F1?

[Galant]

Alright since the season has started and there's a good few fans on here maybe you can help me out - promise I'm not trolling!

I have a good friend who loves F1. Often our families are together on Sundays and when a race is on he's watching it.
As for me, let's just say, I'm not much of a fan. I'm happy to talk about it to whatever limited extent I can, I don't mind learning more, but I've tried to watch races and I just get bored.

Generally speaking I can appreciate most sports but I struggle with F1. If you're a petrol-head I can see the appeal on that front, but is that it? I find I can watch Moto-GP alright - not super engaging but more enjoyable to me than F1 - and I don't mind watching a bit of Rally when I catch it, some seriously skillful driving on display there. F1 just seems to stand out as a motor-sport that fails to push any buttons at all.

So, my question is, what is it that fans love about F1? Is it just the mechanical/technological side of things or is there something else I'm missing? I'm trying to find a new way of seeing a race so that I can sit though it a race with my friend and not want to have a Sunday afternoon nap!

[kalniel]

For me, it's a combinations of several things. Mostly though, it's the raw speed of the things, and this is something that some people pick up on TV better than others. If you can, go to one of the testing sessions, even the straight line tests at Duxford if that's all you manage. Seeing them in the flesh you realise how unbelievable what they're doing is - they seem more like ground jets than cars.

Having seen that, I can relate to the TV pictures much better, which in a lot of cases seems to hide just what amazing feats of physics these things are doing.

Even watching cars do timed laps at these speeds is something, but then seeing them on the edge is even more - they're pushing to the limits of adhesion in each and every corner, and acceleration and braking zone. If you've ever done karting, or even playing a skill based computer game, you can appreciate just how hard it is to get one corner right, yet alone seemingly beyond the limits. These pilots do it on hugely complex tracks, for nearly two hours. Watch the detail in the cars - the steering movements, the tyres juddering and skipping around, and you might be amazed.

And then, if that wasn't enough, they're also racing each other - every car adding a dynamic obstacle and set of new aero-conditions that each pilot has to not only take into account but use to maximise their speed and reduce their time to the ultimate goal - the checkered flag.

It's incredible, and much more than just 'overtaking' or 'going really quickly'.

[virtuo]

I've been a fan since I used to watch it with my dad as a kid (late 80s early 90s) which is why I'm still a fan now. It was good back then. Dangerous cars, refuelling, too much noise, proper facial hair and legends like Senna, Mansell, Schumacher jostling for position in real races.

I agree, the races are pretty boring these days, it just gets less and less about the driving and more and more about the technology and 'looking after your tyres'. You'll still see a couple of exciting moments, I think Raikkonen coming back really helped, he's probably the best driver out there in my opinion.

I'll still watch every race, maybe not live as I don't have Sky, and I'll even go to one or 2 races each year when I can afford it. It's a blast actually going to the race and not watching it on your sofa. But I think these days it's very difficult to get in to.

I find the end of the season to be a bit more exciting, specially if the title can go either way (or one of 3 ways).

[g8ina]

I have to confess to having gone right off F1 this year, the whole feel has changed, possibly solely due to the sound we hear....

Now if you want excitement, try BTCC !!

Go Jason !

[Andy3536]

Now if you want excitement, try BTCC !!

Now your talking!

Go Jason !

Whoa... Steady on


Back to F1, personally i love the technical side of things.
The technical VTs in the buildup talking about how the turbos better on Mercedes, how this aero works/new designs etc is some of the most facinating stuff you'll see.
Then you watch races like last time out and you get lots of fighting and passing. It's great fun.
But, things like BTCC are always going to be better. At Brands there were 23? Cars in 0.8 seconds of each other, there's alot more crashes, overtaking, when overtaking isn't possible they just push each other out the way. It's got to be one of the most enjoyable forms of racing to watch. Add to that no pitstops, then it's also easier to follow. If someones behind, you don't have to think of net gain as they are a pit stop up, or whether they're on a 3 stop or 2 stop strategy. It makes it much easier for those unfamiliar to get into it (although i admit the stratergy element is another aspect of F1 people enjoy, try and guess at and follow)

Well worth a watch of the next round of the BTCC though, 20th April ITV 4.

[kalniel]

Yeah I feel the love for BTCC as well - and a darn sight cheaper to watch in the flesh too (though somehow, not as exciting to do so - what look like great overtakes on TV pass in a flash on the track and you don't get so much of a feel for the build up or ongoing battles.)

[g8ina]

Now your talking!


Whoa... Steady on

and what pray is wrong with my mate Jason Plato ?

I've followed him since he started pretty well, and Andy Rouse before him... At least I am showing faithful

Yeah, I know, he is an aggressive driver and there's certainly no love lost twixt him and Mr Neal, but you have to be honest, it *does* make for one hell of a race

[Gerrard]

I can fully understand why a lot of people don't like F1. For such fast cars, the racing is actually pretty slow. It's been a lot better in the last few years with KERS and DRS and even though Vettel has won the championship for the last 4 years, it's still been a lot more interesting than the Schumacher era. I started following it around the beginning of the 90s with Mansell and Hill. I stopped for a little while during the early 2000's with Schumacher running away with it and got back into it around 2007 or 2008 onwards. TBH, I don't know why I like it and it's not something I generally sit down and watch but rather have on in the background.

I did work most of the races last year and definitely confirm the engines were (or are, I haven't heard this year's in the flesh) loud! Since I never went to the pitwall, I didn't get to watch the full speed of them; I think the best I saw was watching them coming out of La Source and going up La Rouge in Belgium. They were certainly quicker than when I ran it!

[Andy3536]

and what pray is wrong with my mate Jason Plato ?

I've followed him since he started pretty well, and Andy Rouse before him... At least I am showing faithful

Yeah, I know, he is an aggressive driver and there's certainly no love lost twixt him and Mr Neal, but you have to be honest, it *does* make for one hell of a race

You don't get this in F1

[Galant]

Seems like you really have to have a feel or understanding for the reality of what's going on in order to be able to appreciate F1.

I was talking with a different friend last night who used to love F1 but hasn't watched in a long time because he felt it came down to the cars more than the drivers. That is, you can have a lesser driver winning consistently because they're sat in the better car. In his opinion it is possible most years, once you've figured out who has the best car, to know what the final result is going to be. No idea if that's accurate. ?

On another note - it's said there is team strategy involved in the races which, when understood, makes the race more interesting. Apart from choosing the right moment for a pit-stop what's that all about?

Last of all, apparently there are limits placed on the cars/designs, essentially restricting what the cars can do. If F1 is about pushing limits and technology why put those restrictions in place? Let the best designers come up with innovative and ground-breaking designs. If it's about money then just put a cap on spending. No?

[kalniel]

I was talking with a different friend last night who used to love F1 but hasn't watched in a long time because he felt it came down to the cars more than the drivers. That is, you can have a lesser driver winning consistently because they're sat in the better car. In his opinion it is possible most years, once you've figured out who has the best car, to know what the final result is going to be. No idea if that's accurate. ?

To a point, yes - but that's partly why we like it - to see what technological solutions the engineering geniuses produce. On the otherhand there are a) two drivers who have the same car - see the last race in Bahrain for an example where there was one dominant car (mercedes) yet a thrilling race for the lead between both drivers, and b) battles further down the field as well - it's not just about who wins, but who comes 3rd etc. and finally c) there are geniuses throughout the field - while one team may have a dominant advantage, the others usually catch up quite quickly, so that in particular tracks or conditions (rain!) you can't predict the outcome. Go look at the fantasy F1 league and see how the predictions are changing all the time - if we could predict what the outcome was we'd all have the same teams!

On another note - it's said there is team strategy involved in the races which, when understood, makes the race more interesting. Apart from choosing the right moment for a pit-stop what's that all about?

There are a few consumables on a modern F1 car - fuel and tyres for example. These control how you decide your strategy - do you put more fuel in and drive hard all through the race, or do you turn the wick down a bit and save fuel, thus have to put less (=less weight) in and gain the advantage of speed from the weight saving? Do you push the tyres and have to make more pit stops, or conserve them? When you make your pitstop will doing so put you out on track in front of a rival or behind them? What state will your respective tyres be in when you're battling on track?

Again Bahrain was a good example - the two Mercedes were on slightly different strategies. Hamilton chose to go soft-soft-medium for his tyre choice, while Rosberg went soft-medium-soft. The soft is a lot faster per lap than the medium, but doesn't last as long. Hamilton's choice meant that at the final stint he should have been quite clear of Rosberg, but there was a safety car period which had the consequence of bringing the cars closer together. This meant in the final stint Rosberg was on faster tyres and Hamilton had to do a lot of work to keep him behind.

Last of all, apparently there are limits placed on the cars/designs, essentially restricting what the cars can do. If F1 is about pushing limits and technology why put those restrictions in place? Let the best designers come up with innovative and ground-breaking designs. If it's about money then just put a cap on spending. No?

Safety and limits of human physical endurance. With unlimited technology cars would go so fast around corners etc. that if anything went wrong they would cause fatal accidents. In effect, you are limited by the track design (run off areas etc.). Even the most modern tracks with their safety features wouldn't be safe enough for more unlimited design. As for the human body - these guys are pulling 5G now and they're already some of the fittest atheletes around. Too much more and you get more risk to health and danger of things going wrong due to pilot error.

It's also been impossible to enforce a cost cap, either technically or politically.

[Saracen]

To be honest, I find modern F1 about as entertaining as watching a paint-drying competition. I used to watch it religiously years ago, but got bored to tears round about the Schumacher era. I gave it another try a couple of years ago, and it had improved .... a bit. But not enough that I'd go out of my way to watch it.

Partly, it's that it's so rule-bound. Partly, it's some of the team rules. Mainly it's because, for me, racing is about racing, not pre-race computer fuel simulations and scenarios, pre-race strategy or how many milliseconds a pit crew can shave (impressive though that is).

It's about driver v driver, on the track.

I enjoy MotoGP, and Superbike. I enjoy BTCC. Hell, I enjoy single-type racing, be it Porsche or Metros. Why? Because it's edge-of-seat stuff constantly.

But F1, no matter how technologically impressive it is, is BORRRRRING to watch. Give me a paint-drying competition any day.

.... So, my question is, what is it that fans love about F1? ....

Dunno, mate. It beats the proverbial brown stuff outta me.

[Smudger]

Safety and limits of human physical endurance. With unlimited technology cars would go so fast around corners etc. that if anything went wrong they would cause fatal accidents. In effect, you are limited by the track design (run off areas etc.). Even the most modern tracks with their safety features wouldn't be safe enough for more unlimited design. As for the human body - these guys are pulling 5G now and they're already some of the fittest atheletes around. Too much more and you get more risk to health and danger of things going wrong due to pilot error.

It's also been impossible to enforce a cost cap, either technically or politically.

There's also the fact that this year they have fuel limits and fuel flow limits. The techniques they are using to get this will end up in road cars, meaning super-efficient engines without the drop in power.

[nepenthes]

Don't tend to watch F1 much, or car racing in general to be honest. I can remember the only reaosn used to watch F1 was for the Australian GP, because the weather used to make lots of accidents happen

This season seems to be very good though, as I think the cars are somewhat more competitive with each other (other than Mercedes). The last race in Bahrain was very good, lots of competition between the teams, which in the past it felt lethargic watching a race with only a few major contenders.

[kalniel]

There's also the fact that this year they have fuel limits and fuel flow limits. The techniques they are using to get this will end up in road cars,

Well that was the idea, but whether there's actually any meaningful tech transfer is debatable. The powertrain format was defined by the rules so there's no innovation in idea, only in how it's implemented, and whether any of the implementations would be cheap enough for a road car* is questionable.

*I don't class a McLaren P1 as a road car in this instance

[Andy3536]

I'm not sure i buy the whole relevant to real life thing either. TBH, F1 is always behind.
With Toyotas P1 Le mans prototype for the last few years using super capacitors rather than batteries and they even tried to use compressed air to power the wheels rather than electricity but wern't aloud. F1 is a little behind the times.
Some of the smaller prototypes have been running smaller turbo cars for a few years too.


I personally would rather they were just given a tight fuel target and each engine manufacturer could come up with their own way of meeting it. But then you do run into the problem of costs and the chance of one engine manufactuer being completly dominant.
But freeing the regs is the only way you'll drive technology. When they write the rules for F1 engine regs, it's always using current technology.