Who wants to watch F1 on Sky?

[Thirteen Ball]

No, he has the best computers.....

Either in the car or in the wind tunnel.

The only drivers in the paddock who genuinely impress me at the moment are Webber, Hamilton and (much as I don't like him very much) Alonso. Those three would be fast in anything with four wheels. With, or without electronics.

[themusicalrentboy]

so why isn't Webber winning then? Sorry Andi, there has been talk around F1 about Vettel since he came into the sport. He has always been labelled as the next Schumacher, and now he's had a decent car under him for two years he's making a name for himself. Webber did nothing until he had a good car but that's part of the sport, it's about who makes the best car and who has the best drivers. You're not telling me that if Red Bull had Paul Di Resta and Jaime Alguersuari they would still be leading the championship.

Yes, whilst it isn't a level playing field by any stretch of the imagination, it is still the pinnacle of 4-wheeled motorsport (anyone who says it's gotten easier should jump in and take a spin) and it has been proven that level playing fields weren't particularly popular with the spectacular rise and fall of F1 GP.

This year's championship has seen a lot of the aids taken away and the racing has been much better for it. As long as they continue to do that and not wither under driver pressure than I can only see F1 continuing to improve.

[StellaJohnson]

so why isn't Webber winning then? Sorry Andi, there has been talk around F1 about Vettel since he came into the sport. He has always been labelled as the next Schumacher, and now he's had a decent car under him for two years he's making a name for himself. Webber did nothing until he had a good car but that's part of the sport, it's about who makes the best car and who has the best drivers. You're not telling me that if Red Bull had Paul Di Resta and Jaime Alguersuari they would still be leading the championship.

Yes, whilst it isn't a level playing field by any stretch of the imagination, it is still the pinnacle of 4-wheeled motorsport (anyone who says it's gotten easier should jump in and take a spin) and it has been proven that level playing fields weren't particularly popular with the spectacular rise and fall of F1 GP.

This year's championship has seen a lot of the aids taken away and the racing has been much better for it. As long as they continue to do that and not wither under driver pressure than I can only see F1 continuing to improve.

Maybe Webber maybe hasn't adjusted to the car or is not suited to his liking, it happens to all drivers, we are only in the 3rd/4th race, lets give time. Maybe Red Bull are favouring Vettel more to win? I don't know to be honest whats happening in the paddock.

Webber has been a good driver, probably not seen by many people. He did turn the fortunes Jaguar in particualy getting the car to the front row but had been let down by the reliability, (he did retire quite a lot!) and pace during the race. Did he get points for minardi to?

The other drivers whom I don't know much about, probably won't match them at the moment, give them a few races would. Hamilton seem to fall on his feet 1st year in F1 with McLaren??!!

[Thirteen Ball]

Or maybe because Vettel is the darling of the team and the car is built to suit him. Teams have their favourites, and Red bull have made it very clear he's the no:1 driver. He gets all the trick parts first, (and even when he smashes them up, they unbolt them from Webber's car and bolt them onto his for the race the next day) better support, and the team effort is clearly directed toward him winning. They'd rather have a 1-12 finish than a 2-3 finish. Likewise the McLaren is clearly built and designed around Lewis Hamilton. Think back to time when Alonso was there (and was probably far more likely to win a title) yet all the resources somehow gravitated towards Hamilton, because he was practically Ron Dennis's adopted son. OK, they shot themselves in the foot and Raikonnen won the title that year, but it was no shock when Alonso went.

It happens in every motorsport. For various reasons, the best driver/rider is not always put forward by the team. Same thing with Pedrosa at Honda in MotoGP. The only reason honda pushed so hard for 800CC bikes after the end of the 990CC era was because lighter bikes with a more 250-ish style of cornering would suit him. (Ironically until this season he's been garbage on the 800s.) Likewise, the switch from Michelin Tyres to Bridgestone - which eventually led to the control tyres all the riders now use, was entirely motivated by Pedrosa. The rest of the Hondas were happilly scrapping away with Michelin tyres, But pedrosa wanted bridgestones - so Honda sacrificed a very fruitful 30-year partnership for him. The Ducati Desmosedici was built around stoner for years, to the point where it became unrideable by anyone else as the dramatic decline in the careers of Loris Capirossi, Marco Melandri and Nicky Hayden (a former world champion) will attest. At the point they began adapting the bike so that someone OTHER than stoner could ride it, Hayden started climbing the order, but Stoner started falling off, complaining, and eventually decamped to Honda.

I'm not saying Vettel isn't a good driver. He clearly is. But make no mistake about it. Vettel is winning because red bull's efforts are directed toward him winning, not the team winning. Why? Because he brings a lot more to the team commercially than Mark Webber does. And in racing, money is what matters.

[themusicalrentboy]

money is what matters in every sport Andi, what you've just described in MotoGP is basically the same in F1..... it seems to me that your argument is based around a penchant for two-wheeled racing rather than an active dislike of Formula 1

Don't get me wrong, I would love it if the cars got closer to the cars of the 70s and 80s, but realistically it's never going to happen and what they have begun to do is making the sport better all the time.

[Thirteen Ball]

money is what matters in every sport Andi, what you've just described in MotoGP is basically the same in F1..... it seems to me that your argument is based around a penchant for two-wheeled racing rather than an active dislike of Formula 1

I don't have an active dislike of F1. The MotoGP thing was mainly to show that the same thing happens in any motorsport, and that drivers/riders careers are far more often advanced or limited by their commercial viability than how good they are. Jarno Trulli for example, stayed in F1 far too long and was never any good.... but brought in huge amounts of money for the team, because his family owned a chain of supermarkets.

Don't get me wrong, I would love it if the cars got closer to the cars of the 70s and 80s, but realistically it's never going to happen and what they have begun to do is making the sport better all the time.

You know the easiest way to improve F1?

Humanely cull Bernie Ecclestone.....

[themusicalrentboy]

You know the easiest way to improve F1?

Humanely cull Bernie Ecclestone.....

now there's an idea. I can't fault the man for his entrepreneurial nous, but the man would sell his own family if it could make him any more money...

[Thirteen Ball]

And therein lies the problem. F1 isn't following the fans any more, it's following the money. So when some small arab country with huge amounts of money and vast oil reserves decides they want to raise their profile, they buy in a F1 race - which nobody goes to, and the track is usually rubbish - but bernie doesn't care because he makes a boatload of brass, and the teams just have to do what they're told.

I still think if the f1 rules were thrashed out by the teams, the competition would be a lot better. Because they'd look to actually improve the cars - rather than further regulating the system to make the cars slower.

The simple question is, are the cars being engineered to go as fast as possible? If the answer is no, then you're not racing.

[themusicalrentboy]

The cars were restricted and the tracks improved/made less difficult at the drivers' request. I agree about Bernie - trying to get another Dubai-esque race in at the expense of Silverstone is a disgrace and it shows he doesn't know or care about the heritage of the sport.

Also, the F1 rules are thrashed out by the teams.... well, one of them at any rate....

[StellaJohnson]

I don't see any improvements to the tracks at all Chris. Bernie has had his chance to design a track suitable for F1 with Barain and china, same old, same old - boring.

Silverstone, have you ever tried getting to the track?? Transport links a nightmare, I ended up walking to it one day and it was only for BSB a few years ago, goodness knows whats it like on F1 day!! Its old and knackered and have not spent much on it considering how many races and track days they do there a year.

Best track for F1 racing in my opinon is Hockenheim and since they changed the track a few years ago its a great track for racing and to get to the races. Monza even do free train service to the track.

What do silverstone offer, naff all!

[Thirteen Ball]

The cars were restricted and the tracks improved/made less difficult at the drivers' request. I agree about Bernie - trying to get another Dubai-esque race in at the expense of Silverstone is a disgrace and it shows he doesn't know or care about the heritage of the sport.

Also, the F1 rules are thrashed out by the teams.... well, one of them at any rate....

And anything they can't thrash out in the rules, they thrash out in the courtroom. Particularly with the recent metoric rise of the 'utterly impartial' Jean Todt. Makes it even more odd they don't win anything these days.....

It brings us back to the same point. F1 has had to purposely introduce poor-quality products in order to try (and in my opinion fail) to make the racing competitive. Tyres that deliberately shred themselves? Why? What does that bring to the racing that cutting edge technology doesn't? If you want unpredictability, don't try and build it in by makingw purposely poor quality equipment compulsory. Let the teams develop new propulsion methods, new tyre compounds, new suspension parts - which will all be unreliable when they're new and lead to unpredictable results.

F1 has tried tweaking, and even drastically overhauling the rules in recent years, all of which have still left it a processional yawn-fest in all but the most extreme of cases. I very much doubt that the proposed move to 1.6 litre four-cylinder turbos with drastically reduced downforce will improve things - because once again, you're standardising too much equipment, stifling innovation, and making any advantage the team can gain millimetric, rather than decisive. (That and the fact that the cars will be DOG slow....)

Deregulation, not over-regulation is what will breed interesting racing. And the sooner the powers that be in world motorsporrt realise that, the better.

[Thirteen Ball]

Best track for F1 racing in my opinon is Hockenheim and since they changed the track a few years ago its a great track for racing and to get to the races.

Since they changed the track a few year's ago it's a pointless, techincal excercise, sadly emasculated from the schizophrenic and capricious test it used to be.

The best tracks on the world motor-racing circuit are the old ones - those that haven't been destroyed like hockenheim and Assen anyway.

Monza (largely unmolested) Silverstone (OK, issues with transport links, but HUGE amounts spent on facilities.... thanks to motoGP!) Spa-francorchamps, Montreal, Laguna Seca, Motegi, Sachsenring, Interlagos, Suzuka etc.

Monaco is fun for the historical aspect of it, but it's always a rubbish race because it's completely impossible to overtake. If it was anywhere else it would have gone the way of Pau. Fuji has gone on for years, gradually getting worse and worse with more and more chicanes and a longer and longer straight (until you could practically land a space shuttle there) and it's completely destroyed the flow of it. Shanghai is just rubbish, a mere technical exercise. Sepang the same. The street circuit at Valencia was an idiotic exercise, because Valencia already has the Ricardo Tormo circuit, which is a cracker in superbikes, MotoGP, world touring cars and GTs. But Bernie does like his street circuits and I'm guessing someone paid him a lot of money not to have it there.

The only modern circuit I'm actually properly impressed with is Istanbul Parkway - mainly because of that three-turn sequence that ends with a bonkers flat-out corner that's a proper old-school cojones of steel job.

[nook1938]

If you made all the cars the same spec, then see who is the fastest driver, look at all the Teams that dominate for a time till another team gets the edge, then it's a follow my leader and if teams issue orders, then it is a waste of time watching.
I will not be watching it on Sky, that is another waste of money, too many repeats.

20.00 already, its time for bed.

John

[StellaJohnson]

what does people think of the new F1 coveragge on sky? I have to say its excellent, but that wasn't very difficult to begin with it!