Quote:
Originally Posted by flatlandsman
I can nail down a few factors. David Croft is certainly one, the most useless overrated cretin I think who has ever been let loose behind a mic, that is a factor in my lack of interest. And linked to that the selling of the sport to pay tv etc. Even though I have free access to SKY oddly.
The hybrid cars lost me from day one, and I hoped they would eventually pull back, but they just sound miserable, I know they were probably fine live but I cannot justify spending hundreds of pounds, that is my yearly racing attendance budget.
|
Regarding complaints around things like broadcast personalities and especially the cost of viewing and/or attending races are area in which you are likely to get a good bit of agreement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flatlandsman
f1 cars do not LOOK pretty anymore, they look like trucks, yes there is amazing design but it is all silly little winglets and lips and odd stuff, that is the edges, a car like a 640 or Tyrrell 019 that wowed you as it was so different, they all look very similar as do liveries and helmets etc.
|
I think your struggle is not unusual. My theory is that there are a handful of factors at play. First you speak to things like "sounds" and "looks". I think that for a large period of F1's history many cars were primarily the fruit of the imagination of an individual (or very small group). I tend to think that in general humans have a strong affinity toward aesthetics when creating things. F1 cars are no different. So many F1 cars from prior era have a strong subjective "beauty". Sometimes those beautiful cars are also successful. Additionally, I think fans can sometimes latch onto cars that existed in their formative fan years. For me that is the McLaren MP4/4. For me, that is my internal definition of an "F1 car", but it is also deeply rooted in the past. For others it might be something like an Eagle Mk1 or any other number of iconic cars of the past.
And while those cars may have been technical marvels of their era, time has marched on and the overall knowledge of "how to go fast on four wheels" has rocketed skyward. Old solutions have been surpassed. If you want them to look like older cars, then you have to regulate that into them and that is not easy.
So within relatively tightly controlled technical specifications, there tends to be singular solutions to problems. Teams will eventually gravitate towards solutions that are proven to work. Sometime new ideas are tried but failure can be VERY costly. A great example is Mercedes locking into their minimal sidepod aero concepts for a long time and it really hurt them. Now everyone is effectively onboard with Red Bull's winning aero solutions. Now the topic of strict vs. open rules is another can of worms that I not going to get into.
So in short, to be successful today, car design have (mostly) moved out of the head of singular geniuses and into a process that is very focused on scientific methods. And solutions that are quick may not look pretty. The end results is that aesthetics are gone or nearly so. F1 is very much "form follows function". The remaining aesthetics is in livery and even there, we are moving toward a world of saving weight by not painting all of the car. So even livery is impacted by performance realities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flatlandsman
The drivers are OK, I think there are interesting characters in there, but you hear them on the radio and instantly your heart sinks at times, most of it is OK, but the petulant crybaby stuff, sorry it's like footballers rolling about for me, grow a pair and be a man for goodness sake. They are almost told what to do I hate that aspect too, it has always been this way in recent years, but I do not like this, a driver should be left alone to work out HIS way of winning or getting the best result, 50 overpaid people sitting behind screens does not make it more interesting does it?
|
I struggle with much of the above. If you did follow things more closely you would understand that the "crybaby" stuff is not organic. Teams ask drivers to complain on the radio so as to try to influence stewards decisions. Not to say that they are not showing their emotion. I guess we may not know exactly what drivers of old might have said if either asked to do the same or provided with more opportunities to be heard in the heat of the moment.
The "overpaid" bit still puzzles. People are paid based upon market demands. That is just how the world works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flatlandsman
You can say that is progress, I can say that removes the ability of certain drivers to make the difference, that is why the grid is closer, because the rules are so tight every car is almost the same, the drivers are mollycoddled and simulated to within an inch of their life to be fractions apart. IS that better? I dont think so sorry. it leaves imagination, eccentricity, personality out of the loop. They are automatons at times.
|
I would say this is the clearest indication that you haven't been following F1 much at all for a long time. Comments that drivers can't make a difference is objectively incorrect. The easiest example is the situation at Red Bull and relative performance of Max vs. Checo. Something that is very obvious and hotly discussed here and elsewhere. And if you watched you would see the differences in personality and eccentricities of the drivers. They are quite diverse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by flatlandsman
Then the final aspect,m in what world should Stroll, or anyone like him be in this sport for that long, just because he is rich, yes it has always been there, but they dont usually hang around for this long!
|
Most everyone will agree with you on this. But as you say, this is nothing new. It has been going on for a long long time and unlikely to change if money drives F1.
In the end these are your opinions. So hopefully you don't feel overly browbeat by comments like mine. F1 can't be everything to all people. I think fans who are very focused on "how it used to be in my days" are going to be disappointed. Especially with respect to expectations around the aesthetic aspects. However there are good aspects of the past that remain high points of the sport/business and those running the circus should aspire to recreate.
Richard