[Multi 21] f1 is boring. manufactured for tv.

[Aysedasi]

Did he really try after F1?

[GORDON STREETER]

The general consensus on this thread would show that most F1 fans think that it's brilliant, of course the ability to drive at that pace in similar cars
it is.
As to whether it's boring ? if a race at whatever level after the first lap continues to just "drone" around the circuit without any overtaking or "incidents" then it can be classed as boring to anyone that is not a dyed in the wool fan of their type of racing from Bangers to F1.
I have watched most forms of racing over the years at circuits and on the box and would be the first to admit that if F1 is on the box I have dozed off or fast forwarded it on at least half of the races.
I guarantee you that if the BTCC didn't have any "incidents" or overtaking half of the spectators would disappear !

[Marbot]

F1 doesn't have the artificial 'reverse grids' that has drivers actively aiming to finish the race in a lower position in order to be on pole for the next race. Nor does it have half of the squabbling that takes place over things like boost pressure and turbo size, etc (although, that may come next season).

So, it's not just F1 that is manufactured for TV. Not by a long way.

[GORDON STREETER]

We mustn't loose sight of the fact that watching racing on the box is very different than actually being at the track as regards any recognition of speed .

[wolfhound]

Originally Posted by Paradise City

F1 is a short term investment vehicle for Bernie's pals. That means maximising the number you draw in regardless of the medium/long term consequences to the quality of the sport. Shareholders just want to cut and run away with buckets full of money.

Personally I'd like F1 to have a lower profile. I don't care one whit that it is the 2nd biggest series/event/whatever bar the World cup or whatever that accolade was. I'd like to see a more sustainable austere sport at affordable prices for entrants and broadcasters rather than this speculative bubble that could either bounce or go pop at any given year.

I could not agree more with you on that.

[nicanary]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

I could not agree more with you on that.

+1, and then some.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

They clearly didn't possess it and probably shouldn't have been propelled into F1 in the first place.

JPM? Raikkonen in WRC and NASCAR?

[Aysedasi]

If you rate them both that highly.......

I think either could have done a darned good job say in sportscars. I discount Kimi's rallying as that is a completely different discipline. JPM? No, I never saw him as a major talent, personally...

[Jacques Rabbit]

I've used the analogy before, but I'll bring it out again.

Take the best ice hockey goalie in the world and the best association football goalie in the world and have them switch jobs.

They are both goalies in the same way the F1 and NASCAR champions are both drivers.

I remember reading people being impressed by Tony Stewart and Jeff Gordon's F1 demos, and neither one was anywhere near a competitive pace (I remember the NASCAR media reporting Gordon would have qualified 21st or whatever, hoping NASCAR fans thought F1 had a 43 car field ).

Juan Montoya's a whole lot better than that in a stock car; Kimi Räikkönen, too, in rally. Sure, there's a difference between committing to it and doing a demo run for PR, I'll admit that.

Different disciplines of racing are entirely different sports. Some things will translate; multi-sport athletes exist at lower levels of the stick-and-ball stuff (I know of one guy who was drafted into both the NFL and MLB in America).

It's an extremely hard transition in the modern day. It's not just "bigger car" and "smaller car;" it's everything. Mechanical vs. aero grip, tire compounds, steel vs. carbon brakes, etc.

I don't think F1 drivers struggling elsewhere precludes F1 from being the pinnacle. I also don't necessarily believe that it is, though whether it is or isn't makes no difference to me how exciting it is (very, I believe).

[MarkG]

I'm not so sure F1 is the pinnacle of driving nowadays. Yes, there are some terrific drivers in F1 but as to being terrific in other motorsport, who knows.
PC simulators aren't the real thing, I accept that, but F1 2010/2011 on PC or PS3 is way less of a challenge than other sims that use less technological cars. Without having to be brave or exceptionally fit whilst sat at a PC, F1 sims are easy to drive, even without aids, the cars have soooo much capability. Mind you, a F1 sim of 1960's cars.. that's a completely different kettle of fish. I really do believe these sims actually represent the real world to a degree, and if I'm right, then F1 is more about fitness and maximising aero. Yes, driving skill is involved as has to be in any form of racing.
Personally, I think the drivers are seen as heroes purely because of the incredible performance capabilities of the cars. I do accept there are some exceptional skills being employed still but I reckon someone like Sebastian Loeb is of a far higher skill level. Taking Copse at 170mph in a modern F1 car isn't the same as taking a Spa corner in 19-sixty-something at 150mph with the car drifting and likely to end up severely broken if the driver gets it wrong.

[chillibowl]

using the computer sim as a comparison point is an interesting concept but if they actually held any relevant connection to the real world teams would use a PS3 and an F1 game instead of buying supercomputers and building their own simulators.

interestingly a few years ago the US airforce used some ps3's for their simulator but they connected 1760 of them together so im not sure how much you could do with 1.

read about it a while ago and never thought that piece of useless information would ever come in handy.

[Aysedasi]

I stand to be corrected, but I believe many drivers have used sims in the past, particularly to learn new circuits. Certain comments have been made in the past about the perceived accuracy of a certain 'F1 sim of 1960s cars' which I'll mention no further lest it is injurious to chunder's health.......

[Pingguest]

Originally Posted by Marbot

So, it's not just F1 that is manufactured for TV. Not by a long way.

Not yet, maybe? Since 2003 the FIA have been introducing rules to 'spice up' the racing. And it has become from bad to worse since then. Who could think of manipulated tires as well as push-to-pass functions ten years ago?

[Marbot]

Originally Posted by Pingguest

Not yet, maybe? Since 2003 the FIA have been introducing rules to 'spice up' the racing. And it has become from bad to worse since then. Who could think of manipulated tires as well as push-to-pass functions ten years ago?

Ten years ago, when Ferrari were running away with things with regards to rules and how they should be enforced?.....oh, I dunno?

And you're right, these last ten years have been rubbish.

[Matt]

In the ~17 years I've been watching F1, this year was by far the best.

[formerf1champ]

Originally Posted by Matt

In the ~17 years I've been watching F1, this year was by far the best.

Compared to this year, what was wrong with 97? (My favourite season so far)

[GT-Driver]

Honestly I have to agree with All of you!!!! Yes F1 is the essence of motorsport, with the best of the best drivers. Just see how tine the lap time difference is!! On the other hand recently with all these extra-refined F1 cars it has gone little dull but not boring. But again the new cars and the new refinment brings much more safety. Those skinny-type F1you are talking about with stick shifter and no-power steering and assisted pedals and the car vibrates like hell are no where near safe as the new modern bulky extra smooth F1 cars we see today. So safety has to be given the priority. I think in all motorsport there will be some races that are more action and spirit packed than others, it just depends.

[Born Racer]

Some have suggested the available use of DRS everywhere around the circuit, to make things more strategic (like how you can be strategic with your use of KERS), and this would work in a "purist's" sense of negating some of the aero effect at any point, not just in a "gimmicky" zone.

I don't think it seems a great idea though, because doing so would negate the catch-up effect of the existing system though, and we would have to spend more time with our eyes glued at the on-screen graphics to see if drivers are using it or not (and of course many times, we would not see such graphics).

I'm thinking aloud a bit here, but what do you guys think?

[miatanut]

Originally Posted by Born Racer

Some have suggested the available use of DRS everywhere around the circuit, to make things more strategic (like how you can be strategic with your use of KERS), and this would work in a "purist's" sense of negating some of the aero effect at any point, not just in a "gimmicky" zone.

I don't think it seems a great idea though, because doing so would negate the catch-up effect of the existing system though, and we would have to spend more time with our eyes glued at the on-screen graphics to see if drivers are using it or not (and of course many times, we would not see such graphics).

I'm thinking aloud a bit here, but what do you guys think?

If DRS were available everywhere, they would run them flat down every straight. The better drivers would also run them flat in some of the corners, achieving a fuel mileage advantage. It would lead to a new aspect to the race, although there would probably also be some dramatic offs when drivers tried to run them flat in some places where that didn't work.

[wnut]

Originally Posted by Matt

In the ~17 years I've been watching F1, this year was by far the best.

Agreed!

[Matt]

OP still hasn't told us what kinda club racing he's in.

[nicanary]

Originally Posted by Matt

OP still hasn't told us what kinda club racing he's in.

Mini-Miglia, I reckon. Good fun, tight racing, lowish budgets. Few egos.

[migliacars]

Just trying to keep it on the topic.
I am enjoying the thoughts of everyone so far.

At this point I would like to say i didn't start the thread intentionally, I just commented on another thread in the F1 forum. I think a better title would have been.
F1 not as exciting for me as it use to be. what are your thoughts.

[chunder]

Talking of a series manufactured for tv then some American series do spring to mind.

I have tried many times to get into NASCAR, I know a lot of friends who obsess over it and simply cant understand how you could watch anything else, but try as hard as I might I just dont find it interesting enough to sustain an interest.

And this is a series pretty much [erfected around tv in the early days, OK maybe not designed, but certainly lending itself to coverage.

They often used to manipulate the rules to prevent the same teams winning a lot, and if a manufacturer was dominaint, something would always be done to level up teh field.

These days I think the issue is I just find it boring to watch, people say there were 25 lead changes etc etc, but a lot of that is because of pitstops and strategies, at some tracks it seems very hard to pass just as in F1.

At least in F1 they have made the changes to encourage passing, OK some of it is false, but it is also very new still. They dont really make such obvious change in NASCAR, mainly these days for safety, but the cars are still pretty much identikit racers, if you just saw a body with no stickers on it it would be tough for an outisder to ideintify the car just like F1.

Yet NASCAR is often heralded as the bastion of racing in the world. It might be popular, it might get good ratings, but for me, desite trying very hard to get on with it its one of the most overrated race series I have ever come across.

Give me current F1 any day over that sorry. Even with its rather obvious attempts at manipulation.

[migliacars]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G45X6fSk1do

boring!!!!!!!! check this out.