I don't get it anymore (m)

[ep]

I've been following F1 for a couple of years, after having given up on it in the early 90's. Watching today's race it occured to me that I just don't get it anymore. How can one car have an insurmountable lead over the second place car for the majority of the race and not raise questions of "advantages"? Are the other teams that bad? How it must make the other teams feel, knowing that unless the lead car breaks there's no way to catch up? As technically challenged (compared to F1) as the NASCAR race cars are, at least there's usually only a couple of seconds between the first 2-3 cars (I'm not a NASCAR hugger, but like to watch races where the competition during the race is a little closer).

Can someone help me understand?Ernie Peters
2000 steel grey 2.3 5spd

[dill003]

He's just that good.

Chris

[Stl_Don]

Right now you are seeing the pinacle of F1 racing.
Ferrari has the best car with the best reliability managed and engineered by the best and last but not least, driven by the best.

Today KR and JB <i>could</i> have won the race but they didn't due to reliability issues. MS hasn't broken down in <b>50</b> races!
That in itself is an incredible record.

D<br><hr><br><A HREF = "http://stl_don.home.att.net"><img src = "http://members.roadfly.com/stl_don/kitten_sig.jpg"></A>
<br><small>pretty cool eyes</small>

[M3Richard]

cars v. anybody else. Ferrari has a material advantate- again 0.5 seconds a lap or so v. any other car. If anybody in NASCAB had such an advantage, NASCAB would change the rules in the interest of "the show." As to the other teams/drivers in F1, they either need to get better or quit.RichardM///3
Delaware USA
02'M36 Speed, 1/02 Build
Alpine White/Imola Red Leather
"Life is too short not to drive an ///M"

[AC]

it was the same in the 30s when Mercedes and Auto Union won everything, it was the same in the 70's when the Lotus 49 dominated, it was the same in the Mclaren Era, and then in the Williams era...... It's ABOUT driver domination and technical advantage.<p align=center>
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/axis.jpg"height=180 width=180">
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/coupe.gif"WIDTH=180 HEIGHT=120>
<img src="http://www.corriere.it/Media/Foto/2003/08_Agosto/21/loghini/milan1.gif"ALIGN=CENTER>
</p>

[dhabes]

[BMWPower3]

F1 is so uncompetitive. I actually have pretty much lost interest in this season. Sure the qualifying is good but eh, there isnt even any real racing. A pit strategy is not racing if you ask me. I hope next year it will be different. Why doesnt the FIA do like they do in the speed gt and put restrictions on the cars? Mark
1990 325i, Zinnoberrot on Black 96k
AIM: Markman5551

[arig]

f1 b/c i love the sport and the cars and the idea of these guys doing what they do is absolutely fantastic to me. i also watch to see how much more schumi can dominate. he is showing what he is capable and is waiting for someone to make the next step.

it's a demo. so guess what the details are.
20% Tint
<img src="http://members.roadfly.com/arig/new new version sig copy.jpg ">

[RickKap]

"I am never going to forget this race"


http://www.americanlemans.com/News/A...spx?NewsID=346

AMLS is only going to get more competitive.

Two TVR 400Rs were at the 12 hours of Sebring this year and they aren't even sold here! Even a Morgan Aero 8 raced at Sebring. A new Corvette will be out next year and Aston Martin might have a DB9 in AMLS by 06. The two Lamborghini Murcielago R-GTs sounded incredible!

[Jim Derrig 93 750]

If that was true, he'd have won the pole for every race before the 2003 fuel regs went into effect, and he'd be taking every pole in 2003-4 when his fuel load approximated what those near him were carrying. And Barrichello would never outqualify him. But that isn't what really happens, is it?

I'll agree that he's the best current driver, but let's not overstate the case, okay?

[Jim Derrig 93 750]

F1 is not a spec series designed to ensure close racing. F1 is a developmental series, which means that at any given time one team might have a technological edge over the others.

The above is a generalization, of course, since there are hundreds of F1 tech regs, many of which were adopted to reduce potential avenues of advantage.

With any developmental series, the old truism "speed costs money" comes to the forefront. Audi has dominated endurance racing for several years because it spent big $ to develop the R8, did a darned good job, and nobody has been willing to shell out the $ it would cost to outengineer that car.

In F1, Ferrari spent massive $ on facilities, bought the then-current WMC team of byrne-brawn-todt-shumacher wholesale from Benetton, and now even has its own, personal tire mfg in Bridgestone, with whom they work 365/7/24. You can't beat that kind of economic power on any sort of consistent basis unless those holding it are idiots, which the Ferrari folks most certainly are not.

And yes, it makes for damned dull racing sometimes. F1 is in an economic and technical dead end, in which the more $ it spends the less interesting it becomes on Sunday mornings.

[996carl]

a lot of us here get tired of the same ms parade every 2 weeks. the dog and pony show that goes along with f1 is interesting for the first few races and then it gets BORING. if i watch motorsports, i want to see action on the track, not just guys driving around and around without any actual racing.

[dill003]

outside of single car series like porsche supercup. The reason being is that they don't put restrictions, or change rules, just because one team is dominating.

To put it another way, what if the NBA had said that Michael Jordan was only allowed to play 1/3 of each game because he was so good? Or if Sammy Sosa could only bat twice each game because he was so good. How fair would that be? Sure, it would increase "competition" because they would be stifling the winners. Maybe thats what you would prefer to see in other sports as well, winners getting taken down artificially.

Chris

[ep]

"And yes, it makes for damned dull racing sometimes. F1 is in an economic and technical dead end, in which the more $ it spends the less interesting it becomes on Sunday mornings."

I noticed the stands at the Hockenheimring had a lot of empty seats yesterday. I guess it becomes less interesting not only for those watching on the tube but also from the stands.



Ernie Peters
2000 steel grey 2.3 5spd

[AC]

For one thing only a moron would drive an open wheel car like a sedan.... doorbanging is entertaining but to say there is no racing or minimizing what these guys do is plain ignorant.<p align=center>
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/axis.jpg"height=180 width=180">
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/coupe.gif"WIDTH=180 HEIGHT=120>
<img src="http://www.corriere.it/Media/Foto/2003/08_Agosto/21/loghini/milan1.gif"ALIGN=CENTER>
</p>

[Mark in Seattle]

I don't think Carl is ignorant - he's pointing out what is clear to all of us - for 2+ years there has been very very little competition for first place. And it's not even close. And in the RARE occasions when MS isn't in first place, he usually gets there through pit strategy.

How many times in the last few years has someone passed on the track to take the race lead? Not very many times, that's how many.

It's like watching a chess game. Yes, chess is demanding, and yes these people do it very very well. It's just not all that fun for me to watch.

I'd be just as bored (I think) if Williams were as dominant as Ferrari is. Lastly, I am not advocating artificial field leveling (like added penalty weight).

I have no solution other than wait and hope for real racing for second-third while pretending that MS is in some other division.

[dhabes]

I find it incredibly interesting to watch Bill A. race with 200+ REWARDS weight and still win. Now they add 100lbs and reduce 500 rpms and that is just kickin the $hit out of the BMWs. I agree that sucks. But at the same time it is also extremely intense and exciting cus you dont know what is gonna happen the next turn and there are always 5 different makes battling in the top 10.

I agree F1 is fun to watch in that the cars are amazing and M Schumi is amazing, but I find the closeness of SWC must more fun to watch.

[996carl]

go back and read my post.
formula one is one big parade. there is very little racing. the drivers have incredible skill, and the technology is incredible. in spite of all those great ingredients, the racing action on the track sucks because there are a handful of moves per race. i would like to see more on track action where you actually get to see the drivers competing more directly with each other.

[AC]

it was the same when Mclaren was dominant and when Williams was laying waste to the competition. Sadly Rubens sucks and there is not going to be another driver tha can race a Ferrari against Schumi, so untill the other teams get their act together it's going to be what it is. But boring? nah never.<p align=center>
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/axis.jpg"height=180 width=180">
<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/booboo/.Pictures/coupe.gif"WIDTH=180 HEIGHT=120>
<img src="http://www.corriere.it/Media/Foto/2003/08_Agosto/21/loghini/milan1.gif"ALIGN=CENTER>
</p>

[M3Richard]

ion. On a CONSISTENT basis, MS and the Ferrari are fastest. Can someone OCCASIONALLY string to together a fast lap and win the poll. Yup. JPM last week was a good example of a driver being almost as fast in qualifying but the car (and driver?) could not sustain that performance for more than a lap or two. Over a race distance, lap after lap, there's no contest. I'm no fan of MS or the "overdog" Ferrari team, but they are what they are.RichardM///3
Delaware USA
02'M36 Speed, 1/02 Build
Alpine White/Imola Red Leather
"Life is too short not to drive an ///M"