|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
28 Mar 2013, 23:31 (Ref:3226210) | #51 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,016
|
|||
|
29 Mar 2013, 00:14 (Ref:3226222) | #52 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,274
|
What were the figures then, and what are they now? a drop of 100 million is enormous if 200 million people watch, but less so if that's 6 billion. Were the measurement methodologies the same? Do they take into account "delayed" broadcasts, PVRs and so on?
Asking for a friend... |
|
__________________
Walk a mile in someone else's shoes. When they realise you have, you'll be a mile away and you'll have their shoes. |
29 Mar 2013, 00:30 (Ref:3226225) | #53 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,016
|
Quote:
Originally 600 million in 2008. 1/6 of audience is nothing to sneeze at. Ironically, most of the major drops were in new markets F1 is clamouring for. This gives you a bit of perspective on F1 calculations for TV viewership, if you're confused I don't blame you. It really overstates how many people watch F1, for example it claims 9.7 Million watched F1 in North America last year, yet the average race got about 500k viewers in total. : http://www.pitpass.com/48426-The-tru...iewing-figures |
|||
|
29 Mar 2013, 02:18 (Ref:3226242) | #54 | ||||||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,030
|
Really?
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Yes. Quote:
Physics dictates you can have one or the other, in cars sliding around, seeing the car work, widening the opportunity to create a pass or abnormal speeds but the degree of difficulty in passing being very high, but you can't have both. Generations of people/fans fans grown up with wings being the norm, despite the fact it is not. Yet, any deviation from this is considered a radical change. In the 120-130 years that take up history of motorsport, wings have been around for 40-50 years. Wings were not designed to gain a performance so it can satisfy fans. If it means cars going slower and a huge culture change is needed which will create other problems in the shor term (like losing some interest), then so be it. Club racing has no interest because it is for the competitors, not for the fans. It's also a low level, people have little interst in low level sport generally. The reason why classes below F1 have less of a following is because it's easier to follow F1 than other classes. Along with the fact it's accepted as the highest level of motorsport. The same applies for other sports. |
||||||
|
29 Mar 2013, 03:20 (Ref:3226251) | #55 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 316
|
I was at the track for the race and have a question.
Why was Webber put on hard tyres at the end of the race (and pitted second)? Even though they were told to hold station it seems like the strategy was heavily geared towards Vettel as he was pitted first and put on soft tyres allowing him to have the 'undercut' as well as be quicker, regardless of any engine settings. |
||
|
29 Mar 2013, 12:35 (Ref:3226345) | #56 | |||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,606
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
Show me a man who won't give it to his woman An' I'll show you somebody who will |
29 Mar 2013, 12:46 (Ref:3226349) | #57 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 591
|
|||
|
29 Mar 2013, 15:00 (Ref:3226388) | #58 | ||
Team Crouton
20KPINAL
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 39,946
|
No, he was just worried he might make a 'mistake'........
|
||
__________________
280 days...... |
29 Mar 2013, 15:34 (Ref:3226400) | #59 | ||
Race Official
20KPINAL
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 21,606
|
Simple as that.
|
||
__________________
Show me a man who won't give it to his woman An' I'll show you somebody who will |
30 Mar 2013, 01:06 (Ref:3226682) | #60 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,244
|
There seems to be a lot of disagreement in this thread as to what constitutes "proper" F1 racing.
I can only speak for myself but "proper" F1 racing is a race that is settled on track via overtaking, not in pit lane through strategy or radio via orders. I grew up watching the sport in an era where refueling was king. Over the off season I went back and watched some season reviews and heard the commentator get excited as he was describing a battle between 2 drivers, one of which pitted earlier and jumped the other while he was still in pit lane. I shook my head. That isn't racing. How did we let that get so bad? An era of drivers backing off and waiting for clear air through the pitstop phase, overtaking their rivals through pit strategy then after the final stops easing off and nursing their cars to the finish. Only if you got a wet race or a safety car at an unplanned moment were you blessed with a race that wasn't a procession but that wasn't the majority of the time. Now, at least we have cars that give the drivers the opportunity to take their race in their own hands. Tyres going off? Learn to manage them better? Someone passes you with DRS? Well now the weapon is in your hands, repass him with your own DRS KERS leads to someone passing you? Well you have KERS to, what's wrong with you? F1 atm is generated towards delivering its excitement on track and I don't care if that makes me a purist or a WWE style entertainment first type of fan, that is what I want to see. To hear complaints against good racing when they happen is baffling in the extreme. Now, as to the second race in the season being turned into a complete procession because the first 4 cars are told not to race each other, that's not very good news at all. So from now on we have to hope all the teams 2 cars are jumbled up because if they ever get line astern they'll just be called off and told not to race? That doesn't bode well for the image of the sport or the action in the races at all! Something must be done to prevent the teams (who are within their rights to do so atm) from turning the exciting racing we're just getting used to, back into a parade that's not worth watching. |
||
__________________
We need to win like you need to breathe.... |
30 Mar 2013, 02:37 (Ref:3226702) | #61 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,767
|
Quote:
|
||
|
30 Mar 2013, 03:04 (Ref:3226706) | #62 | ||
Racer
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 364
|
I think part of the procession problem in Malaysia was Hamilton being under fueled, and apparently the team wanted him on the podium. Had he had the gas I think him and nico would have went at it more
|
||
|
30 Mar 2013, 03:05 (Ref:3226707) | #63 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,498
|
No I don't think so. Driver aids have always decreased the viability of what the sport is about but minimising the expenditure of what real skill is required in a traditional sense.
That's why Senna has always been closest to the 'best' for me along with Moss, Fangio, Stewart and Clark. Sport is about using the development of natural inclination and ability to out perform others not using mechanical means to advantage your natural ability. Its simply less a sport now than it has ever been and yes, I am tired of it. That probably means I am no longer a devoted fan and that is true. I now will not get up and watch it at night, pay inordinate amounts via pay TV for it, nor will give up work and finances to travel to see it. Its simply not real anymore |
|
|
30 Mar 2013, 09:23 (Ref:3226768) | #64 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,030
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
30 Mar 2013, 09:59 (Ref:3226781) | #65 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 13,226
|
Yes, exactly, and what is more is that every technical improvement over the years, whether it's brakes, tyres, aero etc could be regarded as a driver aid, since it enables an improvement in performance over what went before.
|
||
|
30 Mar 2013, 10:05 (Ref:3226784) | #66 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,030
|
Williams built the FW14B and 15C. That, and the rise of popularity of Indycar racing and Nigel Mansell joining the series instigated a series of changes to the cars and how the races were conducted. There were many, they were all ridiculous, and they were counter productive to a "natural" car race, particularly races that are as long as 300kms.
Indycar/Champcar continued with a high level of popularity into the late 90s, which then lead to even more ludicrous changes to the cars for 98. This has then snowballed further and further to the abomination of a "high level" motorsport series F1 currently is. The overreaction by the FIA/Ecclestone of 20 years ago, still has an effect to this day. All they had to do was ban active suspension, and modern day F1 would dominate the world sporting landscape...DOMINATE! All they would have to do nowadays is revert to revised 89-93 F1 (I said "revised"), but for all the intellgence of the significant, leading people of modern F1, they're pretty silly in other areas. |
||
|
30 Mar 2013, 10:43 (Ref:3226802) | #67 | |
Retired
20KPINAL
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 22,897
|
The main thing is that engineers cannot unlearn things. You could never go back to regulations that were around 20 years ago, the cars would be way too fast, and they would get faster; faster, if you know what I mean.
|
|
|
30 Mar 2013, 11:20 (Ref:3226815) | #68 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 591
|
One problem is that it may be perceived by many that GP drivers are back to using "driving" skills again, like drivers from the past, because "driver aids" have been removed, traction-control for example. Well, this isn't really true is it? Massive aero performance, ridiculously short braking distances, paddle-style gearchanges mean that it's harder to identify the core skill levels of drivers. The actual technology of the cars are "drivers' aids" in themselves. As long as drivers have the fitness and a required level of skill to be in F1 anyway, then the car becomes the star. That's why, over a season, with the odd wet race or slippery conditions, we do get to see some core skills appear and the guy with the best car isn't necessarily driving off into the distance. If we had a season of ALL dry races and qualifying, that F1 season would likely be a very boring season.
If cars had less absolute performance (aero mainly), such that drivers' skills were easier identified, and that their skills were a bigger percentage of the overall performance of car/driver, GP racing would be the better for it. |
||
|
30 Mar 2013, 11:27 (Ref:3226819) | #69 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,885
|
The more I've read of the F1 forum over the past week or so, the more stunned I've become how many apparent fans don't even understand what motorsport is.
|
||
__________________
"Never pick a fight with an ugly person, they've got nothing to lose." |
30 Mar 2013, 11:43 (Ref:3226827) | #70 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,195
|
|||
__________________
'Aerodynamics are for people who can't build engines.' - Enzo Ferrari |
30 Mar 2013, 11:52 (Ref:3226832) | #71 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,885
|
When I have time I might try to.
It's not easy putting it terms that the intended audience will understand. |
||
__________________
"Never pick a fight with an ugly person, they've got nothing to lose." |
30 Mar 2013, 12:25 (Ref:3226843) | #72 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 591
|
|||
|
30 Mar 2013, 12:52 (Ref:3226851) | #73 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 591
|
The point is. F1 aero performance created quite a few years of GP racing where cars could only overtake via pitstop strategy. We have had some "racing" and unpredictability in Gps these recent seasons because it was decided to provide teams with rubbish tyres and introduce DRS. It appears to me, and I might be wrong, it is ONLY because of aero performance and the processions it creates, that "gimmicks" were introduced. Gimmicks aren't needed if the aero performance is dealt with properly.
|
||
|
30 Mar 2013, 13:15 (Ref:3226861) | #74 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,818
|
|||
|
30 Mar 2013, 13:16 (Ref:3226862) | #75 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,885
|
Quote:
Perhaps understanding isn't the right word. We all start somewhere, and I'm not a fan snob (honest). More a lack of willingness to accept it's more complex than some would seemingly like. |
|||
__________________
"Never pick a fight with an ugly person, they've got nothing to lose." |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
F1 is turning ito a bloody joke! | Nismo | Formula One | 4 | 28 Mar 2006 06:33 |
Quick F1 joke | GXH | Formula One | 18 | 19 May 2004 17:41 |
Lame April Fools Joke at F1-Live | DNQ | Formula One | 26 | 5 Apr 2003 12:46 |
F1 Joke (with apologies to Liverpudlians!!) | renaultbel | Formula One | 2 | 10 Aug 2001 02:24 |
F1 Joke!!! | neutral | Formula One | 22 | 19 Oct 2000 11:43 |