Was F1 considered boring when Ascari, Fangio and then Clark dominated their eras?

[Adam43]

A modern example of 'trying' where you could tell and a good old days example of 'not trying'?:

You can still tell when drivers are trying more than others. Mika Hakkinen's Q laps were fantastic. Stand out laps.

What about Prost, or Stewart, or Clark, was it obvious that they were 'trying'? No, they made it look like they weren't.

[GoThatWay]

I'm intrigued. Seems to me that a lot of you folk follow modern F1 (I don't), yet you complain about its lack of appeal. So why follow it - it must have something going for it in your eyes ?

[Mark Barton]

Originally posted by GoThatWay
I'm intrigued. Seems to me that a lot of you folk follow modern F1 (I don't), yet you complain about its lack of appeal. So why follow it - it must have something going for it in your eyes ?

Well old habits die hard... If there's nothing else on, then I'll watch anything racing. If there was Moto GP or Superbikes on the other side I'd watch that instead (but I'd probably still tape the F1...!).

I think we all do care really; we wouldn't make the effort to discuss it all otherwise.

[flagwaver]

Adam,
Perhaps you misunderstood what I ment by trying. I mment that you could actually see the drvers hands fighting with the steering wheel & changing gear etc.

[krt917]

Originally posted by GoThatWay
I'm intrigued. Seems to me that a lot of you folk follow modern F1 (I don't), yet you complain about its lack of appeal. So why follow it - it must have something going for it in your eyes ?

Because we know how good it could be if they got the rules right. And no matter how 'bad' a championship gets, there's always the chance of an interesting race. And, on the whole, F1 still has the best drivers in the world (yes, there are exceptions, but you know what I mean).