these past few years just drives this point home.

    And just for the record, those gay shirts the team are wearing this year do not pay homage to the old McLaren orange.
  8. iGav macrumors G3

    Mar 9, 2002
    Yeah, of course... if you fail to finish then you don't suffer the penalty. whoops... hahahaha.

    It's interesting that they didn't single out an engine failure in the first race, to automatically incur a penalty for the second one, i.e. seperate non engine mechanical failure from engine failure... I wonder why?

    It's such a silly rule though.
  9. brap macrumors 68000

    May 10, 2004
    Homage doesn't bring in enough money. Perhaps you could help McLaren land a multi-million dollar sponsorship with Dyno Rod?


    Anyway, yeah. I'll not repeat myself, my position is clear in many other threads, I'm sure it's getting quite boring! Bag o' bo******.
  10. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    May 7, 2004
    Sod off
    Speaking from the perspective of a enthusiastic (relative) newcomer to the sport:

    My biggest complaint is that it seems that the current relationship between the teams and organizing body is unstable and unsustainable. I get the sense that nobody's really happy with it, and everybody's working together only under the assumption that things will be changed to a more equitable arrangement in the near future. The problem is there are as many definitions of "equitable" as there are teams.

    I do like the idea of cars being expendable each race, at least as far as the rules are concerned. I agree with iGAV that the concept of a driver like JPM "conserving" his car seems oxymoronic. The current rules reflect a loss of focus on the purpose of F1, which I see as (ideally) an entertaining showcase of motor racing technology and driving talent. "It ain't over till its over" has no meaning in a current F1 race. Instead it's "It ain't over until you can retire under advantageous circumstances"
  11. Counterfit thread starter macrumors G3


    Aug 20, 2003
    sitting on your shoulder
    This is exactly what I was hoping for :D
    I'm eagerly looking forward to these! :D

Share This Page