What is Digg?Sponsored by HTC
Who knows you better than your phone? view!
youtube.com - See you from the perspective of your phone.
68 Comments
- Awwzm, on 06/22/2009, -0/+38Mosely needs to go.
- VoteGOP, on 06/22/2009, -1/+39F1 is supposed to be the forerunner for new auto technology. There should be no spending restrictions. The teams with the most money can engineer the best cars, and each year everyone else has to catch up and try to surpass the previous tech leader.
- sumokitty, on 06/22/2009, -1/+20What you dont understand is that Formula 1 develops technologies we see in later cars. The more money a team spends on development, the more they understand how cars react on the road in certain conditions. Put a cap on money then the development of useful technology will decrease. Besides Formula 1 is supposed to be the pinnacle of racing where teams can spend boatloads of money on races.
- kanojo1969, on 06/22/2009, -2/+21There's a ton of 'formula' classes around that provide tight, exciting racing on a very restricted platform and budget.
Formula 1 is not one of those, and it should never be. Formula 1 is the best of the best, and budgetary restrictions is anathema to the whole point of the class. However, performance restrictions of the type that have ruined the sport in the last 10 to 20 years are also anathema and we seem to accept those. Basically, ever since Senna died the class has struggled to be itself.
I reckon instead of mandating a bunch of restrictions to keep the car safe, they should instead mandate safety tests that the car must pass. This might include things like aerodynamic behaviour at various speeds, crush protection, or whatever else they can come up with to make sure the drivers don't die in a realistic range of accident conditions. Make the teams pay every few years to keep the circuits updated so they are safe for the speeds we are talking about.
Then, remove all tech restrictions, as long as they pass the driver safety tests, they can go as fast as they like. No budget restrictions, no speed or equipment restrictions. Then the sport will be back to what it should be. - BillE3, on 06/22/2009, -1/+19What a bunch of nonsense, if they can not find a technology rules violation then they try to go after budget limits. Hogwash. Let the teams do as they please within the limits of the current rules. Those rules are already very stringent.
- SuperCujo, on 06/22/2009, -1/+16I'll use a mirror on that comment:
People actually care about NASCAR?
The biggest race of the F1 season last year, the final round in Brazil, had 78 million people worldwide watching the live broadcast. In comparison, this year's Daytona 500 had 18 million viewers.
So, to answer your question, more than 4 times as many people care about F1 than care about NASCAR. - wc3452, on 06/22/2009, -2/+17I read the title and I read it literally...I thought that they were going to start racing hover cars. Reality sucks.
- Gusbob, on 06/22/2009, -0/+10Brawn and Red Bull are part of FOTA, group of teams who are opposing the budget caps and the very same teams that are threatening a breakaway. Innovation does not come cheap. The reason Brawn and Red Bull are doing so well is because they started building the current car last season, when Ferarri and McLaren are too busy fighting it out for the championship.
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -3/+1120% driver skill.. your kidding right?
Do you know how hard you even have to drive a F1 to get the brakes to work. You need to be an extremely good driver to get around the track let alone as fast as you can.
I agree that even the best driver will be beaten in a ***** car but lets not undermine the professionalism of F1 drivers - bakaoni, on 06/22/2009, -2/+10I love F1 and I don't want to see it go the way of Indy and the Champ Car series' stupidity.
The real fans want to see the best of the best. I know I do. - opitica, on 06/22/2009, -2/+9the driver that starts in pole position eventually falls back once he has to make a stop, there's so much strategy involved in a race regarding stops, hardness of tires, and gas payloads. the race has only just begun at qualifiers.
- SuperCujo, on 06/22/2009, -0/+7Yes, off of.
- kanojo1969, on 06/22/2009, -1/+8You're a fool. When Honda entered F1 the first time in the 80's they blew the doors off everyone else for years. It was precisely their engine-building wizardry that put them in front.
For a Japanese newcomer to walk into F1 and produce an engine that was so much better than anything the Europeans and Americans could build, was just breathtaking. it was a hugely influential event that set the course of F1 for a decade.
It was a sad, sad day when they banned the turbo-monsters from F1, for me the 'ultimate' nature of the sport died right there.
I'm not really following the series now so I'm not sure what happened with Honda this time out. But to say they can't build engines is a willfully ignorant statement. - mercano, on 06/22/2009, -0/+5Yeah, they're coming off, but in 10 seconds they'll have put on a set of new wheels with a fresh set of tires on them.
- kamikazicondon, on 06/22/2009, -2/+7Watch GP2. It's the feeder for F1 and imo it is better than F1 in terms of the winner being determined by driver skill since they all race on the same platform.
- GeorgeStone2, on 06/22/2009, -1/+6All bets should be off. If the driver is willing to drive it, let them.
None of these silly limits on HP and CO2 emissions. This is racing dammit. - GeorgeStone2, on 06/22/2009, -0/+4I agree. Gone are the days of crazy ***** like this:
http://www.autoevolution.com/images/news/formula-o ...
I mean look at it. Just seeing a picture of it makes me smile, I can't even imagine seeing it roll up to the start line. - thinboyslim, on 06/22/2009, -0/+4You do know Eccelston only owns the rights to F1, the rules & regs are down to Max Mosley, he's the guy the teams are hating on. Most team principals have said the only person who can bring the sport back together is Bernie.
- Spire3660, on 06/22/2009, -1/+4There are racing leagues that support your style of fairness. Formula 1 is supposed to 'win at all costs(financial)'
- Gusbob, on 06/22/2009, -2/+5Just look at the difference between Hamilton and Kovalainen last year and you know driver skill is much larger than 20%, especially when the teams are so close in terms of engineering.
- Rapax, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3Quite a few of them are hybrids...google KERS if you want to know more.
- opitica, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3have you even watched this season? ferrari is eating ***** like no other
- kitkat102, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3The FIA have lost the plot. The fans will follow the teams wherever they go and the media and advertisers will follow the fans. If F1 loses all the major teams, they can wave goodbye to a hell of a lot of advertising revenue.
- thinboyslim, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3I'd be interested to see what happens if a split does occur, whether the broadcasters will break their contracts with the FIA and follow the teams or if rival TV networks will pickup the rights cheaply.
- Rashids, on 06/22/2009, -1/+4toro roso and redbull both have had almost the same cars (until the last race) but look at the difference in the performance. f1 is more of a team sports than it seems to be. you need a good strategy, a good car and and most importantly a good driver. a good car alone wont win you races.
- SuperCujo, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3Americans, there hasn't been any American manufacturers in F1 since the early 70s.
The Ford engines were actually Cosworth's which were designed and built in the UK. - psilanthropist, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3There's also the fact that Brawn GP, the team that currently leads the championship with its two drivers leading the drivers' standings too are basically just the BAR Honda team of years past which got bought out by Ross Brawn.
- thinboyslim, on 06/22/2009, -0/+3That's because GP2 cars are identical.
- mrgreenjeans, on 06/22/2009, -0/+2You mean the second time they entered F1. The first was 1964.
- rocketz, on 06/22/2009, -0/+2ok still the format that bernie owns the rights suck. The incentives for the teams to compete is just to pad him and mosely's pockets. Really reflective of business a la 70s style. they need to get with the plan
- badbadmike, on 06/22/2009, -1/+3"I'm not a fan of F1, but I'm gonna show up in the F1 post and offer my poorly-informed opinion anyway."
- kanojo1969, on 06/22/2009, -0/+2Pissing and moaning? Considering most of the also-rans are investing multiple tens-of-millions every year with barely a top-ten finish to show for it, I'd say they are incredibly ***** patient.
When a single tiny mistake from an engineer, the driver, or the pit crew can cost millions and ruin a race weekend, and when this happens multiple times a year for some of these teams, I'm impressed that the team owners don't murder people on a regular basis.
These people are by no means whiners. Jesus Christ. - aychseven, on 06/22/2009, -0/+2yeah, but brawn chucked the honda engines and popped in some merc units. soon thereafter, button went on to win three races in a row on one engine.
the problem with honda and the other japanese teams or manufacturers is that japanese are very strict about playing by the rules in everything they do (try living here; it's ridiculous at times). in F1, they don't go looking for loopholes the way other teams do. for instance, they took the whole engine freeze thing literally and just stopped development while the other engine manufacturers kept working at it.
honda doesn't necessarily make bad engines, they just have never been able or willing to work the modern rules system the way others have. - SuperCujo, on 06/22/2009, -0/+2I don't mind limits on CO2, because it gives the engineers some scope to work around it to make a really efficient motor that makes tons of HP. Smart teams/manufacturers win, consumers win, environment wins.
F1 should continue to be at the leading edge of automotive technology in order for the racing to be relevant to the manufacturers as more than just advertising. - thinboyslim, on 06/22/2009, -0/+2Another thing that next years rules will take away, no more pit stops for refueling, just tyre changes and damage repairs.
- aychseven, on 06/22/2009, -0/+2it is amazing to see what they can do within silly limits though. for instance, when they switched to V8s a few seasons ago, they set a few new track records. HP isn't everything.
as someone stated earlier, F1 is/can be a showcase for new automotive tech, and since things are trending towards fuel efficiency, i think it would be interesting to see what the F1 engineers can do with diesel or CNG etc. just look at audi's le mans wins with diesel and VW's recent le mans wins with the CNG scirocco. - kestermatsumoto, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1what is the point of the 'of'?
- SuperCujo, on 06/22/2009, -0/+1Prior to last race, the differences between Toro Rosso and Red Bull Racing have been numerous: engines (Ferrari vs Renault), gearbox, rear suspension are the main parts. Even though they share the same base chassis design, they have to manufacture their own chassis.
- goteki45, on 06/22/2009, -0/+1I agree with this but apparently a lot of the tracks just wouldn't be drivable with the speeds they could achieve, if given the no holding back approach.
- SpeedyG, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1Except, if a team spends the most money to win, then they get the most money for winning, and it makes it near impossible for anyone else, ESPECIALLY anyone new, to get on the grid and have any success at all.
So you end up with a situation where a small core set of teams spend all the money year after year, and everyone else fights for table scraps because they can't afford to spend as much.
That is one of the key reasons that Max Mosley isn't backing down and compromising (well, ignoring cynicism about power drunkenness). He saw Honda, one of the biggest spenders, pull out of F1 in the offseason. He believes that if he doesn't force the teams to spend less, he's going to end up with 6 and 8 car grids because nobody short of Ferrari and McLaren and maybe teams backed by huge car companies are going to be able to afford to compete.
Of course, this is the same guy who's, year after year, made silly regulations changes he thought would cut costs for the teams without actually asking the teams what would ACTUALLY help. And every time a regulation changed to cut costs, he'd create some other regulation which increased costs again (hello KERS!). For the teams, the drama over the budget cap is simply the last straw. They refuse to continue to bend over backwards for Max the Dictator and the FIA. - jasdf, on 06/28/2009, -0/+1You obviously don't get it. It's all about the engineering.
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -0/+1And who can afford the best driver?
- badbadmike, on 07/07/2009, -0/+1Actually, it just looks like you're a douchebag. Was that your mission by any chance?
- jdoo, on 06/22/2009, -0/+1gotta wait for F-Zero for that one buddy.
- roguewriter, on 06/22/2009, -2/+3Quite literally, the millions of people who follow F1 outside the USA.
- Napiertt, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1Eff off!
- inactive, on 06/22/2009, -0/+1Fairness? GTFO!
- Napiertt, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1I'm still in shock that that Nazi sicko can still be in charge of ANYTHING other than a dungeon. Amazing!
Something is so wrong with that guy. Gotta be a sociopath or something. -
Show 51 - 72 of 72 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 