18/05/2010
NEWS STORY
 |
With six races run, and the European phase of the World Championship well and truly underway, we thought it would be as good a time as any to ask what you, the fans, really think of it so far.
Whilst consigning Bore-rain to history, I was fascinated to see so many empty seats at Sunday's Monaco Grand Prix. Mick Jagger was there, as were countless other 'celebrities', but it appeared that someone forgot to tell the fans.
In terms of Pitpass, I know that in February, as the teams went through their paces on various tracks in Spain, anticipation was at fever pitch, our stats almost going through the roof. However, things have dropped off quite alarmingly since then. While February saw us up 62% on the same month in 2009, March and April also saw increases, but nowhere near as dramatic.
While we are used to the swathes of empty seats at Shanghai, the large patches of dark blue plastic in the Principality on Sunday came as a bit of a shock, and with the World Cup looming one has to fear as to whether F1 can hold its own. Indeed, I am aware of two serious F1 fanatics who spent Sunday afternoon watching the cricket.
As the teams and Bernie argue over tyres, rules, money and just about everything else, one has to wonder if they are still missing the bigger picture. F1 cannot continue looking to the weather gods spicing up the action while the incident at the end of Sunday's race - and subsequent ruling by the stewards - makes one wonder if the sport isn't getting its priorities seriously wrong. Is F1 really only about style over substance?
We'd very much like to hear your thoughts on the opening phase of the championship, not just the bad stuff but also the good. As we've said before, most of those that matter do read your comments on Pitpass, so why not take this opportunity to let them know what you feel, not just about the opening six races but your thoughts on where the sport goes from here.
Let's hear what you think.
Chris Balfe
Editor
To send your thoughts, click here
Note: Please include your full name - without a full valid name we will not publish your entry.
Andrew Anderson - Australia
With discussion on future engine regs now including economy and other "green" stuff to keep some happy,together with the distinct possibility of passenger car led 18" wheels ( which I don't like ), why not "bite the bullet" and include ABS ( now on nearly every car sold on planet Earth ), and ban ALL aerodynamic aids as most passenger cars don't have them.
Imagine the pre - aero slip streaming returning and F1 being seen as an exciting sport as it should be!
Mind you, if that ever happened, scrutineering would have to include gonad size as most modern drivers seem very small in that department !
Cheers, and good luck to you and your friends on The Paddock magazine which is very interesting and well presented,
Jacques Senekal - South Africa
I have to say I am not that impressed with what I have seen so far this year. As you have noted, it was only the races where unpredictable weather changes influenced the race, did we see some excitement. As for the Monaco Grand Prix, it wasn't a great race was it? I have been watching F1 religiously since 1987, never missing a race if I can help it, but on Sunday I was flicking between the race and other programming on other channels.
Highlights in the race? Alonso's overtaking of the Virgin, Lotus and HRT cars at the back of the grid. But then you would expect it with him having a 4 second a lap faster car. What was even more disturbing was the fact that the only overtake amongst the top 8 during the race was penalised by 20 seconds! So much for encouraging overtaking. Only other bits of excitement was the accidents because they bunched the field up again.
The constant in-fighting in F1 has left a sour taste in the mouth as well. The fact that the teams can't agree on a tyre supplier for next year shows the amount of cohesion there is in F1.
As for the future, it does not look good. All of last year we had to listen to the same tune being sung by the FIA, the soaring costs must be limited. Now all of us would probably agree to some limits being imposed, but the way the FIA are going about it is just silly. As an example: last year Brawn caught everyone asleep with their double diffuser and reaped the benefits of it, now it will be banned from nest year. This year McLaren have an advantage at high speed tracks due to their F-duct, guess what, jip it will be banned from next year. Every time a team catches the opposition on the wrong foot with some creative engineering solutions the FIA is quick to ban it in the following season. Why? Why is the FIA's stance that all creative thinking should be stifled as soon as possible? With the strict regulations allowing less and less room for creative thinking and only control tyres being allowed, the only place a team can try and improve their grid placing is by developing the engine and aerodynamics. Oh wait, engine development is also in a freeze. Ok that leaves aero. We all know how hideously expensive the windtunnel testing is, but this is now the only place a team can try and recover some time. Coughing up millions in an effort to try and coax point something of a second out of your car is not great way to limit costs in my view.
We seem to be going more and more towards a regulation type chassis and engine race series. Pinnacle of motorsport? I think not.
Gianluca Mattioli
So far its been good, not great, as the on paper protagonists would have led us to believe the season should have been so far. We have had 6 races, 4 different winners and mixed grids, with some spirited drives from the like of Alonso and Hamilton, but all for the wrong reasons. Schumie seems to be getting back to his old self and its been nice to see some of his race craft in defending, but like he says, he is fighting in the wrong direction.
As it stands, if it wasn't for the weather and some poor judgement/ poor luck hitting a few teams - esp Red Bull - we would have probably seen 6 races with either one of the Red Bull cars going from flag to flag untroubled for the most part. Personally, I think that the main issues are lack of testing and Aero. 1) Lack of testing: ok so all teams needed to cut back spending and give the smaller teams a chance. But what about certain tracks having testing periods after a race weekend - all the staff and equipment are there and it would not give an advantage to the race itself, but encourage pure development in the long run and cost would be minimal due to no extra traveling.
It would give all teams a chance to close the performance gap - eps the guys at the back who missed the opening tests. 2) Aero: I think the FIA/FOTA missed a chance to squash out the double diffuser and even start to limit the front wing size ahead of this years racing.
Ok we know one way or another engineers will come up with ways of clawing downforce back, but why did they wait a year to do this? The new teams have had to spend time and money on developing something for a year and then go back to the drawing board whilst the top teams are probably now spending vast sums in finessing their designs and so the differential will possible increase over the season between the ends of the grid. A big chance missed in order to get the racing closer i think.
But so far we are seeing a close grid and a tight fight for the championships, whether this will be the case in 6 more races will be interesting, but if we have too many races where all we get is the top 10 drivers moan how they can not overtake and have a processional races then it will be a huge shame given the chances the rule makers had.
Looking to the future, KERS looks to be another shallow attempt to be 'green' and just be another drain of resources for little gain if all cars are to have it. The tires offers another opportunity to bring in a way to curb performance via harder compounds, putting the emphasis back on mechanical grip and driver abilities, but I am not sure what is better if that leads to zero pitstops (as seen virtually by Alonso this weekend), or the need to stop due to the shredding of the tires and the benefit going to the 'calmest' driver.
I don't think there is one golden solution, but something is clearly needing to be done - its a shame that F1 seems to be the only sport that needs an 'Entertainment Tsar' and more street circuits is not the answer, not even another 20 races (regardless of where) a season would help at the moment.
As for you guys at Pitpass - keep it up! One of the very few sites that is informative without spouting loads of bull.
Luke Corradi - Oxfordshire, UK
I have been a keen fan of F1 now, since the early 90's. I remember getting up late in the night, to watch the races broadcast from Australia or Suzuka live in 96' on television. Then I stopped watching the races live. Then I started watching race highlights. Then I started skipping races I knew were going to always be dull (Spain, Monaco, Bahrain.)
In the last 5 years, I have slowly turned off Formula 1, as I am tired of the limp efforts introduced to 'spice' things up. I'm sure it will always be exciting for the drivers to partake and those tremendous speeds, but really what is the point if your fan base diminishes? This season was overly hyped, and I think could have been the last straw of disappointment for some regular fans, as soon as they realised that dry races are still going to be awfully dull...
I agree with (a previous article I think I read on pitpass?) in proposing to make the dry tyre, so hard, that it gives the same grip levels as a wet track.
I'd also suggest additionally reversing the grid order in qualifying (but providing the incentive of half race points for those to not intentionally slow down.) In which scenario, I'm sure the engineers would be forced to find a way to make it easier for their cars to claw their way through the field.
Harder tyres and reversing grid orders, would spice up viewing for us all, and would not primiarily require a mandatory redesign of the current cars. (If you put the fastest car at the front of the pack, no matter how easy you make it to follow, if the car in front is pulling away, you're never going to see much overtaking are you?)
Sadly, unless I hear of anything revolutionary like this happening, or a massive reduction in ticket prices, my attention will be drawn elsewhere. I'm just one person. There are however, a great number of 'just one person' people... F1 does have the capacity to change though, so it's not all doom and gloom. There's just too much money at stake for it not to take notice and change!
Assen Koinov - Bulgaria
There were empty seats in Barcelona, as well. I was there at the race, ooohps! Did I said race? This was not a race but a procession of cars driving carefully with drivers doing their mathematics and points calculations during the driving. If it were a race there should have been overtakings, well, there was one in the "fierce battle" for pos. 14 which was on the screens for the entire 3 laps. Otherwise we saw change of positions in the pits which is not racing, or lucky drivers (Alonso, Schumi) moving up one position because of unlucky drivers who DNFed (Hamilton). Definitely not a race! The most exciting moment for me was to watch the extremely happy, applauding and shouting 98 000 Spaniards at Hamilton's demise.
What do we see nowadays - race best laps which are 3 sec up the Saturday qualy lap times!! Can we expect anything different - NO. Heavy loaded cars at the start, worn tires and mathematics at the end - you cannot expect any fantastic times for the best laps. Yes, I was praying for rain in Barcelona and Monaco in order to see an interesting sports event (I still do not call it a race, though). Isn't it ironic? Previous years we were hoping not to rain to see a fair race not influenced by God. Now is the opposite!
I have firmly decided not to attend any more races under the present regulations. Definitely not!
Bill Campbell
Sebastian Vettel, along with Fernando & Michael have stunning amounts of raw natural talent, which is why the are (or will be) deserved multiple times champions. But Mark shows what can be achieved with hard work. I believe I've said that to you (and Joe Saward) a couple of times over the years. Nearly all team mates of the above have just rolled over and "died" when faced with forever coming second. Not Mark. And I'm not for a moment thinking that the championships is a done deal this year. Can't wait for Britain, Germany & Spa.
Having said that for non-Red Bull fans, I can see this year looking like a trying year, but look what McLaren achieved last year. They (and Lewis) were impressive. And see what Jensen has achieved with a car that isn't as good (on the day) as the Red Bull this year. Don't write any of the top teams this year. But I'd like to expand Gianluca Mattioli's idea.
How about a number of test track days to follow after a GP weekend (say the Monday and Tuesday). Maybe four or five over the season? Teams could only test with their GP cars--so no specialist test teams, but are free to use a test/reserve driver. But give the bottom five (say) teams in the championship, extra test days, say six, five, four, three, two. And allow the (bottom) teams to sell all but one of their extras if they so desire. Could generate a reasonable amount of income for them, or, allow them to catch up. You might say that a bottom end team might throw some races, but then it would cost them constructors points and revenue, so maybe that wouldn't be a good idea for them--and is it such a big deal if a team finishes last or second last?
Savo Jovanovic - Belgrade
After 6 races there are some pretty small gaps in points in both champinships, different winners, end-of-race tyre degradations, frantic fighting for position, etc. Statistically. In reality, one team superior, others got their chances by chance - incorporate bad weather and bad judgement and strategy, some part failure into equation and we are where we are now. Some sunny sky accross Europe could bore us to a-day-out-and-do-anything-else-but-tv, even if F1 is on. Sunny sky will do. Will make races boring, and will take us out of chair.
It is quite some time now since I have started thinking of regulations. It is all rubbish, in my opinion. The more limitations, the worse racing. But aero is turning out to be most imoportant issue of all. It spoils possibilities for the car behind. It is fairly likely that designers are delibrately making it that way. Why not to? It would prevent their car to be overtaken, and it is all by the book. It crossed my mind, let take that from them. Let LIMIT the VOLUME OF TURBULENCE created. TURBULENCE is measurable, aint it? Erase almost all other rules, impose this one. And go racing.
David Jackson - Stockport, UK
There have been some incredibly dull races this year but I'm afraid they were entirely predictable. Ahead of this season I, and any other F1 fan of more than a few years, could have looked through the calendar and highlighted which of the races would be bore-fests.
When will the F1 powers that be realise the blindingly obvious: it is all about the circuits! Forget changing the regulations, pit stops, qualifying formats and get those terrible circuits off the F1 calendar for good. Apart from races livened up by the weather when has anybody ever seen a great F1 race at Barcelona, Hungary, China, Bahrain, Valencia or Abu Dhabi? Conversely, how many dull races have we seen at Suzuka, Spa, Montreal, Hockenheim or Monza?
I don't see the point in any more speculation, by anybody, about ways in which F1 can become less processional as long the boring circuits remain on the calendar. Bring back Imola and the A1 ring, keep Spa, and ditch the circuits that fail to deliver exciting races year after year. If that means going back to 12 or 14 races that's fine. Think of it is a mission of mercy to everybody involved. Can you imagine being one of the people involved in organising F1 races at any of those circuits and knowing that, no matter how hard you work, the end product will just be a boring procession that depresses everybody?
Finally, in anticipation of those who may say that the right answer is to change the cars so that they can race well at the boring circuits I can only say that my verdict is based on 20 seasons of F1. I think we can all agree that covers a multitude of different regulations.
Kurt Brunner - California, USA
First of all, F1 is no longer a sport that embraces 'state of the art' technology. That is long gone, so my suggestions take that fact into account. I think we like to see drivers exhibit racing skill more than anything else.
Incorporate rule stability. Only introduce changes in blocks every 4 to 5 years. This would allow smaller teams to better use resources in order to compete on a more equal footing and may result in having talented rather than pay drivers. The points system, qualifying procedure, and car parameters shouldn't change yearly (or race to race).
Have less specific regulations - this would reward creative designers. For instance: A car should be no longer than a certain length, no wider than a certain width, no higher than a certain height (or lower than a specified amount, weigh no more than 1400 pounds, possess no more 3000cc engine capacity, have no more than a certain 'volume of turbulence' (I like that idea), etc.
Let's keep and return to more challenging tracks (as was previously mentioned), even if it means a slight reduction in the number of races.
Softer brake pads would lengthen the braking/passing zone.
Manual gearboxes would require additional driver skill.
An even, codified application of rules would be welcome. Hamilton gets away with potentially lethal behavior two races in a row. Schumacher is more severely punished for trying to get away with something much less dangerous. (It is curious that Schumacher/Brawn tried to see what they could get away with - they probably thought the worst case would be that they would be put back into the previous order - then they found out what happens when you don't wear red!)
New management blood that is interested in the sport rather having knee-jerk reactions more attuned to profit maximization is needed. Fewer sweetheart Tilke and third world tracks, not bending over exciting race venues, making idiotic comments, and ceasing other behaviors of the like would result in not turning fans and potential fans off.
Amol Rotithor
I sincerely think nothing is wrong with modern day F1 as far as the technology is concerned. I think it has more to do with the kind of people we have at the helm of the F1 ship.
Instead of talking about the technicalities of the subject, I would rather draw comparisons with Cricket and specificallly the IPL with the T-20 format.
Quite how cricket turned itself around from being a boring gentleman's game to this fast and furious game of lusty boundaries and action packed extravaganza.
Everyone is absolutely smitten by it and it has managed to do something F1 has not done is years... win new fans!
But amidst all the glamour one thing everyone misses is that the game has remained the same. Just that it has been packaged differently, with a lot of fresh thinking and a huge dose of common sense.
All it took was a certain Lalit Modi and a whole lot of marketing with an incredible incentive offered for cricketers to go out and deliver mind blowing performances.
Perhaps a time for a change for F1?
The way i see it Mr. Modi doesn't have much to do these days, yet has a lot to offer F1. Given the abysmal performance of F1 these days, it certainly seems worth a try to me.
Eric Mogensen - Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
It's come down to this after 30 years of dedicated interest in Formula One: I like Pitpass more than watching a race.
Well done Chris and Pitpass team, your site is always a good read and your independence of opinion breathes life into things that don't have much.
A not so well done to Bernie, banks, the FIA, teams, drivers, and sponsors because you have collectively painted yourselves into a corner, and not a very interesting one at that - it must be a Tilke corner.
Francis Newman - Twyford, UK
I have avidly watched pretty much every F1 race that has been shown on TV over the last 40 years or more, the vast majority of them live at whatever time of day they were shown. I have been to at least one GP live every year for the last 20. So you could say I am a committed F1 fan. For the first time ever I considered turning off the TV during the the Spanish GP the weekend before last - I was so bored. I never thought the day would come when I would consider that and in talking to friends in the pub on the Monday night, all of them petrolheads like me, we all felt the same way. Refuelling may have been a contrivance, but without even that there is pretty much NOTHING other than the weather or car failure left to disturb the post first corner order of a race. I don't call that racing - let alone entertainment. F1 needs some radical blue sky thinking.
David Tarbutt - Hampshire. UK
Kill the aerodynamics. Only allow enough wing to keep the cars on the track ie: to stop them lifting off at speed. Make the grip mechanical, not aerodynamic. Top speeds may be higher but braking distances would be longer and corner speeds would be less due to less grip. We might even get 4 wheel drifts back. Remember Ronnie Peterson and Jochen Rindt in the 70s. The tyres were pretty wide then.
Harder tyres that don't form marbles off line, therefore allowing the whole width of the track to be used for overtaking.
Get rid of artificial pointless regulations like not allowing cars to be worked on after qualifying. Conditions change, so should the cars, and only have three tyres, dry, wet and intermediate.
Have a minimum amount of suspension movement and increase ground clearance.
Allow spare cars. Ridiculous seeing the (arguably) best F1 driver unable to take part in qualifying because he had broken his race car in practice. Again, the spectators were deprived for no good reason.
Save money by cutting down on computerised electronics. Only electronics allowed to be an engine cut out to prevent over revving, manual gearboxes with direct mechanical linkage to gearstick. No ability to adjust differentials between corners and no electronics on steering wheel. No telemetry link between car and pits. Let the drivers work it out for themselves.
Free up engine regulations, why restrict to V8s?
OK, I am living in dreamland, but just go to any historic car race meeting and see how much more fun it is with overtaking and drifting. Much more power than grip. Simple.
I did enjoy the on board shots of Fernando Alonso at Monaco when he was behind the backmarkers. There might not be much actual racing there, but just keeping it out of the barriers for an entire race is impressive enough.
Dave Kane - Scottsdale, AZ USA
The cheapest grandstand ticket at Monaco this year was something like $750 US, I believe. In 1978 I when to the race on a package from Grand Prix Tours, I believe, off an ad in Autosport. We flew from Dulles to London, hooked-up with tour and back to Dulles for not much more than the cost of one ticket at today's ticket price. Our hotel roof overlooked St. Devoite and the run up the hill. From our balcony we could see them exit the tunnel and the Le Tabac corner was right below us.
We also had the run of the paddock and I was taking 8mm sound movies from a tree above the old pit entrance. Good luck doing that today. Bobby Rahal and Howdy Holmes might have helped us with some credentials as they ran the F3 race against Alain Prost and Elio DeAngelis.
Wonder what that same trip would cost today? I think I'd faint if I knew what the Paddock Club costs are these days.
All professional entertainment today is out of control, concerts, pro sports, college sports…all of them.
By the way, we flew on the same flight from London with many of the Teams crew and owners, i.e, Ken Tyrrell and Tim Schenken
Seats in the stand shown in our picture cost £338 ($487), however, there were four stands in which the cheapest seats were £205 ($295) - Editor
Gary Hall - South Africa
I am besotted with F1 and have been since the early 80s.However over the last few years the commercial side of the sport has taken precedence over the goal of F1. I know that without the spectator value and of course the money F1 would not be where it is.
There is however no unknowns in the running order of the teams during the season. The quickest cars remain quickest for the season and only weather and reliability issues change the finishing order. This is caused by the freeze on engine development, uniform tyre for all the teams and virtually no development testing of the cars, period. What are three test sessions before the season starts and less than a handful during the season.
The FIA harp on about cost cutting but old Bernie wants to see a gazillion races in a year which of course only benefits him. If more of the revenue was passed on to the teams, costs would be less of an issue and virtually every race could have a new leading team. Bring back the decision of what tyre compounds the individual teams wish to use at each track, the refueling strategies, innovative aero packages within a more balanced and reasonable ruling and last of all bring back an open engine policy and perhaps even reduce the capacity further and remove the rev limit.
I believe this would be the solution of overtaking and evening out the odds of winning. Aerodynamics alone are not the reason for the lack of overtaking, identical tyres,engine with virtually the same output and almost identical aero packages are.
Mike Knight
Empty seats at Monaco sends the stongest message yet about F1's real appeal; genuine spectacle and proper racing are essential ingredients for its long term stability. Look no further than the bikes. Rightly or wrongly motor sport is different from classic sports in that it is currently in a permanent state of reinvention. The equation of spectator and driver interests and engineers/manufacturers is clearly either extremely difficult to balance or there are no rule makers with the vision or the power to impose themselves. The FIA have some thinking to do.
Sven Orup
You can fool all people for a while, many for some time but you can not fool all the people all the time.
The situation in formula one all boils down to the fact that it has not for a long time been run for the fans and paying spectators. The people who run F1 has only one interest and that is to extract as much revenue as possible for FOM.
More and more fans have realized this and vote with their feet.
Barry Boardman
I am an old hand. Team involvement from 1972-1975, sponsorship, on track PR, member of IRPA, Involved every other weekend.It was great. It was motor racing and that is what happened. Today it is not motor racing , more like follow my leader except when the weather is bad. That's when things happen but it still is no longer motor racing.
Watching Alonso finding his way through the back markers at Monaco was racing. The TV boys were right to concentrate on that as they provided a good spectacle.
One of your earlier writers spoke of every new innovation being banned as it arose. That is the problem. No innovation. Nothing that separates the new from the old. Nothing to stimulate the brain cells and 500+ skilled engineers back at base having no real objective.
Petty wrangling over speeding in the pit lane, ride heights, overtaking where one should not, petulant drivers throwing steering wheels and so on. Come on. Time these drivers started to go back to being racers not skilled drivers.
Watch an ALMS, LMS race and see LMP1 cars threading their way through the slower cars, see the Indy car races on street circuits where they actually overtake to find something ressembling motor racing.
If F1 is to last then it has to be changed FAST. Who does this I do not know but it probably starts with the rule makers.
It is plain that despite all the comments made in the past years no-one has listened and the sport ? has continued to be a blinkered ideal for those involved. The punter is unfortunately ignored.
Matthew Nelson - Minnesota, USA
One change would bring it back to life... raise the minimum ride height to something rational for a car. Keep all The aero you want- just raise the ride height. Drafting and passing would be back instantly. Ground effect is the Real problem.
John De Quincey
Put it this way, I fell asleep about 1/3 into the Monaco GP. Did I miss anything? No.
Harry Ross - Vancouver, Canada
I have actually enjoyed this season's results, if not all of the actual races. Bahrain was a complete snooze-fest but the weather conspired to offer us some outstanding spectacles in subsequent contests... Many respondents to date have pooh-poohed the vagaries introduced by the weather but that is a legitimate part of F1. If you want to take the weather out of the picture, go watch NASCAR or the Indy Series in America... They stop running when it sprinkles because oval tracks aren't safe in the wet. The common denominator there though is that NASCAR and Indy are as close to a one-design series as you can get and still have a little credibility.
The most interesting thing though is how this season has confounded conventional wisdom. Last year, 6 races in, Jenson was bringing his opening streak of wins to a close... This year, we have had 4 different race winners and guess what: Vettel isn't cleaning Webber's clock, Hamilton isn't dominating Button, Rosberg is showing Schumacher what the back of a Mercedes looks like and while Alonso is ahead of Massa, it is not at the level of total domination yet. Nobody is dominating the field yet and a damn good thing that is because that is going to push real racing further into the season before folks start playing the "points" games.
What hasn't changed is the constant prattle and whinging about rules, ride heights, F-ducts, Y-fronts and oops... that last one was a different discussion. I would like to see a return to the days where the "F" in F1 stands for Formula rather than the apparent convergence on a single design spec. It is exciting to see the short wheelbase cars rip up Monaco & Hungary and the LWB cars smoke everyone at Monza, The rules on engine re-use should get ripped up and replaced with an overall budget cap... Most professional sports leagues in the Americas have a salary cap... It is up to the Manager to decide where he gets to spend his magic beans... on defence, a goalie or offence... Why can't this work for F1? With the degree of sophistication that a Chris Sylt brings to financial analysis, surely this could be policed... If you want to spend on Aero updates... great... your engine won't be that hot... Maybe a great engine will overcome aero deficiencies... Will 4WD and smaller wheels provide enough aero advantage to overcome the weight penalty... It is a gamble... It will also see some cars dominate at some circuits and other cars dominate at others at least as long as we stay away from the Tilke homogenous circuit. As ugly as it was, I liked the Walrus Williams from a few years back... Something different.
Anyway... It will be interesting to see what transpires over the remaining 2/3 of a season. On the west coast of North America I will still be getting up at 5AM for the European races... Spare a little thought for us with the sleep dripping from our eyes next time you watch a race with your afternoon libation of choice in hand.
Martin Atkinson - Auckland, New Zealand
I have followed Formula One from well before Aryton Senna's death.
During the period of Aryton Senna, I often sat (barely) on the edge of my seat (often standing), absolutely fixed on the Television screen, rapt up in the battles between Senna and Prost, and the other drivers of that time. Since then, there have been races or similar excitement, no so classic and meaningful, but entertaining none the less, but that occurrance has become more and more an exception than the rule.
However, over the last few years, more and more often, I have found myself using the Fast Forward on my digital recorder. As I live in the Southern Hemisphere, race times are usually scheduled in the middle of the night, which makes live viewing ill considered. All too often, the driving and drivers seem to take second place to the event itself, in a larger sense. That is to say, the fact that a Formula One event is in progress seems to be considered, at least by FOM the related administration and commercial ownership, the most important thing. The fact that the vehicles involved seem to be monotonously following each other around the track, with little or no change to order or circumstance, (other than the odd exception from accidents, technical failure, driver mistake or incidents in the Pitt Lane), means - from the audience perspective - good driving and competition seem assumed as of secondary importance. Yet, from my perspective they are primary in any Formula One event.
I find the skill and raw courage of Formula One drivers breathtaking. However, I find the spectacle of one car following another, lap after lap, devoid of mostly everything I find exciting and attention grabbing. Exciting motor sport is all about competition. If the drivers are at the pinnicle of their trade as Professional Drivers, what is the point of running events in which they barely get to compete? While drivers may well be technically trying their hardest to win the race, or place highly, visually it is not evident. The real spectacle of Formula One is competition in action, which means passing and close and competitive driving. Not one car following another in a train for an hour and a half.
Formula One is dying a slow death ... Arrogance and greed are squeezing the essence of the spirit of F1 and draining the excitement from the Sport.
Rafael del Castillo
I've been a keen F1 follower since I was a little kid. I was only around 5 when my childhood hero was Rene Arnoux. Since then I've closely followed each F1 season, and I can tell you that the last one I fell genuinely excited for was the last season before Damon Hill's retirement (1998). In fact for me 1999 was the beginning of the end, with the introduction of the four-grooved tyres, and since then things have only got worse. Incidentally the same happened with the WRC championship, when a long series of absurd restrictions, plus an uncalled-for long list of new events, were added… but that's another (yet similar) story.
The thing is that due to safety restrictions (which is something totally understandable) the championship has been come terribly dull as a result. F1 is no longer a place where the unexpected can take place, quite simply because is played on a totally controlled environment. And that's because of pure construction, it's designed to be that way. Unfortunately that makes it very boring too. The old days of 150+ mile runs on bathtubs with skinny tires, or the Turbo era 1000bhp qualifying engines, are never going to come back. Is not the restrictions on testing, or the difference on engine development, or even tires that do not allow overtaking, but the need for safety.
Do you want to see more overtaking taking place? Easy! Just limit aerodynamics aids. Tell teams that they can only use wings that generate "x" lbs of weight and soon you'll have cars skidding on the curves and pilots driving to the limit that can effectively overtake others using less 'gusto' at the wheel. But also you'll have accidents happening, and that's not something the FIA, or the pilots, want to see happening. Will a sports governing body allow rules that reduce the safety of its participants? Quite honestly, I can't see that ever happening
Let's be serious, the days of heroic driving are over. The new rules allow room for surprises (like Brawn last year or Red Bull this year when they get the new restrictions/restraints right), but do nothing for the visual appeal of the sport (or even to reduce costs, as teams just divert money from testing, i.e., into other departments)… F1 is little more than slot racing and I can't see how that will ever change now. Do you really like motor racing? Then tune on the next round of the Le Mans series or any GT class event.
Vaughan Barry - Australia
From a user community standpoint, Formula one is still stuck in the 1990's. While there have been countless surveys, and whizz-bang iphone app's, there is still no place that I know of where I can be part of an online 'community'. The 'rights' to anything formula one are tightly locked down. There appears to be no way to see some different camera angles of incidents throughout the races. Why is it that there is no web site (and I suggest part offormula1.com) where incidents from the race are shown in all camera angles. Even better, have some manner of forum where fans can comment.
For example, when Alonso squeezed Massa of the track in the pit entry, had Alonso crossed the white line? I tried to find out, but couldn't. How similar was this incident to the incident that resulted in a penalty for Hamilton at Spa? During the race, there are only so many replays that can be shown, but this limit does not apply after the race.
My other gripe is that the scope of development is too limited, and too intangible. The chances of aero' development for a car travelling at 300 km/h ever making it to something that I get to drive is laughable. I would be far more interested in seeing development that allows innovation that may be applicable outside high end motor racing. The rules should not say an x litre V8 - they should provide some constraint within which development can be made - such as a fuel-energy budget for the weekend, a restricted inlet size, or something in this fashion.
The official formula one site is still a monologue of heavily sanitised, politically palatable material being delivered to consumers. This needs to be made more interactive, and allow user input (more like pitpass). I am certain that by engaging enthusiasts more, and by allowing development that isn't so boring and intangible the interest in this sport can only increase.
Paul Harper - Australia
I firmly believe that this season is shaping to be a continuation of the last 2-3 years. Where we see more than half the field notch up podiums, half a dozen GP winners and both driver's and constructor's title races that go down to the wire. I am thoroughly enjoying the racing right now... the on track tension both inter and intra team is crazy... Felipe and Fernando, Lewis and Webber, Schumacher and all of the mid field (it seems a different car each race returns to parc ferme with silver paint grazed over it's side pods.)
I agree that Bahrain was nothing short of boring, in fact, I ended up with a good, yet rare 8 hours sleep that night.
I also noted that there were large blue bays of empty seats in Monaco. My assessment is that this is mainly to do with the ticket prices for the Monaco event. I researched these recently, dreaming of a cheeky fortnight away in Europe. I was amazed to see that 3 day package deals were not offered (via the web) and that my seat would progressively increase in price to a total spend of almost AUD $1000. Maybe my research was inaccurate, though I think this would have had a detrimental impact on the number of average European race-goers that could afford a week away in the principality.
I wonder how many of those empty seats were purchased, yet remained empty at the mercy of a certain Icelandic volcano?
Rick Wang - Shanghai, China
My 12-year old Son and I have been watching F1 since he was 4 and we both think this season so far has more positives than negatives. First of all, we like the new points system because after 6 races, its a close race for the titles. We like having more teams on the grid although the back markers sometime can be an irritation during races. My son is especially excited with Michael Schumacher back because during his early childhood, Schumacher dominated. We both prefer to see fueling during pit stops because it just adds more strategy, excitement into the sport. We attended the Shanghai race like always and felt that this year's race was the most exciting since F1 came to China.
However, the atmosphere at the race was nothing to speak of and in fact, boring. Only a couple of vendors came to set up booths and all the merchandise they sold were like OLD STUFF. Only Mercedes GP and McLaren put up some nice booths with merchandise. It almost felt like the Chinese government treated the event as its last and didn't put any effort or money behind it (End of a 7 year contract.... We felt it!). To get more people out to the track, a proper racing atmosphere needs to happen. In Japan, Suzuka is great and racing aside, its just fun going out there to the track to soak up the atmosphere. But after all is said, we still remain passionate about the sport and find this season quite exciting.
Mike Plunkett
Regarding the season as a whole, so far so good (Bahrain excepted - not a good venue to start the season at!) The new points system seems to be working and to have so many drivers still in contention at this stage is definitely encouraging. Compare and contrast with last year when at this stage Jenson had won five out of the first six races and there was even talk of him having wrapped up the championship by the time the British Grand Prix came around. We saw then how a team's early qualitative lead can be quickly erroded and I fully expect the same thing to happen with Red Bull this year, especially since it's the likes of McLaren and Ferrari who are doing the chasing.
As for this year's Monaco GP, it wasn't the most exciting race ever but then Monaco often isn't without the intervention of the weather or a truly spectacular accident. I noticed the swathes of empty seats in the Monaco stands as well and I would suggest that this was caused by moving the race forward a week this year. Monaco has been the one fixed point in the F1 calendar for decades and I can't help thinking that moving such an iconic event, even by only a week, disrupted the plans of more than a few race fans. My partner and I had been planning to go this year, but the change of date meant that couldn't and I very much doubt we were the only ones.
Nicole Sanders - South Africa
I cant believe that stewards can be "to busy" to notice a thing like throwing the steering wheel out of a car and the driver gets away with it. Yet when there is a rule with so many grey areas it gets used on (in my opinion) one of the most exciting moves of the race. What is sad is that F1 is being marred by politics and rules again. I watch F1 for enjoyment and to learn something. Get your act together FIA. We have enough politics and rule bungles in this country we don't need it in F1 as well.
Robert Passman - Maryland, USA
There are lots of good comments and the answer lie in a compilation of many of the points. While the need to reduce, or at least contain costs, makes sense, this and, perhaps the longer term regulations have led to the current processions, impacted only by the weather which then lets strategy play a part along with luck.
Prohibiting testing sounded nice but it prevents teams from really making substantive improvements from race to race. They can "try" things for a bit in practice on Friday but the business of collecting tyre and fuel data for the race has to take precedence. For example, last year when the double diffuser seemed to be the main reason for Brawn's early dominance, the other teams could have closed the gap quicker had testing been allowed. Engine equalization is another mistake, in my opinion.
If F1 is all about the drivers, than put them all in the same car. If it is about F1, including individual teams and their fans and their drivers and the cars they build, than let them go. Testing allowed for more information to get to the fans between races. What do we read now - well, Mercedes has dropped their appeal of Schumacher's penalty. F1 is going to make a tyre decision for next year soon. Everyday for about a week, a different manufacturer announced interest.
Oh yes, Damon Hill's hate mail - that's a real corker. I could hardly wait to read about that.
Now, the cream always does rise to the top - Adrian Newey and Red Bull being the latest and prime example, and without an F-Duct. But with such small gaps in performance with 0.1 sec or less through a given sector, there isn't enough differential to make a difference. Like it or not, F1 is an expensive sport. Ferrari has dominated frequently but they have had their bummers. Likewise with McLaren. With Mercedes moving in and Brawn (also a proven winner) chasing Newey, losing the rules and allowing for innovation will make improvements.
I am sure the aero boys are working on near field vortex behavior. If someone solves that problem, you'll see some passing. There was a big hooray for Virgin Racing's, CFC only car. So much for that. Computational Fluid Dynamics is the starting point, not the end game. If you restrict everyone to their desktop (well perhaps more than a desktop computer) as the only design tool, you might see lots of different results. I'll still bet on Newey and Brawn.
Anyway, the rules need to allow for innovation. Get rid of the ridiculous tyre rule. Eliminating refueling was fine. F1 got along without it before but everyone can change tyres in 2-3 seconds. Strategy goes out the window. Monaco and Alonso being the only exception. This was demonstrated years ago when Schumacher was put to the rear so they knew what to do. Look at the troubles Alonso had getting past cars that were several seconds slower - no easy task.
Re-institute testing between races, provide some latitude for the engineers. and if you really want to be green (I don't believe Bernie and the gang care) give the team 100 litres of fuel for the race and let them do what they want to get to the end. If they build the wings out of solar panels all the better. If someone throws in a turbine, so what. As an early comment mentioned, every car on the planet comes with anti-skid brakes, but not the pinnacle of motor racing.
Jaime Grant - Canada
I must admit the season is not as exiting as I would have hoped. Perhaps we need to put a dome over each circuit and douse the track with artificial rain every so often to make it more interesting. But seriously, what we need to do is to get the regulations changed. The world is going green, so why not open up the regulations governing engines. Anything goes. Be as creative as you can. The catch should be that you have a very limited amount of fuel for the race. say start next season with 20% less than we are using now and drop it by 4% each season. Give more allowance for greener fuels like ethanol and bio diesel and hydrogen.
The next step would be to put heavier regulation on aerodynamics. Reduce rear wing size and allow the cars to run closer for better overtaking. And finally, if you want more people at the races, you have to reduce ticket prices. Best way to do this is for the FiA to ask way less of the promoters of the races. Bernie is rich enough.
Wyman Pattee - Canada
F1 must stop trying to be all things to all people. F1 can't be "green" and "safe" and "commercial" and "international" "the pinnacle" and "all about technology" and on and on. Too many goals and too many conflicting aims.
F1 racing used to be the thing that mattered. The race, the series, held sway. F1 was a a top-notch series for teams and drivers and they raced on demanding tracks (demanding bravery, skill, tough but lively machines) and they did it for the sake of competition. Money held it all together but it wasn't the be all and end all.
Now F1 racing takes the back seat. What matters is commerce. Races increasingly take place where no one but a few sponsors care. Things like hotels with flashy lights, the organizer's ability to banish darkness, insane funding for embarrassingly overblown facilities matter more. Government's shouldn't have to throw taxpayer's money at Bernie & Co. to get a race. Even if the income from the tourists pays it back, it is inheritently, fundamentally wrong.
Stop playing with the points system, stop changing the sporting rules and the technical rules every five minutes, stop flying around the world on multiple 747s and then when you land shout about "going green." Stop shunning the core audience of people who want to see F1 - including the cars and people - live and up close. Stop the elitist, phony crap.
Many hard core fans who have followed F1 for years got past much-loved drivers being killed, famous teams closing up shop, the FISA/FOCA war, and on and on, but they can't get past the current "we're F1 and you should care about us and what we do just because of that."
Kate Webber - California, US
Aside from watching the very talented Alonso run up through the pack, the only bits of real entertainment from the Monaco GP were Barrichello's tantrum, and Lewis Hamilton once again displaying his true colors as an upper class twit by verbally chastising his own team on the radio. He may be a talented driver, but were I a team owner, I would never hire him.
I've been watching F1 for decades. At one time, if a team developed a bit of kit that gave them a competitive edge, the other teams would have to scramble and do likewise, or continue to flail around at the back of the pack. The past couple of decades, it seems like whenever someone clever comes up with some new gadget that provides a competitive edge, the thing is immediately protested, then outlawed. I suppose the FIA feels this keeps the sport more competitive, but in my opinion, it does just the opposite. Management of the sport is currently overrun with greedy men - how much is enough, Bernie? The sport is suffering, and therefore fans are suffering, many to the point of giving up altogether. They claim they are controlling costs, but shouldn't the teams realize that F1 is an expensive sport? If you can't pay the freight, stay off the track, right?
So, if they really want to cut costs, instead of limiting engine size and the number of engines, just remove most of the aerodynamic bits and harden the tires, as so many others have suggested.
Ainslie Ensor - Bridgwater, Somerset UK
Well it hasn't been as bad as I feared after the bore fest of Race 1! Indeed at times it has been quite enthralling (thanks to rain, team errors and Alonso's crash at Monaco). However, I too have noticed swathes of empty seats - although I suspect this has more to do with the cost of attending GP's than the actual racing.
So which of the rule changes have worked this year?
New points system - I haven't seen any banzai attempts to get an extra place (Michael's last corner move excepted - and that was deemed illegal anyway!?!).
No refueling - probably a negative because after a few laps strategies seemed fixed (weather apart).
Aero restrictions - not much improvement - but I suppose at least it hasn't got worse this year.
What do we want? We want more competition (i.e. more real racing!!!) So my answers
1: Two tyre companies supplying rubber - a good old tyre war will bring in another variable which will help stir up the pot - also do away with the two compound rule (hasn't achieved much if anything)
2: Stop outlawing innovation (double diffusers, f ducts etc etc) let the clever teams reap rewards - I am not convinced by cost saving arguments and judging by published financial accounts neither are the big teams
3: Refueling - another variable to increase uncertainty and keep the interest
4: Aero regs that really put a premium on mechanical grip
5: Oh and keep the new boys going - I am just waiting for Lotus to get in the mix and put some egg on face of some established team(s) (or is that just nostalgia for C Chapman and J Clark?)
And to get the people - cheaper admission prices - someone in FOTA / CVC needs to look at the elasticity of demand for sports / entertainment tickets - in the next few years "value for money" is going to become the overriding consideration for many many people.
Will I carry on watching - probably I have been following motor sport and F1 since before all the current F1 drivers were born! Best (open wheel) racing I have ever seen? British Formula 3 of the early 70's - think on FOTA et al.
Russell Whitton - UK
I have followed F1 since the mid-80s and have witnessed races of high drama and mind-numbing boredom over the years. Where does this year rank? Probably about halfway up the list - with three edge-of-the-seaters and three processional snore-fests the jury's still out. It has to be said, the exciting races have all been spiced up in some way by the intervention of rain. To put things in perspective, Monaco is normally the highlight of my season as it is often filled with drama and unpredictability. Not so on Sunday, when I found myself snoozing off my Sunday lunch midway through the race!
My view is that the problem is not just with steward decisions or Tilke tracks, FIA politics or sponsor dollars, F-ducts or testing limitations. No, the problem is more fundamental and can be summarised in one word 'regulation'. Since the early 80's there has been a steady stream of rules and directives, sporting and technical, which have turned a sport into a high speed merri-go-round. It has stifled innovation, it has stifled driver courage, but most importantly it has stifled excitement. True the sport is safer than it has ever been, but surely freedom of technical innovation, freedom to research new and clever engineering solutions and freedom to allow 'racing' can go hand-in-hand with safety. The teams have a vested interest and are as guilty as the regulators, for they have always put their commercial interests ahead of that of the supporters of the sport. The other truth is that the investment of money and effort by a handful of individuals has turned a once mildly popular sport into a global mega-brand which has to 'behave' in the eyes of the investors who now have such large stakes at risk.
But Formula One is at a turning point, will it become so 'fixed' it is no more a sport than American Wrestling, or will it become more pure again and allow competition - for that is what it lacks. One make tyres, fixed engines, homologated chassis, single spec ECUs, strict limitations on technical innovation, not to mention the myriad of mystifying sporting regulations, suck the lifeblood out of the sport!! In my ideal world, the rule book should be torn up and a return to a simpler 'Formula' where engineers can engineer and drivers can race, and the cleverest teams and bravest drivers will win as in the days before the Concorde agreements…
Dick Baarse
The problem stays the overtaking and that is no wonder because all the cars have more or less the same specs through all the tech restrictions applied to tame the costs of development and fabrication. What F1 need is only money restriction and some safety rules and then free tech rules so we get all differents designs in wintertime , depending in which area they want to spend the money, one with superior engine others better brakes or aero or whatever so the cars have not all the same brakingpoints or accelaration or roadholding . Passing will be possible again as cars will behave differently in corners or straights.
The budgetcap with free tech was a brillant plan of Max . Time to bring it in and overrule for one time the wishes of Ferrari , F1 is tooooo boring now .
And for the point counting 3 or 4 (worst ) results must be scrapped so the driver can take a little more risks and is not so terrible afraid of not bringing the car home each race .
Stephen Morgan
On the face of it this should be a classic season with several different race winners and a championship that is wide open, but actually I think F1 is facing a major crisis and this is simply because the fans continue to be ignored.
I responded to your talking point after the first Valencia Grand Prix and my experience was such that I said for the first time since 1984 I would not be attending further Grands Prix until and unless the lot of the spectator improved. Ok, I did relent and went to the British Grand Prix last year because it was the "last one" at Silverstone, but I did not travel to any overseas races, and I have no plans to attend any including the British this year, and I see nothing on the horizon that I think will persuade me otherwise.
That said, I have not given up on motor racing and do attend many events, just not F1 at the moment as I don't feel I am valued. F1 is expensive, but so long as value for money is given it's not a problem. What are problems are rules which make overtaking impossible despite assurances year after year that "the show" will be improved. This year we have had two great races simply because of the rain, in the dry we have processions of such dullness that I have actually switched the TV off during race coverage. Quality of racing is the single biggest issue, and if all that is required to improve the racing is to reduce of grip and allow cars to follow close behind each other then surely the rule makers could sort that one out pretty quickly, if they were interested. I am no technical expert, but as there is no tyre war then surely tyre specification can easily be changed to produce a comparatively gripless compound. I would also advocate getting rid of sequential gear boxes to re-introduce the possibility of fumbled changes. It is often argued that F1 needs to be relevant to road car design, so perhaps the flappy paddles are here to stay, but the front and rear wings have little relevance to road cars so they could surely go. How about returning to metal brake discs, there aren't many road cars around that use more exotic materials, and yet they could really benefit by shortening braking distances whereas F1 could only benefit by increasing them?
Improving the racing would be of benefit to both the TV and race track spectator. Not treating spectators like idiots would also help. Time and again we have heard how poor are the facilities at Silverstone, and perhaps things could be better, and maybe the VIPs do find the Northamptonshire red carpet not quite so luxurious as at some of the new venues, but as a paying spectator, I fail to see how its facilities are inferior. I love Spa but its spectator facilities are without doubt inferior and while Monza may be better than Spa, it really offers nothing better than Silverstone; Valencia, a new track and so presumably state of the art, in year one at least, was a pathetic excuse for a race venue, easily the worst track (at almost any level of motorsport) that I have visited.
Having said all that I have not completely lost faith in F1, indeed I find the empty grandstands encouraging. Whilst it is self evident that F1 doesn't really care about the spectator who attends the track, F1 does care about advertising revenue. How much longer will the advertisers want to spend their budgets on a sport that has been deserted by its fans?
Sanjay Mazumder - Southgate, London
The Monaco grand prix is THE most boring one on the whole calendar. What is the point of having a race where you can't overtake - I mean physically can't because you will hit a wall. It is just plain ridiculous. We should try to have a glitzy launch or after party at Monaco, but please lets not race there any more.
When was the last time there was an overtaking move between 2 evenly matched cars in Monaco? I have been following the sport for over 20 years and really struggle to remember. As someone who has watched every race in these 20 years, even I find myself flicking channels during Monaco.
The solution, they must create a section of the track where it is wider and has multiple corner entry lines. I can't immediately see where this is, but maybe they reformat the swimming pool area, by building out to sea.
While reading the various comments, etc. and then watching a clip of BTCC I have had a brainwave about how to make overtaking possible. Lets make the regulation that the front wings are much much much stronger and that there needs to be some kind of bumper on the rear of each vehicle. This would then allow a "friendly" nudge in true BTCC and we clearly split the men from the boys.
Bill Rogers - Canada
So far for me this season is fairly boring and predictable, with not a lot of entertainment value to keep my interest. Other than Schuie 's come back, that is.
Suggested improvement: The sport would be more interesting- in my opinion- if during caution periods involving the safety car, you lined the cars up for double-file, rolling restarts. Not the current, strung out single file version. Cars should not be allowed to accelerate on the restart until the green flag waves, either. Also, I think that the safety car needs to be deployed more often than it is currently.
Changes such as these would potentially result in bunching up the cars several times during any given race, and make for more overtaking opportunities as a result, as well as providing more excitement for the fans (which is woefully lacking at the moment). These sorts of changes could also bring pit stop strategies under yellow into play i.e. NASCAR and INDY racing, and again add to fans' enjoyment.
At the end of the day, in my opinion, F1 is a great sport in danger of falling further into obscurity than it already has unless somebody does something drastic to make it more entertaining.
David Morgan-Kirby
I have been following Formula 1 closely since 1965 but nowadays my interest in the actual 'racing' is as minimal as the action.
Most of the circuits are not suitable for over-taking with the current cars and nothing will change until the cars do. To have overtaking you have to have cars in the braking area longer, and cars that can get close to each other going into that area. Easy isn't it? Less powerful brakes, no aero grip (worth speaking of anyway), more powerful engines and harder tyres.
In several weeks F1 returns to Montreal where the past has generally provided good races in front of massive crowds who pack the place on all three days. I believe this year will be a real barometer of the state of F1. Canada has not been affected by the global economic crisis nearly as badly as the US and Europe and if we see empty seats like the other races we'll have to conclude that the general public are voting with their feet rather than not being able to afford it.
Ando Thomas - Australia
I still religiously follow all the races via television, and have to admit that snoozing during a race has happened on rare occasions. I must also add that this has happened less recently with Mark Webber having better luck, but staying awake hasn't been due to exciting racing - it was due to paranoia that something "wrong" could happen. Weather and failures are what we are watching out for, not racing... This may be fine for those that get aroused by big-budget technical marvels however I want to watch racing and not a procession that appears on par with vehicle testing. Can F1 still do racing and keep its identity? I would hate it more if F1 became too akin to another series therefore making its existence pointless.
We've heard varying suggestions including changing aerodynamics however even if F1 apply a serious change (such as removing wings altogether) soon the gurus will get us back to status quo; fast cars will be at the front, slow cars will be at the back and isn't that the point of F1? But if we want to introduce racing again, can it be done to give us racing in a formula that can be identified as different to others?
Its a hard one, but here is a little proposal. The engine controlled by standard software that changes maximum allowable horsepower output based on the driver's position. The further back you are, the more horsepower you are given. Cap the maximum horsepower, have fixed horsepower settings for each position, make the different settings per position just enough to allow a trailing car to overtake regardless of circuit and aerodynamics, and allow different engines as their varied characteristics would very much still be important (acceleration, etc...). A driver can work his way to the front, and a better car would still make it easier, yet if you're not blessed with one you don't necessarily become a barely-mobile chicane.
No push-to-pass and no kerrs, no reinterpretations of aero regulations and definitely no "I was faster and a better driver but the track/aero/broken-toe-nail stopped me from overtaking" excuses.
Norman Wilson - Australia
To me technology is, and always has been the heart of F1, I am sure it is to most keen followers of F1 feel the same way.
These well informed petrol heads probably fill around 20% of the seats. Perhaps we can fill another 30% or so with people who are sort of half interested. The remaining seats must be filled by people who have only a passing interest in F1, or none at all. May we call them the 50%.
My view is that the 50% is the group that needs to be encouraged, both to fill seats and spread the F1 message.
What does Mr. or Mrs. 50% see now? A lot of noisy cars with advertising signs and bugger all else. Why not give names to the things they have just paid money to are look at?
Is it too much to expect that the cars carry some identification (and full marks to the car that does). Further, it is quite absurd to expect someone with only a passing, or no interest in F1 to commit to memory the colour scheme of all the drivers helmets so they can identify (or relate to) the driver. The drivers name should be painted (readably) on the cockpit sides.
I hear the teams complaining about the loss of advertising space, but a futile argument, if all were to give up the same area, the forces of supply and demand would quickly compensate.
A number are blaming the bloke with the white hair and his mates, I would doubt that they are the problem, the 50% don't even know they exist!
Brian Griffiths
As with most readers of Pitpass, I consider myself a rabid F1 fan. I have watched every TV Qualification and Race for about 30 years and have attended F1 race weekends at Silverstone, Brands Hatch, Indianapolis and after moving to Canada every race at Montreal since 1993. With the race at Montreal in 2009 being cancelled (Due to the never ending greed of Mr. E) I was able to reflect on my financial contribution to F1 racing.
With the money we would normally spend on the Montreal F1 weekend (Thursday through Monday for us with all hotels charging 3-4 times the norm) we spent 15 nights touring the US South West and West Coast in a rental Ford Mustang. We visited Los Angeles, Scottsdale, AZ. Grand Canyon, Vegas, drove up the Pacific Coast Highway from Marina Del Rey to San Francisco. Visited Napa and Sonoma wineries and basically had a blast. I'll admit that our airfares were paid for with airline points but otherwise we spent about the same as our annual F1 weekend in Montreal.
Bernie and co. you are pushing away core supporters and we will probably not be back....