FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[andrew]

Man those were the days! No DRS, no disintegrating tyres....just flat out racing.

And nigh on impossible to pull a pass sometimes... there are two sides to every coin. Although 2003, in particular, was a stand-out year, in a very positive way. Despite the end result, it was a momentary respite during the dreadful years of relentless Ferrari domination and corruption.

Passing is meant to be nigh on impossible. Winning a pass is meant to be a a hard slog, not a case of turn up, push a couple of magic buttons and the pass is done.

We wouldn't have been hearing statements like that a few years ago!

Ohh, how times change!

Actually you would from the hardcore F1 fans. However, these days it seems that the powers that be a trying to make the sport more like a gimmicky game show in an attempt to grab casual viewers.

[LewEngBridewell]

I've given up trying to quell the moaning that has constantly emanated from "fans". All last decade, I was seemingly failing to make any impact on people who mourned "the loss of overtaking", saying, as people are seemingly only coming to realise now, that maybe difficulty in executing a move may not be entirely a bad thing. But it was like banging one's head against a brick wall. The whining continued.

Now, we have overtaking. Sure, the quality and excitement of racing has improved, but it f!cking makes me laugh how people now stick on a pair of rose-tinted specs, and refer to the much-moaned-about non-overtaking days as "back in the day"

Some "fans" are just never f!cking pleased, and to be honest, bollocks to them. I have enjoyed every single F1 season I've watched, in its own way. That's being a "hardcore fan".

[andrew]

I don't recall ever moaning abhout the lack of overtaking.

Overtaking is meant to be hard and not easily won and that's what it has been until DRS, KERS and fragile tyres were introduced. Take the cars back 20 years and there would be no need for any of these gimmicks. Ditch all the over complicated aero, reduce the power of the engines and reduce braking efficiency. Murray Walker used to go on about the last of the late brakers. Oh I weant to hear that again in F1.

[Hammer278]

I've given up trying to quell the moaning that has constantly emanated from "fans". All last decade, I was seemingly failing to make any impact on people who mourned "the loss of overtaking", saying, as people are seemingly only coming to realise now, that maybe difficulty in executing a move may not be entirely a bad thing. But it was like banging one's head against a brick wall. The whining continued.

Now, we have overtaking. Sure, the quality and excitement of racing has improved, but it f!cking makes me laugh how people now stick on a pair of rose-tinted specs, and refer to the much-moaned-about non-overtaking days as "back in the day"

Some "fans" are just never f!cking pleased, and to be honest, bollocks to them. I have enjoyed every single F1 season I've watched, in its own way. That's being a "hardcore fan".

You're generalizing. I never had a problem with the late 90s and 2000s. Yes, 2001, 2002 and 2004 were dreadful but that was just Ferrari being class of the field though the battles in midfield were always worth a watch. An overtaking had to be done by the driver and the driver alone, and normally taking a risk. The driver ahead would know that he still has a chance to defend and do his very best, I always enjoyed seeing defensive driving more than offensive to be honest. Now DRS has nullified it, to increase 'number of overtakings' but does it improve the show? I don't believe so.

If you're happy with the fictional overtaking going on today, I'm pleased for you. But you might not want to generalize those complaining of DRS as 'always complaining no matter what', it's just a lazy argument with no substance whatsoever.

[Bladesman]

I've given up trying to quell the moaning that has constantly emanated from "fans". All last decade, I was seemingly failing to make any impact on people who mourned "the loss of overtaking", saying, as people are seemingly only coming to realise now, that maybe difficulty in executing a move may not be entirely a bad thing. But it was like banging one's head against a brick wall. The whining continued.

Now, we have overtaking. Sure, the quality and excitement of racing has improved, but it f!cking makes me laugh how people now stick on a pair of rose-tinted specs, and refer to the much-moaned-about non-overtaking days as "back in the day"

Some "fans" are just never f!cking pleased, and to be honest, bollocks to them. I have enjoyed every single F1 season I've watched, in its own way. That's being a "hardcore fan".

You're generalizing. I never had a problem with the late 90s and 2000s. Yes, 2001, 2002 and 2004 were dreadful but that was just Ferrari being class of the field though the battles in midfield were always worth a watch. An overtaking had to be done by the driver and the driver alone, and normally taking a risk. The driver ahead would know that he still has a chance to defend and do his very best, I always enjoyed seeing defensive driving more than offensive to be honest. Now DRS has nullified it, to increase 'number of overtakings' but does it improve the show? I don't believe so.

If you're happy with the fictional overtaking going on today, I'm pleased for you. But you might not want to generalize those complaining of DRS as 'always complaining no matter what', it's just a lazy argument with no substance whatsoever.

I see your point there is little defending that can be done against a driver using DRS. Canada proved that when Lewis just strolled past Vettel and Alonso without so much a wave and a how do you do.

Perhaps DRS is making it too easy and it might be worth leaving it down to tyres and kers to make the racing.

[andrew]

The solution is simple. Reduce braking efficiency, reduce the power of the cars, fully manual gearboxes, get rid of the fancy aerodynamics - more emphasis on the driver than the car.

And for the love of all that is Holy, get rid of the moronic trye rules - let them use what they like as often as they like - and allow a new engine and gearbox for each race. This economy F1 is really hacking me off! I want to see proper racing!

[stonemonkey]

The solution is simple. Reduce braking efficiency, reduce the power of the cars, fully manual gearboxes, get rid of the fancy aerodynamics - more emphasis on the driver than the car.

And for the love of all that is Holy, get rid of the moronic trye rules - let them use what they like as often as they like - and allow a new engine and gearbox for each race. This economy F1 is really hacking me off! I want to see proper racing!

I don't really have any problem with the cars having KERS and DRS, I don't like the way they're allowed to use the DRS though and think it would be better if all straights were DRS zones but they were only allowed to deploy it once per lap where they choose whether they're defending or attacking.

Have to agree about the tyres though, when they made the rules about using both compounds the soft was higher performance but shorter lived but it seems that come race day pirelli have managed to make a soft tyre often with poorer performance than the harder compound.

[What's Burning?]

Softs are always quicker, it's the amount of laps they're quicker relative to the degradation. The other problem is that some cars do much better on the harder compound and may overcook the softs given the appearance that they are not as quick.

[Ferrari man 009]

Gotta love FIA and Ferrari...

[youtube]dW2e_wg-bq4&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

No penalty, same case.

Also 9 years ago!

Funny how some people forget the full story. While Vettel went off the track, took the place and finished P2, the stewards didn't need to act since Schumacher DID get a penalty. By going off the track, he hit debris and punctured his wheel, dropping from 2nd to 7th!

It should also be noted how Trulli has 2 wheels OVER the kerb and pushes Schumacher off, whereas Button left Vettel a car's width and offered him the chance to stay on the track, which Vettel didnt take

[spankyham]

Softs are always quicker, it's the amount of laps they're quicker relative to the degradation. The other problem is that some cars do much better on the harder compound and may overcook the softs given the appearance that they are not as quick.

Probably a little technical, and most of the time you're right, but, even when new, softer tires are not always faster. It depends on the track and conditions.

[stonemonkey]

Softs are always quicker, it's the amount of laps they're quicker relative to the degradation. The other problem is that some cars do much better on the harder compound and may overcook the softs given the appearance that they are not as quick.

I guess no one told Webber and Alonso that at silverstone.

I know in quali they're faster but it just seems like in the race if they try to use the supposedly faster tyre to actually go faster then the tyre falls apart.

[scotty]

It's all on track temp and the nature of the track, how the car works that particular compound, the race strategy they're working to, etc.

[What's Burning?]

Well yes, we've got to be very clear when discussing tires, what we mean by quick. The desired result is who finished first and that's the person that ultimately went the quickest on that day! It's pointless to have a tire that gives you three or four blindingly fast laps, and then begins to degrade, making you pay a price of two abysmal laps before you have to ditch them.

With all the "gimmicks" DRS, KERS etc, the bottom line is you can't win unless you get the tire strategy right on race day.

[scotty]

With all the "gimmicks" DRS, KERS etc, the bottom line is you can't win unless you get the tire strategy right on race day.

No doubt, especially as it's so close in the field this season. I do love that factor that stategy can make or break a race though, and it's a bit more pronounced now compared to the old refuelling strategies that became very rigid and predictable towards the end.

[myownalias]

I'm with Andrew on this; reduced aero, allow cars to follow more closely without losing the front end through corners; reduced braking power, making braking distances longer; giving more opportunity to outbrake. A manual H gate gearbox would be fun, drivers missing gears would add to the excitement; although I don't agree with less power; "back in the day", the 90s, engines were more powerful and before that was the turbo days which had upto 1500bhp.