PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts on Formula One in 2009. *Spoiler Alert*



opinionated ow
03-29-09, 08:39 AM
So, we're one race in and I can't help feeling a little disappointed in the whole saga. I feel a level of artificiality has entered the sport I love, as if the only reason for the "interest" is because it has become entertainment not sport.

The primary example of this is the tyres. I am completely against control tyres, and I think the presence of them is a scourge upon the pinnacle of motorsport. The then mandated usage of two tyre compounds (stolen from an incredibly desecrated Champ Car) turned each race into a crapshoot as the team's were forced to juggle an inferior set of tyres. Ironically in an attempt to do something, the current change has made this situation even worse! You have a situation where cars are passed because they are forced to run on rubbish tyres, and that's just contrived. It's not sport. Kimi Raikkonnen said it best on One HD the other day, "The grooved tyres were not so good, the slicks are a bit better. But because there is no competition, the tyres are not as good as they can be. At least when we had competition you had the best tyres and that was a good feeling." This is the pinnacle of motorsport, sticky slick tyres without a control tyre should be mandated!

KERS is irrelevant and gimmicky. Whilst high tech and at least free in design, it is nothing more than a push to pass button, the limits on which make it practically useless. If they are so determined to use hybrid power in the cars, why not allow unlimited storage so that the teams can use it to its greatest possible power extent? It takes away from the purity of the sport however; it's the equivalent of fitting a flyweight to one side of a football to make it even more unpredictable in flight. As it is, its just a waste of time and money, if motorsport gets concerned that much with the environment then I think it is time to get into a nursing home.

New aerodynamic rules exist why? Sure the cars are prettier, apart from those wings which just look plain awful. As Martin Brundle said, "that front wing scares small children." And from what I saw there wasn't much difference in following the cars anyway. Why can't they just set aero rules similar to Formula 3 cars which have no difficulty following at all! More wasted money and limits on design allowances...

The ridiculous concept of a spec ECU and an arbitrary engine revolution cap "to save costs" is crazy. Formula One is about being the pinnacle. Castrating a racing engine doesn't scream pinnacle. Pinnacle screams open design (the FIA have even mandated it must be a 90° V8) with a capacity limit, the ability to change engines and transmissions as needed and the option to be innovative. The engine rules don't any longer.

And getting to the sporting regulations, why did the removal of one car from the circuit require a 5 lap safety car! The FIA has mandated a time period for the cars to get to the pits/rejoin the conga line! Why?!? Enforce the requirement to slow down in the affected region, but why for heaven's sake can't the cars drive at normal speed back to the queue or the pits? Don't tell me is safety because we all know that there won't be people on the track at any other point! It's completely daft...

And then there is the ridiculous unlapping concept. If you end up a lap down its tough titties to you! You haven't travelled fast enough at this time to allow you to regain your lap. Its not up to race control to artificially bring you back into contention! It's all about providing entertainment to the small minded, not about providing sport.

So, this is meant to be sport but because someone told the FIA that people can't understand sport they make it into a "spectacle." I'm disappointed. Lets face it, the major audiences for this sport are Europe and to a lesser extent Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa. These are all countries/regions with proud sporting culture. They can follow something that goes for 90 minutes non stop. So who are the FIA trying to pander to? It's not young people because the crowds at Football, Rugby and Cricket matches are getting younger not older, its not old people because they know what to expect. So who is it? Who told the FIA they were in the entertainment business? They're not! They're providing a sport as entertainment, and until the reverse all these ludicrous decisions I'm going to remain really s*****. PLEASE FIA give us back our sport!

Anyway in my current mood of annoyance, I propose these regulations...
Engine:
-Swept Displacement of 3L
-Naturally Aspirated spark ignition engine (i.e. allowing 2 stroke, 4 stroke, rotary or whatever you choose)
-No maximum or minimum number of cylinders/rotors, no mandated engine design.

Chassis
-Wider maximum rear track than current cars
-Unlimited number of wheels
-Maximum of two wheel drive
-No requirement for engine placement
-Crashworthiness testing to current or future required levels.
-Maximum wing size but no limits on how this is achieved.
-Flat bottom
-Unlimited fuel cell size
-Minimum 600kg weight
-Current wheel and tyre size but no requirement to purchase from one supplier

Sporting Regulations
-All races to be held over a number of laps equivalent to that required to surpass 300km + 1 lap or 2 hours, whichever occurs first. Race to commence at 1400 local time.
-20 minute warm up session on Sunday morning.
-Qualifying to be one 45 minute session for all including usage of qualifying engine should it be so desired.
-Three 90 minute practice session to be held over Friday and Saturday

Methanolandbrats
03-29-09, 11:18 AM
KERS is utter crap and should be junked. The tires are a gimmick. However, the rule changes really shook things up because some teams figured it out, others did'nt. The new cars are ugly as hell, but very quick and much harder to drive, so I guess that's good. I really don't know what to think, I'll give it a few more races. :confused:

stroker
03-29-09, 11:23 AM
For the first time in 30+ years I'm not involved in any sort of Fantasy F1 competition. My brother and I have done so since at least 1975. I can't say I care if each race is decided by .001 seconds and the WDC margin of victory is 1 point.

I just don't give a crap any more. I'll watch the races (probably) but the tipping point has been reached for me. The politics and trappings have finally overwhelmed the actual event and the race is now secondary in importance to who's making the money and who's making the decisions. It's now a 20 car "organ grinder's monkey" competition.

Scroo'm all.

NismoZ
03-29-09, 11:26 AM
So, what do we have here...a season where results are due to 75% car and only 45% driver?:gomer:

stroker
03-29-09, 11:33 AM
KERS is utter crap and should be junked. The tires are a gimmick. However, the rule changes really shook things up because some teams figured it out, others did'nt. The new cars are ugly as hell, but very quick and much harder to drive, so I guess that's good. I really don't know what to think, I'll give it a few more races. :confused:

I think what happened is similar to when Toyota bailed on the .1RL. The teams like Penske who had been working night and day to overcome the 50hp handicap suddenly found themselves with a significant advantage once they had the same hp with the same overpriced lump as AGR.

I think that McLaren/Ferrari had enough hp and windtunnel technology to apply all the winglets and crap most effectively. My suspicion is that Honda was trying to compensate for lack of hp and windtunnel technology with mechanical grip. Brawn suddenly finds the playing field equalized with their customer Mercedes engine and with the winglets gone their mechanical grip is superior to the others. I think Newey's performance at Red Bull supports this to some degree.

Just my opinion and worth precisely what you paid for it.

Rogue Leader
03-29-09, 11:41 AM
I like to control slicks, what I DON'T like is that the FIA says there needs to be a huge performance gap between the two. That just makes teams fear using them. There are very few specific situations where that setup can work out well for a team.

RusH
03-29-09, 11:52 AM
I looked like a vintage race with Champ Car rules (p2p,tyres). Not impressed.

TrueBrit
03-29-09, 12:58 PM
Cars were fugly, the kers thing is stupid (if you have the built-up energy why limit it to 6.6 secs per lap?) the snow-plough movable front wing is ugly, daft and probably dangerous, and the tyre rules are absolutely the most stupid, and again probably dangerous, contrived method to try and inject 'competition' into a race I have seen in a long while...(for vaildation of this please see Vettel v. Kubica Aus. GP 2009)

In other words, Max and Bernie have managed YET AGAIN to eff this sport up...I cannot wait until both of those ego-maniacal money-grubbing bastards are dead and burried...they have done nothing to enhance the sport and EVERYTHING to engorge their wallets...

**** 'EM BOTH...:mad::flame:

Insomniac
03-29-09, 03:04 PM
Cars were fugly, the kers thing is stupid (if you have the built-up energy why limit it to 6.6 secs per lap?) the snow-plough movable front wing is ugly, daft and probably dangerous, and the tyre rules are absolutely the most stupid, and again probably dangerous, contrived method to try and inject 'competition' into a race I have seen in a long while...(for vaildation of this please see Vettel v. Kubica Aus. GP 2009)

In other words, Max and Bernie have managed YET AGAIN to eff this sport up...I cannot wait until both of those ego-maniacal money-grubbing bastards are dead and burried...they have done nothing to enhance the sport and EVERYTHING to engorge their wallets...

**** 'EM BOTH...:mad::flame:

It's a much to blame the tires for Vettel/Kubica. Kubica's car was performing better than Vettel's. Yes, it was the tires that caused the performance difference, but it didn't make them take each other out. It was no different than if Vettel was saving fuel to get to the end and Kubica was going all out. It was a shame too. We didn't get to see if Button's tires would last long enough to hold off Kubica.

I agree on KERS. They should allow them to determine storage capacity and they should be able to fill it and use it however they want. If they want to add weight to add capacity, so be it. If they can generate 12s of it over a lap, let them use it all.

The cars look slower, but aren't. That's not good.

Badger
03-29-09, 03:10 PM
Good lord, does anyone on this board ****ing enjoy racing anymore. Do you guys look at significant other in the morning and only note how fat, old and less attractive they are becoming?

I thought it was an interesting race with a well deserved winner. I agree, the front wings look out of proportion, but through it all, these dumbed down cars were as fast as they have been in years, and they did show the ability to follow closer.

oddlycalm
03-29-09, 05:10 PM
they did show the ability to follow closer.

Yep, that did seem to be the case. Plenty of passing and close following throughout the race and not all of it tire degradation related. Turbulence seems more or less under control :thumbup: Balance between front and rear got screwed up in the process but they can always make the front wing smaller. The sickle bar mower look is not attractive, and it's causing a balance issue, so make it narrower and call it good.

The KERS remains an utterly idiotic waste of money at a time where keeping costs down is important. Seeing it in action did nothing to sway me. The weight offsets the net gain. Having high voltage high current electricity, or a 30,000Rpm flywheel assembly, on a race car that can be expected to crash at some point is beyond stupid. I hope nobody gets hurt or worse.

Also dangerous was the FIA's two hardness tire nonsense. Artifice and affectation are not required. Having tires go completely off is an invitation to disaster.

The sport was great in it's infancy and even greater in it's maturity. Now it feels like we are now seeing it's senility. A return to sanity would be nice.

oc

Cam
03-29-09, 07:21 PM
Plenty of passing and close following throughout the race and not all of it tire degradation related.

We walked about 2/3 of the track after the race and were amazed that there was no marble buildup anywhere on the track that we saw. This after having the V8's out in anger as well.

Tim
03-29-09, 07:57 PM
Good lord, does anyone on this board ****ing enjoy racing anymore. Do you guys look at significant other in the morning and only note how fat, old and less attractive they are becoming?

I thought it was an interesting race with a well deserved winner. I agree, the front wings look out of proportion, but through it all, these dumbed down cars were as fast as they have been in years, and they did show the ability to follow closer.


I agree. I'm glad I stayed up for it.

oddlycalm
03-29-09, 08:33 PM
We walked about 2/3 of the track after the race and were amazed that there was no marble buildup anywhere on the track that we saw. This after having the V8's out in anger as well.

Wow, that is strange. I can't say I've ever seen anything like that in the modern era.

Hobbs had none of his usual comments about clag building up off the racing line but I really didn't give it any thought during the race.

oc

Hard Driver
03-29-09, 10:10 PM
1) Cars are fugly
2) Having the double tire gap is just too much.
3) Having race at dusk was stupid idea
4) If F1 is still supposed to support innovation, KERS needs to not have regulations, like the 6 second rule.

I would say an interesting race. I suspect that the rear bodywork will be different for all the cars in a week or two. That will make the racing more normal.

Methanolandbrats
03-29-09, 10:19 PM
BUtton/Woobens tasting glory reminded me of the Lazer win at Indy.

Cam
03-29-09, 10:27 PM
BUtton/Woobens tasting glory reminded me of the Lazer win at Indy.

So.... Are saying that Brawn is the equivalent of Hemelgarn or are you saying that Hemelgarn was just that good? :saywhat: :saywhat: :gomer:

Methanolandbrats
03-29-09, 10:31 PM
So.... Are saying that Brawn is the equivalent of Hemelgarn or are you saying that Hemelgarn was just that good? :saywhat: :saywhat: :gomer::tony:

ilferrari
03-30-09, 03:12 PM
KERS is used just as much to stop overtaking as it is to enable it. Rosberg couldn't get near Raikkonen's rear wing on the straights in the early stint, despite being 3 seconds per lap faster on the hard tires.

oddlycalm
03-30-09, 04:48 PM
KERS is used just as much to stop overtaking as it is to enable it. Rosberg couldn't get near Raikkonen's rear wing on the straights in the early stint, despite being 3 seconds per lap faster on the hard tires.

Bingo. If both drivers have the same advantage it's no advantage at all, it's a $ 10 million boat anchor... :gomer:

I really enjoyed how Matchett's decisively negative comments about KERS took the other announcers aback...:laugh: Something about taking it off right now and toss it in the rubbish bin.

oc

Gnam
03-31-09, 03:48 PM
I'm never sure if the Speed announcers downplay criticism of F1/teams/drivers for personal reasons or because they have to.

Also, I was surprised to see the Peter Windsor incorporate video footage from the race into his post race interview. I would think the teams would want an opportunity to debrief the drivers before the media. For example, if a video contradicted a driver's recollection the team might want to discuss it first.

JLMannin
03-31-09, 04:12 PM
BUtton/Woobens tasting glory reminded me of the Lazer win at Indy.

I disagree. Lazier beat a bunch of has beens and never would be's and all the top teams walked.

Brawn raced against all the top teams and spanked them. To me, it was like the glory days in CART when a team owner utilized "an unfair advantage" by carefully reading/interpreting the rule book in an innovative way.

The excitement of the race eclipsed the butt-ugliness of the cars for me.

I think KERS in its current incarnation is stupid (why the 6.6 seconds per lap limit?). Set a minimum car weight, let the teams add as much weight in batteries/KERS hardware they want or dare, and have no per lap limit. As long as the cars meet the minimum weight, pass safety specs, and are within the other established rules, let the teams have free reign.

STD
03-31-09, 04:52 PM
Still trying to bring logic to what was clearly spawned in a void.
A tradition since 1993.

Methanolandbrats
03-31-09, 04:58 PM
:tony:
I disagree. Lazier beat a bunch of has beens and never would be's and all the top teams walked.

Brawn raced against all the top teams and spanked them. To me, it was like the glory days in CART when a team owner utilized "an unfair advantage" by carefully reading/interpreting the rule book in an innovative way.

The excitement of the race eclipsed the butt-ugliness of the cars for me.

I think KERS in its current incarnation is stupid (why the 6.6 seconds per lap limit?). Set a minimum car weight, let the teams add as much weight in batteries/KERS hardware they want or dare, and have no per lap limit. As long as the cars meet the minimum weight, pass safety specs, and are within the other established rules, let the teams have free reign. The team deal is true, but it was a s***** driver 1-2 because of a big rules shakeup, that was my point....Bernie/Max = :tony: x 2

Rogue Leader
03-31-09, 11:24 PM
I disagree. Lazier beat a bunch of has beens and never would be's and all the top teams walked.

Brawn raced against all the top teams and spanked them. To me, it was like the glory days in CART when a team owner utilized "an unfair advantage" by carefully reading/interpreting the rule book in an innovative way.

The excitement of the race eclipsed the butt-ugliness of the cars for me.

I think KERS in its current incarnation is stupid (why the 6.6 seconds per lap limit?). Set a minimum car weight, let the teams add as much weight in batteries/KERS hardware they want or dare, and have no per lap limit. As long as the cars meet the minimum weight, pass safety specs, and are within the other established rules, let the teams have free reign.

Re: KERS from what i understood during the technical segment and what I've read, the limits are in place this season to allow all the teams to get a system going that is operational and reliable. Next season they may allow them free reign. Somehow I doubt it though, but thats how I perceived what I read.

I absolutely enjoyed this race as well. It ain't perfect, but I'm interested in what will happen next, and thats the whole point!

Hard Driver
04-01-09, 01:57 AM
Also, I was surprised to see the Peter Windsor incorporate video footage from the race into his post race interview. I would think the teams would want an opportunity to debrief the drivers before the media. For example, if a video contradicted a driver's recollection the team might want to discuss it first.

I don't think the video analysis added anything either.

opinionated ow
04-01-09, 08:44 AM
I don't think the video analysis added anything either.

It was poor. Effectively there was a second round of interview to show off their new (albeit archaic) toy