Daysleeper wrote:

Of course, Renault became Lotus, who then became Renault again didn't they? Don't know why but I had always just assumed that Lotus had just rebranded an actual French design team rather than actually being UK based.

Back in the 1970s, Renault was indeed a fully French operation. But the Renault team of the 2000s had its origin in the British Toleman/Benetton team.

Daysleeper wrote:

An engine manufacturer in F1 has next to nothing to do with its actual brand. Merc F1 engines are developed and made in the UK, as are Honda’s. So Ironically, the new Merc Project 1 hyper-car will actually have a British engine I think Renault are pretty much 100% French though, and Ferrari are definitely Italian. It’s more about brand recognition and financing rather than a car maker actually bringing any technical skill or knowledge.

One thing that stuck with me is that Ferrari makes more money selling things like t-shirts rather than cars. Was pretty eye opening.

Aesma wrote:

Also it's not about the brand as I don't like most Merc cars (good taxis at best) whereas I'm a huge Ferrari fan (until they make a SUV...).

Of course they make a SUV, it's a license to print money.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Renault/Alpine is 50-50 Anglo-French. The Brits handle the car design, the French handle the engine.

Seems less than optimal...

Reminds me of: https://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/susan/joke/heaven.htm

Revelation wrote:

Aesma wrote:

Also it's not about the brand as I don't like most Merc cars (good taxis at best) whereas I'm a huge Ferrari fan (until they make a SUV...).

Of course they make a SUV, it's a license to print money.

Ferrari first announced their SUV, the Purosange, in 2018 with an expected launch date in 2021. That has been delayed, but it is coming for sure. It actually looks quite good.

The Porsche Cayenne pretty much saved the company. Without the Cayenne there would be no 911s, Boxters etc.
If SUVs enables Ferrari to continue making sports cars, then let them make SUVs. Not that i can afford one.

https://www.caranddriver.com/ferrari/purosangue

Great win for Bottas today running the table. I am happy he got one more win under Mercedes and that he finishes strong for the rest of the season.
I know Lewis is pissed, but had he listened to Bono life he did in Russia and pitted earlier (and had a line to Jenson Button) he would have had more time to catch Leclerc and Checo to maybe snag 3rd and only be one point back (or tied if he could have got the fastest lap). It was very interesting that the inters would be bad initially and then improved after enough wear.

I think Mercedes will win the constructors and probably snag it after Brazil.
The driver's will go down to Abu Dhabi in December.

Also (not the biggest fans of them) kudos to Redbull for a 2,3 finish today and they simply were on it. Max is up 6 points going into Austin in 2 weeks which is still close enough that anything can happen in the remaining 6 races. Happy to see a race where I can sleep in Sunday and watch in the afternoon.

It would have been a gamble but the inters seemed to be able to go to the end. I would have mainly been worried about the performance really dropping off but it didn't seem likely (and Lewis thought the same).

I felt exactly like Button was commenting, that the team tricked Lewis into changing tires, not a good move, at least give him all the info and your reasoning.

Also it's all well and dandy trying stuff but Vettel in slicks was ridiculous. Try that during the last ten laps maybe, not when it's still clearly so wet.

StarAC17 wrote:

I know Lewis is pissed,

You just have to trust the team to know better as they got heaps of data they can go through.
Who knows, had Lewis continued with his original tires he might have ended up like Norris did in Russia.

petertenthije wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

I know Lewis is pissed,

You just have to trust the team to know better as they got heaps of data they can go through.
Who knows, had Lewis continued with his original tires he might have ended up like Norris did in Russia.

I agree. They requested him to pit on lap 42 and eventually did it on lap 51.

Had they explained clearly what was observed starting with Riccardo that the inters grained initially but were better very soon after he probably could have got a podium today.

This is very much similar to McLaren in Russia. Had they told Lando there was more rain coming he would have likely won that race.

Aesma wrote:

It would have been a gamble but the inters seemed to be able to go to the end. I would have mainly been worried about the performance really dropping off but it didn't seem likely (and Lewis thought the same).

I felt exactly like Button was commenting, that the team tricked Lewis into changing tires, not a good move, at least give him all the info and your reasoning.

Unless you subscribe to a service that provides it, we don’t hear all the radio traffic. The team could have given Hamilton all the information. They should have known from other drivers that the new inter had a period of several laps where the performance was worse. I can’t help thinking that if they’d pitted Hamilton on the same lap as Verstappen, he could have finished second (or even won if Bottas was prepared to let him pass). The balance, of course, is that the driver is the one person sat in the car and experiencing the race first-hand. We have seen situations where Hamilton has gone against the team and won.

I’m fairly certain that without the stop for new tyres, both Gasly and Norris would have passed him. Dammed if they did and damned if they didn’t. They should have pitted earlier.

On the plus side for Hamilton and Mercedes, the car looked strong all weekend and Hamilton will be encouraged that Bottas had no issue comfortably keeping Verstappen under control.

We heard the radio when he asked his position after the stop so clearly they didn't tell him he would lose 2 places.

As an aside, wet races like this are a welcome change however I would have liked to see this track in the dry as the cars are at their limits, it's beautiful to watch.

scbriml wrote:

…. and Hamilton will be encouraged that Bottas had no issue comfortably keeping Verstappen under control.

VER wasn’t able to push because he had to manage his tyres. At the start of the race it wasn’t clear how the track would dry up, so managing the tyres and staying second was more important than pushing BOT, while HAM was behind him.

Positive note was the third place of Perez and the way he was fighting with HAM. HAM tried a “Monza” by going wide deliberately and forcing PER to take the pit entrance, but luckily there was enough space to continue without drama.

marcelh wrote:

VER wasn’t able to push because he had to manage his tyres.

That sounds like a bit of a poor excuse - did he have to manage his tyres more than anyone else? Drivers were being told on the first lap that the weather wasn't expected to changes much for the entire race. With Hamilton behind him, Verstappen would have wanted to maximise his points advantage and he wouldn't think twice about trying to overtake Bottas.

That's the first time in 20 races that Bottas has finished ahead of Verstappen, that will be a concern for Red Bull.

scbriml wrote:

marcelh wrote:

VER wasn’t able to push because he had to manage his tyres.

That sounds like a bit of a poor excuse - did he have to manage his tyres more than anyone else? Drivers were being told on the first lap that the weather wasn't expected to changes much for the entire race. With Hamilton behind him, Verstappen would have wanted to maximise his points advantage and he wouldn't think twice about trying to overtake Bottas.

That's the first time in 20 races that Bottas has finished ahead of Verstappen, that will be a concern for Red Bull.

indeed, Sergio Perez did well, Verstappens car wasn't fast yesterday for some reason.

scbriml wrote:

marcelh wrote:

VER wasn’t able to push because he had to manage his tyres.

That sounds like a bit of a poor excuse - did he have to manage his tyres more than anyone else? Drivers were being told on the first lap that the weather wasn't expected to changes much for the entire race. With Hamilton behind him, Verstappen would have wanted to maximise his points advantage and he wouldn't think twice about trying to overtake Bottas.

That's the first time in 20 races that Bottas has finished ahead of Verstappen, that will be a concern for Red Bull.

Spin it like you want, but tyre management was more important than overtaking BOT at all costs. And I don’t disagree the fact Mercedes was performing better than RedBull this weekend, so finishing second while HAM losing points isn’t that bad.

Dutchy wrote:

scbriml wrote:

marcelh wrote:

VER wasn’t able to push because he had to manage his tyres.

That sounds like a bit of a poor excuse - did he have to manage his tyres more than anyone else? Drivers were being told on the first lap that the weather wasn't expected to changes much for the entire race. With Hamilton behind him, Verstappen would have wanted to maximise his points advantage and he wouldn't think twice about trying to overtake Bottas.

That's the first time in 20 races that Bottas has finished ahead of Verstappen, that will be a concern for Red Bull.

indeed, Sergio Perez did well, Verstappens car wasn't fast yesterday for some reason.

This track wasn’t ideal for the RedBull. While PER did well in the race (took some time!) but qualified well behind VER and wasn’t able to follow LEC in the first half of the race. VER his goal wasn’t trying to win this race at all costs, it was to gain points as much as possible and succeeded.

VER is always being blamed; often for driving too agressive (Monza) , now for using his brains…

scbriml wrote:

marcelh wrote:

VER wasn’t able to push because he had to manage his tyres.

That sounds like a bit of a poor excuse - did he have to manage his tyres more than anyone else? Drivers were being told on the first lap that the weather wasn't expected to changes much for the entire race. With Hamilton behind him, Verstappen would have wanted to maximise his points advantage and he wouldn't think twice about trying to overtake Bottas.

That's the first time in 20 races that Bottas has finished ahead of Verstappen, that will be a concern for Red Bull.

I saw Max's post race interview. He said the Redbull didn't have the pace to catch Bottas yesterday. The only shot would have been to have a better start than Bottas but the Merc was hard to catch and I don't recall any undercuts at all yesterday.

scbriml wrote:

Aesma wrote:

It would have been a gamble but the inters seemed to be able to go to the end. I would have mainly been worried about the performance really dropping off but it didn't seem likely (and Lewis thought the same).

I felt exactly like Button was commenting, that the team tricked Lewis into changing tires, not a good move, at least give him all the info and your reasoning.

Unless you subscribe to a service that provides it, we don’t hear all the radio traffic. The team could have given Hamilton all the information. They should have known from other drivers that the new inter had a period of several laps where the performance was worse. I can’t help thinking that if they’d pitted Hamilton on the same lap as Verstappen, he could have finished second (or even won if Bottas was prepared to let him pass). The balance, of course, is that the driver is the one person sat in the car and experiencing the race first-hand. We have seen situations where Hamilton has gone against the team and won.

I’m fairly certain that without the stop for new tyres, both Gasly and Norris would have passed him. Dammed if they did and damned if they didn’t. They should have pitted earlier.

On the plus side for Hamilton and Mercedes, the car looked strong all weekend and Hamilton will be encouraged that Bottas had no issue comfortably keeping Verstappen under control.

After Russia F1 released Verstappen's onboard when the rain started. They may for Hamilton, but yeah if you have F1 TV then you can get the onboards for every driver.

That was some race today, I definitely want to pay Austin a visit for this race in the future

Really good on track battles between Max and Lewis obviously with Max winning and no errors for either Redbull or Mercedes. Max won fair and square and if he wins the championship, which I think he is going to after winning this GP. Some good battling with Kimi and Alonso that was enjoyable. Good races from Checo, Danny Ric and Charles Leclerc

Bring on Mexico in two weeks!! I hope the final stretch I hope delivers races like today.

indeed very good race all around. Looks like Max is going to head for the championship. Some very nice races ahead.

Handbags at twenty paces?

Wolff described Horner as a "protagonist in a pantomime" in an interview with the Daily Mail, referring to some people performing like "little actors, like Hollywood" for the television cameras.

That followed the Austrian calling Horner a "windbag" in June after the Red Bull boss made comments about the Mercedes having a "bendy wing".

The pair also clashed ahead of the British Grand Prix, where Mercedes' seven-time world champion Hamilton and Red Bull's Max Verstappen collided, with Horner labelling Wolff a "control freak" who should keep his mouth shut.

Ref: https://www.reuters.com/business/media- ... 2021-11-06

My observations of being a fan of the sport for a few months now is that the gap between the races is too long. It's hard for the media to keep interest going that long between races.

The fact that the gaps are irregular also doesn't help. Some times you get what seems to be a burst of action, then it goes all quite for quite a while. This makes it really different from world football, US football, basketball, etc.

The fact that half or more of the field is not competitive also isn't helpful. I hope the new rules even things up some more in 2022, but the fact that this works against those who have the most invested in the sport, the major teams, makes me doubt that things will change significantly. They will throw money at the problem and find loopholes that give them better performance. Sure, there's spending caps to limit how far this can go, but there's also not meaningful spending minimums that would improve the competitiveness of the weaker teams. In short, it's a money driven sport, and the rule changes mainly are there so there is at least the illusion of having some competition, but if the weak get too strong then the big teams will have the rules changed.

Revelation wrote:

Handbags at twenty paces?

Wolff described Horner as a "protagonist in a pantomime" in an interview with the Daily Mail, referring to some people performing like "little actors, like Hollywood" for the television cameras.

That followed the Austrian calling Horner a "windbag" in June after the Red Bull boss made comments about the Mercedes having a "bendy wing".

The pair also clashed ahead of the British Grand Prix, where Mercedes' seven-time world champion Hamilton and Red Bull's Max Verstappen collided, with Horner labelling Wolff a "control freak" who should keep his mouth shut.

Ref: https://www.reuters.com/business/media- ... 2021-11-06

My observations of being a fan of the sport for a few months now is that the gap between the races is too long. It's hard for the media to keep interest going that long between races.

The fact that the gaps are irregular also doesn't help. Some times you get what seems to be a burst of action, then it goes all quite for quite a while. This makes it really different from world football, US football, basketball, etc.

The fact that half or more of the field is not competitive also isn't helpful. I hope the new rules even things up some more in 2022, but the fact that this works against those who have the most invested in the sport, the major teams, makes me doubt that things will change significantly. They will throw money at the problem and find loopholes that give them better performance. Sure, there's spending caps to limit how far this can go, but there's also not meaningful spending minimums that would improve the competitiveness of the weaker teams. In short, it's a money driven sport, and the rule changes mainly are there so there is at least the illusion of having some competition, but if the weak get too strong then the big teams will have the rules changed.

Hopefully the 2022 regs. will work as designed and make overtaking easier so we have more competitive racing.

One thing I will say is we say we want parity but this season has been one of the best in the last 5 years or even longer because there is a battle for 1st (Mercedes and Redbull) and 3rd (McLaren and Ferrari).

Also if you look at other sports the best years are usually when there are two rivalries that meet every year and excite even the casual fan. Think Yankees-Red Sox in baseball, Manning-Brady in the NFL, Russell-Chamberlain in the NBA etc. I could think about a soccer one but would say Man U - Liverpool if they are the dominant teams and everyone else is bad or average people will follow the rivalry.

We see this win Hamilton and Verstappen. You could be a fan of a midfield team like Alpine who has had a mediocre year but you will tune in to see Hamilton and Verstappen battle it out.

StarAC17 wrote:

Also if you look at other sports the best years are usually when there are two rivalries that meet every year and excite even the casual fan. Think Yankees-Red Sox in baseball, Manning-Brady in the NFL, Russell-Chamberlain in the NBA etc. I could think about a soccer one but would say Man U - Liverpool if they are the dominant teams and everyone else is bad or average people will follow the rivalry.

We see this win Hamilton and Verstappen. You could be a fan of a midfield team like Alpine who has had a mediocre year but you will tune in to see Hamilton and Verstappen battle it out.

Agree, but I'm not saying F1 is devoid of interesting story lines, I'm saying it could be a lot more interesting if a lot more teams had a realistic chance of being anything but cars that others lap.

Ok, occasionally the stars and planets align and someone from the bottom half of the grid gets to the podium, but it seems to take other better cars crashing out rather than some unexpectedly good showing on the behalf of a bottom dweller.

I think the rules changes will make the top part of the grid more competitive with each other, but doubt they will enable bottom of the grid teams to rise.

I wonder if someone who enters the sport committed to a midfield team out of familial or regional sympathies ends up sticking with the sport when they realize how hopeless it is, or if they just go and find something better to do with their time.

Heck, in the NFL, even the Jets managed two upset wins out of eight games. As miserable as the Jets are, the fans of bottom dwelling teams at least have some hope of seeing a win.

Revelation wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

Also if you look at other sports the best years are usually when there are two rivalries that meet every year and excite even the casual fan. Think Yankees-Red Sox in baseball, Manning-Brady in the NFL, Russell-Chamberlain in the NBA etc. I could think about a soccer one but would say Man U - Liverpool if they are the dominant teams and everyone else is bad or average people will follow the rivalry.

We see this win Hamilton and Verstappen. You could be a fan of a midfield team like Alpine who has had a mediocre year but you will tune in to see Hamilton and Verstappen battle it out.

Agree, but I'm not saying F1 is devoid of interesting story lines, I'm saying it could be a lot more interesting if a lot more teams had a realistic chance of being anything but cars that others lap.

IMO it’s the nature of F1 you have got some top teams and some “lesser gods”. You’ve got 4 teams with Mercedes engines (Mercedes, MacLaren, Aston Martin and Williams), it isn’t obvious that MacLaren, Aston and Williams are fighting with Mercedes. When RBR was using the Renault engine -and outraced Renault- the latter weren’t amused. Also some teams can be considered as “second” teams (Alpha Tauri, Alfa Romeo). If you want more equality, than you have to copy the Indy car format: 1 chassis with 2 different engine manufacturers.

My thoughts about the MEX race. First one I've watched "real time" because it was on free TV in the US (like last weekend) and I had the time to watch it. Content was the Sky Sports feed. Normally I just watch the highlights later on.

First, some whinging: 3.5 hours of content on the DVR, less than 0.5 hours of compelling drama, IMO. 1.5 hours lead in before the start the race, that's more foreplay than on a lesbian holiday vacation! Honestly the 0.5 hours of drama was extended by me replaying the start of the race (and the Vettel spin) several times.

Real bummer that Vettel was hit by DR and spun around, maybe having him amongst the race leaders would have made for more drama. They tried to make drama out of Vettel moving up the pack but that's only because his equipment was better than most of the other drivers and in the end even that didn't matter.

Great pageantry at the end with Perez being on the podium at his home race, made for some enjoyable viewing.

Relatively few advertisement breaks compared to US sports which is positively riddled with them, which was a positive. The relatively few ad breaks featured some surprisingly local content, which suggests corporate sponsorship isn't yet where F1 wants it to be.

marcelh wrote:

IMO it’s the nature of F1 you have got some top teams and some “lesser gods”. You’ve got 4 teams with Mercedes engines (Mercedes, MacLaren, Aston Martin and Williams), it isn’t obvious that MacLaren, Aston and Williams are fighting with Mercedes. When RBR was using the Renault engine -and outraced Renault- the latter weren’t amused. Also some teams can be considered as “second” teams (Alpha Tauri, Alfa Romeo). If you want more equality, than you have to copy the Indy car format: 1 chassis with 2 different engine manufacturers.

Strong points especially the last one, it'd be more equal yet more boring if there was something akin to Indy Car.

Ideally it'd be possible to have more equity while retaining diversity, but all things being equal, most newcomers would be more engaged by the competition being more about the people than the machines, no?

Do we think Indy Car shows there really isn't so much difference between drivers if the equipment is more similar? I thought that's what I read in at least one article.

Revelation wrote:

The fact that the gaps are irregular also doesn't help. Some times you get what seems to be a burst of action, then it goes all quite for quite a while. This makes it really different from world football, US football, basketball, etc.

The fact that half or more of the field is not competitive also isn't helpful. I hope the new rules even things up some more in 2022, but the fact that this works against those who have the most invested in the sport, the major teams, makes me doubt that things will change significantly. They will throw money at the problem and find loopholes that give them better performance. Sure, there's spending caps to limit how far this can go, but there's also not meaningful spending minimums that would improve the competitiveness of the weaker teams. In short, it's a money driven sport, and the rule changes mainly are there so there is at least the illusion of having some competition, but if the weak get too strong then the big teams will have the rules changed.

It used to be that you have a race every 2 weeks and the title decided by now. Thanks to an enlarged calendar, we're seeing more double & triple headers as well as large absences.

As for competitiveness, I've been watching F1 consistently since 2000 and to be honest, over the past 2 decades it's always been the case that you have two teams dominating the top & the rest squabbling for scraps. In terms of very close racing I can only cite 2003, 2007 (only because of Alonso & Hamilton squabbling at McLaren), 2012, and this season where the racing had been close (2016 was close, but it was between teammates). Seasons like the 1982 season, where you had 11 drivers from 7 teams winning at most 2 races that season are few and far in between really.

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

Revelation wrote:

The fact that the gaps are irregular also doesn't help. Some times you get what seems to be a burst of action, then it goes all quite for quite a while. This makes it really different from world football, US football, basketball, etc.

The fact that half or more of the field is not competitive also isn't helpful. I hope the new rules even things up some more in 2022, but the fact that this works against those who have the most invested in the sport, the major teams, makes me doubt that things will change significantly. They will throw money at the problem and find loopholes that give them better performance. Sure, there's spending caps to limit how far this can go, but there's also not meaningful spending minimums that would improve the competitiveness of the weaker teams. In short, it's a money driven sport, and the rule changes mainly are there so there is at least the illusion of having some competition, but if the weak get too strong then the big teams will have the rules changed.

It used to be that you have a race every 2 weeks and the title decided by now. Thanks to an enlarged calendar, we're seeing more double & triple headers as well as large absences.

As for competitiveness, I've been watching F1 consistently since 2000 and to be honest, over the past 2 decades it's always been the case that you have two teams dominating the top & the rest squabbling for scraps. In terms of very close racing I can only cite 2003, 2007 (only because of Alonso & Hamilton squabbling at McLaren), 2012, and this season where the racing had been close (2016 was close, but it was between teammates). Seasons like the 1982 season, where you had 11 drivers from 7 teams winning at most 2 races that season are few and far in between really.

This particular triple header is dumbest we have seen this year. At least the other ones made some degree of sense.

Doing the US, off week, Mexico, Brazil, Qatar makes no sense.

It should have been US, Mexico, Brazil, off week and then finish the season with 3 races in 4 weeks. Now I understand the original schedule had them going to Melbourne on the 19th-21st weekend but that this a lot of travel. Even if the drivers and senior team members fly private that's still some serious jet-lag.

StarAC17 wrote:

This particular triple header is dumbest we have seen this year. At least the other ones made some degree of sense.

Doing the US, off week, Mexico, Brazil, Qatar makes no sense.

It should have been US, Mexico, Brazil, off week and then finish the season with 3 races in 4 weeks. Now I understand the original schedule had them going to Melbourne on the 19th-21st weekend but that this a lot of travel. Even if the drivers and senior team members fly private that's still some serious jet-lag.

They should have just cut a race after Melbourne canceled.

Revelation wrote:

Do we think Indy Car shows there really isn't so much difference between drivers if the equipment is more similar? I thought that's what I read in at least one article.

The differences will be smaller, but only the most talented drivers will fight for the title. Instead of 2, you might have 5-6 drivers at the start of the season.

marcelh wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Do we think Indy Car shows there really isn't so much difference between drivers if the equipment is more similar? I thought that's what I read in at least one article.

The differences will be smaller, but only the most talented drivers will fight for the title. Instead of 2, you might have 5-6 drivers at the start of the season.

Thanks. We all know that the manufacturers are a big part of the sport, and the diversity they add does increase interest, but they also bring so much money to the factory teams that it's hard for the rest to compete. Spending caps will help, but still not level the playing field.

I'm glad there seems to be a lot of agreement here on some of the issues of the sport, but I'm also sad that there seems to be a kind of resignation to the fact that many of the issues will not be addressed in a meaningful way.

Revelation wrote:

marcelh wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Do we think Indy Car shows there really isn't so much difference between drivers if the equipment is more similar? I thought that's what I read in at least one article.

The differences will be smaller, but only the most talented drivers will fight for the title. Instead of 2, you might have 5-6 drivers at the start of the season.

Thanks. We all know that the manufacturers are a big part of the sport, and the diversity they add does increase interest, but they also bring so much money to the factory teams that it's hard for the rest to compete. Spending caps will help, but still not level the playing field.

I'm glad there seems to be a lot of agreement here on some of the issues of the sport, but I'm also sad that there seems to be a kind of resignation to the fact that many of the issues will not be addressed in a meaningful way.

IMHO the inequality between teams isn’t an issue, it’s part of what F1 is. The inequality exists because of the possibilities the teams have in developing a body and/or engine within the rules. It’s a technology driven sport and it has a constructors championship for a reason. I agree the inequality must be limited and the budget cap is the best way to do.

marcelh wrote:

IMHO the inequality between teams isn’t an issue, it’s part of what F1 is. The inequality exists because of the possibilities the teams have in developing a body and/or engine within the rules. It’s a technology driven sport and it has a constructors championship for a reason. I agree the inequality must be limited and the budget cap is the best way to do.

Ok, if it is a technology driven sport, and one with obvious inequities, it seems like the right answer would be more technology sharing. Let the rich teams have a monopoly on what they've learned for a season or so, but then they have to share what they know so the sport as a whole improves. Over time this would reduce the incentive to make it a tech driven sport and it could be more of a driver driven sport.

I'm sure this is viewed as silly and naive, I know, but IMO money doesn't fix all ills. The weak teams could be spending money chasing things the strong teams already know are bad ideas.

One of the reasons the US NFL is so competitive is that the successful teams help the less successful teams in many ways. One key way is weak teams get the first shot at selecting talent during the draft so they can get better. F1 could use some sort of measure to help boost the weaker teams, IMO.

Anyhow, just some ideas from a naive newbie, thanks for listening!

Revelation wrote:

marcelh wrote:

IMHO the inequality between teams isn’t an issue, it’s part of what F1 is. The inequality exists because of the possibilities the teams have in developing a body and/or engine within the rules. It’s a technology driven sport and it has a constructors championship for a reason. I agree the inequality must be limited and the budget cap is the best way to do.

Ok, if it is a technology driven sport, and one with obvious inequities, it seems like the right answer would be more technology sharing. Let the rich teams have a monopoly on what they've learned for a season or so, but then they have to share what they know so the sport as a whole improves. Over time this would reduce the incentive to make it a tech driven sport and it could be more of a driver driven sport.

I'm sure this is viewed as silly and naive, I know, but IMO money doesn't fix all ills. The weak teams could be spending money chasing things the strong teams already know are bad ideas.

One of the reasons the US NFL is so competitive is that the successful teams help the less successful teams in many ways. One key way is weak teams get the first shot at selecting talent during the draft so they can get better. F1 could use some sort of measure to help boost the weaker teams, IMO.

Anyhow, just some ideas from a naive newbie, thanks for listening!

There is technology sharing, not only the engines, but also gearbox and some other parts may be used by other teams. Because it’s a constructors championship, a team must develop a meaningful part of the car by themselves. IIRC, at the start of the 2020 championship Racing Point had developed a car which was an almost exact copy of the 2019 World Champion winning car of Mercedes. The rules have been “tightened” so that isn’t allowed any more. Also copying a car doesn’t help a lot, because a car
Is developed constantly during the season.


Also a nice read about wind tunnel testing constraints to create some sort of level playing field:
https://amp.formula1.com/en/latest/article.how-f1s-new-sliding-scale-aero-testing-rules-work-and-what-impact-they-will.pn0sG8N4A0cjbNRbdYx8a.html

IMHO “naive newbies” don’t exist; I would say “enthusiast newbies”

Speaking of F1 triple headers, seems we may have a logistical snag, reported in our freight thread:

viewtopic.php?p=23034091#p23034355

Hamilton has been disqualified from the Friday qualifying in Brazil because of a rear wing infringement.
Verstappen gets 50,000 euros fine for touching Hamilton's car in Parc Ferme.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/live/formula1/54911234

petertenthije wrote:

Hamilton has been disqualified from the Friday qualifying in Brazil because of a rear wing infringement.
Verstappen gets 50,000 euros fine for touching Hamilton's car in Parc Ferme.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/live/formula1/54911234

I was just about to post about that, what is it with the sprint races? So far, each weekend to feature one has had all sorts of drama. At least with Lewis at the back he won't be driving into Max again Well at least for a few laps.

Daysleeper wrote:

At least with Lewis at the back he won't be driving into Max again Well at least for a few laps.

Are you expecting Max to lap Lewis?

petertenthije wrote:

Daysleeper wrote:

At least with Lewis at the back he won't be driving into Max again Well at least for a few laps.

Are you expecting Max to lap Lewis?

I hadn't even thought about that, wow if that actually happened it wouldn't surprise me if Lewis retired from F1 there and then. Well after he brake checked Max of course

In all seriousness, We have seen Lewis start at the back and end up on the podium a number of times already, and the Merc with a new ICU looks strong at Interlagos. It's going to be an interesting weekend.

Heh, just had another thought, With Bottas right next to Max, I wonder how much Lewis is offering him to take out Max... as that would be perfect for Lewis. And it is a team sport after all LOL

Man, I know many love to hate Lewis, but in my mind there is now little to no doubt that he is indeed the greatest of all time.

He gained 15 places in 24 laps and although Max got the fastest lap he was consistently a second a lap faster than the leaders while passing 15 cars! Absolutely incredible. He really is on another level.

Schumacher? Senna? nah its Lewis.

Daysleeper wrote:

Man, I know many love to hate Lewis, but in my mind there is now little to no doubt that he is indeed the greatest of all time.

He gained 15 places in 24 laps and although Max got the fastest lap he was consistently a second a lap faster than the leaders while passing 15 cars! Absolutely incredible. He really is on another level.

Schumacher? Senna? nah its Lewis.

...Clark... Lewis is good, but neither he, Schumi nor Senna hold a candle to Jim Clark. I also hold the belief that we should never call an active athlete the greatest ever, it requires too much perspective to do that in my mind, and we just don't have that much in the present. I also find it unfair to them as it really puts a pressure on them to live up to these titles and cannot be good for ones mental health.

T18 wrote:

Daysleeper wrote:

Man, I know many love to hate Lewis, but in my mind there is now little to no doubt that he is indeed the greatest of all time.

He gained 15 places in 24 laps and although Max got the fastest lap he was consistently a second a lap faster than the leaders while passing 15 cars! Absolutely incredible. He really is on another level.

Schumacher? Senna? nah its Lewis.

...Clark... Lewis is good, but neither he, Schumi nor Senna hold a candle to Jim Clark. I also hold the belief that we should never call an active athlete the greatest ever, it requires too much perspective to do that in my mind, and we just don't have that much in the present. I also find it unfair to them as it really puts a pressure on them to live up to these titles and cannot be good for ones mental health.

Yes, I should have perhaps prefaced my comments with "of the modern era" as F1 was a very different sport back then. Also, with the constant changes to points and number of events per season, it can also make it difficult to compare current generation drivers to ones who retired only a few years ago on a statistical basis.

But I stand by my comment;, I honestly don't think there is another driver on the grid who could have completed 16 over-takes within 24 laps, or perhaps has ever been another driver capable of such a feat.

In regard to his mental health, I see what you are saying, and I agree in general. But he is already a 7 times world champion, I suspect he is able to deal with the pressure to perform.

Daysleeper wrote:

But I stand by my comment;, I honestly don't think there is another driver on the grid who could have completed 16 over-takes within 24 laps, or perhaps has ever been another driver capable of such a feat.

Lewis is a fantastic driver, but I think you‘re slightly exaggerating here.

Just one example from the top of my head, 1998 Japanese Grand Prix. Schumi startet 22, and was on position 7 by the end of lap 4. That was on a track that‘s harder to pass and with a car less dominant. I‘m not gonna say that was better than Lewis yesterday (You can‘t compare different drivers of different times, so it‘s just pointless)… but to say no one else could do something is just wrong as Michael gained 15 places in 4 laps.

Daysleeper wrote:

T18 wrote:

Daysleeper wrote:

Man, I know many love to hate Lewis, but in my mind there is now little to no doubt that he is indeed the greatest of all time.

He gained 15 places in 24 laps and although Max got the fastest lap he was consistently a second a lap faster than the leaders while passing 15 cars! Absolutely incredible. He really is on another level.

Schumacher? Senna? nah its Lewis.

...Clark... Lewis is good, but neither he, Schumi nor Senna hold a candle to Jim Clark. I also hold the belief that we should never call an active athlete the greatest ever, it requires too much perspective to do that in my mind, and we just don't have that much in the present. I also find it unfair to them as it really puts a pressure on them to live up to these titles and cannot be good for ones mental health.

Yes, I should have perhaps prefaced my comments with "of the modern era" as F1 was a very different sport back then. Also, with the constant changes to points and number of events per season, it can also make it difficult to compare current generation drivers to ones who retired only a few years ago on a statistical basis.

But I stand by my comment;, I honestly don't think there is another driver on the grid who could have completed 16 over-takes within 24 laps, or perhaps has ever been another driver capable of such a feat.

In regard to his mental health, I see what you are saying, and I agree in general. But he is already a 7 times world champion, I suspect he is able to deal with the pressure to perform.

Maybe you can qualify your comment by "The greatest driver of all time driving a Mercedes in the hybrid era" but that would still be disputed as Nico has won once with the same car.
So, we need to modify this as "The GOAT driving a Mercedes after 2016"

Now everyone is happy heading into the proper race.

cfischaleck wrote:

Just one example from the top of my head, 1998 Japanese Grand Prix. Schumi startet 22, and was on position 7 by the end of lap 4. That was on a track that‘s harder to pass and with a car less dominant. I‘m not gonna say that was better than Lewis yesterday (You can‘t compare different drivers of different times, so it‘s just pointless)… but to say no one else could do something is just wrong as Michael gained 15 places in 4 laps.

yonahleung wrote:

Maybe you can qualify your comment by "The greatest driver of all time driving a Mercedes in the hybrid era" but that would still be disputed as Nico has won once with the same car.
So, we need to modify this as "The GOAT driving a Mercedes after 2016"

Now everyone is happy heading into the proper race.

Yeah both valid points, it really is difficult to compare drivers from different generations of cars. But in regards to Nico, who I have the utmost respect for and love his YouTube channel – He himself has said multiple times that beating Lewis in that one season took everything he had, and there was no way he could do it again – Hence he retired.

And yeah, the Merc has dominated within the hybrid era, but there are other constructors with the same engine and 5 years after its introduction many of its unique advantages such as its split turbo have been replicated by other manufacturers.

Edited as im an idiot:)

Heh - 11 laps to go, from qualifying in 20th, to first.

He's good. Really good.

Daysleeper wrote:

Heh - 11 laps to go, from qualifying in 20th, to first.

He's good. Really good.

Cheers to him and to you, but https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... Zm3Bx.html says he started in P10 ???

https://racingnews365.com/starting-grid ... grand-prix also shows him as 10th.

He did start the sprint in 20th according to sources, maybe that's where the confusion comes from?

Either way, the whiskey should taste the same, no?

Revelation wrote:

Daysleeper wrote:

Heh - 11 laps to go, from qualifying in 20th, to first.

He's good. Really good.

Cheers to him and to you, but https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... Zm3Bx.html says he started in P10 ???

https://racingnews365.com/starting-grid ... grand-prix also shows him as 10th.

He did start the sprint in 20th according to sources, maybe that's where the confusion comes from?

Either way, the whiskey should taste the same, no?

Indeed, it does, and I am not even a Hamilton fan -no really I'm not. But seeing someone at the top of their game excel is really exhilarating.

And yes, he did start in 10th. Its BS an my part to say he qualified 20th as technically he did. The sprint races changes things..

Revelation wrote:

Daysleeper wrote:

Heh - 11 laps to go, from qualifying in 20th, to first.

He's good. Really good.

Cheers to him and to you, but https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... Zm3Bx.html says he started in P10 ???

https://racingnews365.com/starting-grid ... grand-prix also shows him as 10th.

He did start the sprint in 20th according to sources, maybe that's where the confusion comes from?

Either way, the whiskey should taste the same, no?

Yes, he started the race in P10, but that was only possible after a very good drive from 20th in the Qualifying Sprint. So the reality is he's overcome a total of 24 grid place penalties to take the win, despite some very dodgy defending from Verstappen. I admit to being a Hamilton fan, but considering where he started qualifying, it will go down as probably his best win and one of F1's great performances.

scbriml wrote:

Yes, he started the race in P10, but that was only possible after a very good drive from 20th in the Qualifying Sprint. So the reality is he's overcome a total of 24 grid place penalties to take the win, despite some very dodgy defending from Verstappen. I admit to being a Hamilton fan, but considering where he started qualifying, it will go down as probably his best win and one of F1's great performances.

Thanks for the clarification, it is appreciated.

As someone who is unaffiliated I'm glad the driver's championship is drawing closer, it makes the rest of the season more exciting.

scbriml wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Daysleeper wrote:

Heh - 11 laps to go, from qualifying in 20th, to first.

He's good. Really good.

Cheers to him and to you, but https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/arti ... Zm3Bx.html says he started in P10 ???

https://racingnews365.com/starting-grid ... grand-prix also shows him as 10th.

He did start the sprint in 20th according to sources, maybe that's where the confusion comes from?

Either way, the whiskey should taste the same, no?

Yes, he started the race in P10, but that was only possible after a very good drive from 20th in the Qualifying Sprint. So the reality is he's overcome a total of 24 grid place penalties to take the win, despite some very dodgy defending from Verstappen. I admit to being a Hamilton fan, but considering where he started qualifying, it will go down as probably his best win and one of F1's great performances.

One of the defining drives of his career IMO. And also in my opinion, justice was done in the light of what seems to be a clearly signposted dirty tricks campaign by Red Bull, one which FIFA seem to have some skin in too, if being driven off the road is not deemed to be punishable. Hamilton took the high ground and let his driving do the talking.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/59285491

I love George Russel's comment - "Hamilton was an absolute beast!"

Rgds

astuteman wrote:

One of the defining drives of his career IMO. And also in my opinion, justice was done in the light of what seems to be a clearly signposted dirty tricks campaign by Red Bull, one which FIFA seem to have some skin in too, if being driven off the road is not deemed to be punishable. Hamilton took the high ground and let his driving do the talking.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/59285491

I love George Russel's comment - "Hamilton was an absolute beast!"

Rgds

Yeah, it’s going to be interesting to see what comes out of the FIA complaint (I assume you mean FIA rather than FIFA? – With this race being in Brazil, the next in Qatar and FIFA’s history of corruption with both I am genuinely not sure if FIFA do indeed have skin in the game)

I think I heard in the commentary that from viewing the onboard footage with Max you could see that it wasn’t deliberate on his part, hence the stewards said it was a racing incident. I’m sure there will be footage available on the web later today and we can re-watch it and draw our own conclusions.

Should I find the footage or evidence that Sepp Blatter was involved I’ll post a link