sport.guardian.co.uk— Given the competitive nature of F1, with cars separated by less than a tenth of a second, it is unreasonable to expect drivers to be passing and repassing with the frequency of MotoGP riders.
Jul 23, 2006View in Crawl 4
It's hardly fair to compare racing series to another. You always end up with a different agenda and goal.Formula1 is the epitomy of motorsports. What it lacks in competitiveness it over-excels in pushing technology and cars to their limits. The single most advanced racing series in the world. 400+ million a year for a single team.MotoGP...they are motorcycles!. Sure, the "F1" of bike racing, and still fun to watch, but it's not comparable.Sure, it comes down to the driver, but, there's a lot more involved...and it makes MUCH more difference in F1 than other racing series. Let me break a few things down here:1. Tyres: Look at last year, huge difference. Bad tires and the only races you'll win are the ones where everyone else doesn't race.2. Aero: If you botch your aero, you're hosed. Not only in design, but during the race, too. You make one little mistake, you run over the wrong curb, you make a run through the grass and catch a stick that breaks your aero, and you're in the pits for a new nose. Look at BMW and thier constant playing, they can't get it right. Of course, they have other problems, but the fact that they can't get a good aero package is hurting them.3. Reliability. McLaren, last year. Nuff said. For those that don't know, if you finish a race the next race you must use the same engine as before...1 engine, 2 races. McLaren kept blowing them. Arguably, Kimi would have won the championship had the engine been more reliable.It's the little things that make F1 exciting.Obviously there's other factors involved, I'm just trying to put the point accross that with F1, it's not as much about the viewing pleasure of the sport, but more about the technology and pushing the envelop as far as you can go. We're talking about teams haveing FULL-SCALE wind tunnels. You get the full effect of these cars when they show a ground level shot of them passing through a chicane...the corning speed is amazing.Boring to watch races? I've fallen asleep during them, yea, but the sound of a F1's engine is pure technological harmony. I'll never be bored with that. The courses are awesome, the drivers, amazing. I would venture to say that I stay interested in 80% of the races, and I watch them all...I've been to Indy 3 times for the GP...if you live close, you should at least go see them practice.I've rambled, but in respect to F1!
First, I want to say that I like all of the tech things on an F1 car, and I like the idea of competition between teams in designing reliable engines and a slick chassis. I'm a fan of F1 as well as the Champ Car World Series and the WRC (even though it isn't carried in the U.S. anymore. . .Speed channel sucks ass now). However, the Champ Car World Series has a fixed formula engine (V-8 turbo), which dramatically reduces the costs to the teams and provides reliable engines. They have also introduced the Power to Pass button which provides a total of 60 seconds (sometimes more) of a 75 horsepower boost. _Most_ of the drivers and teams in CCWS are young and not backed by astronomical budgets making them work harder for a win. The end result is a bit more passing than F1.I also like the variety of tracks that CCWS visits, but they are probably going to do away with ovals next year (finally).Regarding NASCAR. . .too many races, too many cars on the track, stop fooling yourself by calling them "stock" cars and force the bodies to match their street equivalent (i.e. make the NASCAR Monte Carlo match the Chevrolet Monte Carlo's dimensions), more road courses to weed out the "left turn only" drivers, and go with fuel injected engines instead of the carburetor, push-rod dinosaurs they currently have. The existing engines do nothing to advance consumer products which is what all forms of racing should focus on (better tires, fuel economy, safety, etc.)
Plus, take a look at all the babes that work for the sponsors. I swear once at Laguna Seca, I saw a chick wearing nothing but paint... everywhere! I'll take them over NeckCAR babes any day of the week.
Hardly, NASCAR isn't about technology it's about competition.Its a "sport": an otherwise pointless activity that one tries to perform better than others.
"You have the most advanced cars is world in the hands of the best drivers in the world."And their fate is determined by the technical directors watching the monitors in pit lane.That's the maddening thing about F1--you have the best drivers, the best cars, and yet the rules are such that they're not allowed to push them to the limit; they encourage strategy to the detriment of the racing.
look at F1 now - How Michael has managed to snatch the points off Alonso n Renault.. its not only the driver - the tyres, the engine n the aero apart from all other nitty gritty has to it perfect.. F1 is complex - not something you or me can understand to roots.. its the most exciting thing nowadays - you simply dont understand - thats it :P
F1 shouldn't be categorized as a sport. What it is is an engineering competition. It's also a myth that F1 features the best drivers. This is just a spillover perception based on what the cars themselves are doing. Fastest, quickest, most nimble cars MUST have the best drivers, right? Wrong. The cars are marvels of technology. The sport? Gimme a NASCAR race any day over watching Schumacher win his 7th straight race by 30 seconds.
"NASCAR is got to be the most dullest motorsport, good luck montya next season hopefully you won't get bored of turning left!" Yeah that last Daytona 500 that was decided by half a car length with 90% of the field just a second behind crashing all over the place was REALLY boring. F1 should just end the whole racing thing. Given what its fans seems to appreciate about the "sport" there's really no reason to ever have its cars on the track at the same time. Ever notice how F1 fans never discuss actual competitive racing? It's all about how the cars sound and what they can do. Might as well make the sport a series of exhibitions featuring a different car each week.
"What I love is watching these huge NASCAR behemouths try to race on a road course. To me, it seems that there's so much technology in F1 with traction control and computer controls everywhere, it takes a bit away from the driver. NASCAR has a carburated engine, and absolutely no interference from a computer. No antilock brakes, nothing but a driver and his machine. I'll take that."Which is why stock car racing requires more raw skill. You don't have computers doing things for you. F1 racers can be lazy and stupid because they have the engineers to fall back on.
jameshalesJul 24, 2006
That joke is so lame.
r111Jul 24, 2006
Those who think F1 is boring, are people who dont fully understand what F1 is all about..I was hook when I watch a guy named Senna..
mrstylzJul 25, 2006
It's hardly fair to compare racing series to another. You always end up with a different agenda and goal.Formula1 is the epitomy of motorsports. What it lacks in competitiveness it over-excels in pushing technology and cars to their limits. The single most advanced racing series in the world. 400+ million a year for a single team.MotoGP...they are motorcycles!. Sure, the "F1" of bike racing, and still fun to watch, but it's not comparable.Sure, it comes down to the driver, but, there's a lot more involved...and it makes MUCH more difference in F1 than other racing series. Let me break a few things down here:1. Tyres: Look at last year, huge difference. Bad tires and the only races you'll win are the ones where everyone else doesn't race.2. Aero: If you botch your aero, you're hosed. Not only in design, but during the race, too. You make one little mistake, you run over the wrong curb, you make a run through the grass and catch a stick that breaks your aero, and you're in the pits for a new nose. Look at BMW and thier constant playing, they can't get it right. Of course, they have other problems, but the fact that they can't get a good aero package is hurting them.3. Reliability. McLaren, last year. Nuff said. For those that don't know, if you finish a race the next race you must use the same engine as before...1 engine, 2 races. McLaren kept blowing them. Arguably, Kimi would have won the championship had the engine been more reliable.It's the little things that make F1 exciting.Obviously there's other factors involved, I'm just trying to put the point accross that with F1, it's not as much about the viewing pleasure of the sport, but more about the technology and pushing the envelop as far as you can go. We're talking about teams haveing FULL-SCALE wind tunnels. You get the full effect of these cars when they show a ground level shot of them passing through a chicane...the corning speed is amazing.Boring to watch races? I've fallen asleep during them, yea, but the sound of a F1's engine is pure technological harmony. I'll never be bored with that. The courses are awesome, the drivers, amazing. I would venture to say that I stay interested in 80% of the races, and I watch them all...I've been to Indy 3 times for the GP...if you live close, you should at least go see them practice.I've rambled, but in respect to F1!
Closed AccountJul 25, 2006
First, I want to say that I like all of the tech things on an F1 car, and I like the idea of competition between teams in designing reliable engines and a slick chassis. I'm a fan of F1 as well as the Champ Car World Series and the WRC (even though it isn't carried in the U.S. anymore. . .Speed channel sucks ass now). However, the Champ Car World Series has a fixed formula engine (V-8 turbo), which dramatically reduces the costs to the teams and provides reliable engines. They have also introduced the Power to Pass button which provides a total of 60 seconds (sometimes more) of a 75 horsepower boost. _Most_ of the drivers and teams in CCWS are young and not backed by astronomical budgets making them work harder for a win. The end result is a bit more passing than F1.I also like the variety of tracks that CCWS visits, but they are probably going to do away with ovals next year (finally).Regarding NASCAR. . .too many races, too many cars on the track, stop fooling yourself by calling them "stock" cars and force the bodies to match their street equivalent (i.e. make the NASCAR Monte Carlo match the Chevrolet Monte Carlo's dimensions), more road courses to weed out the "left turn only" drivers, and go with fuel injected engines instead of the carburetor, push-rod dinosaurs they currently have. The existing engines do nothing to advance consumer products which is what all forms of racing should focus on (better tires, fuel economy, safety, etc.)
j00fekJul 25, 2006
its the same with nascar... who wants to watch cars go in a circle for 5 hrs? not me
tylerdurden0Jul 26, 2006
Plus, take a look at all the babes that work for the sponsors. I swear once at Laguna Seca, I saw a chick wearing nothing but paint... everywhere! I'll take them over NeckCAR babes any day of the week.
urlorjkronJul 27, 2006
Hardly, NASCAR isn't about technology it's about competition.Its a "sport": an otherwise pointless activity that one tries to perform better than others.
aviaznJul 27, 2006
"You have the most advanced cars is world in the hands of the best drivers in the world."And their fate is determined by the technical directors watching the monitors in pit lane.That's the maddening thing about F1--you have the best drivers, the best cars, and yet the rules are such that they're not allowed to push them to the limit; they encourage strategy to the detriment of the racing.
Closed AccountAug 4, 2006
look at F1 now - How Michael has managed to snatch the points off Alonso n Renault.. its not only the driver - the tyres, the engine n the aero apart from all other nitty gritty has to it perfect.. F1 is complex - not something you or me can understand to roots.. its the most exciting thing nowadays - you simply dont understand - thats it :P
hotsnotAug 6, 2006
Hopefully today's race in Hungary will have put paid to this discussion.One of the most enthralling sporting events of any kind in recent memory.
mytharcMay 2, 2007
F1 shouldn't be categorized as a sport. What it is is an engineering competition. It's also a myth that F1 features the best drivers. This is just a spillover perception based on what the cars themselves are doing. Fastest, quickest, most nimble cars MUST have the best drivers, right? Wrong. The cars are marvels of technology. The sport? Gimme a NASCAR race any day over watching Schumacher win his 7th straight race by 30 seconds.
mytharcMay 2, 2007
"NASCAR is got to be the most dullest motorsport, good luck montya next season hopefully you won't get bored of turning left!" Yeah that last Daytona 500 that was decided by half a car length with 90% of the field just a second behind crashing all over the place was REALLY boring. F1 should just end the whole racing thing. Given what its fans seems to appreciate about the "sport" there's really no reason to ever have its cars on the track at the same time. Ever notice how F1 fans never discuss actual competitive racing? It's all about how the cars sound and what they can do. Might as well make the sport a series of exhibitions featuring a different car each week.
mytharcMay 2, 2007
"What I love is watching these huge NASCAR behemouths try to race on a road course. To me, it seems that there's so much technology in F1 with traction control and computer controls everywhere, it takes a bit away from the driver. NASCAR has a carburated engine, and absolutely no interference from a computer. No antilock brakes, nothing but a driver and his machine. I'll take that."Which is why stock car racing requires more raw skill. You don't have computers doing things for you. F1 racers can be lazy and stupid because they have the engineers to fall back on.
marthabrowMay 3, 2007
Dugg that. Even if it's not true it is quite a nice idea.