The F1 thread

stickyfiddle

Fretwired said:

stickyfiddle said:

It's not about giving the little guys enough cash that they start winning, it's about giving them enough cash that they aren't constantly at risk of going under.

Having more manufacturers is essential, but soon as you lose the privateers, one of the big guys has to finish last, and they don't like that one bit - it's why Toyota and Honda both quit last time.

It's nothing to do with coming last. It's about winning sometimes. I'd rather see 14 teams chasing for the championship rather than 2 teams winning everything. If Mercedes constantly finished 9 and 10 every race they'd quit. They are in it to win but would stay if there was close championship racing rather than the sprint from the front, tyre and fuel saving then a sprint at the end with the undercut being the only way to overtake a car on some tracks.

The reason Mercedes does well is the fact it has a massive resources in Germany doing 'research' that gets them around the budget constraints. Ferrari do the same thing.

I completely agree you need to have a chance of winning (or podiums or points for the little guys), which is as important for fans as for teams & drivers (see my earlier comment on Trulli & Fisichella).

But clearly they also need to get it to the point that the big guys see value in it even if they aren't winning, because only one guy can actually win. Starting the season with a strong chance and having a great battle through the season is all well and good, but if Porsche comes last they will not stay. Then the next year Honda comes last (again) and leaves. etc etc

chillidoggy

Fretwired said:

chillidoggy said:

The thing is, if there's not enough talent to go round (and if Ross Brawn says so, who would disagree?), whoever has the cash gets the top people. Hence my point about Caterham. No money, no top people.

It's always all about money, whichever way you look at it. Maybe there are no fixes and the monster simply evolves year-on-year, which is what seems to have happened anyway.

What you're suggesting with a basic car, I see what you're saying but would that not create a two-tier system? Come to think of it, that's almost what we have now, so maybe they should have F1 as the primary event and an F1 Junior series as the secondary. Then you'd have your 14 cars in one race, and another 14 cars to watch racing later as a feeder series, with closer racing being the result, and the opportunity for those with the most talent to feed through.

Some good ideas in there. With the best will in the world Caterham could have had millions but they'd never have got Adrian Newey. Williams have been struggling. The idea of the basic car, gearbox and engine was smaller teams could pool resources to development it so they wouldn't need dedicated aero teams or spend cash on separate wind tunnel sessions.

Your idea of a twin series is a good one but they could all race together - chances are the junior series would probably be more entertaining if the cars are closely matched.

Who needs Bernie, eh?

The Fretboard F1 Management Team is on the case!

Fretwired

chillidoggy said:

Who needs Bernie, eh?

The Fretboard F1 Management Team is on the case!

Bernie's gone .... :-)


Good qualifying session ...

chillidoggy

Shame about Vettel, though. And a Merc on top as usual, which is unsurprising. I had hoped the Ferraris would get a 1 - 2, but hey-ho, it'll be interesting tomorrow.

Fretwired

chillidoggy said:

Shame about Vettel, though. And a Merc on top as usual, which is unsurprising. I had hoped the Ferraris would get a 1 - 2, but hey-ho, it'll be interesting tomorrow.

Rain .. lots of rain according to the Met office and thunder ...

lewism

Interesting that it was so tight between Lewis & Kimi when Merc had looked to be struggling, but also that Bottas was still off the pace. From a racing point of view it's a shame about Vettel but I do find him insufferable when he's winning. Have Ferrari been running their engines harder throughout the season to maintain their competitiveness and it's now catching up with them? We played Kimi interview first word bingo - I went with "bwaaaaah", Mslewism chose "ayerummnhah". She won.

Fretwired

lewism said:

Interesting that it was so tight between Lewis & Kimi when Merc had looked to be struggling, but also that Bottas was still off the pace. From a racing point of view it's a shame about Vettel but I do find him insufferable when he's winning. Have Ferrari been running their engines harder throughout the season to maintain their competitiveness and it's now catching up with them? We played Kimi interview first word bingo - I went with "bwaaaaah", Mslewism chose "ayerummnhah". She won.

Vettel won't be too unhappy .. he was going to have to take a major engine penalty which would have pushed him to the back of the grid in one race. He will now change everything meaning Ferrari will be set for the end of the season and can push Hamilton whom I expect to have at least one DNF or have to take some penalties. Ferrari have a few tracks they will do well at so expect Vettel to come back strongly. If it rains hard he will also be in a strong position as his car can be setup for the wet whereas Hamilton was setup for dry qualifying. If it's wet Vettel could make a podium.

chillidoggy

Rain? That should make for an interesting spectacle. Alonso on the podium, anyone?

lewism

Agree Hamilton will have at least one DNF and this happening to Vettel at a track where he wouldn't have been expecting to win won't hurt him too badly. He shouldn't have too much of a problem climbing up to 6th at which point Kimi will move over and at least one Red Bull engine will go pop so a podium is possible. I've not been too impressed with Vettel in the rain, even before the last GP, certainly not at the same level as Hamilton. Rain is forecast but last I read was it was due about 30 minutes after the race. I certainly don't think the season's over like some are predicting.

FX_Munkee

Bottas continued running with the new aero  upgradepieces, wheras Hamilton reverted to the ones they used previously. Which explains the difference between the 2 cars I think.

Fretwired

FX_Munkee said:

Bottas continued running with the new aero  upgradepieces, wheras Hamilton reverted to the ones they used previously. Which explains the difference between the 2 cars I think.

Not what the experts say nor Lauda. New parts wouldn't make that amount of difference. A bad day at the office.

Garthy

stickyfiddle said:

It's not about giving the little guys enough cash that they start winning, it's about giving them enough cash that they aren't constantly at risk of going under.

Having more manufacturers is essential, but soon as you lose the privateers, one of the big guys has to finish last, and they don't like that one bit - it's why Toyota and Honda both quit last time.

Honda & Toyota both quit because of the global financial crisis (as did BMW and Renault) and not being able to justify to their unions spending $500m a season plus additional funds for other projects while shutting factories and having tens of thousands laid off or redundant. Honda's 2009 car won both championships with someone else's name above the door and the 2010 Toyota was a monster that never raced, eventually used as a tyre test car and still competitive years for another two years when it did back to back runs with the Merc W04 at Barcelona in 2013.

DesVegas

I'm hoping for a good race tomorrow, also hoping max can make it through at least 2 corners

stickyfiddle

@Garthy W and Toyota quit partly cos of he financial crisis but also cos they’d already spent hundreds of millions and won nothing. 

Honda’s 2009 car won because it had a Mercedes engine shoe-horned in at the eleventh hour. If it’s had the Honda lump they’d still have been at the back, except for maybe Monaco.

sinbaadi

stickyfiddle said:

@Garthy W and Toyota quit partly cos of he financial crisis but also cos they’d already spent hundreds of millions and won nothing. 

Honda’s 2009 car won because it had a Mercedes engine shoe-horned in at the eleventh hour. If it’s had the Honda lump they’d still have been at the back, except for maybe Monaco.

Honda's engines weren't quite that bad then, but everything including the late unveiling and lack of pre season testing just fell into place so nicely that you can guarantee Honda wouldn't have been as successful as Brawn were.

Anyway, I expect Seb to make it to 5th in a dry race, in a wet race it's podium or bust.  Timely safety car to bring him into winning contention around lap 45?

Garthy

stickyfiddle said:

@Garthy W and Toyota quit partly cos of he financial crisis but also cos they’d already spent hundreds of millions and won nothing. 

Honda’s 2009 car won because it had a Mercedes engine shoe-horned in at the eleventh hour. If it’s had the Honda lump they’d still have been at the back, except for maybe Monaco.

Brawn said the Merc engine was a compromise, the car would have been quicker with the Honda lump as it would have a better COG, better aero towards the back of the car, the driveshafts wouldn't have been pissed and they wouldn't have had to remove and replace the back six inches of the tub.

It won because it had unlimited testing from April 2008 and Honda throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at the thing, while Mclaren, Ferrari and BMW concentrated on the 2008 championship. The in season testing ban for 2009 meant it was extremely difficult for the other teams to catch up once they had seen Brawn absolutely rinse the grid in winter testing. The only team that had a hope was RBR because they had invested in the very best CFD to rival aerospace (and had persuaded enough teams and the FIA to restrict wind tunnel time from 2009 "to cut costs").

holnrew

Wasn't there a team that wanted to enter using that Toyota? But they let US F1 in instead, who didn't ever race.

thumpingrug

Oh, not looking good for Ferrari 

Fretwired

Great race .... WTF did Stroll do ......

thumpingrug

Well I was about to say that Vettel did well, but something very odd just happened on the cool down lap.