Formula 1, 2020

[PaulRhB]

9 minutes ago, Andrew P said:

The other answer Paul, is that Teams would have to work that into their budget, like it or not, cut out some other things. like drinks parties etc.

 

I thought that was the real point for the money men behind F1 

[rocor]

It seems, that although one Alphatauri driver was ecstatic with the result of the Italian Grand Prix. The other was not so delighted with his unintended part in the victory.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfu3hq83Yq8

[Hobby]

One thing worth pointing out to all of those people quoting Sunday's race as an excuse for "reverse grid" that it wasn't a true reverse grid. All that happened is that the mid runners ended up at the front rather than the middle. Had it been a true reverse grid Williams (and if they'd been around) Ferrari would have been at the front and it would have meant that Hammy would have like as not finished even higher due to the delay to the podium finishers who would have had to waste some time getting through to the front, which they didn't have to on Sunday.

 

6 hours ago, SR71 said:

I never quite get the instant refusal to consider reverse grids in any form but then I was brought up on short oval racing. Never seen consistently better racing than reverse grid hot rods (non contact formulae before anyone references banger racing - put someone wide ala Mr Schumacher or Mr Verstappen and you get black flagged and likely banned).

 

I was brought up with short oval as well, but I don't think it makes a fair comparison to be used as a reason for reverse grids, much shorter races, much smaller track so easier to get to the front, as long as you didn't have some white top with a good car and able to drive in which case it is as boring as heck until the next grading changes when he goes straight to the back! I never saw enough Hot Rods out in one race to make for good racing, though down in the SE I believe grids over 10 were more common! Actually, if anything, the short oval system may work better on the full circuits if they also do regular re-grading during the season to get your starting position on the grid... 

 

4 hours ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

As I see it, the only way that reverse grids work is if you have two 1-hour races instead of 1 2-hour race.

 

Or we could go back to the three hour races and see who lasts...

 

 

TBH this constant meddling by the FIA/Liberty is sooo annoying!

Edited September 8, 2020 by Hobby

[Zomboid]

14 hours ago, 57xx said:

 

If the other drivers or teams want to win, they need to do better. Just because he is in a class of his own, doesn't mean it's handing anything to him on a plate.

I'm not sure he's quite in a class of his own. Put Verstappen in Bottas' car and things would be very interesting indeed. I don't think anyone else is in the Lewis/ Max class at the moment though. Some of the other upcoming younglings might get there though.

 

I feel sorry for anyone who has to be Verstappen's team mate. I reckon that's a fairly mediocre car he's driving, and making everyone else look bad by working miracles with it. Lewis would do better than Albon & Gasly did, but I wouldn't bet a lot on the outcome of that hypothetical battle.

[Hobby]

7 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

but I wouldn't bet a lot on the outcome of that hypothetical battle.

 

I would, Max is probably the best of the rest at the moment, but Lewis is better, and in a class of his own in the current field. You don't break all the records he has done if you are not the best.

[Pete the Elaner]

Reverse grid races are a strange idea.

A team tries hard to make a good race car. What reward do they get for their efforts? A grid penalty! That sucks.

So what would be the point of making he best car? You may as well build an average one & start from the front.

 

Should Liverpool be made to start each league match 1-0 down because they were champions last season?

Should cricket be based off a handicap based on their rankings?

I have played handicap snooker. I got no sense of achievement from beating the league's best player; the format won it for me.

Winning against the same opposition from a level start was completely different.

[Hobby]

2 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

Should Liverpool be made to start each league match 1-0 down because they were champions last season?

 

Now there's a thought.... Make it 2-0 if you win two on the trot, and so on! It would cut out those 1-0 wins!!

[PaulRhB]

Hamilton has the talent plus more years of experience and has quietened down a lot, he finally really upped his head game after the fight with Nico and has been clear since then  Max is getting there but still blows a fuse occasionally. 
I’d say there are several capable of getting close with a bit more experience, Leclerc has shown the blistering pace pretty consistently, so is prob ahead of Albon, Sainz and Norris, but see what happened this weekend when he’s frustrated by a sudden big drop in performance  

This is the problem comparing drivers, Hamilton ran against Schumi and I would say has already surpassed him in sportsmanship. 
The young guns will be wondering how long Lewis can continue and I reckon it’s how the cars match up in 22 that may be the crucial point as he still seems to have the hunger in such a great car. 

[Pete the Elaner]

12 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

 

I feel sorry for anyone who has to be Verstappen's team mate. I reckon that's a fairly mediocre car he's driving, and making everyone else look bad by working miracles with it. Lewis would do better than Albon & Gasly did, but I wouldn't bet a lot on the outcome of that hypothetical battle.

 

Ricciardo was a good match, but he was with the team first & was more consistent.

I think Verstappen has moved on since then. He was usually the faster of the 2 faster when he had a good race but seemed to finish mid-field at other times. He does not seem to have these mediocre days any more.

I doubt we will see him in the same car as Hamilton. We would see Senna/Prost or Hamilton/Rosberg all over again.

Verstappen's best chance right now is to stay with Red Bull. They seem the most likely to be the next Mercedes-beater.

[Andrew P]

Williams announce new Team Principal = Simon Roberts, Not a name I know of.

https://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/29836138/williams-announces-simon-roberts-acting-team-principal

 

[Dunsignalling]

I've always thought that the current start arrangement with the fastest cars in front and the slowest at the back seems specifically designed to prevent exciting racing rather than encourage it. There were valid safety reasons for that when F1 was so often lethal to its participants, but it's safer these days to prang in F1 at 100mph than in most road cars at 10mph. 

 

OK, with a reverse-grid start based on the previous race finish, driver attitudes to Turn One might have to change, but they'd soon discover ways to deal with it, and the slow learners get to be on the front row next race.

 

For me, one of the reasons Monza became the most entertaining F1 race for years was that the combination of circumstances meant the quickest guy had to do some real work for a change, rather than (usually) getting away first then cruising round twenty seconds ahead of everybody else.

 

OK, Lewis was put to the back well in to the race and, if he'd been there at the start, he'd almost certainly have won anyway, but if F1 is to prosper, and attract new followers, maybe a big chunk of predictability needs removing.

 

I've friends who stopped watching just because, most weeks, they consider that at least two of the people on the podium will come from the same group of four drivers. They've been right more often than wrong for quite a while.

 

John

 

Edited September 8, 2020 by Dunsignalling

[Hobby]

Here's me thinking the current F1 set-up is to reward the best team/driver set-up and so make it the pinnacle of motor racing... Many other car racing formulas also do it this way (based on qualifying), so it's not alone.

 

The trouble is that when you start meddling you end up with lots of strange things to "even things out" like weight penalties as well as reverse grids.

Edited September 8, 2020 by Hobby

[Zomboid]

 

4 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

I would, Max is probably the best of the rest at the moment, but Lewis is better, and in a class of his own in the current field. You don't break all the records he has done if you are not the best.

Lewis might be better, but (in my view) it's positions 1a and 1b, rather than being a class apart. I don't want to go down the "he's just in the best car" rabbit hole because it's not that simple, but given equal machinery I don't think there would be a huge gap either way between them. And Lewis has had a lot longer to rack up his numerous and well deserved records.

 

Those two are in a class of their own, and then there's everyone else.

 

Without doing any research myself, how did Lewis's years driving mediocre McLarens compare to how Max has been doing in his not-that-great Red Bulls?

[friscopete]

12 minutes ago, Andrew P said:

Williams announce new Team Principal = Simon Roberts, Not a name I know of.

https://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/29836138/williams-announces-simon-roberts-acting-team-principal

 

Sadly not team managers they need but great designers and top engineers .Not easy to find or employ .Ferrari dominated in the Schumi years by poaching the best around .this ensured  they got the top guys and other teams didnt ,like like Merc now .I dont doubt Claire knew what was needed but enticing them to Williams  is another matter .Also Frank was a prickly sod .While they have gone the team is still in a poor way .Often when a team is down it stays there .A whole bunch of up and coming designers and engineers out of college  learn their trade in smaller formulas and teams but that doesnt mean they are any good . The top rise but not quickly .Its  a season by season   climb. Now we cant even test the bloody things so its out of the box and race ready , Cant change this or that or back the rear of the grid Win but probably lose.I can think of at least three well know designers who copied some one elses car and got star billing never to repeat it its dizzy heights again .

[Hobby]

Someone did a statistical comparison a while ago, but I can't remember where it was. Lewis was better though. A key point is races finished, even in his early days when he was a little rough round the edges his finishing rate is better than Max's early days. 

 

The trouble is that Max needs Lewis to retire now if he's any chance of winning the WC before the current crop of young guns get involved as Paul said.

[Dunsignalling]

28 minutes ago, Hobby said:

Here's me thinking the current F1 set-up is to reward the best team/driver set-up and so make it the pinnacle of motor racing... Many other car racing formulas also do it this way (based on qualifying), so it's not alone.

 

The trouble is that when you start meddling you end up with lots of strange things to "even things out" like weight penalties as well as reverse grids.

But doesn't giving the best teams/drivers an effective head start really mean the contest is half over before it's begun? Maybe the pinnacle of Motor Racing but hardly the pinnacle of competition.

 

Grands Prix are long enough to ensure that the best will continue to earn the points they deserve, especially with the advantage of DRS. Reverse-grid starts would introduce rather more "spectacle" than we (usually) get with grids set by qualifying. I've seldom bothered to watch quali this season and doing away with it would reduce F1s hardware consumption, too. Might even free up some resources for a bit of testing also.....  

 

John

Edited September 8, 2020 by Dunsignalling

[Hobby]

It's still the pinnacle of competition if you accept that the definition of "competition" is that you have to be the best to win. Without any help artificial aids such as reverse grids, weight penalties, etc.

[Dunsignalling]

14 minutes ago, Hobby said:

It's still the pinnacle of competition if you accept that the definition of "competition" is that you have to be the best to win. Without any help artificial aids such as reverse grids, weight penalties, etc.

But I wouldn't consider reverse grid to be any more "artificial" than qualifying, which is basically just running two (four?)  races with the result of the important one half-decided by the first (three?).

 

Also, of course, anybody "disadvantaged" by reverse grid in one race, will automatically be compensated in the next..... 

 

There are already weight penalties in F1, if cars fall below the minimum by the end of the race, but that's more about maintaining durability and avoiding having bits of car flying off than anything else.

 

John

Edited September 8, 2020 by Dunsignalling

[Grovenor]

Why not just draw lots for the grid positions? They could borrow the lotto machine and put 20 balls in, use the order they come out.

[Hobby]

24 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

But I wouldn't consider reverse grid to be any more "artificial" than qualifying, which is basically just running two (four?)  races with the result of the important one half-decided by the first (three?).

 

There are already weight penalties in F1, if cars fall below the minimum by the end of the race, but that's more about maintaining durability and avoiding having bits of car flying off than anything else.

 

The qualifying still rewards the best, whether that's the best car, or driver.  So it's not "artificial"

 

The weight limits of an F1 car are set for the season, and not changed artificially as they are in, say, BTCC. So a team will set up their car for a certain weight (within the limits) and will not have to change other things because of some arbitrary outside ruling changes it. And F1 cars are a lot more susceptible to changes like this than the much more rugged BTCC car.

Edited September 8, 2020 by Hobby

[57xx]

If reverse grids are such a good idea, then will we have reverse grid penalties too? Swap your engine out and go to the front of the grid? Everyone complains about grid penalties so how can reverse grids be any good? They are about as good an idea as Bernie wanting to turn the sprinklers on.

 

[PaulRhB]

This will be the eternal problem of racing vs spectacle when an entertainment company is in charge, that’s happened because money and sponsorship is everything these days. You can only hope for a compromise because so many non racers have a say. Like I said earlier maybe designating a few non championship events for these reverse grid ideas, or the equivalent of the WRC special stages are the way to balance it?

[Dunsignalling]

9 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

The qualifying still rewards the best, whether that's the best car, or driver.  So it's not "artificial"

 

 

But it still reinforces advantage for those who (should) least need one.

 

Why bother with qualifying at all? Just starting in points order would have pretty much the same effect. 

 

John

[Zomboid]

Perhaps they could separate the component building from the operational race teams, and have an NFL style draft. The worst team from last year gets first pick of the various bits of car (front wing, engine etc) until they've all picked enough components to build a car. Then they can trade bits around ("swap brake ducts for your third round pick next year") to add to the mayhem.

 

It's a terrible idea, but might make for an interesting spectacle...

[Hobby]

21 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

But it still reinforces advantage for those who (should) least need one.

 

Why bother with qualifying at all? Just starting in points order would have pretty much the same effect. 

 

It doesn't actually re-enforce the advantage, as things can go wrong as proved many times, especially when the weather gets involved...

 

You could start in points order, but qualifying creates a "spectacle" as Paul mentions and gets more viewers/advertising money in so its likely to stay. Would having a false jeopardy such as reverse grids get even more viewers, quite possibly, but would it stop F1 being the pinnacle of the sport, yes in my view.

 

What to do, eh!